Jump to content
GMS, SMS, and WMS User Forum

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Earlier
  2. So I have figured it out from PEST manual (5th edition) - Watermark Numerical Computing: The relative composite sensitivity of a log-transformed parameter is determined by multiplying the composite sensitivity of that parameter by the absolute log of the value of that parameter. Adam
  3. Sure. Click out the river using the observation coverage. Plot it. You got the elevations and length, so you can determine slope.
  4. Can I determine slope of river using SMS interface?
  5. Hi, There is Rel. Sensitivity column in the ASCII file with .sen extension coming from PEST estimation. Could someone please explain me, how the value of relative sensitivity is determined? Thanks, Adam
  6. Dear Chris, @Chris Smemoe in wms , I created new coverage type rain gauge and inputted depth values in mm for 12 rain gauge stations of one watershed : I wanna create hydrograph using HEC-1 model to find the peak discharge value of the watershed based on these depths values of the stations for a return period of 2 years and 5 min duration . I simulated the model and got the hydrograph . but the problem is the hydrograph shows no discharge (flat curve ) as shown in the enclosed picture here why does that ? ?? please notice the precipitation depths in the first picture.( the curve number of the watershed is 90, and the initial abstraction (Ia) according to CN is 5.66 mm, I can find answer with you ? thanks in advance!
  7. Sorry, hope I didn't mess you up. I forgot they changed it a few releases ago. My apologies.
  8. calberts


    pagesk, if you abort the simulation, you would lose the results since SRH-Post would not run and give you the final _XMDF.dat file. I found myself in a similar situation once and found that you can override the original simulation end time by using the _DIP.dat file. See Appendix C of the SRH-2D user manual Page 91 https://www.usbr.gov/tsc/techreferences/computer software/models/srh2d/downloads/Manual-SRH2D-v2.0-Nov2008.pdf The process would look like this: 1. while srh is running, open the _DIP.dat file in a text editor 2. copy and paste in the start and end lines as well as the command to override the total simulation time (see below for example, this would override the simulation end time and make it stop at hour 9) $DATAC TOTAL_SIMULATION_TIME = 9.0 $ENDC 3. Save the text file, SRH will then read it and override the end time Note: If you will run the simulation again and do not wish for it to stop at that override time, you need to manually delete the lines in the file added in step 2 above, or delete the _DIP.dat file. -calberts
  9. Yup. You can actually look at the results while the model is running.
  10. pagesk


