Jump to content
TUFLOW Forum

Lih_Chong

Members
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Lih_Chong

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

1052 profile views
  1. Hi Chris, I have been having issues recently with a new Win10 machine where the simulation inexplicably drops out, last couple of times when writing output. The sim hasn't crashed or paused, but the simulation window just closes by itself. Any ideas if it is the same issue? I have applied your suggested Quick Edit solution anyway. Cheers, Lih
  2. Hi, I'm trying this thinning process with T2G 2014, processing .xmdf output file. But I receive an error when importing into mapinfo "Error is 615 -..... - Found [NaN] while searching for [a numeric constant]". Any suggestions?
  3. Lih_Chong

    Q Type Pits

    I have modelled cut off drains as 1D channels before, rather than as pits, as this accounts for the limited capacity of the cutoff drain in conveying flow to the pipe or connector pit. Plus you get to specify which cells connect to the cutoff drain.
  4. I had this issue yesterday! I had an error when trying to run the scenario options in version 2010, but it works fine with version 2011.
  5. Hi, I have previously used "Q" pits to connect the 2d domain to a 1d underground pipe network, using a depth vs inflow relationship to define the pit inlet capacity. At the moment I want to connect a 1d cess/dish drain (instead of the 2d domain) to a pipe network via a pit inlet with limited capacity. Is there a way? I have unsuccessfully tried a number of options. Currently the pit inlets are being modelled as a wide (10m wide)1d weir structure to link the dish drain and pipe, which represents it as having unlimited inlet capacity (pipe capacity is the constraint). Was hoping there would be something similar to a 1d_tab object where d vs inflow could be defined. I suppose I could limit the weir width to the actual inflow width, but that would not represent orifice flow if the pits become highly drowned. Thanks
  6. Might be useful to compare against for example the pit inflow relationships in DRAINS for on-grade pits as a sanity check.
  7. My understanding is that the post-processor won't output a t=99999 (max of max) q file, although I think it would be a useful result file. It works for h,d,v and Z1 and possibly other outputs. Perhaps other users or admin can clarify.
  8. Have you got a HX line across and within the channel? i can see the HX lines on the overbank areas but not in the channel.
  9. What about just running up to t=5h (with the command "start map output (h) == 2") then extracting the max from that run? If there aren't any problems with rerunning the model.
  10. The .dat files contain results written throughout the entire simulation. You can extract results at t=2h and t=5h to .asc using TUFLOW_to_GIS, import using Vertical Mapper and then use the grid splicer to derive a grid with the max results of the 2h and 5h grids.
  11. Hi I've been using 2D_SA polygons to apply the inflows to 1d_nwk pit objects (Type="Q"; Conn_2D="SX" or "SXZ" though I think there are other settings you could use.) to assign catchment flows to pit surfaces. If multiple pits fall inside the SA polygon then the flow hydrograph is split equally between the pits.
  12. I have experienced this as well. You either need to reboot the machine, or log out/log back in (not sure if logging out will affect other programs running?) If you wait just a couple more seconds to stop the simulation (i.e. wait til the software has detected the dongle and starts processing the model files) then this problem is avoided.
  13. I have modelled two small bridges over a 2d concrete channel using 2d_lfcsh objects. The bridges are simply concrete slabs placed over the channel, with no piers. I have specified a layer 1 loss (L1_FLC) of 0.01, a L2_FLC of 1.56 and a L3_FLC of 1.56. I opened the lfcsh_uvpt_check layer, and the relevant invert/obvert levels and blockages (0% for L1 and 100% for L2 and L3) are all correct, however, the losses have been doubled (e.g. L1_FLC = 0.02, L2_FLC and L3_FLC = 3.12)... is TUFLOW reading and treating the layer's attributes correctly? Should the losses not be as specified in the 2d_lfcsh layer? cheers
  14. Capability of the "Read TIN zpts command" to read ArcMap TINs would also be useful. Is this a possibility?
  15. (Hi Bill ) I want to model a 1D stormwater pipe network within a 2D domain. I believe that the network capacity is constrained by the pit inlets rather than the pipes. Is there a way to model the pit inlets using the 1D pit objects, eg setting the pit object to type "R" and applying the lintel length and height (for a kerb entry pit)? Otherwise, is there a way to apply a known pit inflow relationship to the pit (similar to a pump, except limited by the tailwater conditions)? I have previously been modelling pit inlets using a weir structure connected to the pipe network but I think this may be overestimating the pit inlet capacity. Thanks
×
×
  • Create New...