Jump to content
TUFLOW Forum

jrwbell

Members
  • Content Count

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by jrwbell


  1. I was experimenting with functional surface in SMS and it looks great. I would like this option in TUFLOW though. i.e. for the 1d_wll derived output to be in correct elevation. With reference to the attached image, when I turn on the texture map, if you look closely, whilst the 1d_output is now at the correct elevation, the aerial photo is super-elevated. I presume this is because .2dm is super-elevated.

    post-2137-1298973114_thumb.jpg


  2. I hit an error, ERROR 2450 - Model is not a registered tutorial model. Please remove "Tutorial Model == ON" command. I was trying to add a 1d_nwk layer with Q pits.

    If I comment out the 1d_nwk layer, the model runs.

    Any idea as to why Q pits are unable to be read in the tutorial model? I just wanted to test something.

    thanks

    Justin


  3. Hi.

    I have a large model that I want to use a restart file to 'hot-start'. At the moment I'm working through the calibration stage.

    I was wondering about Qi with the hot-started model because it's gone a bit crazy, and hence dV is indicating signifcant inflow into the model. Mass balance is fine and model appears stable in terms of no negative depths and CE is 0.0% but I just thought I'd ask if there's any reason why Qi isn't realistic if using a restart file.

    The hot-start for the model was set prior to commencement of rainfall into the model, so is just 4 hours of tidal data before the storm event. The primary model had Qi = 0 at equivalent time.

    Any ideas?

    cheers

    Justin


  4. Thanks Everyone.

    I have decided to try 1d_bc:QT|P via a polygon so as to apply inflows to the bottom of the pits. My logic for this approach is because I'm not modelling every pit and pipe in the drainage system so it's therefore reasonable to apply inflows at the bottom of the pit channels. I have also used the same approach at some locations too, as point objects (can I do this?).

    My follow-up question though is I've encountered the following error at some pits underlying my 1d_bc:QT|P polygon, but at not all pits: ERROR - All 1D nodes within 1D QT region to be assigned a flow are a H boundary or a 2D SX link. The error is written twice at the particular pit, yet there's no error in the next pit above or below that fall under the same polygon.

    Anyhow, if anyone can shed light on this then that'd be appreciated:

    a) can i use point objects with a |P flag (or doesn't it matter); and

    B) what might be causing that error at particular pits but not others under the same 1d_bc:QT|P polygon?

    cheers

    Justin


  5. Hi.

    I would like to use a 1d_bc:QT polygon to apply inflow from RAFTS .LOC to the top of Q pits. i.e. take into consideration the depth-discharge relationship referred to in the pit database such that surcharge appears in the 2D domain.

    I note the manual has "C", "O" and "P" flags, however, can anyone tell me whether the "P" flag will apply QT (uniformly distributed underneath the polygon to relevant nodes) to top of Q pits or will it "only direct flow into the bottom of pit channels".

    cheers

    Justin


  6. Hi SjB.

    3 decimal places is the norm as far as I'm concerned. i.e. 0.016, 0.025, 0.033. Obviously the impact of 0.025 compared to 0.026 would be almost negligible so if the model is uncalibrated then perhaps 0.015, 0.020, 0.025 might be appropriate.

    regards

    Justin


  7. Hi Everyone.

    I am new user of Create ZTIN Zpts and I have a query about "3D breakline effect".

    The manual states:

    "© If there are any points snapped to the line’s vertices, the elevations of these points are used to set the elevations at all the vertices generated along the line. In this way, a 3D breakline effect can be produced within the TIN. If there are no points snapped to the line, the line’s elevation is used giving the effect of a horizontal line."

    My experiment to try and understand these was to try to generate a simple earthern bund. I used is a triplet of point objects with elevation at 5 m spacing (the centre "run of points" being the top of the bund), a polyline along the top of the bund and a polygon around the outside in a 2d_tin file (read in using Create TIN Zpts WRITE TIN == mi\2d_ztin_M03_Test_014.MIF).

    I've tried the point objects in a separate file and embedded in the 2d_tin. I've also tried the polyline snapped to the first and the last node of the top of the bund, and snapped to every point.

    The M03_5m_014_sh_obj_check.mif file indicates that the triangulation is working fine (and semed to work fine with points in separate file and embedded and with and without snapping the polyline to the points), but I was hoping to achieve a 2d_ZLN RIDGE effect.

    My question is should I expect Create TIN Zpts to work in the same way as 2d_ZLN RIDGE works.

    regards

    Justin

×
×
  • Create New...