Support units in drift, runoff und sediment PECs

3 files changed, 36 insertions, 15 deletions

diff --git a/tests/testthat/test_PEC_sed.R b/tests/testthat/test_PEC_sed.R
index 443f789..0681adc 100644
--- a/tests/testthat/test_PEC_sed.R
+++ b/tests/testthat/test_PEC_sed.R
@@ -5,5 +5,7 @@ test_that("PEC_sw_sed calculates correctly using the percentage method", {
   # default assumptions of CRD spreadsheet (5 cm sediment depth, 1.3 kg/L sediment density)
   # Reference value calculated with CRD spreadsheet
   PEC_sw_100_1_m <- PEC_sw_drift(100, distances = 1)
-  expect_equivalent(round(PEC_sw_sed(PEC_sw_100_1_m, percentage = 50), 3), 2.131)
+  expect_equivalent(
+    round(PEC_sw_sed(PEC_sw_100_1_m, percentage = 50), 3), 
+    set_units(2.131, "µg/kg"))
 })
diff --git a/tests/testthat/test_PEC_sw_drift.R b/tests/testthat/test_PEC_sw_drift.R
index a0972eb..6177aef 100644
--- a/tests/testthat/test_PEC_sw_drift.R
+++ b/tests/testthat/test_PEC_sw_drift.R
@@ -1,22 +1,32 @@
 library(pfm)
+library(testthat)
+library(units)
 context("Simple PEC surface water calculations with drift entry")
 
 test_that("PEC_sw_drift gives the same results as the CRD PEC calculator", {
   # One application of 30 g/ha to field crops calculated with UK PEC calculator published by CRD
-  expect_equal(round(PEC_sw_drift(30), 3),
-               c('1 m' = 0.277, '5 m' = 0.057, '10 m' = 0.029, '20 m' = 0.015))
+  expect_equal(
+    round(PEC_sw_drift(30), 3),
+    set_units(c('1 m' = 0.277, '5 m' = 0.057, '10 m' = 0.029, '20 m' = 0.015), "\u00B5g/L"))
 
   # 7 applications of 30 g/ha to field crops calculated with UK PEC calculator, initial PEC
-  expect_equal(round(PEC_sw_drift(30, 7), 3),
-               c('1 m' = 0.161, '5 m' = 0.033, '10 m' = 0.017, '20 m' = 0.008))
+  expect_equal(
+    round(PEC_sw_drift(30, 7), 3),
+    set_units(c('1 m' = 0.161, '5 m' = 0.033, '10 m' = 0.017, '20 m' = 0.008), "\u00B5g/L"))
 
   # 4 applications of 30 g/ha to late fruit crops calculated with UK PEC
   # calculator published by CRD. CRD uses different drift values from SANCO aquatic
   # guidance), except for 50 m
   pfm_30_4_obst_spaet <- round(PEC_sw_drift(30, 4, crop_group_JKI = "Obstbau spaet",
       distances = c(3, 20, 50)), 3)
-  crd_30_4_obst_spaet <- c('3 m' = 1.101, '20 m' = 0.080, '50 m' = 0.013)
+  crd_30_4_obst_spaet <- set_units(c('3 m' = 1.101, '20 m' = 0.080, '50 m' = 0.013), "µg/L")
   expect_equal(pfm_30_4_obst_spaet[3], crd_30_4_obst_spaet[3])
+
+  # Synops scenario with 45 m angle. Mean width is 100 cm - (2 * 15 cm).
+  expect_equal(
+    PEC_sw_drift(100) * 100/70,
+    PEC_sw_drift(100, side_angle = 45)
+  )
 })
 
 test_that("The Rautmann formula is correctly implemented", {
diff --git a/tests/testthat/test_exposit.R b/tests/testthat/test_exposit.R
index 13371a6..44337bd 100644
--- a/tests/testthat/test_exposit.R
+++ b/tests/testthat/test_exposit.R
@@ -1,4 +1,7 @@
 library(pfm)
+library(units)
+library(dplyr)
+
 context("Exposit calculations")
 # Expected results are from the Exposit 3.02, downloaded 2019-02-15
 
