Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

bug: Check Laytyp in MFsimulation.load with verify_data=True #1880

Closed
martinveenvlietrhdhv opened this issue Jul 25, 2023 · 2 comments
Closed

bug: Check Laytyp in MFsimulation.load with verify_data=True #1880

martinveenvlietrhdhv opened this issue Jul 25, 2023 · 2 comments
Assignees
@spaulins-usgs
Labels
bug

Comments

@martinveenvlietrhdhv
Copy link

Hi,

When loading an existing transient Modflow 6 model (confined layers) in Flopy, using the option verify_data=True, the check_storage definition throws an error TypeError: '<' not supported between instances of 'NoneType' and 'int' at line 424. This is because the specific yield package is not defined due to the simulation being fully confined.

It seems that, in line 383 (pakbase.py, if "laytyp" in self.dict:), skip_sy_check is not set to true due to "laytyp" not existing in an modflow 6 simulation. It therefore always checks whether SY exists, even if the simulation only contains confined layers.
@spaulins-usgs spaulins-usgs self-assigned this Jul 26, 2023
spaulins-usgs added a commit that referenced this issue Jul 27, 2023
@spaulins-usgs @scottrp
fix(check): check now works properly with confined conditions (#1880) (…
8c330a7 
…#1882)

* fix(check): check now works properly with confined conditions (#1880)

* github workflows undo

---------

Co-authored-by: scottrp <45947939+scottrp@users.noreply.github.com>
@spaulins-usgs
Copy link
Contributor

@martinveenvlietrhdhv, I just committed a fix to the develop branch of FloPy that should fix this problem.

@martinveenvlietrhdhv
Copy link
Author

Can verify that it works in the develop branch! Thanks!

wpbonelli pushed a commit that referenced this issue Aug 25, 2023
@spaulins-usgs @scottrp @wpbonelli
fix(check): check now works properly with confined conditions (#1880) (…
7e8a0cb 
…#1882)

* fix(check): check now works properly with confined conditions (#1880)

* github workflows undo

---------

Co-authored-by: scottrp <45947939+scottrp@users.noreply.github.com>
@wpbonelli wpbonelli mentioned this issue Aug 25, 2023
Merged
@wpbonelli wpbonelli mentioned this issue Feb 1, 2024
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@spaulins-usgs spaulins-usgs

Labels
bug
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@spaulins-usgs @martinveenvlietrhdhv