TUFLOW Version Backward Compatibility: Difference between revisions

 

=Backward Compatibility Change Register=

{|class="wikitable"

 

| Will not cause different results if a <font color="blue"><tt>Set Mat </tt></font> <font color="red"><tt>== </tt></font><tt> 1</tt> is specified before other material settings in the .tgc file, or if every cell has been assigned a material value.

|-

| 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'''

|

|}