R: type 9 quick question

["Pietro Filippi" <P.Filippi@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Michaël,
My doubt rose by tha fact that using the same meteo data in the 2 typologies, data in columns with ot without dot separators, perfectly matched in their output with the same instruction for decimals in the Special Card. So I just wondered why prefer a typology to the other one. From what you said and, on the other hand, since programs as meteonorm generate data with decimal sepatator (more readible as well...), I'm gonna use this format in the future. If you have anything to punctualize more about it please contact me again
Thanks again 
Pietro

Ing. Pietro Filippi
Nier Ingegneria SpA
Via Altabella 3, 40126 Bologna
tel: 051234359
fax: 051239530


-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: owner-trnsys@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-trnsys@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Per conto di  Kummert
Inviato: giovedì 3 giugno 2004 18.40
A: trnsys@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Oggetto: Re: type 9 quick question


Pietro,

> in the examples in Trnsys I found "Ex5" with T9b (-> Summer.dat) data
> reader and T9d (->Copennew.try) in "Building" files.
> in the weather files the data are as follows:
>  
> in Summer.dat:
>  
> "  8  1 11 3592  283    115  2" and in the T9 Special Card there is (10X 
> ,F4.0,1X,F4.1,1X,F6.4,1X,F2.0)
>  
> in Copennew.try:
>  
> "   8     0.00   0.00  2.1   8.7 87" and in the T9 Special Card there 
> is (6X F7.2,F7.2,F5.1,F6.1,F3.0)
>  
> The MAIN DIFFERENCE is the presence of the dot separator for decimals.
> In both Special Cards decimals are specified counting in the same way, I 
> mean from the right. But in this way the dot separetor would become the 
> first not decimal cararter. Is it automatically not taken in account 
> while reading the data or is it indifferent to use one typology or the 
> other? 

Let's first take a look at the first format instruction:

(10X,F4.0,1X,F4.1,1X,F6.4,1X,F2.0)

This is how the file should look like (x stands for a blank and 12345... 
for numbers)
xxxxxxxxxx1234x12.3x1.2345x12
And this is what you have:
   8  1 11 3592  283    115  2
xxxxxxxxxx1234x12.3x1.2345x12

The only catch is that (according to my tests) the "283" will be read as 
28.3 and "115" will become 0.0115 because fortran knows it has to read a 
number with a decimal point and a given number of digits after the point 
(note that it "makes up the decimal point").

For the second FORMAT instruction:

(6X F7.2,F7.2,F5.1,F6.1,F3.0)

This gives:
xxxxxx1234.561234.56123.41234.5123
    8     0.00   0.00  2.1   8.7 87

In this case all numbers will be read correctly.

I would definitely avoid things like the first format.

Generally speaking, I tend to use free format read and just have numbers 
separated by spaces or tabs. In that case any number of digits, before 
or after decimal points, is OK, and special formats like 1.02e04 also 
work. Such files are easy to get from Excel, TRNSYS, etc.

I hope this helps,

Michaël

-- 
_________________________________________________________

Michaël Kummert

Solar Energy Laboratory - University of Wisconsin-Madison
1303 Engr Res Bldg, 1500 Engineering Drive
Madison, WI 53706

Tel: +1 (608) 263-1589
Fax: +1 (608) 262-8464
E-mail: kummert@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

SEL Web Site: http://sel.me.wisc.edu
TRNSYS Web Site: http://sel.me.wisc.edu/trnsys