Jump to content
TUFLOW Forum

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Last week
  2. Hi Kian, Using half the smallest cell size (e.g. 1 second) would be a safe starting point, the solver will adaptively change it. Cheers Phil
  3. Hi, I am trying to use Quadtree in a model, with four levels of grid size (16m to 2m). My question is what would be an appropriate starting timestep in tcf? For single size model the rule of thumb was half of the grid size in sec. Thanks
  4. I am having an issue with some output files, and what they actually relate to, from an old model.

     I have both  a Tdur_0.3m and a Texc_0.3m (flt and hdr files).

     I believe these to be time of duration where a cells depth exceeds 0.3m (Tdur) and the time at which the cells depth first exceeds 0.3m (Texc).

     I believe the files are created by the code – ‘Time Output Cutoff Depths == 0.1, 0.3, 1’ in the tcf.

    Can anyone confirm that this is what they refer to? as I've not come across them before.

  5. Earlier
  6. Hi Francis, Output types other than h, v, q and d are not predefined with the -type switch and should be called with -v (scalar dataset) and/or -s (vector dataset). A summary of the available datasets is listed within the DOS window, as you have highlighted in the second image (ZAEM1 is scalar dataset four in the provided .xmdf). For example: " TUFLOW_to_GIS_w64.exe" -asc -s4 -max “X.xmdf” For more information please see: https://wiki.tuflow.com/index.php?title=TUFLOW_to_GIS#XMDF_Switches Kind regards, Eliza
  7. Hi, We have a Council TUFLOW model running build 2017-09-AC. Results are output to .xmdf and we have maintained that for consistency when we hand back to Council We are using the current TUFLOW_to_GIS utility build 2020-08-AA We have been able to extract height and depth as ascii grids, however we can't seem to extract the zaem1 output. ZAEM1 was definitely written as an output, and is listed as a scalar dataset within the .xmdf file (see attached image). We have tried converting to.dat first using the res_to_res utility, but to no avail. Any help or suggestions as to how to extract the zaem1 hazard as an ascii grid would be appreciated. Kind regards, Francis
  8. Eirianc, Can you please email this outage issue to support@tuflow.com? One of the team should be able to help.
  9. Hi SirAdelaide, Section 3.2.9 of the release notes available here provides the following:- "Treatment of Infiltration and Negative Rainfall with SGS Enabled With SGS enabled, cells that are partially wet the treatment of infiltration and direct rainfall is as follows. See Section 3.2.4 above for details on the SGS Infiltration Approach and SGS Negative Rainfall Approach options. For positive rainfall, i.e. rainfall on to the 2D cell, the volume source for each cell is the total cell area times the rainfall irrespective of whether the cell is partially wet or not. For negative rainfall (evaporation), the volume of evaporation is factored by the wet area fraction of the cell. That is, if the cell is only 10% wet, only one tenth of the cell’s total area contributes to the negative source term. For models with soil infiltration the infiltration rate is proportional to the wet area fraction of the cell. However, initial infiltration losses are based on the total area of the cell (i.e. infiltration will proceed at the maximum possible rate until the cumulative infiltration – also based on total cell area - equals the initial loss value) even if the infiltration occurs with the cell partially wet. This approach is adopted to conform with that required for direct rainfall, which assumes the rainfall is applied over the entire cell irrespective of whether the cell is partially wet or not. Likewise, soil capacity is based on the total cell area (i.e. infiltration will cease once the cumulative infiltration equals soil capacity), and the cumulative wet time for the Horton model will also increment for cells that are partially wet."
  10. Using soil parameters we can simulate infiltration, and with negative rainfall we can simulate evaporation. How do these losses interact with SGS when only part of a cell may be inundated? For example using the attached image, SGS may determine there is a narrow channel equivalent to half a cell. Will evaporation/infiltration be calculated based on the full area of the cell, or the area calculated by SGS?
  11. Hi Prabhanjan, Could i start by asking if the initial conditions are meaning that maximums are actually happening at this point rather than the actual peak of the event - if so i would strongly suggest re-defining initial conditions or more so if you are aware that they are very unrealistic i would be re-running to define new initial conditions anyway. TUFLOW to GIS can extract the maximum output of the simulation from the .dat or .xmdf file using the flag -tmax - you can also specify output times using the -t flag and then the desired output, for example -t9 will extract at 9 hours. Res to Res has the 'Range' and 'Remove' input switches which would create a new results file either only within a specified range or removing a specific time, for example the beginning of your simulation: https://wiki.tuflow.com/index.php?title=RES_to_RES One would assume once the new results files have been created from res-to-res you could then use the TUFLOW to GIS utility to extract what you want. Kind regards, Joe
  12. Our office IT has recently moved to cloud servers. Since the move there have been a number of times where TUFLOW (Classic) has stopped running mid-simulation without any errors or warnings. The model is running smoothly until it stops.. This has happened maybe 10 times over the last 2 weeks. Looking at the .tlf it seems to happen when the simulation is writing outputs, but this may not always be the case. We have tried running the same model reading and writing to the local machine and it worked fine. The model is a 76hr run time, so its a bit frustrating when it stops midway 😬 We have contacted our cloud service provider and they have completed some testing which was apparently all fine from their end. Anyone else had this issue or got any suggestions what might be the cause/solution? Thanks Eirian
  13. Hi, Is there an option in asc_to_asc (or res_to_res) to exclude the outputs of a certain duration, and extract maximums in a specified range? The results at the beginning of a simulation are to be excluded due to bad initial conditions. Thanks, Prabhanjan
  14. Hi, just came across this post. Sorry it's probably not in time to be much use for you Adrian, but maybe it can be of use to others who find this thread in future. These are just my thoughts on the matter, I think the application of rainfall across 2D catchments is still sufficiently new that there probably isn't yet a consensus on best practice, just a bunch of modellers with their own thoughts and attempts! Anyway, here goes... 1. Simply applying SPR to the total runoff would be a simplistic approach to handling the losses within your system. Given you've made use of FEH to generate the inflows and rainfall data, you already have the data to go a step better by using the net rainfall, which has the losses accounted for. If you were to look at the ratio of net rainfall to total rainfall, as generated by FEH units, you would see that higher return periods (lower AEP events) generate a higher percentage of runoff than smaller events (as one might expect in the real world) and probably none of them match the SPR. 2. The loss model does indeed already consider infiltration, so if applying net rainfall from FEH then you need to make sure you don't also have losses in the TUFLOW model. An alternative approach, which can more closely reflect physical processes, would be to apply the total rainfall to TUFLOW and apply suitable soil conditions to represent the spatial distribution of the losses. It can be tricky to get hold of suitable information to inform (and calibration data to be confident in) your soil parameters though, in which case applying the net rainfall from "conventional" rainfall runoff techniques can be a good approach to follow. I don't feel like the above is my best writing, but hopefully it'll be of use to someone. As ever, if others have different thoughts on the matter I'd love to hear them! It's good to try and hash these things out together. Peter.
