mirror of
https://github.com/Hestia-Homes/Model.git
synced 2026-07-12 13:29:04 +00:00
d97b8e87a4
10 modelling_e2e properties failed with "unmapped SAP code in fuel_code: 10": the billing layer (`sap_code_to_fuel`) had no carrier for Table-32 code 10 (dual fuel, mineral + wood) and raised rather than guess one. SAP 10.2 treats dual fuel as its OWN fuel (its own Table-12 factors), so model it as its own billing carrier rather than collapsing onto wood or coal: - New `Fuel.DUAL_FUEL_MINERAL_AND_WOOD`. - `_CODE_TO_FUEL[10]` -> that carrier. - Fuel Rates snapshot prices it at 7.69 p/kWh — the midpoint of the COAL proxy (7.13) and WOOD_LOGS (8.25). This mirrors SAP's own construction: Table-32 dual fuel (3.99) ~= midpoint of house coal (3.67) and wood logs (4.23). Marked `derived` with a documented _note/_gap/_assumption (like the COAL and HEAT_NETWORK proxies), since there is no retail blend price. A dedicated carrier + rate (vs a one-line map to an existing carrier) keeps the fuel identity faithful to SAP and avoids mispricing dual fuel as pure wood/coal. Tests: code 10 -> DUAL_FUEL carrier; snapshot prices it at 7.69; grid-export codes (36/60) still raise (the genuine no-carrier case). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| bulk_upload | ||
| comparable_properties | ||
| epc | ||
| fuel_rates | ||
| geospatial | ||
| landlord_overrides | ||
| magic_plan | ||
| materials | ||
| plan | ||
| product | ||
| property | ||
| property_baseline | ||
| scenario | ||
| solar | ||
| spatial | ||
| tasks | ||
| unstandardised_address | ||
| uploaded_file | ||
| __init__.py | ||
| postgres_unit_of_work.py | ||
| unit_of_work.py | ||