swanmodel-users — for questions and discussion related to SWAN

Re: [swanmodel-users] SEGMent boundary mismatch - file and results

[Samantha M. <sma...@gm...>]

Thanks all, I just wanted to update here to let you all know that it was
related to using BOUN SEGM XY. When I used BOUN SEGM IJ, I no longer had
issues (Thanks, Nabi for the tip!).
Samantha


On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 11:28 PM Joao Albuquerque <ja...@au...>
wrote:

> Hi Samantha,
>
> Assuming that what you have are points along your grid boundaries, I'd
> suggest you to input them in the following way:
>
> BOUND SHAPE JONSWAP 4 PEAK DSPR DEGREES <- change this for your own setup
> BOUND SEGMENT XY _
> 164.5000 -31.5000  _  <- these can be your grid points (at the edge of the
> grid) closer to each of your original boundary points
> 164.5000 -32.0000  _
> 164.5000 -32.5000  _
> 164.5000 -33.0000  _
> ... (I have heaps of locations here)...
> 164.5000 -31.5000  VARIABLE FILE  _
> ...(and now, one file for each location)...
> 0.0000 '../../NZB9310/164.5E_31.5S-C.sp2' 1  _
> 0.5000 '../../NZB9310/164.5E_32.0S-C.sp2' 1  _
> 1.0000 '../../NZB9310/164.5E_32.5S-C.sp2' 1  _
> 1.5000 '../../NZB9310/164.5E_33.0S-C.sp2' 1  _
> ...(heaps of files)...
> 70.0000 '../../NZB9310/164.5E_31.5S-C2.sp2' 1
>
> Basically you define the locations of each boundary point and then you
> specify the distance from each point to the first point, followed by the
> input file of each point. If you do it this way, SWAN will interpolate the
> boundary values between each point and input them along your grid points
> without input values. I think this example together with the manual's
> explanation should be enough.
>
> Good luck,
> João
>
>
> On Wed, 24 Feb 2021 at 11:24, Javi Rodriguez via swanmodel-users <
> swa...@li...> wrote:
>
>> Hi Samantha,
>>
>>
>> Nice! Now you can focus on fixing that segment.
>>
>> The plots you sent in the first message have little detail. Maybe
>> plotting your computational grid with the overlay segment may help to see
>> what is happening in that area.
>>
>> An alternative would be to calculate distances between your grid points
>> and the segment line to check the one-hundredth-rule is being fulfilled.
>>
>>
>> Best,
>> Xavier
>>
>>
>>
>> -------- Missatge Original --------
>> A 23 febr. 2021, 22.47, Samantha Maticka va escriure:
>>
>>
>> Hello again!
>>
>> I'm sorry, I stand corrected - there is an error, and it explains the
>> issue, but I'm not sure why it exists or how to resolve it.
>>
>> For the problem boundary segment, the error I get is below, but I
>> confirmed that the point indicated is even given in the output results from
>> SWAN. Is there a way to see what points are 'active' or to ensure that all
>> of the points I give SWAN are active? I'm not sure why 1 of the 4
>> boundary segments would have a problem, but not the other 3.
>>
>> Thank you for your help!!
>>
>>   BOUN SEGM XY   575401.000   8177348.000    575451.000   8177298.000    &
>>  point with location  575451.00008177298.0000 is not active
>>  ** Error            : invalid boundary point
>>  segment point  575451.008177298.00 grid   183.20  114.80 184 116
>>                       CON  FILE 'spectral1.bnd'  1
>>
>> Best,
>> Samantha
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 10:11 PM Samantha Maticka <sma...@gm...>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Javi,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the response! I've looked at the PRINT file and I only have 2
>>> warnings, but no errors. The 2 warnings are below.
>>>
>>> For the line, I made 4 separate segments as an attempt to respect this
>>> restriction. Unless I'm miss reading/interpreting what exactly is the
>>> computational grid, it looks like all of the boundary grid points fall on
>>> the boundary segment.
>>>
>>> *1*
>>> no convergence in set-up calculation
>>>   ** WARNING : Differences in wave height at the boundary
>>>  Relative difference between input and computation >=   0.10
>>>
>>> *2*
>>>  ** Warning          : Limiter is de-activated in case of no quadruplets
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Samantha
>>>
>>> ~~~~~
>>> This is the output for the first 2 timesteps:
>>> ~~~~~
>>>
>>>
>>>  COMPUTE NONSTAT 20180701.030000    60.00 MIN 20180701.090000
>>>  ** Warning          : Limiter is de-activated in case of no quadruplets
>>>  Time of computation ->  20180701.040000      in sec:      14400.
>>>  accuracy OK in   0.00 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>>
>>>  accuracy OK in  25.00 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>>
>>>  accuracy OK in  21.56 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>>
>>>  accuracy OK in  29.82 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>>
>>>  accuracy OK in  28.60 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>>
>>>  accuracy OK in  33.39 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>>
>>>  accuracy OK in  34.73 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>>
>>>  accuracy OK in  36.64 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>>
>>>  accuracy OK in  50.00 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>>
>>>  accuracy OK in  62.91 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>>
>>>  accuracy OK in  86.39 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>>
>>>  accuracy OK in  83.61 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>>
>>>  accuracy OK in  93.88 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>>
>>>  accuracy OK in  84.26 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>>
>>>  accuracy OK in  84.72 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>>
>>>  no convergence in set-up calculation
>>>   ** WARNING : Differences in wave height at the boundary
>>>  Relative difference between input and computation >=   0.10
>>>                          Hs[m]      Hs[m]      Hs[-]
>>>      ix    iy  index   (input) (computed) (relative)
>>>   --------------------------------------------------
>>>    180   119  90592       1.84       1.19       0.36
>>>    181   118  91339       1.84       0.04       0.98
>>>    182   117  92088       1.84       0.04       0.98
>>>    183   117  92840       1.84       0.06       0.97
>>>    184   116  93592       1.84       1.41       0.23
>>>
>>>  Time of computation ->  20180701.050000      in sec:      18000.
>>>  accuracy OK in   5.07 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>>
>>>  accuracy OK in  70.99 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>>
>>>  accuracy OK in  94.85 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>>
>>>  accuracy OK in  98.54 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>>
>>>  no convergence in set-up calculation
>>>   ** WARNING : Differences in wave height at the boundary
>>>  Relative difference between input and computation >=   0.10
>>>                          Hs[m]      Hs[m]      Hs[-]
>>>      ix    iy  index   (input) (computed) (relative)
>>>   --------------------------------------------------
>>>    180   119  90592       1.85       1.16       0.37
>>>    181   118  91339       1.85       0.03       0.98
>>>    182   117  92088       1.85       0.03       0.98
>>>    183   117  92840       1.85       0.06       0.97
>>>    184   116  93592       1.85       1.44       0.22
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 3:40 PM Javi Rodriguez <ja...@pr...>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Samantha,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Have you checked the print file (.PRT extension) that SWAN generated
>>>> when running the model? Any warnings or errors with your boundary
>>>> conditions must be there.
>>>>
>>>> Remember that the line connecting your XY points must be close to the
>>>> computational grid (The (straight) line connecting two points must be close
>>>> to grid lines of the computational grid (the maximum distance is one
>>>> hundredth of the length of the straight line).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Xavier
>>>>
>>>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
>>>> On Tuesday 23 February de 2021 a les 0:24, Samantha Maticka <
>>>> sma...@gm...> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello all,
>>>>
>>>> The wave boundary condition that I assign to SWAN does not match the
>>>> results, and I can't figure out where the miscommunication is.
>>>>
>>>> When I plot the results and the grid that SWAN uses, you can see the
>>>> mismatch.
>>>>
>>>> Below is a plot of significant wave height results, with the grid
>>>> (white points) and segment endpoints (red) overlain. It's the first time
>>>> step before any waves propagate, but it shows where the boundary is applied.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [image: image.png]
>>>>
>>>> The second plot shows the next time step with the missing boundary
>>>> condition enforcement from the second segment.
>>>>
>>>> [image: image.png]
>>>>
>>>> In the *.swn file, I specify 4 SEGMent boundaries as:
>>>>
>>>>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>>>>  BOUN SEGM XY   575331.000   8177408.000    575391.000   8177348.000
>>>>  &
>>>>                      CON  FILE 'spectral.bnd'  1
>>>>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>>>>  BOUN SEGM XY   575401.000   8177348.000    575451.000   8177298.000
>>>>  &
>>>>                      CON  FILE 'spectral1.bnd'  1
>>>>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>>>>  BOUN SEGM XY   575461.000   8177298.000    575501.000   8177258.000
>>>>  &
>>>>                      CON  FILE 'spectral2.bnd'  1
>>>>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>>>>  BOUN SEGM XY   575511.000   8177258.000    575551.000   8177218.000
>>>>  &
>>>>                      CON  FILE 'spectral3.bnd'  1
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thank you in advance to anyone who is familiar with what might be the
>>>> cause !
>>>>
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Samantha
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>> swanmodel-users mailing list
>> swa...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/swanmodel-users
>>
>>
>
> --
> João Claudio Albuquerque
> PhD. Candidate, School of Environment, The University of Auckland,
> Level 4, Room 449, Science Centre, 23 Symonds Street, Auckland, NZ.
> +64 021 02365705
> _______________________________________________
> swanmodel-users mailing list
> swa...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/swanmodel-users
>

