open TELEMAC-MASCARET The mathematically superior suite of solvers

Thanks Jean-Michel and Pablo, Certainly a lot is changing. My apologies for the desinformation in my comment.

Hi,
Thanks Michiel for your suggestions –I hadn’t considered the long line-length, but this didn’t make a difference. The (first) problem was that I had left LIQBOR=5 on some of the outflow boundaries in the SISYPHE cli file.

Following Pablo’s document, and the example of validation case 002_canal_solid_discharge_inflow, I have set all inflow boundaries with prescribed flux to LIQBOR=5 and LIEBOR = 4 with a value for Q2BOR, and all outflow boundaries to LIQBOR =4 and LIEBOR =5 with 0 for Q2BOR. Revised BC file is attached.

I appear to be on the right track, but only the outflow boundaries and the last of the inflow boundaries show bedload flux . The first 3 inflow boundaries show 0 flux.

With my rudimentary debugging skills, it seems to me that within subroutine CONLIT, the call to DISIMP for each prescribed influx overwrites with 0 the QBOR values for previously calculated boundaries. Unfortunately my fortran knowledge doesn’t extend to being able to correct this :)

Would really appreciate if anyone can confirm this problem, and offer any help toward a fix.

Best regards,
Dougal

As a slight aside, one thing that has confused me, and I’m hoping someone can confirm, is that QS BEDLOAD seems to be the sediment transport *capacity*, not the actual transport rate. I had thought to double-check the boundary flux by integrating QS BEDLOAD across the boundaries, but it represents something else.

For example, when I accidentally had 0 sediment influx on all boundaries, if I used a rigid bed, I would get 0 EVOLUTION (i.e. confirming the rigid bed is working, and there is no sediment input), but there would still be QS BEDLOAD throughout the model.

Can be also shown for validation case 002_canal_solid_discharge_inflow - whilst there is a constant inflow of sediment, QS BEDLOAD on the inflow boundary nodes is initially much smaller than the inflow flux, and then increases in time as the sediment deposits and transport capacity increases.

Dougal

Hello Dougal,
yes you are right, the QS BEADLOAD is merely the sediment transport capacity.
It is problem for evaluation that we encountered before. It is supposed to get fixed, but I don't know how the work for this is going on.
Annalena

Attached is the altered CONLIT subroutine I've used to successfully get multiple PRESCRIBED SOLID DISCHARGES to work.

May not be pretty but it works. Perhaps correction needs to be made to DISIMP function?

Cheers,
Dougal

Dear Dougal,
many thanks for sharing your file.
(1) By the way, it is possible to take your files (geo, conlim, f, etc.) to prepare an application case to be include in the database of tests of Sisyphe? Of course your name will be included in the credits

(2) We will take a look to the DISIMP function

Many thanks again,

Pablo

Hi all,

In order to not create a new topic I will complete this topic by a new question.

I've read solide_discharge_sisyphe.pdf and others topics ([url=http://http://www.opentelemac.org/index.php/kunena/17-sisyphe/7732-rigid-bed-at-upstream-boundary#16524][/url]) which deal with solide discharge but I'm still a bit confused.

I want to impose solid discharge in one of my boundary so I set (in my .cli file and on all the node of my boundary)
4 5 5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 89 742
LIHBOR | LIQBOR | LIQBOR | Q2BOR | X5 | X6 | X7 | LIEBOR | EBOR | X10 | X11 | N | K

According to the pdf it means
Q2BOR is taken as a profil (because I imposed a solid discharge in my sisyphe .cas file)
LIQBOR = 5 (KENT) and LIEBOR = 4 (KSORT) for boundaries with prescribed solide discharge
If I set Q2BOR to 0 I got an error ''DONNER UN PROFIL DE DEBIT SOLIDE DANS LE FICHIER DES CONDITIONS AUX LIMITES'' which is normal because I need to imposed a profil on Q2BOR.

Question
How is set the weighting on all the nodes ? It's Q2BOR (value) * ''DEBITS SOLIDES IMPOSES'' (case 1) or this a balancing Q2BORD (value) * solid discharge on every node = ''DEBITS SOLIDE IMPOSES'' (case 2) ?




I hope I'm clear.
Thanks again for helps.
Best regards,
PN