Forum Replies Created
You can certainly generate a regular cartesian grid using the grid generator we have provided here on GitHub: https://github.com/dsi-llc/EFDCPlus/tree/master/GridGenerator
That grid generating tool is pretty easy to use, and you will have no problem generating a regular cartesian grid.
We don’t recommend using the EPA EFDC version 1.01, as it is quite old now and is a bit difficult to use compared to EFDC+. Please give it a try using the tools we provide on GitHub. A lot of the issues you appear to be having should be resolved by using our grid generating tool to create the input files.
It certainly is. You can set up a time series for open boundaries using the pser.inp file.
If you are using EFDC_Explorer, you can follow the steps here (rather than selecting flow you would select water level): https://eemodelingsystem.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/EK/pages/240386145/External+Forcing+Data
If you want to see the file format that EFDC_Explorer will read you can look at this page: https://eemodelingsystem.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/EK/pages/243630365/Appendix+B+-+Data+Formats
Let me know if you have further questions.
The new version is not available for download yet. We will be releasing it sometime in early November.
That makes sense, you are telling EFDC_Explorer to use the values you have provided in aser.inp, which are all zero. If you want EFDC+ to compute evaporation as a function of air temp, water temp, relative humidity, wind, etc. you need to choose one of the other options.
Note that these options only impact the computed mass balance of the model. The latent heat flux will still be included in the computations of water temperature during the simulation even with the options you are showing deactivated.
We have found the issue and it will be fixed in the next release.
Please have a look at the following page on our knowledge base, which covers the general format of the p2d and other file formats: https://eemodelingsystem.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/EK/pages/243630365/Appendix+B+-+Data+FormatsOctober 16, 2019 at 12:40 am in reply to: WQ Model – Problem w/ Dye and Nutrient Mass Balance #6410
Please attach your model input files and we can take a look.
Thank you for your question. This is something we have planned on adding for awhile and are just now getting around to.
Right now we are planning to release this feature with EFDC_Explorer 10.1 later this month or in early November.
It’s a bit of all of the three you mentioned, depending on what is available to you. Parameters for Nutrients and Algae could be based on site specific data, provided it is of sufficient detail. Typical values from literature or other source may also help constrain the range of values you might use for calibration.
If you like, you can send a ticket to [email protected] about this. We can will try to support you further.
The dimensions of a grid cell can be displayed in the 2DH view by selecting the cell: https://eemodelingsystem.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/EK/pages/246252290/Grid+Cell+Properties
Summary statistics for the grid are also displayed in the model control form: https://eemodelingsystem.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/EK/pages/240222297/Model+Grid
Additionally, you can export the grid to shapefile from the 2DH view and work with it externally too if that is more suitable to your goals: https://eemodelingsystem.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/CVLKB/pages/2818186/Export+Current+Layer
Let me know if you have any further questions.
Although we haven’t tested with this version ourselves, we believe it should work. Please let us know if you have any issues with this and we will try to help troubleshoot.
Based on the plot you provided, it appears the water levels are effectively constant. The variations you are showing are within the range of numerical precision for the model when using a 2-time level solution and single precision executable. You may see improved numerical stability in your model if you switch to the 3-time level solution, and it may also improve further if you use the double precision executable. Using the two together should yield very stable results numerically. A more conservative time step could also help maintain a perfectly (numerically) constant water level.
If you want to maintain a constant water level, I would recommend using an open boundary rather than a flow boundary.
Please have a look at the following step-by-step guide for developing a water quality model using EFDC_Explorer: https://eemodelingsystem.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/EHG/pages/3407891/Building+a+2D+Lake+Water+Quality+Model+Level+2+Step-by-Step+Guidance