Alan Lemon

GMS Development Team
  • Content count

    644
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Alan Lemon

  1. If you have not done so already please contact support@aquaveo.com to look at your project.
  2. You can create parameters from the values of HK assigned to the materials. Then use the parameters dialog for these HK parameters just as you did the RCH parameters.
  3. Those are dataset that you should be able to contour. If something is still not working you should contact support@aquaveo.com.
  4. From looking at the code it looks like the warning means that there is something wrong with the input lag parameters and that the kriging code could not find points to create the variogram. As to your second question... The experimental variograms are used as a guide to create a model variogram. This is the variogram used to do the interpolation. I am guessing that your model variograms would be quite different if compared logarithmic to non-logarithmic.
  5. The solids to MODFLOW command will create the HK data for the LPF package. The HK array can then be contoured. Currently, there are no tools in GMS for creating a dataset of HK values from the HUF package. If your HUF data was created from solids, you could use the Solids->MODFLOW command to generate an HK array with the LPF package so that you could visuallize the HK data.
  6. If you have not done so already, you should contact support@aquaveo.com to check your model.
  7. The documentation for GMS is available at this website: http://www.xmswiki.com/wiki/GMS:GMS or as a help file in the installation directory. The file is called GMS_Help.chm.
  8. A first pass of this is available in GMS 10.3.
  9. This has been implemented in the development version of GMS and will be included in GMS 10.3.
  10. This has been implemented in the development version of GMS and will be released in GMS 10.3.
  11. This has been implemented in the development version and will be included in the next release of GMS (10.3).
  12. The iConcINTP variable has been implemented. The name of the point has also been added to the comment section of the TOB file. Both of these have been implemented in the development version and will be in the next version of GMS.
  13. The recharge mapping has also been implemented in the development version of GMS. We will also have a tutorial that explains how it works with USG.
  14. pht3d

    GMS doesn't interact with this file. So if you have a simulation that uses this file you can copy it to the appropriate directories before PHT3D runs.
  15. You are correct. Currently there is just one display property for all shape files. We do plan to change this is future versions of GMS.
  16. A first pass integration with MT3D-USGS has been implemented in our development version and will be released in the next version of GMS (10.3). Additional packages for MT3D-USGS will be added to future versions of GMS.
  17. This has been implemented in our development version and will be in the next release of GMS. (Most likely 10.3)
  18. Currently there is no transport available for MODFLOW-USG except for mod-PATH3DU. Hopefully, the USGS will release a version of MODFLOW-USG with the transport package.
  19. If you open the *.out file for the MODFLOW simulation can you tell if MODFLOW terminated successfully?
  20. After doing a "deep dive" into the Map->MODFLOW code we have decided that adding the <Cell top>, <Cell bottom> is not the best way to address this issue. Part of the problem is that we like to keep the data completely independent of the grid in the conceptual model. Also, we have an option to auto assign the layer based on elevation. I not sure how that could work with the <Cell top>, <Cell bottom> option. If you really want to make sure that your boundary conditions get the same value that is assigned to the grid top or bottom you can convert the MODFLOW grid to scatter points using the Grid | MODFLOW Layers -> Scatter Points command. Then you can convert the scatter to a TIN and that TIN can be associated with your boundary condition. This should make it so you boundary conditions get the same value assigned to the grid cell and you won't have to do any extra processing outside of GMS.
  21. The problem has been fixed and will be in the nightly update as well as the next release of 10.2. We have also added a test to verify that the fix stays fixed.
  22. This looks like a bug. I am currently putting in a fix and adding a test so we will know if it breaks again.
  23. Sounds like it may be a bug with your particular model in GMS. Contact support@aquaveo.com so we can get this resolved.
  24. When you go into the parameters dialog and select the "Intialize from model" button GMS will search the model inputs looking for "key" values. GMS recognizes key values as negative values for inputs that could be parameters. The problem with the Q specified for wells is that it is often a negative value. (Right? like a pumping well). So if you want to have pest calibrate to the Q for a well you have to manually create the parameter. Another issue that you will run into is that your specified flow boundary was created with a polygon where you entered a single flow value that was divided up among the cells that the polygon is assigned to. There is probably not just 1 key value assigned. You will need to go into the well package and look at the name assigned to the well boundary conditions and set them to the same key value. Then go to the parameters dialog and create the parameter that matches your key value. Now pest should be able to modify the parameter value as it runs.
  25. I tried this with our FEMWATER tutorial files and it seems to work fine. It may be a problem that is specific to your project. Can you contact support@aquaveo.com? We will take a look at your files and fix the issue.