Jump to content
GMS, SMS, and WMS User Forum

Matthew

Members
  • Content Count

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Matthew

  • Rank
    Member
  1. The forward model converges and runs successfully, but I get the same error. I will try to contact support.
  2. I am having the identical problem....was the cause identified and was a resolution found? Thanks, Matthew
  3. Thanks Sean, yes, I know that I can export the CAD file once it is created. My problem is that the "Display....Convert to CAD" step will not convert my head contours to CAD unless I delete all the CAD data in memory. The problem I'm describing is that I have a CAD file that already includes a head contour CAD layer from a previous run. I want to overwrite that head contour CAD layer with one from a newer run, but it will not allow me to do so at the "Display....Convert to CAD" step, unless I delete all the CAD data in memory, which in my case includes the site map, other concentration and elevation contours, etc. I do not want to delete all the CAD data just to get the head contours, I just want to add the new head contours CAD layer to my existing CAD data (and preferably delete the old head contours). Also, I do not understand why the Help file says there is a "File... Save as..." DXF/DWG option, when none appears in my menu. Is the Help file fibbing?
  4. Hi, I am running GMS for a site simulation, and I have an extensive site basemap CAD file that I wish to keep in the simulation files. I exported the head output from a previous run to the CAD file by displaying the run's head output from the 3D Grid module and then choosing "Data...Convert to CAD". At that point it asked me if I wanted to delete the current CAD data. I answered "No" and so it added the head contours as a new CAD layer in the CAD file in the Project Explorer. Now on subsequent runs I have a new head file and I want to add or replace the current head contours in the CAD file but it does not do it unless I delete the whole file. I suspect that it is because it assigns the same name to the CAD layer and does not allow itself to overwrite a CAD layer. The Help directory says I should just be able to use the "Save As..." command and save whatever is open to a DXF/DWG file, but the "Save As" command does not offer a DWG/DXF option. Am I missing a module or something? Here's what the Help file says about the subject: Exporting GMS data can be exported to a DWG or DXF file that can then be read into a CAD package. If there is CAD data in memory when a GMS project is saved, GMS creates a new DWG file from the CAD data. The file is put in the same folder with the other project files and named using the project prefix. Any CAD data in memory can also be saved using the Save As command in the File menu. You can select either the DWG or DXF file types to save the CAD data. GMS objects must first be converted to CAD data before CAD data can be exported. To convert GMS data to CAD data, use the Convert To CAD command in the Display Menu. It also says: Exporting Non-native GMS Files GMS can export files that can be used in other software. There are two methods to export data from GMS. Data can exported through the Save As dialog or by right-clicking on items in the Project Explorer. Exporting through Save Dialog The file types that can be exported are shown in the table below. To export a particular file type, the file filter corresponding to that file type should be selected in the Save dialog. File Type File Ext Description DXF/DWG .dxf, .dwg Saves the current CAD data to a dxf or dwg file. You can convert your GMS data to CAD data by using the Data->CAD command in the CAD menu in the Map module. But neither the right-click nor the "File...Save as" seems to offer anything for CAD. Anyone else figure this out?
  5. Thanks for the reply Rob. My problem was that for a long time I thought I was allowing re-wetting properly- I seemed to have had all the right "allow re-wetting" boxes checked in the LPF dialog. So I couldn't understand why the cells above flooded cells were not re-wetting. It turned out that just checking the rewetting box and choosing the wetting equation from the drop-down box doesn't get the job done- apparently the wet/dry flag was still set at a default value (0) that doesn't allow re-wetting. There was nothing useful in the GMS help file about the wet/dry flag, but I learned by web-searching that I needed to set it to a negative value to allow rewetting from beneath only, and that the value should be selected to be a non-zero number (its absolute value representing the threshold flooding thickness- with the sign chosen for the source cells for re-wetting- "cell beneath" is negative, "all adjacent is positive"- that triggers re-wetting, balanced for solution stability). I asked a lot of people for help on this, but no one pointed me in this direction until I finally stumbled on it- It may have been too obvious to most MODFLOW users! But I am only an occasional episodic GMS/MODFLOW user, so I did not notice or understand it. I am still running into some errors and stability problems in the thinly-saturated cells, but at least I am finally making some sense out of the rewetting behavior. Unfortunately, it took me a very long time of hitting my head against the wall to discover the full meaning of the wet/dry flag and threshold. Maybe this thread will help others avoid the same frustration. I also hope that GMS adds some better explanation of the wet/dry flag to the GMS Help file- right now it seems to be missing from the LPF dialog discussion. Also GMS should not map it as zero as the default- it would be better to map it 0.5 or -0.5 as the default. Or better yet, have it assigned based on the rewetting boxes checked! I also checked the box to eliminate the vertical leakance correction as I understand that can cause difficult non-linearities in the solution in rewetting areas, that can make things harder to settle. Thanks again for the response.
  6. I have a MODFLOW steady state simulation where some of the top layer cells go dry in areas where this may truly be what is happening. However, the cells immediately below the dry cells are calculated as flooded, which is obviously inconsistent and nonsensical. Has anybody experienced this, and how did they solve it? I have tried various solvers- the only ones that work are PCG and GMG. They seem to converge nicely despite the obvious problem. I have tried adjusting the starting heads to the solution, with heads set at the bottom of dry layers. Any help would be appreciated likely beyond any appreciation you have ever received or imagined thus far in your life.
×
×
  • Create New...