Skip to content

Fix issue 1684: bad stream table formatting for flash#1719

Open
Lingyan90 wants to merge 8 commits intoIDAES:mainfrom
Lingyan90:fix-issue_1684-Bad-stream-table-formatting-for-Flash
Open

Fix issue 1684: bad stream table formatting for flash#1719
Lingyan90 wants to merge 8 commits intoIDAES:mainfrom
Lingyan90:fix-issue_1684-Bad-stream-table-formatting-for-Flash

Conversation

@Lingyan90
Copy link
Contributor

Fixes

Fixed a issue that has bad stream table formatting for Flash with Modular Properties (#1684)

Summary/Motivation:

Changes proposed in this PR:

  • Updated the table formatting in flash.py under ideal separation scenario
  • Uncommented the existing test for the related stream table formatting in test_flash.py

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.

@Lingyan90 Lingyan90 self-assigned this Dec 23, 2025
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 23, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 73.81%. Comparing base (7f5c598) to head (cab3315).

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1719      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   73.80%   73.81%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         399      399              
  Lines       65373    65369       -4     
  Branches    11007    11006       -1     
==========================================
+ Hits        48249    48253       +4     
+ Misses      14609    14605       -4     
+ Partials     2515     2511       -4     

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@ksbeattie ksbeattie added the Priority:Normal Normal Priority Issue or PR label Jan 15, 2026
Copy link
Contributor

@bpaul4 bpaul4 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just a couple of typos, otherwise looks good.

stream_attributes[n][k + " " + kname] = quant.m
stream_attributes["Units"][k + " " + kname] = quant.u
else:
# If not using idea separation, we can get outlet state directly
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
# If not using idea separation, we can get outlet state directly
# If not using ideal separation, we can get outlet state directly

"Inlet": {
"flow_mol": pytest.approx(
1.00, rel=1e-4
), # This is different from it's property package's (BT_idea) properties_out value of 100
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
), # This is different from it's property package's (BT_idea) properties_out value of 100
), # This is different from its property package's (BT_ideal) properties_out value of 100

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

updated all the typos in new push

@ksbeattie
Copy link
Member

@Lingyan90, do you think you can get to this for the Feb (this month's) release?

@Lingyan90
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Lingyan90, do you think you can get to this for the Feb (this month's) release?

Yes, was distracted by other things. The review comments looks straight forward. will push the changes asap. and should be able to be ready for Feb release.

Comment on lines +426 to +428
"flow_mol": pytest.approx(
1.00, rel=1e-4
), # This is different from its property package's (BT_ideal) properties_out value of 100
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why is this value different?

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