Add cross section table data to GeoJSON export

[leendertvanwolfswinkel]

For two features in 3Di Live, we need the data that describes the cross-sections of flowlines with tabulated cross-sections.

Proposal is to add three new fields to the geojson lines outputs:

• cross_section_table_1: [[height], [widths]]
• cross_section_table_2: [[heights], [widths]]
• cross_section_weight: value (0-1) to interpolate between cross-sections 1 and 2

[leendertvanwolfswinkel]

Frontend 1: https://app.zenhub.com/workspaces/frontends-62dfbf294a7dde0018f68e92/issues/gh/nens/nens-frontends/454 Frontend 2: Limit 1D flow viz width to max cross sectional width

[daanvaningen]

Added tabulated data to:

• channels
• pipes
• weirs
• culverts
• orifices

extra fields:

• cross_section_type_1
• cross_section_table_1
• cross_section_type_2
• cross_section_table_2
• cross_section_weight

Example with tabulated data:

    "properties": {
        "id": 42144,
        "content_pk": 727,
        "code": "",
        "kcu": 2,
        "calculation_type": 102,
        "dist_calc_points": 10.0,
        "connection_node_start_pk": 2629,
        "connection_node_end_pk": 2300,
        "discharge_coefficient": 1.0,
        "model_type": "Channels",
        "cross_section_type_1": 6,
        "cross_section_table_1": [
            [
                1.0,
                1.0
            ],
            [
                0.0,
                0.5
            ]
        ],
        "cross_section_type_2": 6,
        "cross_section_table_2": [
            [
                1.0,
                1.0
            ],
            [
                0.0,
                0.5
            ]
        ],
        "cross_section_weight": 0.998636509093291
    }

    "properties": {
        "id": 42448,
        "content_pk": 13173,
        "display_name": "1546 - 1754",
        "code": "",
        "kcu": 4,
        "cross_section_shape": 1,
        "cross_section_width": 5.0,
        "cross_section_height": null,
        "crest_level": 134.06,
        "crest_type": 4,
        "sewerage": 0,
        "discharge_coefficient_positive": 0.8,
        "discharge_coefficient_negative": 0.8,
        "friction_value": null,
        "friction_type": -9999,
        "connection_node_start_pk": 1754,
        "connection_node_end_pk": 1546,
        "model_type": "Weirs",
        "cross_section_type_1": 1,
        "cross_section_table_1": [
            [],
            []
        ],
        "cross_section_type_2": 1,
        "cross_section_table_2": [
            [],
            []
        ],
        "cross_section_weight": 1.0
    }

[leendertvanwolfswinkel]

@daanvaningen ik heb een model op staging ge-regenerate en de channels geojson gedownload, maar daar vind ik die nieuwe velden niet in terug https://api.staging.3di.live/v3/threedimodels/16634/geojson/channels/download/

[daanvaningen]

staging is weer terug naar een vorige versie omdat de DB versie niet compatibel is met Django 4.2. Hadden we even kunnen laten weten sorry.

[leendertvanwolfswinkel]

Tested again, with a testbank model containing several cross-sections. All YZ, all the same. They look like this:

I do see the cross section tables in the geojson, so that's nice. But I don't think it's quite right:

"cross_section_table_2":[
               [
                  0.0,
                  1.0,
                  2.0,
                  4.0,
                  12.5,
                  15.0,
                  17.0,
                  19.0,
                  21.0,
                  22.0
               ],
               [
                  2.0,
                  6.25,
                  12.5,
                  15.381,
                  25.5,
                  33.556,
                  39.333,
                  68.667,
                  3.333,
                  100.0
               ]
            ]

See https://api.staging.3di.live/v3/threedimodels/16664/geojson/channels/download/

Second point: for visualization purposes it would be nice if we could show the original YZ profile, instead of the profile we see here that has been converted to Tabulated trapezium.

[daanvaningen]

The tabulated cross sections that are set in the gridadmin file do contain the 3.333 as width, if it's not right we'll need to look into that. I agree that it looks a bit weird but I have not heard any complaints about the transformation from yz to tabulated before, so I am bit hesitant to dive into it. Took a small glance but it looks a bit complex so didn't pursue it further. Let me know what you think.

I did change the output to YZ in case of YZ (heights, widths):

        "cross_section_table_1": [
            [
                19.0,
                17.0,
                12.5,
                2.0,
                1.0,
                0.0,
                0.0,
                4.0,
                15.0,
                21.0,
                22.0
            ],
            [
                0.0,
                28.0,
                38.0,
                40.0,
                45.0,
                48.0,
                50.0,
                55.0,
                66.0,
                70.0,
                100.0
            ]
        ],

[leendertvanwolfswinkel]

@daanvaningen I think it would be good to look into this, because the width value of 3.333 is obviously wrong, and it would affect the simulation results if this error occurs in a part of the cross section that is wet. In the current testbank test, this part of the cross-section does not become wet. I have asked @Overmeen to run a test with a higher water level to see if it actually affects simulation results

[daanvaningen]

I have found the issue regarding the 3.333 width. It is caused by the left height being lower than the right height. A way to fix this would be to extend the left side vertically until the max height is reached. But it is dependent on what you would expect as a user.

Would you expect the waterlevel to rise beyond the highest left most point until the highest pixel in the cell is reached? Or does the cell directly overflow after the waterlevel reaches the left most point?