PLE forum

Full Version: Error in calculation DEADW
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Affected version: Ple4Win Professional v4.4.2 build 17081

In this version the DEADW output table is not generated correctly if the WLEVEL is specified, see attached project file.
The jumps from DEADW1 to DEADW2 are not correctly calculated and visualised in Ple4Win.
Somehow Ple4Win introduces a inclination in the DEADW which is not really there in the elements.

[attachment=904]

If the WLEVEL is undefined in the last row the jumps are correctly calculated and visualised.
I am not totally shure, but I get the impression that there is a misunderstanding in how the WLEVEL column works:
from the Help File Wrote:If one or more WLEVELs are defined as Yes all empty WLEVELs are considered to be Yes as well.
...
A combination of Yes and No is not accepted and will result in error E310/11.

So all DEADW2 values in your case are "above water" deadweights, including the -29,197 in row 1.
The gradient / inclination is a result of the values -27,177 @ D200BK1s and -29,197 @ D200MB1s.

We are aware that the layout / functionality of the DEADW table is not ideal. I increased the priority of ticket J-997 which covers the re-design of that table.
The error E310/11 did not occur in this project file with strange results in the DEADW output column. All horizontal pipes are under water and vertical pipe is partly under water. That was the case here. It will succesfully test the input table and the error E310/11 did not occur.

It would be nice to make it possible to have empty and non-empty WLEVELS for this project case.
Error 310/11 should only occur if there are "No" and "Yes" values in the WLEVEL column (which is not the case in your project, so DEADW tests okay and DF3.1 finishes without error).

For clarity: If there is a "Yes" value anywhere in the WLEVEL column (as in your case with the last row), the whole DEADW table is treated as above water/under water data. In that case it is not possible to define steps in deadweight.
It is not much work to add these extra steps. It is only changing the algorithm of the DEADW output column.