Jump to content
GMS, SMS, and WMS User Forum

Alan K. Zundel

SMS Development Team
  • Content Count

    105
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Alan K. Zundel

  1. Jeremy, The recommended method for do that is to use a rating curve. You can use the populate tool to compute a level for any flow in the expected range of flows that will occur during a hydrograph. This avoids needed to worry about latency and attenuation of the flow from the inflow to the outflow. Alan
  2. Don has reminded me that the default "Wall" boundary does have velocities of zero. I will be revising SRH-Post to treat walls as zero-velocity while wet/dry boundaries will still be scaled. In the future I hope to use both cell centered and edge values to give a more accurate representation of what SRH-2D is doing internally.
  3. Don, This changed as a result of update to SRH-2D 3.2. However, as I recall, the edge of the pier did not get assigned a zero velocity even in the old version. SRH-2D would assign values to the nodes from the cell centered values that it computes. The process used a simple averaging of the wet/active cells attached to each node. So for a pier wall, the velocity from the cell centers was mapped to the edge of the mesh. When 3.2 was released we detected that the node interpolation changed from the 3.1 and the activity mapping appeared to have an error. We asked the SR
  4. Where did your SOF file come from? Was it created when you launched SRH from inside of SMS? Which version of SMS are you using? SMS 11 used what SRH referred to as the "Full" interface. SMS 12 uses what SRH refers to as the "Custom" interface. If SMS 12.1 or SMS 12.2 are creating an incomplete SOF file, I would be very interested in getting the data files and resolving this issue as a bug.
  5. Hello. The SRH-2D simulation should be able to run from a previous project. The "sof.dat" file created by SRH-Pre will contain all the input that was processed by SRH-Pre. Looking at it or stepping through the SRH-Pre run in partial mode can give greater insight about what is not working. Another option would be to make sure you have exported the SRH input files again. That would replace all the input you have so you may want to save them for forensic reasons. Finally, if you submit your data files to the Aquaveo tech support group, we can evaluate the project to see what is
  6. Heeyoon, The dx value for LTEA does not control the mesh size. The mesh size comes from a distribution of nodes based on the LTEA ananlysis and result in a specified target number of nodes. The dx value is a base grid size utilized by the LTEA calculations. Basically, it is the limits the how quickly the distribution can change in more than a linear fashion. Alan
  7. Ian, I have not yet been able to reproduce your error. When you import the fort.53, are you importing any other ADCIRC solution files at the same time? How many constituents have you included in the harmonic run? Alan
  8. Ian, I have not heard of this issue before. I will investigate and get back to you. Alan
  9. Jismy, I assume this is an ADCIRC simulation. Are you using NWS = 8 or NWS = 19? Where is the cyclone track? Alan
  10. Amy, Is there any chance you can post a couple of .nc files for subsequent timesteps on the aquaveo ftp site (pubftp.aquaveo.com)? Alan
  11. Sorry for the delay in getting you a response. The contours you are displaying are from the scatter set based on the legend. The range of sizes is 10-3 to 10-5 and your coordinates show geographic. I recently found a tolerance issue bug in the mesh generator that has caused some issues when paving in geographic coordinates. I am adjusting those tolerances and I think it should be fixed (at least significantly improved) in the next update of SMS. I personally try to avoid using fractional degrees as the size because the values don't mean anything to me intuitively. You could reproject to a
  12. Amy, The support in SMS for several of the wind formats that ADCIRC allows is not fully there. This is an area we are trying to enhance. The approach we have taken to date is to allow the user to specify through the SMS interface the type of wind file that exists and then the user provides the fort.22 to conform to the option. We have been adding support for more of the options inside of the interface. In these situations, SMS will create the appropriate fort.22 file. The NWS=5 option uses velocity and pressure at each node in the ADCIRC mesh. So your pressure files need to have pressur
  13. The format for NWS=8 is described as a BEST track file, but it really isn't. We have a tutorial demonstrating the use of NWS=8 in ADCIRC under development. I will check on the availability of the files.
  14. There are two ways to increase resolution when using paving. The first applies to regular paving (no scalar size function). To use this add a feature point or arc in the area you want the increased resolution and specify the desired resolution by assigning the refine attribute to the feature point or redistribute the feature arc. The second applies to scalar paving. In this method you specify a size function in the form of a scattered data set. When using this method, you can just create a new scatter vertex in the area where resolution is being lost and specify the size in that area to be
  15. CMS-Flow will output a final bathymetry (z) value for each cell in the grid. If you read in the full survey of final measured bathymetry as a scatter point set (TIN) in the scatter module, you can interpolate that to the grid. Then you use the data calculator or the compare function in the dataset tool box (Data menu) to create a difference dataset.
  16. What engine (numeric model) are you using? What is the format of the "measured" change in bathymetry? Do you have it at multiple locations, a full survey, or just a few points?
  17. I have removed the hardwired tolerance for converting CAD data to feature objects. That change is available in the next update (or nightly build). We have been working on the projections for version 11.1. If you have steps that cause problems, I would love to get them reported so that you can work with the correct projection specified. This would allow you to use dynamic images and the project on the fly features. I understand that reporting such issues can be a nuisance. We are testing the system ourselves but we appreciate feedback from the community. If you can send me a sample shapefi
  18. We were able to reproduce a version this problem and I believe it has been resolved in the latest build. Please let us know if the problem persists in your case.
  19. I know that the CMS developers at the USACE-ERDC have done significant work with parallel and long term runs. I will make sure they see your question.
  20. I just checked the code and there is a hard coded tolerance for coincident nodes set to 0.0001. As I said, it does not seem to impact feature nodes (ends of arcs), but it will impact stand alone feature points and probably feature vertices on an arc. We will have to discuss this to determine if we need to expose this tolerance so the user can set it, remove it, or compute it in some way to be automatic. Thank you for identifying this issue.
  21. I have noticed that poly lines shorter than the tolerance I noted are not merged. However, stand along points are.
  22. You have raised a good question. When I look at this, it appears that objects less than 1.0e-3 are being merged. I will investigate where this tolerance is coming from. What projection are you working in?
  23. Perhaps we need to expand the documentation of this tool. The tool is setup to identify specific zones that match a list of criteria. It seems that you are trying to define zones for distinct criteria at the same time. Therefore no zones satisfy all the criteria you have specified. It appears that you want to define a series of zones, each with a single criterion, and then select the option to generate the merged coverage. You indicate that you can't afford the time to process each criteria independently. Is that because processing one takes too long or because you want to do this over and o
  24. Matt, This must be a licensing glitch. What module are you in when you try to save? Alan
×
×
  • Create New...