Changeset 5698


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Aug 27, 2008, 3:47:27 PM (14 years ago)
Author:
duncan
Message:

Hinwood - continuing fix for line overrunning graph in anuga report, plus words for the report

Files:
12 edited

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
  • anuga_validation/Hinwood_2008/calc_rmsd.py

    r5696 r5698  
    209209    #scenarios = [scenarios[0]] # !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    210210
    211     outputdir_tag = "_nolmts_wdth_0.1_z_0.0_ys_0.5_mta_0.01_A"
     211    outputdir_tag = "_nolmts_wdth_0.1_z_0.0_ys_0.01_mta_0.01_A"
    212212    calc_norms = True
    213213    #calc_norms = False
  • anuga_work/development/Hinwood_2008/calc_norm.py

    r5697 r5698  
    442442   
    443443    outputdir_tags = []
    444     outputdir_tags.append("_lmts_wdth_0.1_z_0.0_ys_0.01_mta_0.01_I")
     444    outputdir_tags.append("_nolmts_wdth_0.1_z_0.0_ys_0.01_mta_0.01_I")
    445445    #outputdir_tag = "_test_limiterC"
    446446    #scenarios = [scenarios[0]] # !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • anuga_work/development/Hinwood_2008/plot.py

    r5697 r5698  
    269269                                                time_sim)
    270270    time_sim = compress(condition_sim, time_sim)
     271    condition_exp = get_max_min_condition_array(run_data['wave_times'][0],
     272                                                run_data['wave_times'][1],
     273                                                time_exp)
     274    time_exp = compress(condition_exp, time_exp)
     275   
    271276   
    272277    if is_interactive:
     
    286291        # Trim the simulation data, due to strange anuga paper bug
    287292        quantity_sim = compress(condition_sim, quantity_sim)
     293        quantity_exp = compress(condition_exp, quantity_exp)
    288294
    289295   
  • anuga_work/publications/anuga_2007/anuga_validation.tex

    r5680 r5698  
    556556To explicitly determine if ANUGA can model waves after breaking
    557557several experiments were conducted at the Monash University Institute for
    558 Sustainable Water Resources using a wave flume.  The experiment was
    559 designed to produce a variety of breaking waves.  The experiment was
     558Sustainable Water Resources using a wave flume.  The experiments were
     559designed to produce a variety of breaking waves.  The experiments were
    560560conducted on a 2.5$^\circ$ and a 1.5$^\circ$ plane beach slope set-up
    561561in a glass-sided wave flume of 40m in length, 1.0m wide and 1.6m deep.
     
    564564
    565565Four scenarios with different combinations of wave height and wave period
    566 were used, with each scenario being repeated once.
    567 
    568 A variety of measurements were taken during the simulation.  Mid-depth
     566were used, with each test being repeated.
     567
     568A variety of measurements were taken during each test.  Mid-depth
    569569water velocity and wave height were measured on the approach section.
    570570The water height at several points along the flume were measured using
     
    572572determined the location of breaking waves. All the tests produced 4 to
    5735737 waves.  Generally the first wave did not break, with subsequent
    574 waves breaking; accept for scenario 2, for which the first 3 waves
    575 did not break.  Scenario 1 produced plunging breakers.  Scenario 3
     574waves breaking; accept for scenario 2, for which the first 3 waves did
     575not break.  Scenario 1 produced plunging breakers.  Scenario 3
    576576produced collapsing breakers.  All other scenarios produced spilling
    577 breakers.
    578 
    579 
    580 Details of the tests performed are given in Table \ref{tab:hinwoodSummary}.
     577breakers.  Details of the tests performed are given in Table
     578\ref{tab:hinwoodSummary}.
    581579
    582580\begin{table}
     
