Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'network'.
Found 2 results
Hi, We have a large model running which takes about 12 days. We are 4 days into two of the runs and my PC detached from the network where we have a network licence for ISIS. The run log says: "Seeking licence for ISIS-TUFLOW-PIPE link...Licence code 4 unobtainable. Dongle read error code 0 Please attach the dongle and hit return." I ensured I was reattached to the network but when I pressed return on one run and the model run just closed. The second is still paused awaiting my input, I'd rather not lose 4 days run time if possible. Is there a way to continue running the model having lost and regained network connection? Thanks, Lucy
Hi, I've got a large ESTRY network which is read in from lots of separate files. Portions of this network include culverts which have been linked to the main channel using X connector channels. I wanted to block all of my culverts for a sensitivity, and rather than go through every file and find the culverts and change pblockage, I thought I'd just pick up the 1d_nwk_C check file, select the relevant culverts from this single location, save them into a new file, change pblockage and read it in as after I'd read in all the other network files. My expectation being that this would replace the portions of channel with a straight substitution; the check file channels being in the same place and with the same id. What actually happened was that at all the culverts which were connected to X channels, the model failed to initialize with the error that goes something like "ERROR: X connection has multiple channels at upstream end" (sorry I didn't take a note of it and have subsequently got rid of that file). The other culverts seemed ok with no errors, though I didn't stop to assess them thoroughly. So my question is this: Is this a 'feature' with how X channels work and are checked, where it doesn't substitute the new channel in place of the original until after it looks to make sure there's only one thing attached to the X channel and think something is amiss when it wouldn't be if it could just process a smidge further, and a fix might be along soon in an up coming release? Or have I missed some facet of the check file that means that I'm not actually offering ESTRY a copied pipe for substitution? Or something else?! In the interests of getting the project going, I've done the long hand method of saving a copy of each of my inputs and finding and changing each culvert as required, but it would have been nice (and much faster) if my original technique, as described above, would have worked! Thoughts? PHA.