Revision as of 13:22, 4 January 2018 view source Chris Huxley (talk \| contribs) Bureaucrats, Administrators 7,785 edits →University Thesis Studies ← Older edit		Revision as of 06:56, 6 January 2018 view source Chris Huxley (talk \| contribs) Bureaucrats, Administrators 7,785 edits →Other Benchmark Studies Newer edit →
Line 71: [http://evidence.environment-agency.gov.uk/FCERM/Libraries/FCERM_Project_Documents/SC120002_Benchmarking_2D_hydraulic_models_Report.sflb.ashx Benchmarking the Latest Generation of 2D Hydraulic Modelling Packages (Environment Agency, 2013)]</li> [https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/290884/scho0510bsno-e-e.pdf Benchmarking of 2D Hydraulic Modelling Packages (Environment Agency, 2010)]</li> The above benchmark documents have been superseded by the document below. It is a revision of the benchmark modelling using the 2017-09-AC version of TUFLOW. It includes results for TUFLOW Classic, FV, GPU and the new TUFLOW HPC solver. [https://www.tuflow.com/Download/Publications/UK%20EA%202D%20Benchmarking%20Results.TUFLOW%20Products%202017-09.pdf United Kingdom Environment Agency 2D Benchmarking Results - TUFLOW Products 2017-09]</li> <li>Bill Syme presented model validation results for a case study in the Eudlo Creek Catchment, Australia at the 2006 Association of State Floodplain Managers (ASFPM) Conference. TUFLOW was benchmarked against a physical model and FESWMS. [http://www.tuflow.com/Download/Publications/2006.05%20-%20Bruce%20Highway%20Eudlo%20Ck%20Hydraulic%20Investigations%20-%20A%20Turning%20Point.Syme.ASFPM%202006.pdf Bruce Highway Eudlo Creek Hydraulic Investigations (ASFPM Conference, 2006)]</li>

TUFLOW Benchmarking: Difference between revisions