[swanmodel-users] problem including currents

[Christos S. <Chr...@si...>]

Hi,

I have a nested SWAN setup, which is already up-and-running in SWAN 40.51; see results in big.prt and sma.prt.

Then, I tested in SWAN 41.20, and I got slightly different (but OK) results; see big_withoutCurrents.prt and sma_withoutCurrents.prt.

Finally, I want to add a current field (UVcurrData.dat) and see the difference. But something is going wrong and I don't know what is exactly ☹ See big4120.prt and sma4120.prt.

Can someone help me with this ?

Thanking you in advance 😊

Christos


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Christos Stefanakos
Senior Reseacrh Scientist, PhD
SINTEF Ocean
www.sintef.no<http://www.sintef.no/>
Postal address:
Postboks 4762 Torgarden
7465 Trondheim, Norway
Visiting address:
Brattørkaia 17C
7010 Trondheim
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Re: [swanmodel-users] Gridded output from SWAN

[Joao A. <ja...@au...>]

Hi Henrique,

I was checking this version of SWAN and I couldn't find any entry for this
NOSWLL parameter in the manual. How is the syntax for this command?

Thanks,
João

On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 15:06, Henrique Rapizo <hra...@gm...> wrote:

> Hi João,
>
> Just one additional comment to your reply. With the latest released patch
> SWAN now supports watershed partitioning variables in netcdf format and
> fixes a bug to make sure the first partition is always reserved to
> wind-sea. You can now also set the number of swell partitions for output
> with the NOSWLL parameter (making it consistent with the WaveWatchIII
> model).
>
> Cheers
> Henrique
>
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2021 at 15:09, Joao Albuquerque <ja...@au...>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Mahmud,
>>
>> Adding to Garcia's answer:
>>
>> For swells, SWAN can provide you either with wave heights, based on a
>> cut-off frequency threshold. However, if you are interested in all these
>> other wind-sea and swell parameters, SWAN can output the partitioned wave
>> parameters (have a look into PTDIR, PTHSIG, etc), which would provide you
>> with 10 partitions, the first being a windsea partition and up to 9 swell
>> partitions... In this case, you would have to integrate all the swell
>> partitions into a single swell system. It is also definitely worth having a
>> look into how the partitioning algorithm works.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> João
>>
>> On Thu, 4 Mar 2021 at 06:10, Garcia Medina, Gabriel via swanmodel-users <
>> swa...@li...> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Mahmud,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If you want time series of all your variables at all points in your
>>> computational grid you can use the following command in your input file:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> TABLE 'COMPGRID' HEAD 'CG_bulk_198407.txt' &
>>>
>>> TIME XP YP DEP HS PDIR DIR RTP PER WIND FORCE &
>>>
>>> OUTPUT 19840701.000000 3 HR
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Here I am not requesting all the variables in your list but you can
>>> modify the second line as you see fit.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> ____________________________________
>>>
>>> *Gabriel García Medina*
>>>
>>> Coastal Sciences Division
>>>
>>> Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Mahmud-Ul-Hasan Monim <mha...@gm...>
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 3, 2021 01:27
>>> *To:* swa...@li...
>>> *Subject:* [swanmodel-users] Gridded output from SWAN
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Check twice before you click! This email originated from outside PNNL.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hello All,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I am working on a wave modeling project for Narragansett Bay (Rhode
>>> Island, USA). I wanted to get the following *time-series output at the
>>> grid points from SWAN* -
>>>
>>> 1. Significant total wave height
>>> 2. Peak total wave period,
>>> 3. Mean total wave period
>>> 4. Mean zero-down-crossing total wave period
>>> 5. Mean total wave direction
>>>
>>>
>>> 6. Significant wind-driven wave height
>>> 7. Peak wind-driven wave period
>>> 8. Mean wind-driven wave period
>>> 9. Mean zero-down-crossing wind-driven wave period
>>> 10. Mean wind-driven wave direction
>>>
>>>
>>> 11. Significant swell-driven wave height
>>> 12. Peak swell-driven wave period
>>> 13. Mean swell-driven wave period
>>> 14. Mean zero-down-crossing swell-driven wave period
>>> 15. Mean swell-driven wave direction
>>>
>>> After reading the SWAN manual, I understand I can get time-series of
>>> some of these variables in grid points but not sure if all are available.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Is there a way for me to get time-series of all these variables at the
>>> grid points.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Mahmud
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> swanmodel-users mailing list
>>> swa...@li...
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/swanmodel-users
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> João Claudio Albuquerque
>> PhD. Candidate, School of Environment, The University of Auckland,
>> Level 4, Room 449, Science Centre, 23 Symonds Street, Auckland, NZ.
>> +64 021 02365705
>> _______________________________________________
>> swanmodel-users mailing list
>> swa...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/swanmodel-users
>>
>

-- 
João Claudio Albuquerque
PhD. Candidate, School of Environment, The University of Auckland,
Level 4, Room 449, Science Centre, 23 Symonds Street, Auckland, NZ.
+64 021 02365705

Re: [swanmodel-users] Gridded output from SWAN

[Henrique R. <hra...@gm...>]

Hi João,

Just one additional comment to your reply. With the latest released patch
SWAN now supports watershed partitioning variables in netcdf format and
fixes a bug to make sure the first partition is always reserved to
wind-sea. You can now also set the number of swell partitions for output
with the NOSWLL parameter (making it consistent with the WaveWatchIII
model).