  15. We are pleased to announce a beta release of TUFLOW Classic/HPC 2020-10-AB. We are releasing initially as a beta with the intent to finalise during June 2021. This public beta release is a substantial update to the 2020-10-AA version that includes a range of enhancements and bug fixes. Included are a few of the new features for the 2021 release that are ready for application and we are seeking feedback on. Operational control enhancements to allow operational control channels to other control channels, making coordinated operations possible. New SGS processing approach that: Samples material layers to carry out a parallel channel analysis across cell faces Removes issues with elevation datasets that cover part of a 2D cell Allows for high resolution raster output Detection of SGS cells which may require a breakline Support for output zones in Quadtree Ability to reduce groundwater levels over time Support for 12DA supertins Ability to spatially vary weir factor in the HPC solver Ability to user define hazard categories based on a depth, velocity and depth-velocity thresholds HPC stability improvements for models with depth varying Manning’s n values Non-Newtonian flow enhancements for the HPC solver The new executable and the release notes are available for download from: https://tuflow.com/downloads/#tuflow. This release is included in the 2020/2021 maintenance period, for any licensing queries, please contact sales@tuflow.com. An update to the TUFLOW manual is progressing and when released will be aligned with the 2020-10-AB version. Happy modelling from the TUFLOW Team and as always, any queries, suggestions or issues, please don’t hesitate to contact support@tuflow.com. Best regards The TUFLOW Team
  16. I am looking to convert an FMP model into ESTRY and use the xsGenerator to create individual XS .csvs from a .DAT file. Please note I only have access to ISIS version 2.7.2, not Flood Modeller. I looked at the wiki (https://wiki.tuflow.com/index.php?title=XsGenerator) and the manual, but both examples use .asc or .xyz files for ISIS.I don't have these and I'm not sure how to create them. I tried using the xsGenerator with a .DAT file but it said "Trying to open file... Can't Open" Help is appreciated, as I have hundreds of cross-sections. Thank you.
  17. the answer appears to be that initial losses are indeed reset if you start a model with a restart file, so using a restart file to avoid running the preburst period results in double counting it
  18. Hi all are initial losses reset if I start a model with a restart file? I'm trying to avoid running the preburst period for each temporal pattern, as they only change with duration, so I'm using restart files, but obviously if the inital loss resets that would defeat the purpose thanks Sam
  19. Hi, The FEH rainfall-runoff model does consider infiltration losses both in the development of runoff (direct/total runoff and baseflow), as in the case of the upstream 2d_bc boundary, and the development of net rainfall, as in the case of the 2d_rf boundary. Therefore, if you're using runoff or net rainfall from FEH/ReFH and assuming your FEH/ReFH model is calibrated appropriately, you shouldn't have to also apply additional infiltration. To do risks double-counting the losses. Duncan
  20. Hi Ryan, In order to be able to access the TUFLOW licence server, you will need to have setup you machine to access this, as per this instructions on the wiki: https://wiki.tuflow.com/index.php?title=Wibu_Dongles#Configuring_Access_to_Network_Licence As is sounds like you are not in the office, you will likely need to be on a VPN to tunnel into your work network. Regards Phil
  21. HI all, I am trying to Run TUFLOW from Indonesia accessing Councils Server for the License... However I get this error ?? Initialising TUFLOW Dongle Settings... Looking for "C:\BMT_WBM\TUFLOW_Dongle_Settings.dcf"...not found. "C:\BMT_WBM\TUFLOW_Dongle_Settings.dcf" does not exist - default settings assigned. Simulations Log Folder == C:\BMT_WBM\log WIBU Retry Time == 60 WIBU Retry Count == 0 WIBU Dongles Only == OFF ! If set to ON, searches for WIBU dongles only. Searching for a WIBU (Metal) Dongle... TUFLOW Engine Server could not be found. Searching for a SMS WIBU (Metal) Dongle... TUFLOW Engine Server could not be found. Halcrow dongle service is not running. NOTE - 64-bit TUFLOW requires a maintained 64-bit compatible dongle. Closing any unclosed GIS layers... Any Clues how I can resolve this ??? Regards Rudy
  22. AdrianMQ

