GREAT-ER catchement pre-processing comments

Jan-Oliver Wagner jan at
Wed Apr 10 16:19:54 CEST 2002

Hi Frederik,

On Wed, Apr 10, 2002 at 04:12:17PM +0200, Frederik Verdonck wrote:
> Some suggestions:
> - Addition of 'untreated discharges' as a separate type of discharge: in 
> the Rupel basin, I had to consider untreated discharges as 'fake' WWTP 
> with fraction treated set to 0.

you mean something like UD (untreated discharge) as an alternative to
current types TF and AS?
This is desireable, but for the rework on the pre-processing I can't
incorporate this since a chain of changes would be required up
to the simulator.
The re-implementation of the simulator is a later package and
then it should be easy to incorporate the new type.

> - Possibility to run the pre-processing routine under Windows platform

Well, we regard already a big step forward to be independent
of ArcInfo so that you can run the pre-processing on all the Unices
(e.g. GNU/Linux).
The whole stuff can then run on Windows as well, but you havo to know
how to install the required tools (python, awk, ...) which
of course all are available for most Windows versions.

> - Error messages may become more explanatory (I remember I had to mail 
> you guys from time to time because certain error messages were not clear 
> to me).

True. I have just implemented a preliminary syntax check with
verbose error messages to help iron out basic problems (will go
online soon).
Sematics are, however, sometimes more difficult to find out and describe.
The procedure already improved after you worked on the Rupel.

> Most of the time, my work on the Rupel basin implementation was absorbed 
> in the pre-pre-processing :-) so the pre-processing routine works fine.

This is natural. Lots of time is even spend on just gathering the data.



Jan-Oliver Wagner     

Intevation GmbH	          

More information about the Great-er-list mailing list

This site is hosted by Intevation GmbH (Datenschutzerklärung und Impressum | Privacy Policy and Imprint)