Cheers
Henrique

On Thu, 4 Mar 2021 at 15:09, Joao Albuquerque <ja...@au...>
wrote:

> Hi Mahmud,
>
> Adding to Garcia's answer:
>
> For swells, SWAN can provide you either with wave heights, based on a
> cut-off frequency threshold. However, if you are interested in all these
> other wind-sea and swell parameters, SWAN can output the partitioned wave
> parameters (have a look into PTDIR, PTHSIG, etc), which would provide you
> with 10 partitions, the first being a windsea partition and up to 9 swell
> partitions... In this case, you would have to integrate all the swell
> partitions into a single swell system. It is also definitely worth having a
> look into how the partitioning algorithm works.
>
> Cheers,
> João
>
> On Thu, 4 Mar 2021 at 06:10, Garcia Medina, Gabriel via swanmodel-users <
> swa...@li...> wrote:
>
>> Hi Mahmud,
>>
>>
>>
>> If you want time series of all your variables at all points in your
>> computational grid you can use the following command in your input file:
>>
>>
>>
>> TABLE 'COMPGRID' HEAD 'CG_bulk_198407.txt' &
>>
>> TIME XP YP DEP HS PDIR DIR RTP PER WIND FORCE &
>>
>> OUTPUT 19840701.000000 3 HR
>>
>>
>>
>> Here I am not requesting all the variables in your list but you can
>> modify the second line as you see fit.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> ____________________________________
>>
>> *Gabriel García Medina*
>>
>> Coastal Sciences Division
>>
>> Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Mahmud-Ul-Hasan Monim <mha...@gm...>
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 3, 2021 01:27
>> *To:* swa...@li...
>> *Subject:* [swanmodel-users] Gridded output from SWAN
>>
>>
>>
>> Check twice before you click! This email originated from outside PNNL.
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello All,
>>
>>
>>
>> I am working on a wave modeling project for Narragansett Bay (Rhode
>> Island, USA). I wanted to get the following *time-series output at the
>> grid points from SWAN* -
>>
>> 1. Significant total wave height
>> 2. Peak total wave period,
>> 3. Mean total wave period
>> 4. Mean zero-down-crossing total wave period
>> 5. Mean total wave direction
>>
>>
>> 6. Significant wind-driven wave height
>> 7. Peak wind-driven wave period
>> 8. Mean wind-driven wave period
>> 9. Mean zero-down-crossing wind-driven wave period
>> 10. Mean wind-driven wave direction
>>
>>
>> 11. Significant swell-driven wave height
>> 12. Peak swell-driven wave period
>> 13. Mean swell-driven wave period
>> 14. Mean zero-down-crossing swell-driven wave period
>> 15. Mean swell-driven wave direction
>>
>> After reading the SWAN manual, I understand I can get time-series of some
>> of these variables in grid points but not sure if all are available.
>>
>>
>>
>> Is there a way for me to get time-series of all these variables at the
>> grid points.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>>
>> Mahmud
>> _______________________________________________
>> swanmodel-users mailing list
>> swa...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/swanmodel-users
>>
>
>
> --
> João Claudio Albuquerque
> PhD. Candidate, School of Environment, The University of Auckland,
> Level 4, Room 449, Science Centre, 23 Symonds Street, Auckland, NZ.
> +64 021 02365705
> _______________________________________________
> swanmodel-users mailing list
> swa...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/swanmodel-users
>

Re: [swanmodel-users] Is hcat still working?

[Lionel B. <lio...@gm...>]

Thank you Rafael,

I spent a week trying to make it work and thought something was wrong with
my namelist.

When working with many geographical domains and mpi tasks, the amount of
initialization files can be pretty high so giving problems in Lustre
systems.
That's why I would like to concatenate all of them in a single one.

Regards,
Lionel


El lun, 8 mar 2021 a las 21:31, Rafael Guedes (<raf...@ya...>)
escribió:

> I have been using it with the latest swan version but with ascii output.
> There seems to be a bug in the code for some specific grids though, which
> causes the merged restart file to have different number of rows or column
> compared to the computational grid. This happens with me when one or more
> of the model boundaries are entirely on land (but not for every grid where
> this condition happens) - for some reason the code struggles to deal with
> full row or column of missing values along the boundary when merging the
> restarts.
> On Tuesday, 9 March 2021, 08:26:49 am NZDT, Lionel Betanz <
> lio...@gm...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> I can't manage to get hcat working in the latest SWAN v41.31
> 64 init files from a MPI run are sucessfully read but soon after that a
> segmentation error arises and program crashes.
>
> Has anyone used hcat recently?
>
> P.S.: I working with binary files (free = .false.)
>
> _______________________________________________
> swanmodel-users mailing list
> swa...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/swanmodel-users
>

Re: [swanmodel-users] Is hcat still working?

[Rafael G. <raf...@ya...>]

 I have been using it with the latest swan version but with ascii output. There seems to be a bug in the code for some specific grids though, which causes the merged restart file to have different number of rows or column compared to the computational grid. This happens with me when one or more of the model boundaries are entirely on land (but not for every grid where this condition happens) - for some reason the code struggles to deal with full row or column of missing values along the boundary when merging the restarts.    On Tuesday, 9 March 2021, 08:26:49 am NZDT, Lionel Betanz <lio...@gm...> wrote:  
 
 
Hello everyone,

I can't manage to get hcat working in the latest SWAN v41.31
64 init files from a MPI run are sucessfully read but soon after that a segmentation error arises and program crashes.
Has anyone used hcat recently?

P.S.: I working with binary files (free = .false.)

_______________________________________________
swanmodel-users mailing list
swa...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/swanmodel-users
  

[swanmodel-users] Is hcat still working?

[Lionel B. <lio...@gm...>]

Hello everyone,

I can't manage to get hcat working in the latest SWAN v41.31
64 init files from a MPI run are sucessfully read but soon after that a
segmentation error arises and program crashes.

Has anyone used hcat recently?

P.S.: I working with binary files (free = .false.)

[swanmodel-users] Error endless loop in CHGBAS

[Bremm, G. <Gia...@nl...>]

Hi,
I'm rerunning some older swan runs. Now I get an error: endless loop in CHGBAS. About one year ago Sofia described the same error here in the the swanmodel-user list. Without a solution. I found CHGBAS is a subroutine in the
swanser.ftn.
!  1. Purpose
!
!       change x-basis of a discretized y-function
!
!  2. Method
!
!     A piecewise constant representation of the functions is assumed
!
!     first boundaries of a cell in X1 are determined
!     then it is determined whether there are overlaps with cells
!     in X2. if so Y1*common length is added to Y2
!     Finally Y2 values are divided by cell lengths

Unfortunately this doesn't helps me so far. Looking up the PRINT file the endless loops appears right after the compute statement. Somehow, the endless loop is overcome and the expected section with the computational part of swan follows before the iteration begins.

