Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

top/base information often lacking for zones #854

Open
Tracked by #869
tnatt opened this issue Oct 17, 2024 · 0 comments
Open
Tracked by #869

top/base information often lacking for zones #854

tnatt opened this issue Oct 17, 2024 · 0 comments

Comments

@tnatt
Copy link
Collaborator

tnatt commented Oct 17, 2024

There is no structuring or information to tell that an element is a zone or a horizon in the stratigraphy block in the global config.
Without this we can’t make pydantic logic to ensure all zones have a top and base defined.

The top and base goes into the metadata but it is optional (since it is not required for horizons) and hence becomes unreliable since many users don’t specify the top and base horizon for their zones.

We could potentially structure the stratigraphy different so that the keys are zones and each zone has a top/base horizon defined under it.

We could also look into splitting out the stratigraphy mapping in a separate block/file. And then when we do a look-up and convert the name and set stratigraphic=True for the user if it is present in this mapping.

current potential change
Image Image

This could be exported by RMS, and might be even more smooth once roxar supports accessing the stratigraphic column (RMS14.5)
Image

Image

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant