PART 2 - 957 feature request production method in steel cross section #959

GerjanDorgelo · 2026-01-30T18:22:54Z

Description

feature request production method in steel cross section

Fixes #957

Type of change

Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
This change requires a documentation update

Checklist:

I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes

Summary by CodeRabbit

New Features
- Steel cross sections now support designation of section type, allowing users to specify whether sections are rolled or welded (default: rolled).
Tests
- Added test coverage to verify section type functionality.

_{✏️ Tip: You can customize this high-level summary in your review settings.}

…ng test

coderabbitai · 2026-01-30T18:23:10Z

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are disabled on base/target branches other than the default branch.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

🔍 Trigger a full review

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

A new public field section_type is added to the SteelCrossSection class with a literal type constraint ("rolled" or "welded") and default value "rolled". A corresponding test validates the default value of this field.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Field Addition `blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py`	Adds `section_type` field with `Literal["rolled", "welded"]` type and "rolled" default value; includes `Literal` import and docstring.
Test Coverage `tests/structural_sections/steel/test_steel_cross_section.py`	Adds `test_fabrication_method` test method to validate default `section_type` value equals "rolled".

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

Poem

🐰 A rolled or welded choice, so fine,
Steel sections now shine in design,
Type fields are set, default's "rolled" with care,
Tests confirm it's there, beyond compare! 🏗️

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Title check	❓ Inconclusive	The title references 'production method' which aligns with the PR objective of adding production_method to steel cross section, but the implementation uses 'section_type' attribute instead, creating a naming mismatch.	Clarify whether the title should be updated to reflect 'section_type' or if the implementation attribute naming should be reconsidered for consistency with the issue description.

✅ Passed checks (4 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description check	✅ Passed	The description follows the template structure with all required sections completed: description provided, issue reference (`#957`), type of change selected, and checklist items marked.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	The PR implements the feature requested in issue `#957` by adding section_type attribute to SteelCrossSection and providing corresponding tests, meeting both acceptance criteria.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	All changes directly support the linked issue `#957` objective: adding a production_method attribute (implemented as section_type) to indicate rolled or welded sections with corresponding tests.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	Docstring coverage is 100.00% which is sufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

Create PR with unit tests
Post copyable unit tests in a comment
Commit unit tests in branch 957-feature-request-production_method-in-steel-cross-section

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

GerjanDorgelo · 2026-01-30T18:26:03Z

hi @SZeltaat, id like to add production_method as an attribute to the steel cross section, so that i can diff between option a) and d) for shear area

Could you give it a check? thanks!

egarciamendez · 2026-01-30T21:37:28Z

@CodeRabbit review

coderabbitai · 2026-01-30T21:37:34Z

✅ Actions performed

Review triggered.

Note: CodeRabbit is an incremental review system and does not re-review already reviewed commits. This command is applicable only when automatic reviews are paused.

codecov · 2026-01-31T07:31:14Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 100.00%. Comparing base (630615e) to head (5148da0).
⚠️ Report is 20 commits behind head on 840-feature-request-add-first-steel-check-to-blueprints.

Additional details and impacted files

@@                                    Coverage Diff                                    @@
##           840-feature-request-add-first-steel-check-to-blueprints      #959   +/-   ##
=========================================================================================
  Coverage                                                   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================================================================
  Files                                                          422       422           
  Lines                                                        13145     13189   +44     
=========================================================================================
+ Hits                                                         13145     13189   +44

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Copilot

Pull request overview

This PR adds support for specifying the fabrication method (rolled or welded) for steel cross-sections, addressing feature request #957. The implementation adds a new optional parameter with a default value of "rolled" to maintain backward compatibility.

Changes:

Added a fabrication_method attribute to the SteelCrossSection class with type Literal["rolled", "welded"] and default value "rolled"
Added test coverage to verify the fabrication method functionality

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 3 comments.

File	Description
blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py	Added `fabrication_method` attribute with type hint and default value
tests/structural_sections/steel/test_steel_cross_section.py	Added test case to verify default fabrication method is "rolled"

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py

tests/structural_sections/steel/test_steel_cross_section.py

Co-authored-by: Copilot <175728472+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py

SZeltaat

Hi Gerjan,
I think this is the right place for this attribute, but we should be more carefull with the default. Please see my comment 😉

blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py

…ossSection class

…string handling

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py

…lass

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py

tests/structural_sections/steel/test_steel_cross_section.py

…lass

SZeltaat

I think this can be implemented in a much better way. Now, we look for profile's name in the whole database. We can narrow it down more effectively.

In any case, we should have good test cases to test this functionality.

For hot rolled
For cold-formed
For edge cases where name is not found, etc... (so every if-condition)
For tricky situations like RHS and RHSCF

If all test cases pass, we can always change the implementation later.

My suggestion for the implementation:

First extract only the first alphabetic part of the name.
Find the corresponding profile class by matching against the cls.name
Then extract the profile name (like you already do, alternatively use the pattern alphabetic, followed by multiple numerics optionally seperated by "x")
Then if any(profile_name == standard_profile.name for standard_profile in cls._database.values()), assign hot-rolled / cold-formed based on cls.name.