Some advice would be great,
Cheers, Gian

--
Dipl.-Ing. Gian Christian Bremm
Forschungsstelle Küste - Küsteningenieurwesen
NLWKN - Bst Norden/Norderney * Jahnstraße 1 * 26506 Norden
Tel.: +49 4931 / 947 275
Fax.: +49 4931 / 947 125
gia...@nl...<mailto:gia...@nl...>
www.nlwkn.niedersachsen.de/fsk/<http://www.nlwkn.niedersachsen.de/fsk/>

Re: [swanmodel-users] Gridded output from SWAN

[Joao A. <ja...@au...>]

Hi Mahmud,

Adding to Garcia's answer:

For swells, SWAN can provide you either with wave heights, based on a
cut-off frequency threshold. However, if you are interested in all these
other wind-sea and swell parameters, SWAN can output the partitioned wave
parameters (have a look into PTDIR, PTHSIG, etc), which would provide you
with 10 partitions, the first being a windsea partition and up to 9 swell
partitions... In this case, you would have to integrate all the swell
partitions into a single swell system. It is also definitely worth having a
look into how the partitioning algorithm works.

Cheers,
João

On Thu, 4 Mar 2021 at 06:10, Garcia Medina, Gabriel via swanmodel-users <
swa...@li...> wrote:

> Hi Mahmud,
>
>
>
> If you want time series of all your variables at all points in your
> computational grid you can use the following command in your input file:
>
>
>
> TABLE 'COMPGRID' HEAD 'CG_bulk_198407.txt' &
>
> TIME XP YP DEP HS PDIR DIR RTP PER WIND FORCE &
>
> OUTPUT 19840701.000000 3 HR
>
>
>
> Here I am not requesting all the variables in your list but you can modify
> the second line as you see fit.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> ____________________________________
>
> *Gabriel García Medina*
>
> Coastal Sciences Division
>
> Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
>
>
>
> *From:* Mahmud-Ul-Hasan Monim <mha...@gm...>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 3, 2021 01:27
> *To:* swa...@li...
> *Subject:* [swanmodel-users] Gridded output from SWAN
>
>
>
> Check twice before you click! This email originated from outside PNNL.
>
>
>
> Hello All,
>
>
>
> I am working on a wave modeling project for Narragansett Bay (Rhode
> Island, USA). I wanted to get the following *time-series output at the
> grid points from SWAN* -
>
> 1. Significant total wave height
> 2. Peak total wave period,
> 3. Mean total wave period
> 4. Mean zero-down-crossing total wave period
> 5. Mean total wave direction
>
>
> 6. Significant wind-driven wave height
> 7. Peak wind-driven wave period
> 8. Mean wind-driven wave period
> 9. Mean zero-down-crossing wind-driven wave period
> 10. Mean wind-driven wave direction
>
>
> 11. Significant swell-driven wave height
> 12. Peak swell-driven wave period
> 13. Mean swell-driven wave period
> 14. Mean zero-down-crossing swell-driven wave period
> 15. Mean swell-driven wave direction
>
> After reading the SWAN manual, I understand I can get time-series of some
> of these variables in grid points but not sure if all are available.
>
>
>
> Is there a way for me to get time-series of all these variables at the
> grid points.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Mahmud
> _______________________________________________
> swanmodel-users mailing list
> swa...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/swanmodel-users
>


-- 
João Claudio Albuquerque
PhD. Candidate, School of Environment, The University of Auckland,
Level 4, Room 449, Science Centre, 23 Symonds Street, Auckland, NZ.
+64 021 02365705

Re: [swanmodel-users] Gridded output from SWAN

[Garcia M. G. <gab...@pn...>]

Hi Mahmud,

If you want time series of all your variables at all points in your computational grid you can use the following command in your input file:

TABLE 'COMPGRID' HEAD 'CG_bulk_198407.txt' &
TIME XP YP DEP HS PDIR DIR RTP PER WIND FORCE &
OUTPUT 19840701.000000 3 HR

Here I am not requesting all the variables in your list but you can modify the second line as you see fit.

Best,
____________________________________
Gabriel García Medina
Coastal Sciences Division
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

From: Mahmud-Ul-Hasan Monim <mha...@gm...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 3, 2021 01:27
To: swa...@li...
Subject: [swanmodel-users] Gridded output from SWAN

Check twice before you click! This email originated from outside PNNL.

Hello All,

I am working on a wave modeling project for Narragansett Bay (Rhode Island, USA). I wanted to get the following time-series output at the grid points from SWAN -

1. Significant total wave height
2. Peak total wave period,
3. Mean total wave period
4. Mean zero-down-crossing total wave period
5. Mean total wave direction

6. Significant wind-driven wave height
7. Peak wind-driven wave period
8. Mean wind-driven wave period
9. Mean zero-down-crossing wind-driven wave period
10. Mean wind-driven wave direction

11. Significant swell-driven wave height
12. Peak swell-driven wave period
13. Mean swell-driven wave period
14. Mean zero-down-crossing swell-driven wave period
15. Mean swell-driven wave direction

After reading the SWAN manual, I understand I can get time-series of some of these variables in grid points but not sure if all are available.

Is there a way for me to get time-series of all these variables at the grid points.

Thanks,

Mahmud

[swanmodel-users] Gridded output from SWAN

[Mahmud-Ul-Hasan M. <mha...@gm...>]

Hello All,

I am working on a wave modeling project for Narragansett Bay (Rhode Island,
USA). I wanted to get the following *time-series output at the grid points
from SWAN* -

1. Significant total wave height
2. Peak total wave period,
3. Mean total wave period
4. Mean zero-down-crossing total wave period
5. Mean total wave direction

6. Significant wind-driven wave height
7. Peak wind-driven wave period
8. Mean wind-driven wave period
9. Mean zero-down-crossing wind-driven wave period
10. Mean wind-driven wave direction

11. Significant swell-driven wave height
12. Peak swell-driven wave period
13. Mean swell-driven wave period
14. Mean zero-down-crossing swell-driven wave period
15. Mean swell-driven wave direction

After reading the SWAN manual, I understand I can get time-series of some
of these variables in grid points but not sure if all are available.

Is there a way for me to get time-series of all these variables at the grid
points.

Thanks,

Mahmud

Re: [swanmodel-users] Old SWAN-Version 40.85 serial for windows

[Javi R. <ja...@pr...>]

Hi Gian,

I have a Gitlab repository with old SWAN source files. You con download 40.85 from there:

https://gitlab.com/javier.rodriguezg/swan-support/-/tree/master/source

To build SWAN on a Windows 10 computer, I wrote a small guide some time ago:

https://gitlab.com/javier.rodriguezg/swan-support/-/blob/master/recipes/build_win.md

Regards,
Javi

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Monday 1 March de 2021 a les 16:15, Bremm, Gian <Gia...@nl...> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> is there a way to get an old swan-version 40.85 executable for serial runs on a windows machine?
>
> On http://swanmodel.sourceforge.net/ is only the new 41.31 and 41.20. I really need the old Version.
>
> Best regards, Gian
>
> --
>
> Dipl.-Ing. Gian Christian Bremm
>
> Forschungsstelle Küste – Aufgabenbereich Küsteningenieurwesen
>
> NLWKN, Bst. Norden-Norderney
>
> Tel.: +49 4931 / 947 275
>
> gia...@nl...
>
> www.nlwkn.niedersachsen.de/fsk/

[swanmodel-users] Old SWAN-Version 40.85 serial for windows

[Bremm, G. <Gia...@nl...>]

Hi,

is there a way to get an old swan-version 40.85 executable for serial runs on a windows machine?

On http://swanmodel.sourceforge.net/ is only the new 41.31 and 41.20. I really need the old Version.

Best regards, Gian


--
Dipl.-Ing. Gian Christian Bremm
Forschungsstelle Küste - Aufgabenbereich Küsteningenieurwesen
NLWKN, Bst. Norden-Norderney
Tel.: +49 4931 / 947 275
gia...@nl...<mailto:gia...@nl...>
www.nlwkn.niedersachsen.de/fsk/<http://www.nlwkn.niedersachsen.de/fsk/>

[swanmodel-users] SWAN Tutorials

[Tahiru G. <tah...@ho...>]

Hi,

I am a Final year Civil Engineering student at Imperial College London. I was wondering if there are any tutorials available for SWAN (apart from the Haringvliet case and the five examples of tests on the website). I am using an unstructured grid with spherical coordinates for my project. So, a tutorial for that would be highly appreciated. When I googled, I couldn’t find much resources although it is a widely used model. Would it be possible to send me a link or files that would provide a lot of guidance (apart from the User Manual)?

Thanks a lot.

Kind regards,

Tahiru

Re: [swanmodel-users] SEGMent boundary mismatch - file and results

[Joao A. <ja...@au...>]

Hi Samantha,

Assuming that what you have are points along your grid boundaries, I'd
suggest you to input them in the following way:

BOUND SHAPE JONSWAP 4 PEAK DSPR DEGREES <- change this for your own setup
BOUND SEGMENT XY _
164.5000 -31.5000  _  <- these can be your grid points (at the edge of the
grid) closer to each of your original boundary points
164.5000 -32.0000  _
164.5000 -32.5000  _
164.5000 -33.0000  _
... (I have heaps of locations here)...
164.5000 -31.5000  VARIABLE FILE  _
...(and now, one file for each location)...
0.0000 '../../NZB9310/164.5E_31.5S-C.sp2' 1  _
0.5000 '../../NZB9310/164.5E_32.0S-C.sp2' 1  _
1.0000 '../../NZB9310/164.5E_32.5S-C.sp2' 1  _
1.5000 '../../NZB9310/164.5E_33.0S-C.sp2' 1  _
...(heaps of files)...
70.0000 '../../NZB9310/164.5E_31.5S-C2.sp2' 1

Basically you define the locations of each boundary point and then you
specify the distance from each point to the first point, followed by the
input file of each point. If you do it this way, SWAN will interpolate the
boundary values between each point and input them along your grid points
without input values. I think this example together with the manual's
explanation should be enough.

Good luck,
João


On Wed, 24 Feb 2021 at 11:24, Javi Rodriguez via swanmodel-users <
swa...@li...> wrote:

> Hi Samantha,
>
>
> Nice! Now you can focus on fixing that segment.
>
> The plots you sent in the first message have little detail. Maybe plotting
> your computational grid with the overlay segment may help to see what is
> happening in that area.
>
> An alternative would be to calculate distances between your grid points
> and the segment line to check the one-hundredth-rule is being fulfilled.
>
>
> Best,
> Xavier
>
>
>
> -------- Missatge Original --------
> A 23 febr. 2021, 22.47, Samantha Maticka va escriure:
>
>
> Hello again!
>
> I'm sorry, I stand corrected - there is an error, and it explains the
> issue, but I'm not sure why it exists or how to resolve it.
>
> For the problem boundary segment, the error I get is below, but I
> confirmed that the point indicated is even given in the output results from
> SWAN. Is there a way to see what points are 'active' or to ensure that all
> of the points I give SWAN are active? I'm not sure why 1 of the 4
> boundary segments would have a problem, but not the other 3.
>
> Thank you for your help!!
>
>   BOUN SEGM XY   575401.000   8177348.000    575451.000   8177298.000    &
>  point with location  575451.00008177298.0000 is not active
>  ** Error            : invalid boundary point
>  segment point  575451.008177298.00 grid   183.20  114.80 184 116
>                       CON  FILE 'spectral1.bnd'  1
>
> Best,
> Samantha
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 10:11 PM Samantha Maticka <sma...@gm...>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Javi,
>>
>> Thanks for the response! I've looked at the PRINT file and I only have 2
>> warnings, but no errors. The 2 warnings are below.
>>
>> For the line, I made 4 separate segments as an attempt to respect this
>> restriction. Unless I'm miss reading/interpreting what exactly is the
>> computational grid, it looks like all of the boundary grid points fall on
>> the boundary segment.
>>
>> *1*
>> no convergence in set-up calculation
>>   ** WARNING : Differences in wave height at the boundary
>>  Relative difference between input and computation >=   0.10
>>
>> *2*
>>  ** Warning          : Limiter is de-activated in case of no quadruplets
>>
>> Best,
>> Samantha
>>
>> ~~~~~
>> This is the output for the first 2 timesteps:
>> ~~~~~
>>
>>
>>  COMPUTE NONSTAT 20180701.030000    60.00 MIN 20180701.090000
>>  ** Warning          : Limiter is de-activated in case of no quadruplets
>>  Time of computation ->  20180701.040000      in sec:      14400.
>>  accuracy OK in   0.00 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>>  accuracy OK in  25.00 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>>  accuracy OK in  21.56 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>>  accuracy OK in  29.82 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>>  accuracy OK in  28.60 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>>  accuracy OK in  33.39 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>>  accuracy OK in  34.73 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>>  accuracy OK in  36.64 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>>  accuracy OK in  50.00 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>>  accuracy OK in  62.91 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>>  accuracy OK in  86.39 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>>  accuracy OK in  83.61 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>>  accuracy OK in  93.88 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>>  accuracy OK in  84.26 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>>  accuracy OK in  84.72 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>>  no convergence in set-up calculation
>>   ** WARNING : Differences in wave height at the boundary
>>  Relative difference between input and computation >=   0.10
>>                          Hs[m]      Hs[m]      Hs[-]
>>      ix    iy  index   (input) (computed) (relative)
>>   --------------------------------------------------
>>    180   119  90592       1.84       1.19       0.36
>>    181   118  91339       1.84       0.04       0.98
>>    182   117  92088       1.84       0.04       0.98
>>    183   117  92840       1.84       0.06       0.97
>>    184   116  93592       1.84       1.41       0.23
>>
>>  Time of computation ->  20180701.050000      in sec:      18000.
>>  accuracy OK in   5.07 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>>  accuracy OK in  70.99 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>>  accuracy OK in  94.85 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>>  accuracy OK in  98.54 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>>  no convergence in set-up calculation
>>   ** WARNING : Differences in wave height at the boundary
>>  Relative difference between input and computation >=   0.10
>>                          Hs[m]      Hs[m]      Hs[-]
>>      ix    iy  index   (input) (computed) (relative)
>>   --------------------------------------------------
>>    180   119  90592       1.85       1.16       0.37
>>    181   118  91339       1.85       0.03       0.98
>>    182   117  92088       1.85       0.03       0.98
>>    183   117  92840       1.85       0.06       0.97
>>    184   116  93592       1.85       1.44       0.22
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 3:40 PM Javi Rodriguez <ja...@pr...>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Samantha,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Have you checked the print file (.PRT extension) that SWAN generated
>>> when running the model? Any warnings or errors with your boundary
>>> conditions must be there.
>>>
>>> Remember that the line connecting your XY points must be close to the
>>> computational grid (The (straight) line connecting two points must be close
>>> to grid lines of the computational grid (the maximum distance is one
>>> hundredth of the length of the straight line).
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Xavier
>>>
>>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
>>> On Tuesday 23 February de 2021 a les 0:24, Samantha Maticka <
>>> sma...@gm...> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> The wave boundary condition that I assign to SWAN does not match the
>>> results, and I can't figure out where the miscommunication is.
>>>
>>> When I plot the results and the grid that SWAN uses, you can see the
>>> mismatch.
>>>
>>> Below is a plot of significant wave height results, with the grid (white
>>> points) and segment endpoints (red) overlain. It's the first time step
>>> before any waves propagate, but it shows where the boundary is applied.
>>>
>>>
>>> [image: image.png]
>>>
>>> The second plot shows the next time step with the missing boundary
>>> condition enforcement from the second segment.
>>>
>>> [image: image.png]
>>>
>>> In the *.swn file, I specify 4 SEGMent boundaries as:
>>>
>>>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>>>  BOUN SEGM XY   575331.000   8177408.000    575391.000   8177348.000    &
>>>                      CON  FILE 'spectral.bnd'  1
>>>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>>>  BOUN SEGM XY   575401.000   8177348.000    575451.000   8177298.000    &
>>>                      CON  FILE 'spectral1.bnd'  1
>>>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>>>  BOUN SEGM XY   575461.000   8177298.000    575501.000   8177258.000    &
>>>                      CON  FILE 'spectral2.bnd'  1
>>>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>>>  BOUN SEGM XY   575511.000   8177258.000    575551.000   8177218.000    &
>>>                      CON  FILE 'spectral3.bnd'  1
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you in advance to anyone who is familiar with what might be the
>>> cause !
>>>
>>> Best Regards,
>>>
>>> Samantha
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
> swanmodel-users mailing list
> swa...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/swanmodel-users
>
>