    Infiltration

    Hi everyone, I am currently carrying out a surface water hydraulic modelling, but due to the huge size of the upstream catchment, I am forced to use two inflow boundary conditions (i.e. 2d_bc QT and 2d_rf). In order to avoid modelling the entire catchment, I established the 2d_bc (QT) associated with the upstream catchment hydrographs based on the FEH method (from Flood Modeller) and catchment descriptors from FEH website (https://fehweb.ceh.ac.uk/). On the other hand, a second boundary condition (2d_rf) has been established for rainfall hyetographs for my ‘active’ catchment (2d_code). These hyetographs were created using the ReFH method (also from Flood Modeller), which calculates the ‘loss model’ and then extracts the ‘net rainfall’. However, in order to consider infiltration within the model, the ‘Standard Percentage of Runoff’ (SPR) of the FEH catchment descriptors would consider the infiltration for both the upstream catchment hydrographs and the hyetographs within the 2d_code area, is that correct? My questions are: Would the ‘Standard Percentage of Runoff’ (SPR) of the FEH catchment descriptors would be enough to consider the infiltration in the upstream catchment hydrographs? Regarding 2d_rf, does the ‘loss model’ from ReFH method already consider the infiltration? Or should I apply an additional method? Many thanks
  23. Hi everyone, I am dealing with a similar situation. I am currently carrying out a surface water hydraulic modelling, but due to the huge size of the upstream catchment, I am forced to use two inflow boundary conditions (i.e. 2d_bc QT and 2d_rf). In order to avoid modelling the entire catchment, I established the 2d_bc (QT) associated with the upstream catchment hydrographs based on the FEH method (from Flood Modeller) and catchment descriptors from FEH website (https://fehweb.ceh.ac.uk/). On the other hand, a second boundary condition (2d_rf) has been established for rainfall hyetographs for my ‘active’ catchment (2d_code). These hyetographs were created using the ReFH method (also from Flood Modeller), which calculates the ‘loss model’ and then extracts the ‘net rainfall’. However, in order to consider infiltration within the model, the ‘Standard Percentage of Runoff’ (SPR) of the FEH catchment descriptors would consider the infiltration for both the upstream catchment hydrographs and the hyetographs within the 2d_code area, is that correct? My questions are: Would the ‘Standard Percentage of Runoff’ (SPR) of the FEH catchment descriptors would be enough to consider the infiltration in the upstream catchment hydrographs? Regarding 2d_rf, does the ‘loss model’ from ReFH method already consider the infiltration? Or should I apply an additional method? Many thanks
  24. Hi everyone I am carrying out a surface water hydraulic modelling using TUFLOW. I have established a 2d_bc (HQ downstream condition of 0.06), along the downstream side of the catchment. However, I tried to establish a second downstream boundary condition via a drainage pipe using a second 2d_bc (SX) that collects runoff, conveys this via a 1d_nwk and then leaves the site via a 1d_bc (QT), without success, since the model does not indicate that flood water leaves the site via the drainage pipe. I mean, I would like that flood water to leave the site through the 2D downstream condition (i.e. to the downstream land) and through a 225mm drainage pipe (i.e. to the drainage sewers). See below a screenshot showing the model and attached the tlf file. How could I fix this problem? Any help would be appreciated thanks
  25. Hi Tom, asc_to_asc utility can be used on any grids regardless of which software produced them as long as the grids dimensions are matching (have identical headers when you open them in a text editor) and number of elements are matching respectively. You might need to do some further GIS post-processing to achieve that........ or use TUFLOW from the start Pavlina
  26. Hi, might be a bit cheeky asking an ICM related question here but I was hoping to use the asc to asc utility When I have a number of storm duration events results for TUFLOW I would use asc to asc to find the maximum water level between each of these durations. I have some ICM results that I have converted from shapefile to ASCII hoping to use asc to asc for finding the critical duration as I would for TUFLOW but I get two erros; 1. ERROR - number of rows for input grids do not match. 2. ERROR - dimensions of grids do not match Is it possible to use asc to asc in this way for converted ICM results and if so how can I fix these errors? Many thanks for any help you can provide.
  27. Dear Mpolak, It appears that your license may not have been coded with threads. As of 2019 each TUFLOW FV license comes with 4 threads as default. The term 'threads' refers to the degree of parallelism a given simulation can be run on (more on this here:https://fvwiki.tuflow.com/index.php?title=A_Model_Runs_Slow#Parallel_Processing). As you have a local 8 of TUFLOW FV you should also have access to 32 threads (8x4=32 threads). So we can take a closer look at your license could you please create a cmDust file (follow the instructions on this link: https://fvwiki.tuflow.com/index.php?title=WIBU_create_cmDust) and send through the resulting to support@tuflow.com. We look forward to getting you back up and running as soon as possible. Kind regards, Mitch.
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...