    I'm monitoring a model and I can see that the peaks of my hydrographs have passed. There are still several hours of model to run. If I "Abort" the model, will I be able to post process and review the model simulation data that has been calculated. I should have investigated this earlier, but now with the model having run for hours, I don't want to lose that information.
  11. I resolved the issue, one of the nodes was at the junction between a patch mesh and a pave mesh. Needs to be full inside a "patch " mesh.
  12. Fcernst, you likely have already moved on from this question, but for sake of providing an answer for others out there that may be facing a similar question, the elements are generated based upon the spacing of the arc vertices and nodes. To see a great demonstration of this, check out the meshing tutorial at the link below. http://smstutorials-13.0.aquaveo.com/SMS_MeshGeneration.pdf -calberts
  13. I'm getting an error " Wrong IFACE matching occurred in structure_internal.f90 #4" Error code 139762 and the same error message with error code 51575. It seems the errors may be related to pressure flow boundaries. Do the error code numbers have any significance that would help me find the error? I've checked to see see that my pressure flow boundary arcs are properly attached to to the vertices in my mesh generating file. A "Patch" type mesh is assigned between the pressure flow arcs.
  14. Definitely worth a try. It would make sense since it is say 500 nodes.
  15. The internal sink arcs are defined by two nodes and a couple of vertices. But the arcs are long, several thousand feet, so they cross many mesh cells. If you think that may be the cause I could probably shorted the arcs or split the flow between several shorter arcs. Thanks
  16. Do you have any BC lines that have more than 500 nodes? I would start there.
  17. As in the title PreSRH-2D stopped due to the following "Number of nodes exceeded 500 in sec_str.f90 Weir_up Error Code is: 502" Immediately before this message, the Command Line box said "***TVF file is read in successfully" I do not have a weir in my model. The only thing I would suggest is unusual about this model is that it has "internal sinks" to simulate local run on in addition to the normal inlet Qs at the defined channels. Anywhere to suggest to start trouble shooting?
  18. Hi Bruce, it is hard to tell. I suggest you to compare the HK and Sy arrays of the HDF5 and native MF version of your model. See if they are different. They should be exactly same. You could read the HDF file directly using Python for instance, see the discussion here. Good luck Michal
  19. among the hydrological models which model is better when studying an intermediate watershed?
  20. Hi -- I'm getting different water-level results with GMS 10.4.7 files when I switch from a PEST calibrated binary version to native text files. Here's the workflow: 1) Build and calibrate the models using PEST in GMS, 2) Get good results and acceptable calibration, using pilot points for aquifer horizontal hydraulic conductivities (HK) and specific yield (Sy) (for the surficial aquifer), 3) Interpolate the calibrated pilot point HK and Sy data to a 2-D grid created from the 3-D grid (same cell size and alignment) with the same interpolation methods as PEST used, 4) Replace the parameters (pilot points and drain conductances) in a new set of GMS files with calibrated values, 5) Used the Kriging interpolation method in both the PEST calibration process and when the resulting pilot point set is interpolated to the 2D grid in the native text files, 6) Write the files out as native text, do a forward run, and import results into GMS, 7) Compare key observations from the native text file results to the original binary GMS files. Here's a plot of one of the wells using outputs from the original calibrated binary GMS files. Here's the same well using outputs from the model run using the native text files. I've gone through the process of replacing the PEST variables in GMS with the final calibrated parameters twice and get the same results. One thing I have noticed is the dataset info differs between the calibrated pilot points and the version that I interpolated to the 2D grid. Here's a comparison of the dataset info for one of the pilot point datasets: Orig Cal PP Interp to 2D Grid Min 1.072 1.072 Max 904.99 734.94 Range 903.91 733.87 Mean 129.78 48.05 Median 50.132 20.75 SD 212.28 77.46 Why would these be so different? Both were done using the Kriging interpolation method. Any ideas would be appreciated!
  21. Rob Virtue

    Modflow - modpath

    Arto, hydraulic conductivity determines how much volume flows through fro a given aquifer for a given area an gradient. Imagine a block of aquifer and a block of water being extruded out of the side as it flows. If the aquifer was all space (porosity of 1) a particle of water would flow through the aquifer at the same rate is is extruded out the side. If the porosity is only half (0.5) and everything else remains the same, the velocity of a particle in water in the aquifer has to flow twice as fast to keep the block of water moving out. If your porosity is 0.01 for the same K, it has to move 100 times as fast. This is expressed in the Darcy flow velocity equation V=K*(dh/dl)/Pe where V = velocity K= hydraulic conductivity dh/dl = hydraulic gradient Pe = effective porosity. Particle flow velocity is inversely proportional to effective porosity, if all other parameters remain the same. This may seem counter intuitive, because you are thinking that less pore space means lower flow, but remember, you are keeping hydraulic conductivity the same, so the volumetric water flow stays the same.
  22. What conductance value are you using for the drain and what are the Kh & Kv of the high conductivity layers? A higher drain conductance is required to fully drain a higher conductivity layer.
  23. I am setting a drain with a specific elevation in a MODFLOW run, but the final gw elevation for the cell that the drain is located in, is not the same as the elevation that I set for the drain. It seems to vary depending on the hydraulic conductivity that I set for the layer that the drain is in. For low layer conductivities, the final drain elevation in the cell is close to the elevation that i specified for the drain, but for higher layer conductivities, the gw elevation in the cell can be several feet higher than the specified drain elevation. How can I get the drain to force the elevation in the cell to what I specify?
  24. Thanks Chris!
  25. I'd recommend making a rain gage coverage and add points to that coverage. In each point's attributes, you can assign the rain gage data to each location. You would normally assign a rainfall amount for a particular storm from the IDF curves along with some kind of rainfall distribution. All this information can be assigned in the point attributes in the rain gage coverage. If your rain gage coverage is defined and you have a watershed that you've delineated in WMS, WMS computes the gage weights for each sub-basin in your watershed when you compute the basin data. Chris
  26. Hello guys, I am still a junior in wms and need a help? how can I know which hydrologic model is better to create hydrograph for a watershed ??? and I have some gauge stations and still not quite sure how to add their depth values to wms interface?
  1. Load more activity
  • Create New...