Jump to content
GMS, SMS, and WMS User Forum

Petra Furychova

Members
  • Content Count

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Petra Furychova

  1. Hi Bruce, can I ask you if you find out the solution for this issue? I am having probably very similar problem: I have observation values from different piezometers for which varies the filter depth. Different filterdepths falls into different modelling layers, therefore I look for solution how to obtain the residuals for some observation piezometers from first layer, for different ones from second layer and so on. So far I obtain in GMS always only one residual, and I am neither sure from which layer it is.... Do you, or anyone else have suggestion how to solve this problem?
  2. Hi Alan, could I ask if this feature is now included in the recently upgraded version 10.4? Thanks
  3. Hi Bruce, thank you for sharing these settings. I have done one test on one of my models that is in NWT (around 2 million cells). Well, the model converged to me but I didn't get any significant improvement of the model runtime. Maybe the main benefit of those settings is for the model with even bigger size (as you had mention that your model consists of 8 mil cells) In any case thanks, once it can be certainly useful.
  4. Hello Bruce, Thank you for your advice. I expected a bit that the reply would be better PC , but I was interested if someone has any tricks or advices. At the end I decreased the cellsize of the grid (to one third – around 800 000), and got to the running time around an hour. In this way I am losing the high resolution which was necessary for my project, but at least I am able to work on calibration of model in some reasonable model-running time. I would be really interested in your NWT solver set-up as I am dealing many times with the models with the size in this order of ma
  5. Hi everyone, I would like to ask about the length of the computational time of the transient model. I have built already several more complex models, but my transient models never exceeded 1 or max 2 hours to be finished. Not this time. I had built (I have to admit rather big model) with the number of the cells around 3 000 000. As flow package there is used HUF and as the solver PCG2. For the steady state my model finishes somewhere at the 10th iteration with the total computational time around 7 min. Built on that is the transient model with 27 stress periods. From previous e
  6. Maybe you could use Local grid refinement? to define new child grid (inside the original parent grid) with refined cellsize?
  7. Thank you , the problem was indeed in the Projection, it was kept in the feets. Now is solved.
  8. Hello, I am struggling with exporting the river coverage to shapefile - mainly I want to export the nodes with its ID and the head stages to shapefile I do it in standard way: Export Coverage - and choosing the .shp extension. Then I can export arcs and point file (polygon no as my coverage doesnt contain any polygons). The shp with arcs is exported without any problem, but what I am mainly interested is the shapefile with points. That is created but it doesn' t contain any data. (it contains just the names of attributes, but under that novalue). Is there any problem? Accord
  9. Do your rasters have the good elevation when you import it to GMS? Actually to me gms perform the same problem. I have posted it here just few hours before you. The problem just occurs step before the interpolation, when I import it to the GMS, it already has some crazy values. And indeed that different values then are taken to interpolated layer.
  10. I have problem with importing the raster (both in format ascii and also tiff). When I am importing those rasters to the empty GMS file, then I see the right z value of topography. But afterwards when I try to insert the same rasters to my model (already with grid and some coverages) - imported rasters have completely another Z value (change from 50 m to 200 m). Does anyone know what is the reason of this issue? I am using licence of GMS 10.1.5 ( I have found that this problem was probably solved by the bug for licence 10.0.6 - so why then it occurs also in my licence?) T
×
×
  • Create New...