@@ -8,12 +11,14 @@ test_that("Runoff PECsw are as in Exposit 3.02", {
     runoff = c(183.62, 110.17, 73.45, 36.72),
     erosion = c(19.96, 11.98, 2.99, 1.00),
     PEC_dissolved = c(0.71, 0.61, 0.52, 0.37),
-    PEC_total = c(0.78, 0.68, 0.55, 0.38))
+    PEC_total = c(0.78, 0.68, 0.55, 0.38)) |> 
+    mutate(across(c(runoff, erosion), ~ set_units(., "mg"))) |> 
+    mutate(across(starts_with("PEC_"), ~ set_units(., "\u00B5g/L")))
 
   res_1 <- PEC_sw_exposit_runoff(100, Koc = 1000, DT50 = 1000)
   res_pfm_1 <- data.frame(
-    runoff = round(1000 * res_1$runoff["dissolved"], 2),
-    erosion = round(1000 * res_1$runoff["bound"], 2),
+    runoff = round(set_units(res_1$runoff[["dissolved"]], "mg"), 2),
+    erosion = round(set_units(res_1$runoff[["bound"]], "mg"), 2),
     PEC_dissolved = round(res_1$PEC_sw_runoff, 2)["dissolved"],
     PEC_total = round(res_1$PEC_sw_runoff["dissolved"] + res_1$PEC_sw_runoff["bound"], 2))
   expect_equivalent(res_exposit_1, res_pfm_1)
@@ -23,12 +28,14 @@ test_that("Runoff PECsw are as in Exposit 3.02", {
     runoff = c(0.08, 0.05, 0.03, 0.02),
     erosion = c(36.63, 21.98, 5.49, 1.83),
     PEC_dissolved = c(0, 0, 0, 0),
-    PEC_total = c(0.14, 0.12, 0.04, 0.02))
+    PEC_total = c(0.14, 0.12, 0.04, 0.02)) |> 
+    mutate(across(c(runoff, erosion), ~ set_units(., "mg"))) |> 
+    mutate(across(starts_with("PEC_"), ~ set_units(., "\u00B5g/L")))
 
   res_2 <- PEC_sw_exposit_runoff(10, Koc = 300000, DT50 = 10)
   res_pfm_2 <- data.frame(
-    runoff = round(1000 * res_2$runoff["dissolved"], 2),
-    erosion = round(1000 * res_2$runoff["bound"], 2),
+    runoff = round(set_units(res_2$runoff[["dissolved"]], "mg"), 2),
+    erosion = round(set_units(res_2$runoff[["bound"]], "mg"), 2),
     PEC_dissolved = round(res_2$PEC_sw_runoff, 2)["dissolved"],
     PEC_total = round(res_2$PEC_sw_runoff["dissolved"] + res_2$PEC_sw_runoff["bound"], 2))
 
@@ -39,12 +46,14 @@ test_that("Runoff PECsw are as in Exposit 3.02", {
     runoff = c(295.78, 177.47, 118.31, 59.16),
     erosion = rep(0.00, 4),
     PEC_dissolved = c(1.14, 0.99, 0.85, 0.59),
-    PEC_total = c(1.14, 0.99, 0.85, 0.59))
+    PEC_total = c(1.14, 0.99, 0.85, 0.59)) |> 
+    mutate(across(c(runoff, erosion), ~ set_units(., "mg"))) |> 
+    mutate(across(starts_with("PEC_"), ~ set_units(., "\u00B5g/L")))
 
   res_3 <- PEC_sw_exposit_runoff(200, Koc = 30, DT50 = 100)
   res_pfm_3 <- data.frame(
-    runoff = round(1000 * res_3$runoff["dissolved"], 2),
-    erosion = round(1000 * res_3$runoff["bound"], 2),
+    runoff = round(set_units(res_3$runoff[["dissolved"]], "mg"), 2),
+    erosion = round(set_units(res_3$runoff[["bound"]], "mg"), 2),
     PEC_dissolved = round(res_3$PEC_sw_runoff, 2)["dissolved"],
     PEC_total = round(res_3$PEC_sw_runoff["dissolved"] + res_3$PEC_sw_runoff["bound"], 2))