Jump to content
GMS, SMS, and WMS User Forum

Donald Hendon

Members
  • Content Count

    38
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

1 Follower

About Donald Hendon

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Jackson, MS

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. For the culvert option, check the culvert.dat file and compare them. The overtopping should be in there too if I remember right. You are correct about the pressure flow I think. You will need to adjust the walls to make it the right size. Also, remember that the velocity goes to 0 by the voids. That will affect your flow. Try to make a small element next to it to mitigate this effect.
  2. Excellent! We all are always learning! Glad I could help.
  3. The model does not need to see the vertical walls using HY8 because once the water goes into the culvert, it will come out the other side of the culvert. Therefore, no flow will be between your two BC arcs and the vertical face is irrelevant. Yes, the pressure flow option is for box culverts and box bridges. When using the pressure flow option, your outside vertical walls can be represented as voids as well. The number of elements in this channel looks good, but I would add one or two to the driveway. Also, use the mesh quality feature to check out the elements. That will help the fidelity of your mesh.
  4. First of all, I misspoke. You use the vertical walls when modeling a culvert as a pressure flow bridge. I see why you are getting a crash here. Your elements are nearly on top of each other. Seeing the pics helps a lot. You need refine you mesh more near the culvert itself. Those near vertical walls at the face of your culvert are unnecessary. I would try 2 things: 1. Refine your mesh at the culvert with more slope going up to the road. 2. Do a 2D culvert with voids on the side and make your culvert BC into a pressure flow BC. Either way, I would at least double the nodes in the vicinity of the culvert. It shouldn't add much to your run time. Hope this helps!
  5. The culvert should snap to the mesh where the invert of the culvert is. As for pics, just helps to see if there are any other problems that might stand out that you are not aware of. I have had better luck with quads for culverts than triangles.
  6. First, I would recommend updating to the latest version of SMS, 13.0.5. Second, yes you should use voids to represent your culvert walls. Vertical, or near vertical walls have always given me trouble. The voids only present a problem if the structure is overtopped. The model might say 100% complete, but you need to look at the tab of the run to verify the model ran to completion and didn't crash, which is what it sounds like it is doing. If these suggestions do not help, let us know. Also, at a couple of screen shots and that might get you a few more ideas to try.
  7. hmm, I am not sure what it means either. I have never had that error, but it has been a while since I worked with TUflow. Make sure your elevation data extends beyond your mesh domain. You can keep redrawing the elements shown as negative until you cover them all. You could regenerate your mesh with a new domain. Renumber your elements. Sorry I can't be more helpful.
  8. There is a couple of things I would try. One thing is I would delete the element and the ones nest to them, and then draw them back manually. Another is changing your boundary shape. Does it need to have that point? Let me know if this helps!
  9. Can you share a picture of the highlighted cell in question?
  10. Thanks, I am using an arc, and I know I can set the thickness. Here is my issue: There is a deflector in a river. The top elevation is 141'. The ground line along that arc varies from 112.7' to 131.9'. The WSE is 141.9, so it overtops the structure. If it did not overtop, there wouldn't be an issue. The "work around" I am using is to break the length of the deflector into separate arcs the length of a cell and taking the difference of 141' - elevation of each element and using that as the thickness. It would just be easier if I could make the arc got from the ground to a certain elevation, like you do for the low chord when using the pressure flow. As the image shows, it is not perfect, but best I can do at the moment.
  11. Is there a way to set the height of an obstruction to a certain elevation? Doesn't appear to be, but I might be missing it. That would come in handy on a project I am doing right now.
  12. You can only link one boundary condition into the simulation so the monitor lines have to be in the same coverage as your inflow/outflow arcs.
  13. First of all, SMS does not do numerical modeling. It is for pre- and post-processing of numerical models. Second, I do not believe that the sediment transport aspect of SRH-2D has been implemented into SMS. I think it will be added in the next version, and you may be able to use it in the current beta version. Hope this helps!
  14. I have been using SRH2D for about 5 years now, and it has never shown a hydrograph while running. The graph what was taken out, showing a downward trend, was a graph of the residual. If I remember correctly, that is how much volume is "lost" out of the model. That is about as deep as I can go in describing it. Sorry.
×
×
  • Create New...