Index: DamClients/DamUI/branches/DamUI 18.1/doc/Differences with previous release.txt
===================================================================
diff -u -r1733 -r1734
--- DamClients/DamUI/branches/DamUI 18.1/doc/Differences with previous release.txt	(.../DamUI 18.1 obsolete/doc/Differences with previous release.txt)	(revision 1733)
+++ DamClients/DamUI/branches/DamUI 18.1/doc/Differences with previous release.txt	(.../DamUI 18.1/doc/Differences with previous release.txt)	(revision 1734)
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 For design results, the actual values for all kind of Z-values which are based on the redesigned surface line 
 are corrrected in the new UI.
 
-MWDAM-1057/1056
+MWDAM-1057/1056/1155
 For design results, the profilename and the profile probability are now always filled.
 
 MWDAM-1057/1056
@@ -33,5 +33,25 @@
 MWDAM-1223
 When design was made for piping calculations in combination with DTH adaption the Sf piping was set to '1' if crest was adapted to DTH. Now real safety factor is calculated.
 
+MWDAM-1225
+Message The surfaceline points are not ascending (x-values) for same project no message in DAM 15.1
+Surfaceline validator in DAM 15.1 was not correct and accepted vertical lines in surfacelines. Vertical lines has to be avoided in D-Geo Stability due to possible failing calculations.
+
 MWDAM-1227
-As with MWDAM-1219 the real problem is the correct determination of the Location With Lowest UpliftFactor. Old DAM uses (wrongly) global surface line whereas the engine uses the correct localised surface line. The effect here is a different value for xCoordinateLastUpliftPoint which is passed on to the DGSMStabDam.dll which determines the grid.
\ No newline at end of file
+As with MWDAM-1219 the real problem is the correct determination of the Location With Lowest UpliftFactor. Old DAM uses (wrongly) global surface line whereas the engine uses the correct localised surface line. The effect here is a different value for xCoordinateLastUpliftPoint which is passed on to the DGSMStabDam.dll which determines the grid.
+
+MWDAM-1237
+DAM 15.1 always calculated with Psi=Phi since Psi wsa no input in D-Geo Stability 15. Later versions of D-Geo Stability (also 18.1) consider Psi as input. Also DAM 18.1 always calculates with Psi=Phi. Note: When *.sti files are used with a different value for Psi are 'reset' to psi=phi.
+
+MWDAM-1238
+Piping design calculation with geometry adaption gives wrong safety factor in result in release 15.1.
+This issue has been solved, so the safety factors in design calculation with geometry adaption will be different than in the 15.1 release version. The new answers are the correct answers.
+
+MWDAM-1273
+See MWDAM-1219 above as this has the same cause for the problem: In Old DAM, the determination of the regional scenarios is done based on een suface line given in global RD coordinates. This while all plline data is local. So trying to find the proper phreatic level for any given point of the surface line ALWAYS results in the last level of line PL1 as the point of the surfacel line is way betong the PL1 line. The new version has all data in local coordinates so the proper phreatic level is found, resulting in a better uplift factor and therefor other results (amongst which the proper status for hydraulic shortcut).
+
+MWDAM-1274
+In v15.1, in the determination of regional assessment scenarios, extending the 1D geometry to the surface level (when needed) was done by stretching the top layer. This should have been done by adding a layer on top of the original top layer with DikeEmbankmentMaterial as material. In v18, this correct way is implemented. Note that the difference in results may be neglectable is most cases.
+
+MWDAM-1272
+In v15.1 the in between aquifer layer is detected by searching from above to the first found aquifer layer. This is not completely correct. It should be the first aquifer layer that is not on top (so covered by an aquitard layer). This has been corrected in v18.1 .