TUFLOW Version Backward Compatibility: Difference between revisions

 

 

{|class="wikitable"

|No backward compatible workaround provided.<br>

|-

|No backward compatible workaround provided.<br>

|-

|Set <font color="blue"><tt>Defaults </tt></font> <font color="red"><tt>== </tt></font><tt>PRE 2016</tt> if similar results are required to the 2013-12-AC release.<br>

|-

|Set <font color="blue"><tt>Defaults </tt></font> <font color="red"><tt>== </tt></font><tt>PRE 2016</tt> if similar results are required to the 2013-12-AC release.<br>

|-

 

| rowspan=1|2013-12-AA

| Set <font color="blue"><tt>Defaults </tt></font> <font color="red"><tt>== </tt></font><tt>PRE 2013-12</tt> if similar results are required to the 2012-05 release.

|-

| rowspan=1|2013-12-AC

| The default setting for <font color="blue">Link 2D2D Approach</font> has changed.

 

|-

 

| rowspan=2| 2012-05-AA

| Set <font color="blue"><tt>Defaults </tt></font> <font color="red"><tt>== </tt></font><tt>PRE 2012-05</tt> if similar results are required to the 2011-09 or 2010-10 releases.

|-

| The approach to the sizing of automatic manholes and the application of losses has been enhanced.

|-

 

| No workaround. Use the same platform (w32 or w64) for all simulations. Use <font color="blue">Model Platform</font> to force which platform should be used.

|-

| Set <font color="blue"><tt>Defaults </tt></font> <font color="red"><tt>== </tt></font><tt>PRE 2010-10</tt> if similar results are required to the 2008-08 or 2009 07 releases.

|-

| rowspan=1| 2008-08-AC

| The default setting for <font color="blue"><u>Shallow Depth Stability Factor</u></font> has changed.

|-

 

|-

| Uses a new set of defaults for a number of commands (see <font color="blue">Defaults</font> ).

|-

| The method for interpolating n values where the 2D Manning’s n varies with depth has been enhanced from a linear interpolation of the M (1/n) value to a spline interpolation of the n value. See <font color="blue"><u>Bed Resistance Depth Interpolation</u></font>.

| The new defaults may produce slightly different results. For established models run using the 2006-06-XX builds, use <font color="blue"><tt>Defaults </tt></font> <font color="red"><tt>== </tt></font><tt>PRE 2007-07-AA</tt> to use the default settings used by the 2006-06-XX builds. Each of the new default settings and their affects are discussed in the rows below.

|-

|-

| Testing thus far has not shown any difference between the two methods (other than the substantial gains in processing time of polygons).

|-

| May change results slightly, but improved stability and a smoother water levels along HX lines result.

|-

| May change results slightly, but stability should be significantly enhanced in some situations.

|-

| Will influence results, usually slightly, but more pronounced where there are sudden changes in Manning’s n values such as in the urban environment.

|-

|-

| Changed the setting of the default width (if eN1 < 0.001) of automatic weirs over R and C channels (i.e. RW and CW) to be the diameter/width multiplied by the number of culverts (previously, the width was not multiplied by the number of culverts).

|-

| Bug fix that incorrectly set the water levels on dried VG cells (only applies to simulations with source inflows, e.g. SA or RF, somewhere within in the model).

|-

| Fixed bug that did not correctly apply the reduction in conveyance for a FC BD (bridge deck) of FD (floating deck) cell using the 2d_fc Mannings_n attribute.

|-

| Uses a new set of defaults for a number of commands.

|-

| The most pronounced effect of the shallower wet/dry depths is likely to occur in areas that are still filling at the flood peak, such as behind a levee that is only just overtopped. The shallower wet/dry depths provides a greater flow depth for a longer period over the levee.

|-

| Usually does not have a major influence on results except where very high velocities occur.

|-

| May select slightly different cells along boundary/link lines. This may cause a difference where the line is along the top of levee, possibly creating a “hole” in embankment.

|-

| Can have a significant effect where the viscosity term is influential. This occurs where the friction term is less dominant (i.e. low Manning’s n and/or deeper water such as the lower, tidal, reaches of rivers).

|-

| Can have a significant affect in the vicinity of structures within a 1D network and for culvert networks. Does not affect 1D structures linked to a 2D domain or at the structure ends not connected to another 1D channel.

|-

| Usually negligible effect unless the model storage is predominantly within 1D closed sections (i.e. B, C and R channels). The 1D domain is likely to be more sensitive to instabilities due to the much smaller storage above the top of the closed sections, therefore, a smaller 1D timestep may be required and/or the Storage Above Structure Obvert (%) increased.

|-

| No effect as previously the model would have become “unstable” as the trigger for an instability was the top of the channel/node.

|-

| Usually only minor effects plus improved stability.

|-

| Minor influence.

|-

| Negligible influence plus improved stability. However, note the different treatment of energy losses once the bridge deck obvert/soffit is submerged if a BG or LC table is specified.

|-

| Only affects the presentation of results. Note, that Method A is no longer recommended or supported.

|-

Does not affect hydraulic calculations, however, if a Blank, B or W channel is now lowered/raised because the inverts are now used, this will affect results/stability - see note at end of Apply All Inverts).

|-

| Will affect results as ALL PARALLEL can be around 10% more “slippery” than CHANGE IN RESISTANCE. For calibrated or established models developed using build prior to Build 2006-06-AA , recommend setting to CHANGE IN RESISTANCE

|-

| Negligible effect.

 

|-

|'''Builds prior to 2006-06-XX'''

|

|}

== Why are model results developed in an older release different to a newer release? ==

If comparing a Classic model with HPC, also check the <u>[[HPC_FAQ#Will_TUFLOW_HPC_and_TUFLOW_Classic_results_match.3F | Will TUFLOW HPC and TUFLOW Classic results match?]]</u> page in addition to this answer. <br>

 

The recommendation is usually for new or reworked models to use the newest build to take advantage of the latest features and enhancements, some level of calibration might be required for reworked models. The new TUFLOW executable is not different from the previous ones in the meaning that any existing model should be re-calibrated if there are available calibration data. However, particularly if a model is already calibrated, using prior builds of TUFLOW or winding back default settings using <font color="blue"><tt>Defaults</tt></font> <font color="red"><tt>== </tt></font> command is considered reasonable for established models that are to be used for minor tasks and an update of the model would not be cost effective.<br>

<br>

{{Tips Navigation