…itional test fixtures

…nd corresponding test

GerjanDorgelo · 2026-02-02T18:25:59Z

@SZeltaat

For hot rolled -> done
For cold-formed -> done (and also welded)
For edge cases where name is not found, etc... (so every if-condition) -> also testing a none, and an altered named profile.
For tricky situations like RHS and RHSCF -> done

First extract only the first alphabetic part of the name.
Find the corresponding profile class by matching against the cls.name -> difficult with "SHS" being part of "SHSCF". for now i just go trough the entire list.
Then extract the profile name (like you already do, alternatively use the pattern alphabetic, followed by multiple numerics optionally seperated by "x") -> done. also finding corrosion lvl now.
Then if any(profile_name == standard_profile.name for standard_profile in cls._database.values()), assign hot-rolled / cold-formed based on cls.name. -> instead of values, i check the polygon. that should do it.

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 3 comments.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py

Co-authored-by: Copilot <175728472+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

…class

…ction' of https://github.com/Blueprints-org/blueprints into 957-feature-request-production_method-in-steel-cross-section

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py

… fabrication method and profile extraction

…' into 957-feature-request-production_method-in-steel-cross-section

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 9 comments.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py

SZeltaat

LGTM!

feat: add section_type attribute to SteelCrossSection and correspondi…

e1a4aca

…ng test

GerjanDorgelo requested a review from SZeltaat January 30, 2026 18:22

GerjanDorgelo self-assigned this Jan 30, 2026

GerjanDorgelo added 2 commits January 31, 2026 08:27

Update steel_cross_section.py

a7735a7

Update test_steel_cross_section.py

1360d71

fix: remove unnecessary blank line in SteelCrossSection class

07c81f5

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings February 1, 2026 18:50

Copilot AI reviewed Feb 1, 2026

View reviewed changes

blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

tests/structural_sections/steel/test_steel_cross_section.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

GerjanDorgelo and others added 2 commits February 1, 2026 19:50

fix: correct docstring for fabrication_method in SteelCrossSection class

9b9668c

Apply suggestion from @Copilot

e48cbeb

Co-authored-by: Copilot <175728472+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings February 1, 2026 18:51

Copilot AI reviewed Feb 1, 2026

View reviewed changes

blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

SZeltaat reviewed Feb 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

GerjanDorgelo added 3 commits February 2, 2026 16:05

feat: add fabrication method enum and update SteelCrossSection class

61bf4c0

feat: add tests for default and custom fabrication methods in SteelCr…

a68b6f4

…ossSection class

refactor: change FabricationMethod from Enum to StrEnum for improved …

7974fca

…string handling

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings February 2, 2026 15:10

Copilot AI reviewed Feb 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

GerjanDorgelo added 2 commits February 2, 2026 16:11

refactor: remove unnecessary comment in SteelCrossSection class

da74c92

feat: enhance fabrication method determination in SteelCrossSection c…

395005b

…lass

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings February 2, 2026 15:18

Copilot AI reviewed Feb 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

tests/structural_sections/steel/test_steel_cross_section.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

refactor: simplify profile list initialization in SteelCrossSection c…

b9f7a8e

…lass

SZeltaat requested changes Feb 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

feat: enhance SteelCrossSection class with corrosion handling and add…

c029bc3

…itional test fixtures

feat: add fixture for SteelCrossSection with different profile name a…

7350c11

…nd corresponding test

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings February 2, 2026 18:25

Copilot AI reviewed Feb 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py Show resolved Hide resolved

Update blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py

14d8c30

Co-authored-by: Copilot <175728472+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings February 2, 2026 18:27

GerjanDorgelo added 2 commits February 2, 2026 19:27

fix: correct regex for double corrosion parsing in SteelCrossSection …

6ff48c3

…class

Merge branch '957-feature-request-production_method-in-steel-cross-se…

d37eaec

…ction' of https://github.com/Blueprints-org/blueprints into 957-feature-request-production_method-in-steel-cross-section

Copilot AI reviewed Feb 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

blueprints/structural_sections/steel/steel_cross_section.py Show resolved Hide resolved

feat: enhance SteelCrossSection class with detailed documentation for…

544b295

… fabrication method and profile extraction

GerjanDorgelo requested a review from SZeltaat February 5, 2026 16:56

GerjanDorgelo changed the title ~~957 feature request production method in steel cross section~~ PART 2 - 957 feature request production method in steel cross section Feb 7, 2026

Merge branch '840-feature-request-add-first-steel-check-to-blueprints…

5148da0

…' into 957-feature-request-production_method-in-steel-cross-section

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings February 8, 2026 10:42

Copilot AI reviewed Feb 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

SZeltaat approved these changes Feb 9, 2026

View reviewed changes

GerjanDorgelo merged commit 5f48d14 into 840-feature-request-add-first-steel-check-to-blueprints Feb 9, 2026
9 checks passed

GerjanDorgelo deleted the 957-feature-request-production_method-in-steel-cross-section branch February 9, 2026 08:43

PART 2 - 957 feature request production method in steel cross section #959

PART 2 - 957 feature request production method in steel cross section #959

Uh oh!

Conversation

GerjanDorgelo commented Jan 30, 2026 • edited by coderabbitai bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Description

Type of change

Checklist:

Summary by CodeRabbit

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 30, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Review skipped

Walkthrough

Changes

Estimated code review effort

Poem

Uh oh!

GerjanDorgelo commented Jan 30, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

egarciamendez commented Jan 30, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 30, 2026

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Jan 31, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

SZeltaat left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

SZeltaat left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

GerjanDorgelo commented Feb 2, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

GerjanDorgelo commented Jan 30, 2026 •

edited by coderabbitai bot

Loading

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 30, 2026 •

edited

Loading

GerjanDorgelo commented Jan 30, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Jan 31, 2026 •

edited

Loading

GerjanDorgelo commented Feb 2, 2026 •

edited

Loading