-- 
João Claudio Albuquerque
PhD. Candidate, School of Environment, The University of Auckland,
Level 4, Room 449, Science Centre, 23 Symonds Street, Auckland, NZ.
+64 021 02365705

Re: [swanmodel-users] SEGMent boundary mismatch - file and results

[Javi R. <ja...@pr...>]

Hi Samantha,

Nice! Now you can focus on fixing that segment.

The plots you sent in the first message have little detail. Maybe plotting your computational grid with the overlay segment may help to see what is happening in that area.

An alternative would be to calculate distances between your grid points and the segment line to check the one-hundredth-rule is being fulfilled.

Best,
Xavier

-------- Missatge Original --------
A 23 febr. 2021, 22.47, Samantha Maticka va escriure:

> Hello again!
>
> I'm sorry, I stand corrected - there is an error, and it explains the issue, but I'm not sure why it exists or how to resolve it.
>
> For the problem boundary segment, the error I get is below, but I confirmed that the point indicated is even given in the output results from SWAN. Is there a way to see what points are 'active' or to ensure that all of the points I give SWAN are active? I'm not sure why 1 of the 4 boundary segments would have a problem, but not the other 3.
>
> Thank you for your help!!
>
> BOUN SEGM XY 575401.000 8177348.000 575451.000 8177298.000 &
> point with location 575451.00008177298.0000 is not active
> ** Error : invalid boundary point
> segment point 575451.008177298.00 grid 183.20 114.80 184 116
> CON FILE 'spectral1.bnd' 1
>
> Best,
> Samantha
>
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 10:11 PM Samantha Maticka <sma...@gm...> wrote:
>
>> Hi Javi,
>>
>> Thanks for the response! I've looked at the PRINT file and I only have 2 warnings, but no errors. The 2 warnings are below.
>>
>> For the line, I made 4 separate segments as an attempt to respect this restriction. Unless I'm miss reading/interpreting what exactly is the computational grid, it looks like all of the boundary grid points fall on the boundary segment.
>>
>> 1
>> no convergence in set-up calculation
>> ** WARNING : Differences in wave height at the boundary
>> Relative difference between input and computation >= 0.10
>>
>> 2
>> ** Warning : Limiter is de-activated in case of no quadruplets
>>
>> Best,
>> Samantha
>>
>> ~~~~~
>> This is the output for the first 2 timesteps:
>> ~~~~~
>>
>> COMPUTE NONSTAT 20180701.030000 60.00 MIN 20180701.090000
>> ** Warning : Limiter is de-activated in case of no quadruplets
>> Time of computation -> 20180701.040000 in sec: 14400.
>> accuracy OK in 0.00 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>> accuracy OK in 25.00 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>> accuracy OK in 21.56 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>> accuracy OK in 29.82 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>> accuracy OK in 28.60 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>> accuracy OK in 33.39 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>> accuracy OK in 34.73 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>> accuracy OK in 36.64 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>> accuracy OK in 50.00 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>> accuracy OK in 62.91 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>> accuracy OK in 86.39 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>> accuracy OK in 83.61 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>> accuracy OK in 93.88 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>> accuracy OK in 84.26 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>> accuracy OK in 84.72 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>> no convergence in set-up calculation
>> ** WARNING : Differences in wave height at the boundary
>> Relative difference between input and computation >= 0.10
>> Hs[m] Hs[m] Hs[-]
>> ix iy index (input) (computed) (relative)
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> 180 119 90592 1.84 1.19 0.36
>> 181 118 91339 1.84 0.04 0.98
>> 182 117 92088 1.84 0.04 0.98
>> 183 117 92840 1.84 0.06 0.97
>> 184 116 93592 1.84 1.41 0.23
>>
>> Time of computation -> 20180701.050000 in sec: 18000.
>> accuracy OK in 5.07 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>> accuracy OK in 70.99 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>> accuracy OK in 94.85 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>> accuracy OK in 98.54 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>>
>> no convergence in set-up calculation
>> ** WARNING : Differences in wave height at the boundary
>> Relative difference between input and computation >= 0.10
>> Hs[m] Hs[m] Hs[-]
>> ix iy index (input) (computed) (relative)
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> 180 119 90592 1.85 1.16 0.37
>> 181 118 91339 1.85 0.03 0.98
>> 182 117 92088 1.85 0.03 0.98
>> 183 117 92840 1.85 0.06 0.97
>>
>> 184 116 93592 1.85 1.44 0.22
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 3:40 PM Javi Rodriguez <ja...@pr...> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Samantha,
>>>
>>> Have you checked the print file (.PRT extension) that SWAN generated when running the model? Any warnings or errors with your boundary conditions must be there.
>>>
>>> Remember that the line connecting your XY points must be close to the computational grid (The (straight) line connecting two points must be close to grid lines of the computational grid (the maximum distance is one hundredth of the length of the straight line).
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Xavier
>>>
>>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
>>> On Tuesday 23 February de 2021 a les 0:24, Samantha Maticka <sma...@gm...> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello all,
>>>>
>>>> The wave boundary condition that I assign to SWAN does not match the results, and I can't figure out where the miscommunication is.
>>>>
>>>> When I plot the results and the grid that SWAN uses, you can see the mismatch.
>>>>
>>>> Below is a plot of significant wave height results, with the grid (white points) and segment endpoints (red) overlain. It's the first time step before any waves propagate, but it shows where the boundary is applied.
>>>>
>>>> [image.png]
>>>>
>>>> The second plot shows the next time step with the missing boundary condition enforcement from the second segment.
>>>>
>>>> [image.png]
>>>>
>>>> In the *.swn file, I specify 4 SEGMent boundaries as:
>>>>
>>>> BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP 3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>>>> BOUN SEGM XY 575331.000 8177408.000 575391.000 8177348.000 &
>>>> CON FILE 'spectral.bnd' 1
>>>> BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP 3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>>>> BOUN SEGM XY 575401.000 8177348.000 575451.000 8177298.000 &
>>>> CON FILE 'spectral1.bnd' 1
>>>> BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP 3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>>>> BOUN SEGM XY 575461.000 8177298.000 575501.000 8177258.000 &
>>>> CON FILE 'spectral2.bnd' 1
>>>> BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP 3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>>>> BOUN SEGM XY 575511.000 8177258.000 575551.000 8177218.000 &
>>>> CON FILE 'spectral3.bnd' 1
>>>>
>>>> Thank you in advance to anyone who is familiar with what might be the cause !
>>>>
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Samantha

