Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About nandrewes

  • Rank
  1. Hi Bill, Further to your comment above regarding the specification of a different Q pit curve for a reverse flow; is this option available for the current TUFLOW build? Cheers Nick
  2. Hi Phillip, I have been playing around with the new file format and have used the new TUFLOW_TO_GIS executable to extract a maximum grid from a single xmdf file, but was wondering if there is a DAT_TO_DAT equivalent for xmdf files (i.e. to extraxct a maximum envelope from a series of xmdf files)? Thanks, Nick
  3. Currently we are running V3 of Security Server on a dedicated License Server. Port 1042 was chosen. TUFLOW licences are not accessible to clients unless a user has actually logged onto the License Server and has executed the Security Server software. Once this occurs, licences are accessible. The moment the user logs out of the License Server (yet the server is still physically running), the licences are no longer available. Page 5-5 of the documentation states "The usual procedure is to set the dongle Security Server to start automatically by placing it in the startup folder of the server" Doesn't this require a user to logon to the server to initiate the startup? Is it possible to start the Security Server application without the need for a user to log onto the server? i.e. after an unexpected reboot?
  4. Hi Bill, Thanks for your reply. I checked all of the above and everything makes sense in the model. I am now modelling the bridge by extending the cross section under the bridge to the level of the deck crest, and creating loss coefficients in HECRAS using the velocities generated without the bridge and head loss generated with the bridge in place. This seems to work well. However, I'm still not convinced that when using Bridge Flow == Method B, and a BF channel type (with seperate B and W representation) that TUFLOW is linearly interpolating between loss coefficient entries in the BG table. Also it would be useful to have an extra decimal place for both the velocity and LC outputs in the TSF.mid, to allow more effective analysis. Regarding the BW setup, is it possible to have a 'fixed' bg table specific to a particular bridge, and if so how would you represent it? I tried a BWF channel type which TUFLOW couldn't recognise. Thanks again!
  5. I think I have found the answer to my previous question regarding the application of the loss coefficients in bg tables. There appears to be NO linear interpolation between coefficients in the bg table.
  6. Thanks for your help Bill, I have changed the set up by digitising the B and W channels in parallel and I'm now confident with the output. I have however had some problems in applying the bg table to the structure. I have generated my bg table using a HECRAS model with the same 1d network as TUFLOW. I want to generate the same afflux accross the bridge I found in HECRAS with TUFLOW. My method of generating the K values in the bg table was to use the upstream and downstream water levels to determine the head loss, use the velocity under the structure to determine the velocity head and then divide the head loss by the velocity head to get K (which is then entered into the bg table next to the appropriate down stream water level). I was having the following difficulties; firstly that the K values I entered into the bg table were not being used by the TUFLOW model; and, secondly when the waterlevel reached the soffit of the bridge (as defined by the maximum elevation in the CS) it used the same loss coefficient for all water levels exceeding the soffit level. In investigating the problem I noted that I had the Structure Losses == Adjust option on as default (I'm using the 2008-08-AA-isp version) which was adjusting my loss coefficients. As I only wanted to fix the losses at one bridge I altered the channel type at the bridge from B to BF (F flag for fixed). This seemed to fix the problem of not applying the loss coefficients specified in the bg table but didn't solve the problem of applying the same loss coefficient to waterlevels exceeding the soffit level. Is there a way of using all the loss coeffients in the bg table, even those with downstream water surface levels (velocities in both models for a given D/S water level match well) exceeding the soffit level of the bridge? Cheers
  7. I'm trying to represent a bridge using the channel type BW (Bridge/Weir) option in my 1dnwk. I am able to model the bridge soffit (by limiting the associated CS data to the soffit elevation) but I am having difficulty representing the crest level of the bridge. I initially tried entering the depth of the bridge (approx 1.5m) in the eN2 attribute, however the 1d_nwk check file indicated that the invert elevation of the weir was approx. 1.5mAHD and I was getting errors whilst trying to run the model (water level exceeds node height....). I then altered the eN2 attribute to represent the crest level of the bridge (mAHD) which yielded a working model and the 1d_nwk check file indicating the US and DS invert of the weir equal to the crest level of the bridge. I thought the model was representing the bridge accurately until I checked the .eof file which indicated that the weir representing the crest of the bridge was 5m deep. My question is essentially how do I represent the deck of the bridge? Do I set the eN2 attribute to the soffit height of the bridge and if so how do I specify how deep the deck (and hence the crest level) is? Thanks for your help!
  • Create New...