open TELEMAC-MASCARET The mathematically superior suite of solvers

Hello,

I am a beginner of telemac.

Now I am trying to make waves at liquid boundary by means of incide.f.

waves I want to make are 1.43s for period, 0.14 for wave height. And bottom elevation is -0.40m.

I edited the source code and set incide.f as fortran file in steering file of Telemac2D according to Telemac manual.
But when I ran this case, no waves were made in the result file.

I do not understand which arguments are necessary.
Please tell me how I set arguments properly?

I add my incide.f as follows:

SUBROUTINE INCIDE
*(COTOND,H,C0,PATMOS,ATMOS,ZF,MESH,LT,AT,GRAV,ROEAU,PRIVE)
USE BIEF
IMPLICIT NONE
INTEGER LNG,LU
COMMON/INFO/LNG,LU
c
INTEGER, INTENT(IN) :: LT
LOGICAL, INTENT(IN) :: ATMOS
DOUBLE PRECISION, INTENT(IN) :: AT,GRAV,ROEAU
TYPE(BIEF_OBJ), INTENT(IN) :: PATMOS,H,C0,ZF,PRIVE
TYPE(BIEF_OBJ), INTENT(INOUT) :: COTOND
TYPE(BIEF_MESH), INTENT(INOUT) :: MESH
c
DOUBLE PRECISION PI
DOUBLE PRECISION PERIOD,WPLG,A,ZMOY
DOUBLE PRECISION HENDO
INTEGER K
c
c

---

CALL OS( 'X=C ' , X=COTOND , C=0.D0 )
PI = 3.141592653589D0
PERIOD = 1.43D0
WPLG = 2.*PI/PERIOD
A=0.07D0
ZMOY = 0.0D0
HENDO = A * SIN(WPLG*AT)[/color]
COTOND%R(1) = ZMOY + HENDO
DO K=1058,1064
COTOND%R(K) = ZMOY + HENDO
ENDDO
c

---

RETURN
END



Thank you for your help.
With best regards

Can you also send the other input files too (CAS, GEO, CONLIM, etc) ? That would help check the boundary setting, in particular your CONLIM.

Sébastien

Hi,

>>Mr. sebourban
Thank you for your answering.
Now I solved the problem by oneself.
So I succeeded generating waves using incide.f.

But I am encountering a difficulty in the case I made.
As the result of the calculation, the animation in Blue Kenue shows bad wave shape that is more bigger than I wanted.
And when I run my case, an error message is displayed as follows:

ILL-POSED PROBLEM, ENTERING FREE VELOCITY
FOR EXAMPLE AT BOUNDARY NUMBER 1061
ILL-POSED PROBLEM, FREE DEPTH
ON BOUNDARY WITH ENTERING VELOCITY
AND SUPERCRITICAL FLOW
FOR EXAMPLE AT BOUNDARY POINT NUMBER 1061

Could you tell me the reason why wave shape become strange?
Anyway I add my files to forum.

Best regards,

Ryuta

This is often a problem with unsatisfied boundaries, when there are not enough conditions to close the numerical problem.

May I recommend you use the subroutine SL instead (I have attached it here, having modified it with your incident wave), which seems to run in a much more stable manner, even though it also highlights the none closure of your problem as the velocity changes direction. I was able to complete the simulation and produce a very nice animation of the wave transformation and breaking -- maybe something we can use in the gallery -- I had to change the boundary condition code from 1 1 1 to 5 4 4 in you CONLIM (also attached).

I changes your graphical output period to a smaller value (in your CAS file). Also note that PI = 4.d0 x DATAN( 1.d0 ) is machine accurate (in your PRINCI file).

Finally, may I recommend you check / use / compare with the Finite Volume formulation. Ideally you may want to do the same with TELEMAC-3D, which will be open source very soon.

Hope this helps.

Sébastien.

Hi,

>>Mr. sebourban
Thank you for your kind answering and modifying.

Now I am able to make waves.
But there are two more questions I have.

(question #1)
I would like to know whether I can simulate the return flow between shoreline and breaker zone in the vicinity of the bottom using this configuration of steering file or not.

The reason why I want to do this is because I want to recreate bar and trough in bottom morphology using Sisyphe.
But when I used coupling with sisyphe and calculated it for 5 hours, bed change was much smaller than that I observed in actual experiment, and there were not bar and trough.
I felt that mass transport flow and return flow get balanced out when depth averaged flow is assumed.
Is my thought right?

(question #2)
Can I recreate wave setup and wave setdown?

In the simulation, the first wave I made became swash of a wave nearby shoreline. But latter waves can't go over the shoreline, and then the elevation of free surface decreases gradually in comparison with that of initial state.
I thought that wave setup and wave setdown happen in this simulation.


As you say, I want to compare with 3D simulation because I want to see the velocity profile near the bottom of slope in detail when eroded or deposited.

Best regards,

Ryuta