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.

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

Doc for second electrodialysis flowsheet #1386

Merged
merged 27 commits into from
May 16, 2024
Merged

Conversation

lbibl
Copy link
Contributor

@lbibl lbibl commented May 11, 2024

Fixes/Resolves:

check ED * @lbibl in #1219

Summary/Motivation:

As title

Legal Acknowledgement

By contributing to this software project, I agree to the following terms and conditions for my contribution:

  1. I agree my contributions are submitted under the license terms described in the LICENSE.txt file at the top level of this directory.
  2. I represent I am authorized to make the contributions and grant the license. If my employer has rights to intellectual property that includes these contributions, I represent that I have received permission to make contributions and grant the required license on behalf of that employer.

@lbibl lbibl marked this pull request as ready for review May 11, 2024 21:11
@lbibl lbibl self-assigned this May 11, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 11, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 93.85%. Comparing base (64e61f1) to head (6f3bba2).
Report is 74 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1386   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.85%   93.85%           
=======================================
  Files         339      339           
  Lines       35931    35931           
=======================================
  Hits        33723    33723           
  Misses       2208     2208           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Contributor

@MarcusHolly MarcusHolly left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

A couple of minor things to address. Most of these comments also apply to #1385

Comment on lines +25 to +28
Documentation for unit models from IDAES:
* `Feed block <https://idaes-pse.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reference_guides/model_libraries/generic/unit_models/feed.html>`_
* `Separator <https://idaes-pse.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reference_guides/model_libraries/generic/unit_models/separator.html>`_
* `Product block <https://idaes-pse.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reference_guides/model_libraries/generic/unit_models/product.html>`_
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In other flowsheet documentation, we have not listed these IDAES models. Personally I think they can be left out since these will be present in almost every flowsheet, but I'm curious what others think.

lbibl and others added 3 commits May 14, 2024 09:39
Co-authored-by: MarcusHolly <96305519+MarcusHolly@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: MarcusHolly <96305519+MarcusHolly@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: MarcusHolly <96305519+MarcusHolly@users.noreply.github.com>
lbibl and others added 3 commits May 14, 2024 09:41
Co-authored-by: MarcusHolly <96305519+MarcusHolly@users.noreply.github.com>
@lbibl lbibl requested a review from MarcusHolly May 14, 2024 17:32
Copy link
Contributor

@MarcusHolly MarcusHolly left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

One more minor typo, but I won't let this or the question of whether or not to include the IDAES models hold up my approval

Copy link
Contributor

@agarciadiego agarciadiego left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM just a small typo

@hunterbarber hunterbarber self-requested a review May 14, 2024 18:39
Co-authored-by: agarciadiego <40575271+agarciadiego@users.noreply.github.com>
@ksbeattie ksbeattie added the Priority:Normal Normal Priority Issue or PR label May 16, 2024
@ksbeattie ksbeattie merged commit 929e539 into watertap-org:main May 16, 2024
24 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Priority:Normal Normal Priority Issue or PR
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants