Jump to content
GMS, SMS, and WMS User Forum

US_AA

Members
  • Content Count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

US_AA last won the day on October 21 2009

US_AA had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About US_AA

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 02/10/1981

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  1. Hi, I am not sure if you read my posting (a week ago). Because I have to provide some results I hereby want to ask you again. Before using the multiple domains, the model was working well. Now it is also getting unstable in areas, where there is not as yet water. Some unstabilities occur at the borders of my GM Coverage, which defines the buildings in my model; the unstabilities are mostly inside the finer (1m) Grid. Do you have some hints to reduce unstabilities within my model? Thanks
  2. O.k., I did what you advised me. But after simulating some minutes the model is still getting unstable. Before using the multiple domains, the model was working well. Now it is also getting unstable in areas, where there is not as yet water. Some unstabilities occur at the borders of my GM Coverage, which defines the buildings in my model; the unstabilities are mostly inside the finer (1m) Grid. So what should we do???
  3. The spacing varies between some 400m in the outer boundary and circa 300m in the inner (2D/2D Linkage) border. I did not redistribute the vertices, they are spread like it reasulted from drawing them. And yes, it is getting unstable near one of the boundaries that join the domains. While having a look a the results (so far), it seems as if there would be another inlet in the finer Grid (see the attchment). The problem is, I did not define this inlet. I already had a related problem in the outer BC as you can see a the following link: http://aquaveo.invisionzone.com/index.php?showtopic=757&st=0&p=2124&fromsearch=1entry2124 I was told to set up a negative flow as downstream BC; this worked faultlessly. But In the finer Grid, there is no seperate BC. I hope you can help me to get rid of this unsolicited "inlet", thanks and regards!
  4. Thanks, your pointers helped me to get over my .tcf file problem and the simualtion now starts without complaining. But (I really feel sorry for asking you another question) there is still one problem left. When I am using multiple domains, the simualtion always gets unstable. I already reduced the timestep to 0.1 s but my simulation is still not working proper. Regards
  5. O.k., I just found out how to use it. But after starting the simulation, a new problem occurs. While opening the files, the system is telling me that the simulation_name.tcf file does not exist. The thing is, that actually this file existits at the location the system is seeking. For more details, please have a look at the attached image. Kind regards and thanks in advance!!!
  6. Hi, I am using TUFLOW in SMS 10.1 and I would like to link a fine Grid in some areas to a coarser Grid. We already ordered the multiple domains license. When I try to link the two 2D domains according to the help file on http://www.xmswiki.com/xms/SMS:TUFLOW_Linking_2D_Domains as below To setup multiple 2D domains in SMS: 1. Create multiple TUFLOW grids and associated grid components. 2. Define a 2D/2D Linkage coverage and attributes (see below). 3. Add all the 2D domains being used and the 2D/2D Links Coverage to the simulation. the program always tells me, that "this component already has a grid linked to it!". So what can I do to get this thing done? I already posted my question in the TUFLOW forum and they gave me a Tutorial. Unfortunately the multiple domains tutorial is not yet documented and so it is not easy to understand, how to use this tool. Kind regards
  7. Hi, currently We are working on a sudden dam breaking scenario. As input data we are using a storm tide with a recurrence of 10,000 years; the water runs into an area, were no or just a small drainage exists. The arc in the inlet is defined as WSE vs. Time (design tide) while we defined the outlet arc as computed WSE vs. Flow. The Model is working so far, but when the water reaches the downstream arcs boundary, the water is beginning to flow out of this whole arc back into the model area (see attached picture). The other two boundaries, which are the orange ones in the picture, are defined as "not used" and have an effect as a wall. As soon as the water gets in contact with these walls, the current gets directed along those. If the wals are defined as WSE vs. Flow, the water is running out of the arcs as described above. So could you please help to find a solution or maybe the correct BC for my model? Another problem is the size of my results. I am simulating 28 hours with a Grid size of 4m. The resulting Mesh has an enormous size of more than 66 GB and when I try to open it, the time bar, the values for h, dep and v disappear from the explorer. Only the elevation remains in my mesh. Do you know the reason for this? P.S.: We are using the latest version of TUFLOW in SMS 10.0.11.! Thanks in advance and kind regards Arne
  8. Hi there, I am searching for a way to model a variable geometry or respectively a time dependent geometry, such as it would occur in a dam breaking situation. I am using the latest version of Tuflow with SMS 10.0.11. Thanks in advance an kind regards, Arne
  9. Hi, Currently I am working on a project, where it is necessary to differentiate the resolution in particular areas. In that case, I was told, I need to buy MapInfo Professional!? Is that true? Can anyone recommend me refenrences or tutorials dealing with this subject? The second question is, if it is possible to use a non-rectangular (irregular) "Grid" or however this is called for my simulation? The model I am using is TUFLOW. Thanks for your assistance!
  10. Oh sorry, I forgot! I am using the latest version of TUFLOW!
  11. Hi there, I have a problem to locate the actual height in a certain location. When I have a look at predefined point of my OC, the value of the elevation is above the WSEs height. Additionally, the height of the GRID - while using the plot wizzard - is differnt to the height of the elevation of the generated mesh! Now I´m not sure about the reliability of my model. Could anyone explain the reason for these circumstances? kind regards
×
×
  • Create New...