Changeset 5318

Timestamp:

May 14, 2008, 11:38:09 AM (17 years ago)

Author:

duncan

Message:

update

File:

• anuga_work/publications/anuga_2007/anuga_validation.tex (modified) (3 diffs)

anuga_work/publications/anuga_2007/anuga_validation.tex

@@ -536 +536 @@
 
 Figure~\ref{fig:uq-flume-depth} shows that ANUGA predicts the actual
-water depth very well, with the exception of the fluid tip-region {\bf
-Duncan - what does that mean? About where on the graph is that). 
-Water depth and velocity are coupled as described by the nonlinear shallow water equations, thus
-if one of these quantities accurately estimates the measured values, we would expect 
-the same for the other quantity. This is demonstrated in figure~\ref{fig:uq-flume-velocity)
-where the water velocity is also predicted accurately. Sediment transport studies
-rely on water velocity estimates in the region where the sensors cannot provide this data.
-With water velocity being accurately predicted, studies such as sediment transport can now use
+water depth very well, although there is an initial drop in water depth
+within the first second that is not simulated by ANUGA.
+Water depth and velocity are coupled as described by the nonlinear
+shallow water equations, thus if one of these quantities accurately
+estimates the measured values, we would expect the same for the other
+quantity. This is demonstrated in Figure~\ref{fig:uq-flume-velocity}
+where the water velocity is also predicted accurately. Sediment
+transport studies rely on water velocity estimates in the region where
+the sensors cannot provide this data.  With water velocity being
+accurately predicted, studies such as sediment transport can now use
 reliable estimates.
 
@@ -549 +551 @@
 \subsection{1D flume tank to verify friction}
 
-The same flume tank experimental setup was used to obtain friction values for
-use in hydrodynamic models. A number of bed friction scenarios were simulated in 
-the flume tank. The PVC bottom of the tank is equivalent to a friction value of 0 (i.e
-completely smooth) and small pebbles were used to cover the base of the tank and the
-aim of the experiment was to determine what the Manning's friction value is for 
-this case.
+The same flume tank experimental setup was used to obtain friction
+values for use in hydrodynamic models. A number of bed friction
+scenarios were simulated in the flume tank. The PVC bottom of the tank
+is equivalent to a friction value of 0 (i.e completely smooth) and
+small pebbles were used to cover the base of the tank and the aim of
+the experiment was to determine what the Manning's friction value is
+for this case.
  
 As described in the model equations in \section~\ref{sec:model}, the bed
@@ -568 +571 @@
 \centerline{\includegraphics[width=4in]{uq-friction-depth}}
 \caption{Comparison of wave tank and \ANUGA{} water height at .4 m
-  from the gate, simulated using a Mannings friction of 0.0 and 0.1.}\label{fig:uq-friction-depth}
+  from the gate, simulated using a Mannings friction of 0.0 and
+  0.1.}\label{fig:uq-friction-depth}
 \end{figure}