    598596   
    599597    % Mapping of new names to old names
    600     % T1R2 T1R3
    601     % T1R1  T1R5
    602     % T2R1  T2R7
    603     % T2R2   T2R8
    604     % T3R2  T3R28
    605     % T3R1    T3R29
    606     % T4R2  T4R31
    607     % T4R1  T4R32
     598    % S1R2 T1R3
     599    % S1R1  T1R5
     600    % S2R1  T2R7
     601    % S2R2   T2R8
     602    % S3R2  T3R28
     603    % S3R1    T3R29
     604    % S4R2  T4R31
     605    % S4R1  T4R32
    608606   
    609607
     
    616614
    617615 All of these tests were simulated using ANUGA. The Mid-depth water
    618 velocity and wave height measured on the approach section were as
    619 boundary conditions for the ANUGA simulations.  For both the
    620 experimental and simulation results the zero data was the still water
    621 line. The origin of the x coordinate is the toe of the beach, x
    622 measured positive shorewards A Manning's friction coefficient of zero
    623 was used.  To quantify the difference between the simulated stage and
    624 the experimental stage the Root Mean Square Deviation (RMSD)
     616velocity and wave height measured on the approach section were used as
     617boundary conditions for the ANUGA simulations.  The origin of the z
     618coordinate was the still water line, positive upwards. The origin of
     619the x coordinate was the toe of the beach, x measured positive
     620shorewards A Manning's friction coefficient of zero was used.  To
     621quantify the difference between the simulated stage and the
     622experimental stage the Root Mean Square Deviation (RMSD)
    625623(\cite{Kobayshi2000}) was used
    626624
     
    630628
    631629 Figures \ref{fig:S1-rmsd} to \ref{fig:S4-rmsd} show the RMSD of each
    632  sensor in four tests and the location where each wave broke.  The
     630 sensor for all tests and the location where each wave broke.  The
    633631 RMSD is calculated over the time of the experiment.
    634632 
     
    652650\caption{RMSD of stage between the wave tank and ANUGA for S3R1 and
    653651S3R2. Horizontal lines represent the x location of breaking waves.
    654 Circles represent gauges shown in \ref{fig:S3-stage-compares}}
     652The circles represent gauges shown in \ref{fig:S3-stage-compares}}
    655653% More, circles represent gauges shown in
    656654%\protect{\ref{fig:S3-stage-compares}} Again, circles represent gauges
     
    667665
    668666For a more direct comparision between the simulation and the
    669 experiment the stages at three gauges, generally the initial, final
     667experiment the water stages at three gauges, generally the initial, final
    670668and worst fit, were compared in Figures \ref{fig:S1-stage-compare} to
    671 \ref{fig:S4-stage-compare}.
    672 
     669\ref{fig:S4-stage-compare}.
    673670
    674671\begin{figure}[htbp]
     
    702699\label{fig:S4-stage-compare}
    703700\end{figure}
     701
     702 Overall these results show an excellent level of agreement between
     703predicted and measured stage.  The RMSD figures generally show a
     704decrease in accuracy, the further the gauge is from the initial
     705condition, untill wave breaking.  Generally after wave breaking the
     706RMSD value decreases. This is a clear indication of ANUGA accurately
     707predicting the stage after the wave has broken.  There are
     708several points worth emphasising here.  Overall all of the RMSD values
     709are good.  There is not much difference between the worst and best
     710gauges (-0.7 m and 5.6m) for S1R1, for example.  A decrease in RMSD
     711does not necesarily mean the accuracy of ANUGA is improving.  For
     712example, in S4R1 the drop in RMSD between gauges 7.6 and 11.6 is partially due
     713to vertical water motion effecting gauge 7.6 and a decrease in the
     714time period where waves are being measured, as oppossed to still
     715water, for gauge 11.6.  Additionally, sensors near the wave run-up
     716have a lower amplitude than the wave at breaking, which can result in
     717a low RMSD, which may not be the case if the results were relative,
     718see gauge 5.6 and 7.6 \ref{fig:S1-stage-compare}.
     719
    704720
    705721
Note: See TracChangeset for help on using the changeset viewer.