Re: [swanmodel-users] SEGMent boundary mismatch - file and results

[Samantha M. <sma...@gm...>]

Hello again!

I'm sorry, I stand corrected - there is an error, and it explains the
issue, but I'm not sure why it exists or how to resolve it.

For the problem boundary segment, the error I get is below, but I confirmed
that the point indicated is even given in the output results from SWAN. Is
there a way to see what points are 'active' or to ensure that all of the
points I give SWAN are active? I'm not sure why 1 of the 4
boundary segments would have a problem, but not the other 3.

Thank you for your help!!

  BOUN SEGM XY   575401.000   8177348.000    575451.000   8177298.000    &
 point with location  575451.00008177298.0000 is not active
 ** Error            : invalid boundary point
 segment point  575451.008177298.00 grid   183.20  114.80 184 116
                      CON  FILE 'spectral1.bnd'  1

Best,
Samantha


On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 10:11 PM Samantha Maticka <sma...@gm...>
wrote:

> Hi Javi,
>
> Thanks for the response! I've looked at the PRINT file and I only have 2
> warnings, but no errors. The 2 warnings are below.
>
> For the line, I made 4 separate segments as an attempt to respect this
> restriction. Unless I'm miss reading/interpreting what exactly is the
> computational grid, it looks like all of the boundary grid points fall on
> the boundary segment.
>
> *1*
> no convergence in set-up calculation
>   ** WARNING : Differences in wave height at the boundary
>  Relative difference between input and computation >=   0.10
>
> *2*
>  ** Warning          : Limiter is de-activated in case of no quadruplets
>
> Best,
> Samantha
>
> ~~~~~
> This is the output for the first 2 timesteps:
> ~~~~~
>
>
>  COMPUTE NONSTAT 20180701.030000    60.00 MIN 20180701.090000
>  ** Warning          : Limiter is de-activated in case of no quadruplets
>  Time of computation ->  20180701.040000      in sec:      14400.
>  accuracy OK in   0.00 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>
>  accuracy OK in  25.00 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>
>  accuracy OK in  21.56 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>
>  accuracy OK in  29.82 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>
>  accuracy OK in  28.60 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>
>  accuracy OK in  33.39 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>
>  accuracy OK in  34.73 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>
>  accuracy OK in  36.64 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>
>  accuracy OK in  50.00 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>
>  accuracy OK in  62.91 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>
>  accuracy OK in  86.39 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>
>  accuracy OK in  83.61 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>
>  accuracy OK in  93.88 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>
>  accuracy OK in  84.26 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>
>  accuracy OK in  84.72 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>
>  no convergence in set-up calculation
>   ** WARNING : Differences in wave height at the boundary
>  Relative difference between input and computation >=   0.10
>                          Hs[m]      Hs[m]      Hs[-]
>      ix    iy  index   (input) (computed) (relative)
>   --------------------------------------------------
>    180   119  90592       1.84       1.19       0.36
>    181   118  91339       1.84       0.04       0.98
>    182   117  92088       1.84       0.04       0.98
>    183   117  92840       1.84       0.06       0.97
>    184   116  93592       1.84       1.41       0.23
>
>  Time of computation ->  20180701.050000      in sec:      18000.
>  accuracy OK in   5.07 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>
>  accuracy OK in  70.99 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>
>  accuracy OK in  94.85 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>
>  accuracy OK in  98.54 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)
>
>  no convergence in set-up calculation
>   ** WARNING : Differences in wave height at the boundary
>  Relative difference between input and computation >=   0.10
>                          Hs[m]      Hs[m]      Hs[-]
>      ix    iy  index   (input) (computed) (relative)
>   --------------------------------------------------
>    180   119  90592       1.85       1.16       0.37
>    181   118  91339       1.85       0.03       0.98
>    182   117  92088       1.85       0.03       0.98
>    183   117  92840       1.85       0.06       0.97
>    184   116  93592       1.85       1.44       0.22
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 3:40 PM Javi Rodriguez <ja...@pr...>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Samantha,
>>
>>
>>
>> Have you checked the print file (.PRT extension) that SWAN generated when
>> running the model? Any warnings or errors with your boundary conditions
>> must be there.
>>
>> Remember that the line connecting your XY points must be close to the
>> computational grid (The (straight) line connecting two points must be close
>> to grid lines of the computational grid (the maximum distance is one
>> hundredth of the length of the straight line).
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Xavier
>>
>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
>> On Tuesday 23 February de 2021 a les 0:24, Samantha Maticka <
>> sma...@gm...> wrote:
>>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> The wave boundary condition that I assign to SWAN does not match the
>> results, and I can't figure out where the miscommunication is.
>>
>> When I plot the results and the grid that SWAN uses, you can see the
>> mismatch.
>>
>> Below is a plot of significant wave height results, with the grid (white
>> points) and segment endpoints (red) overlain. It's the first time step
>> before any waves propagate, but it shows where the boundary is applied.
>>
>>
>> [image: image.png]
>>
>> The second plot shows the next time step with the missing boundary
>> condition enforcement from the second segment.
>>
>> [image: image.png]
>>
>> In the *.swn file, I specify 4 SEGMent boundaries as:
>>
>>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>>  BOUN SEGM XY   575331.000   8177408.000    575391.000   8177348.000    &
>>                      CON  FILE 'spectral.bnd'  1
>>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>>  BOUN SEGM XY   575401.000   8177348.000    575451.000   8177298.000    &
>>                      CON  FILE 'spectral1.bnd'  1
>>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>>  BOUN SEGM XY   575461.000   8177298.000    575501.000   8177258.000    &
>>                      CON  FILE 'spectral2.bnd'  1
>>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>>  BOUN SEGM XY   575511.000   8177258.000    575551.000   8177218.000    &
>>                      CON  FILE 'spectral3.bnd'  1
>>
>>
>> Thank you in advance to anyone who is familiar with what might be the
>> cause !
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Samantha
>>
>>
>>

Re: [swanmodel-users] SEGMent boundary mismatch - file and results

[Samantha M. <sma...@gm...>]

Hi Nabi,

Thanks for the feedback.

