Remove assignable#6
Conversation
|
A general comment, we try to be explicit in the object name if the object type is a data frame, e.g., instead of using |
i-am-sijia
left a comment
i-am-sijia
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Both MAZs and TAZs should be included in the network, but only TAZs should be treated as centroids. This is the same logic as before.
|
Hold off on merge for 1 minute I need to check something |
|
Note, to regenerate network connectors, this version of Ranch is Required: |
| ranch_roadway = ranch.Roadway(nodes_df, links_df.drop(columns=["index_left", "index_right"], errors="ignore"), shapes_df, ranch_params) | ||
| ranch_roadway.build_centroid_connectors(build_taz_active_modes=True, build_maz_drive=True, | ||
| input_taz_polygon_file=taz_zone_shapefile_path, | ||
| input_maz_polygon_file=maz_zone_shapefile_path, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm a bit concerned about this step. Can we please make sure the TAZ IDs are not renumbered?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Raised Not Implemented error. Will require reworking in Task Order 6
|
Validation of current pr (run 22) against run 15. This is linkwise differences in volumes broken down by ft.
|
|
Adressed comments, will require one more rerun, as very minor changes occured |
|
Hold off on merging, very minor changes need to do one more model run |
|
Minor Updates to Code, Checking for major differences in results:
Note small change in Service Roads due to bug discovered in algorithm keeping bus links. This resulted in a very similar performing network:
|
2 participants
Tested and Emmbank now outputs, running a maz and taz assignment with the network today