Reference cooling case is not updated

[daren-thomas]

Have we tested the SG case yet with the 2.31.0 databases? I'm getting the following error:

Workflow step: script=archetypes-mapper
Running archetypes_mapper with args {'input_databases': ['comfort', 'architecture', 'air-conditioning', 'internal-loads', 'supply', 'schedules'], 'buildings': [], 'scenario': 'C:\\Users\\darthoma\\Documents\\CityEnergyAnalyst\\projects\\reference-case-cooling\\baseline'}
City Energy Analyst version 2.31.0
Running `cea archetypes-mapper` with the following parameters:
- general:scenario = C:\Users\darthoma\Documents\CityEnergyAnalyst\projects\reference-case-cooling\baseline
  (default: {general:project}\{general:scenario-name})
- archetypes-mapper:input-databases = ['comfort', 'architecture', 'air-conditioning', 'internal-loads', 'supply', 'schedules']
  (default: ['comfort', 'architecture', 'air-conditioning', 'internal-loads', 'supply', 'schedules'])
- archetypes-mapper:buildings = []
  (default: [])

---------------------------
ERROR: Missing input files:
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "C:\Users\darthoma\Documents\CityEnergyAnalyst\Dependencies\Python\Scripts\cea-script.py", line 11, in <module>

    load_entry_point('cityenergyanalyst', 'console_scripts', 'cea')()
  File "c:\users\darthoma\documents\github\cityenergyanalyst\cea\interfaces\cli\cli.py", line 66, in main
    script_module.main(config)
  File "c:\users\darthoma\documents\github\cityenergyanalyst\cea\workflows\workflow.py", line 56, in main
    do_script_step(config, step)
  File "c:\users\darthoma\documents\github\cityenergyanalyst\cea\workflows\workflow.py", line 138, in do_script_step
    run(config, py_script, **py_parameters)
  File "c:\users\darthoma\documents\github\cityenergyanalyst\cea\workflows\workflow.py", line 29, in run
    f(config=config, **kwargs)
  File "c:\users\darthoma\documents\github\cityenergyanalyst\cea\api.py", line 52, in __call__
    self._runner.__call__(*args, **kwargs)
  File "c:\users\darthoma\documents\github\cityenergyanalyst\cea\api.py", line 28, in script_runner
    cea_script.print_missing_input_files(config)
  File "c:\users\darthoma\documents\github\cityenergyanalyst\cea\scripts.py", line 48, in print_missing_input_files
    if 'created_by' in schema_data[method_name]
KeyError: 'get_building_typology'

[daren-thomas]

(BTW: it works when running from the GUI - @reyery do you have an idea why?)

[jimenofonseca]

yes, we noticed it. it was a hotfix into master https://github.com/architecture-building-systems/CityEnergyAnalyst/commit/ccc3157e7094dd686eb129a4e92a02cfe11fb344

is this still an issue?

[reyery]

I have a feeling that the input files in reference-case-cooling are not updated. And the other thing is that get_building_typology is not in schemas.yml. Also it could be working in the GUI because its running with another scenario with the right files? I'm not sure about that one.

[jimenofonseca]

Right, I will actually erase reference cooling and reference WTP, they are just too outdated and nobody is following them.

Jimeno On 24 Feb 2020, 10:49 AM +0800, Reynold Mok notifications@github.com, wrote:

I have a feeling that the input files in reference-case-cooling are not updated. And the other thing is that get_building_typology is not in schemas.yml. Also it could be working in the GUI because its running with another scenario with the right files? I'm not sure about that one.

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/architecture-building-systems/CityEnergyAnalyst/issues/2595?email_source=notifications&email_token=ACEOXAQ7IATCXVFEGYEO6KTREMYRVA5CNFSM4KZDKJT2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEMWP25Y#issuecomment-590151031, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACEOXAT6NU6XP77WGN7CRELREMYRVANCNFSM4KZDKJTQ.

[daren-thomas]

@JIMENOFONSECA can we have maybe another cooling test case to run the workflows on instead?

[jimenofonseca]

Maybe we can use the same case study to test both workflows?, or should we prepare new case studies, maybe even we use real data to make sure we are well close to reality?

Jimeno

---

Jimeno A. Fonseca Dr. Sc. ETH Zurich

Senior Researcher Singapore ETH-Centre (SEC)https://sec.ethz.ch/

Project Coordinator Multi-Scale Energy Systems (MuSES)https://fcl.ethz.ch/research/high-density-cities/multi-scale-energy-systems.html

Product Owner & Developer City Energy Analyst (CEA)https://cityenergyanalyst.com/

Principal Investigator Cooling Singapore (CS1.5)https://www.coolingsingapore.sg/ Future Resilience Systems (FRS)https://frs.ethz.ch/research/cyber-physical-systems/digital-twin-enabled-system-resilience.html

On 24 Feb 2020, 4:43 PM +0800, Daren Thomas notifications@github.com, wrote:

@JIMENOFONSECAhttps://github.com/JIMENOFONSECA can we have maybe another cooling test case to run the workflows on instead?

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/architecture-building-systems/CityEnergyAnalyst/issues/2595?email_source=notifications&email_token=ACEOXASY4E32FAGMYMDCMNLREOCB7A5CNFSM4KZDKJT2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEMW743I#issuecomment-590216813, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACEOXAWCKHFTSXAQSB3Y4J3REOCB7ANCNFSM4KZDKJTQ.

[daren-thomas]

I like the idea of having the reference cases be plausible.