open TELEMAC-MASCARET The mathematically superior suite of solvers

Hello,

As I was browsing the trunk logs during my morning coffee session, I noticed an interesting addition regarding ARTEMIS. Is it possible to learn more about CUE-391 and CUE-392 so that I can test it in my current project?

Best Regards,
Costas

Hello,

These are changes we just committed - they will be documented with other changes with v7p3. The LECLIM / CLI file setup also took into account changes on the wish lists of community users (for instance: #21283).

Since you already have an svn login, you can actually access the cue.opentelemac.org ... and participate (?)

Our next step is to do the CLI file setup in QGIS.

Sébastien.

Hello Sebastien,

Logged in to the cue.opentelemac.org and got an idea how this works. However the description regarding CUE-391 and 392 is less explanatory than the svn log but I can figure it out from the sources anyway.

So far I was employing a python script to create a borh subroutine for each wave condition for batch processing. It can be easily adapted to do the same with CLI files and potentially do some of the solid boundary pre-processing at the same time. However, a graphical tool like BK or QGIS must inevitably be employed at some stage.

Regards,
Costas

Hello,

Using Artelia's PostTelemac plugin or developing a brand new tool?

Regards,

José Díaz.

Hello,

Defining ALFAP through subroutine borh was straight forward. However, I am having trouble doing the same trough the cli file. Looking through the examples, I assume that 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th columns in the cli file are HB, TETAB/TETAP, ALFAP and RP respectively. However, I haven't noticed any example with wave dephasing other than 0 to verify this.

Can someone verify my assumption?

Regards,
Costas

Morning Costas,

I'm assuming you're using the latest code (this being a new-ish feature).

If you haven't worked it out from the sources already, I can confirm that HB, TETAP, ALFAP and RP are in 4th,5th,6th and 7th columns respectively in the cli file, should you wish to use it to define your run.

I would just like to add that you don't have to, and can still code up in BORH if you prefer...

Hope that helps - Noémie

Good morning Noémie,

Thank you for confirming this to me. I am on v7p3r0 and using this feature already for defining HB, TETAP and RP up to this far, so the feature is enabled. I had a brief try to define ALFAP as well and it appeared as it was not working. Since this was a small structure near shallow waters, the effect could be suppressed. So I will test with plain geometry solid boundaries before I file any complaint.

Regards,
Costas

The use of ALFAP is not tested in the standard testcases, as you have already noted. Do let us know if something does not look quite right...

Noémie

I have finally located the culprit. According to the 2018 TUC proceedings:
Since BlueKenue sets LIUBOR and LIVBOR to 1 by default (and I did not bother to change them), TETAP and ALPHAP were ignored...

Regards,
Costas