Same party-ceiling semantics as the already-mapped code 7 ("another
dwelling above" / "same dwelling above") — the unit has no exposed
roof, so there's nothing for the cascade to compute a U-value for.
Confirmed against the live cert (uprn 10013320122): roofs[].description
= "(another premises above)", roof_insulation_location = "ND" (the
codebase's established "no exposed roof" signal).
Surfaced by 1 failed modelling_e2e subtask on portfolio 817
(task_source='modelling_e2e', job_completed > '2026-07-03 12:50:37.555+01:00').
Golden cert 0330 now reaches band C on the dwelling-sized ASHP alone
(ADR-0049), dropping its solid_floor_insulation companion; cert 0390
still fires three measures, so the per-measure trigger-attribute
assertions move there (and gain the lighting triggers).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
`from_sap_schema_17_1` hardcoded is_dwelling_export_capable=False, so
SAP 10.2 Appendix M1 zeroed the PV export credit on every export-capable
full-SAP cert. Cert 0380-3044-6070-2305-5925 (property 741840, PRD #1435
WS3) now reproduces its lodged 92 exactly (was 89); the existing
19.1.0 pin 10096028301 closes its documented -1 residual (84 -> 85 =
lodged). The full-SAP top-level pv_connection is deliberately NOT
carried: its enum disagrees with the RdSAP one the calculator gates on.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The printed "candidate measures considered" now matches what the
orchestrator actually offered — on 711795 the lodged cavity wall printed
a cavity-fill candidate the plan (timber-frame effective wall) never saw.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Regression guard: category 8 + control 2701 keep the ADR-0048 coherence
invariant satisfied for SAP codes 421/422/424.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
WS2 of PRD #1435, diagnosed on property 711795: an electric-underfloor
override inherits the replaced community-heating category (no pathway,
baseline mis-rated 51 vs 67), and wall generators offer £4k insulation
that cannot change an age-band-L wall's derived U (0.280 → 0.280).
Glossary: Wall U-Value Gate.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Sizing selects the aroTHERM plus rung nearest PSR ~0.8 (0.8 x design heat
loss) — the Appendix-N efficiency peak, reproducing the pump a real
installer fits — rather than the MCS PSR>=1.0 capacity target, which
oversizes. Validated against the relodged Elmhurst ASHP cert (delta 0
held at the 5 kW Vaillant); the two self-snapshot pins re-pin to their
correctly-sized larger pumps, and the orchestrator/harness thread the
calculator's design heat loss so production sizes to the dwelling. Manual
SapResult test stubs carry the new design_heat_loss_kw field.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
_ashp_option threads its sized design heat loss into ashp_cost_inputs so
the cost band and the pump's efficiency record share one figure — a leaky
dwelling's larger pump is priced on the matching band.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
_ashp_option now selects the aroTHERM plus PCDB record matching the
threaded design heat loss (floor-area proxy fallback), so the overlay's
efficiency anchor is sized to the dwelling instead of a fixed 5 kW unit.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Walked the water-heating worksheet section: assumed occupancy (42) matched
exactly (2.4234 both sides), but (43) average daily hot water use was
117.41 L/day (Elmhurst) vs 110.73 L/day (ours) — same occupancy, different
shower/bath demand. Root cause: the cert's shower_outlets field is
genuinely unlodged, which the mapper correctly maps to 0 mixer showers
per its documented, already-validated "no entry = no shower" convention.
Elmhurst's build shows a "Non-electric shower" fixture anyway — its UI
silently defaults one when the build script doesn't explicitly configure
"0 showers" to match the cert.
Verified: a single 7 L/min vented mixer reproduces Elmhurst's (42a)
monthly series exactly (4 d.p., all 12 months) and closes hot water to
2616.04 vs Elmhurst's 2616.03. Corpus-wide check across 170 certs sharing
this "bath present, no shower data" pattern shows no systematic bias
(mean dSAP +0.12, median -0.04) — confirms the mapper convention is
correct on average; this is a build-entry artifact on this one cert, not
a mapper bug (no code change warranted).
Combining all three found causes (window orientation, Table 11, shower
default): SAP 72.4567 vs Elmhurst's precise 72.0681 — residual 0.39,
~91% of the original 4.26-point gap now precisely explained.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
design_heat_loss_kw = annual-average HLC x 24.2 K (SAP design temperature
difference) / 1000, the quantity Appendix N's PSR divides a heat pump's
rated output by — surfaced so the ASHP recommendation can size the pump.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The sizing ladder (Vaillant aroTHERM plus 3.5-12 kW PCDB records) picks
the smallest rung whose rated output meets the design heat loss, so SAP
10.2 Appendix N reads the heat-pump efficiency near its PSR peak instead
of collapsing on an undersized fixed unit.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
