open TELEMAC-MASCARET The mathematically superior suite of solvers

Hi Zheng,

"mean wave direction=270 degree" --> the waves are going to the west!
"Wind forcing speed=40 and direction=270 degree. The Wind blowing to the east direction?" --> No!

The wave direction in TOMAWAC is :
- the wave propagation direction = direction where the wave is going
- in the clockwise direction with respect to the North
- expressed in degrees
Example: a value of 90 corresponds to a wave that goes to the East (ie coming from the West)

"BOUNDARY MAIN DIRECTION 1 =40." --> why 40°? waves going to the east = 90°

"WIND VELOCITY ALONG X =40.0
WIND VELOCITY ALONG Y =0.0" --> Ok

"INITIAL MAIN DIRECTION 1 =270." --> put 90°

You can also make some tests to see if that influence your results :

- try to change the spectral discretization : use more directions (36 for example), more frequencies (50?) with a smaller frequential ratio and a smaller minimal frequency

- try to put less breaking (you can first run a simulation without any breaking) to see if it gives you more physical results

Did you do some tests about the time step?

Regards and good luck!

Elodie

Elodie, good morning,
Sorry to replay your message later and according to your suggestion and advice. Some parameters in steering file have been changed as list below ( wave propagation and wind are all from west to east):
FREQUENTIAL RATIO =1.05
MINIMAL FREQUENCY =0.04
NUMBER OF DIRECTIONS =36
NUMBER OF FREQUENCIES =50
BOUNDARY DIRECTIONAL SPREAD 1 = 2.
BOUNDARY MAIN DIRECTION 1 =90.
WIND VELOCITY ALONG X =40.0
WIND VELOCITY ALONG Y =0.0
INITIAL DIRECTIONAL SPREAD 1 =2.
INITIAL MAIN DIRECTION 1 =90.
But result is still not right? My steering file and result attached.
Could you help me to see them where is wrong?
I will be varying time step in next test.
Thank you very much!
Zheng

Hi, Elodie,

I have done the test varying in time step (1s, 100s and 3600s)and results attached. I think them are all right. The Mike result is 3600s for once.

What do you think?

Thanks again,

Zheng

Hi Zheng,

sorry for the late reply. I was thinking about a smaller time step (less than 1 s, and not 100 s or 3600 s which is far too much) and a larger simulation time (a larger number of time steps).

Regards,

Elodie