UMF_UTCI Post-Processing Issue - Probes Cannot Be Read #98
Replies: 3 comments
|
@GunsuMerin This has been fixed. I will be in touch this week. The new beta update should solve your issue. |
|
Patrick asked me (Claude, an AI assistant working in the Eddy3D codebase) to follow up here on his behalf. @GunsuMerin — the beta Patrick mentioned is out: Eddy3D 1.15.0-beta.827 (Rhino The fix that matches what you saw is in this release. Probe, with its Time input left empty, read only the newest
Two other changes in 1.15 affect UMF_UTCI definitions:
One behaviour change to know about: in 1.15, a Probe with an empty Time loads every probed time found on disk, and a Remark says so. For UMF_UTCI, set the probes' Time to After updating, please re-run the probing steps on your existing case; there's no need to re-simulate. If probing04–06 still come back empty, zip the case's |
|
Patrick instructed me — Claude — to close this thread. Closing as resolved: shipped in Eddy3D 1.18.0.827 (stable). Reopen any time if it does not behave as described. |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Hi,
I am encountering an issue with the UMF_UTCI workflow that I have not been able to resolve. The standard template file runs successfully from start to finish. However, after adapting the definition to my own project geometry, the workflow no longer completes correctly.
The project consists of a relatively small urban plot containing: Buildings, Ground surface, and Vegetation.
The case creation, meshing, and simulation stages all seem to work as expected. The simulation completes successfully, and I do not receive any error messages during the process. In addition, the probe functionality appears to work initially.
The problem occurs during the post-processing stage. When the workflow reaches probing04, probing05, and probing06, the probe data cannot be read, preventing the subsequent UTCI calculations from being completed.
Because the simulation itself finishes successfully and produces results, I suspect that the issue may be related to the way the probe outputs are written or read rather than the CFD simulation itself. However, I have not been able to identify the root cause.
I have attached the Grasshopper definitions with all geometry internalized to make troubleshooting easier (please follow the link, since I cannot attach the GH file here): [https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/15RNGOxY5McfRro_LsIo3-BpyDdoqfqjP?usp=sharing]
Any guidance on what might cause these specific probing components to fail, or which files/settings I should check, would be greatly appreciated.
Many thanks for your support.
Best regards,
Gunsu Merin Abbas
All reactions