For the continuous line you recommend, I believe I did specify a continuous
and straight boundary segment. The green points that you see Ithat extend
into the domain) are where the results are printed to, but the boundary
segment line that I actually applied should be the straight line that
connects the red points. These are just on the edge of the domain.

For the location, I'm not sure what you mean by being able to apply off the
grid. Any time I've tried to specify a point that's outside the outer
boundary, I get this error:

 ** Error            : invalid boundary point
 segment point  575401.008177338.00 grid   -99.00  -99.00 -98 -98
 ** Error            : Boundary point outside comp. grid

And if I try to specify points in the domain, but not on the boundary, I
get this error:
 ** Error            : invalid boundary point
 segment point  575341.008177408.00 grid   171.00  125.00 172 126

If you know another way to apply the boundary segment, I'm all ears/eyes :D

Thanks!
Samantha


On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 8:36 PM Nabi Allahdadi <nab...@gm...>
wrote:

> Samantha
>
> I think you need to more carefully introduce the coordinates of BC
> segments along the open boundary. Try more continuous order since I see
> some gaps between your boundary coordinates(if it is not in purpose). Looks
> like for the second boundary segment, the start and end points are very
> close, so actually, no wave propagates into the model.  Although, some of
> the BC points are actually inside the model that may cause instability of
> incorrect results. Note that the start and end of the boundary segments do
> not need to necessarily be on the grid. It wouldn't hurt if you use the
> segments with a little bit of buffer out of the modeling area. Always check
> if the BC data are applied to your model correctly by plotting the wave
> vectors.
>
> Nabi
>
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 4:16 AM Samantha Maticka <sma...@gm...>
> wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> The wave boundary condition that I assign to SWAN does not match the
>> results, and I can't figure out where the miscommunication is.
>> When I plot the results and the grid that SWAN uses, you can see the
>> mismatch.
>>
>> Below is a plot of significant wave height results, with the grid (white
>> points) and segment endpoints (red) overlain. It's the first time step
>> before any waves propagate, but it shows where the boundary is applied.
>>
>> [image: image.png]
>>
>> The second plot shows the next time step with the missing boundary
>> condition enforcement from the second segment.
>>
>> [image: image.png]
>>
>> In the *.swn file, I specify 4 SEGMent boundaries as:
>>
>>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>>  BOUN SEGM XY   575331.000   8177408.000    575391.000   8177348.000    &
>>                      CON  FILE 'spectral.bnd'  1
>>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>>  BOUN SEGM XY   575401.000   8177348.000    575451.000   8177298.000    &
>>                      CON  FILE 'spectral1.bnd'  1
>>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>>  BOUN SEGM XY   575461.000   8177298.000    575501.000   8177258.000    &
>>                      CON  FILE 'spectral2.bnd'  1
>>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>>  BOUN SEGM XY   575511.000   8177258.000    575551.000   8177218.000    &
>>                      CON  FILE 'spectral3.bnd'  1
>> Thank you in advance to anyone who is familiar with what might be the
>> cause !
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Samantha
>> _______________________________________________
>> swanmodel-users mailing list
>> swa...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/swanmodel-users
>>
>
>
> --
> Nabi Allahdadi, Ph.D.
> Coastal Engineer and Oceanographer
>
>

Re: [swanmodel-users] SEGMent boundary mismatch - file and results

[Samantha M. <sma...@gm...>]

Hi Javi,

Thanks for the response! I've looked at the PRINT file and I only have 2
warnings, but no errors. The 2 warnings are below.

For the line, I made 4 separate segments as an attempt to respect this
restriction. Unless I'm miss reading/interpreting what exactly is the
computational grid, it looks like all of the boundary grid points fall on
the boundary segment.

*1*
no convergence in set-up calculation
  ** WARNING : Differences in wave height at the boundary
 Relative difference between input and computation >=   0.10

*2*
 ** Warning          : Limiter is de-activated in case of no quadruplets

Best,
Samantha

~~~~~
This is the output for the first 2 timesteps:
~~~~~


 COMPUTE NONSTAT 20180701.030000    60.00 MIN 20180701.090000
 ** Warning          : Limiter is de-activated in case of no quadruplets
 Time of computation ->  20180701.040000      in sec:      14400.
 accuracy OK in   0.00 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)

 accuracy OK in  25.00 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)

 accuracy OK in  21.56 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)

 accuracy OK in  29.82 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)

 accuracy OK in  28.60 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)

 accuracy OK in  33.39 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)

 accuracy OK in  34.73 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)

 accuracy OK in  36.64 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)

 accuracy OK in  50.00 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)

 accuracy OK in  62.91 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)

 accuracy OK in  86.39 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)

 accuracy OK in  83.61 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)

 accuracy OK in  93.88 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)

 accuracy OK in  84.26 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)

 accuracy OK in  84.72 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)

 no convergence in set-up calculation
  ** WARNING : Differences in wave height at the boundary
 Relative difference between input and computation >=   0.10
                         Hs[m]      Hs[m]      Hs[-]
     ix    iy  index   (input) (computed) (relative)
  --------------------------------------------------
   180   119  90592       1.84       1.19       0.36
   181   118  91339       1.84       0.04       0.98
   182   117  92088       1.84       0.04       0.98
   183   117  92840       1.84       0.06       0.97
   184   116  93592       1.84       1.41       0.23

 Time of computation ->  20180701.050000      in sec:      18000.
 accuracy OK in   5.07 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)

 accuracy OK in  70.99 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)

 accuracy OK in  94.85 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)

 accuracy OK in  98.54 % of wet grid points ( 98.00 % required)

 no convergence in set-up calculation
  ** WARNING : Differences in wave height at the boundary
 Relative difference between input and computation >=   0.10
                         Hs[m]      Hs[m]      Hs[-]
     ix    iy  index   (input) (computed) (relative)
  --------------------------------------------------
   180   119  90592       1.85       1.16       0.37
   181   118  91339       1.85       0.03       0.98
   182   117  92088       1.85       0.03       0.98
   183   117  92840       1.85       0.06       0.97
   184   116  93592       1.85       1.44       0.22



On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 3:40 PM Javi Rodriguez <ja...@pr...>
wrote:

> Hi Samantha,
>
>
>
> Have you checked the print file (.PRT extension) that SWAN generated when
> running the model? Any warnings or errors with your boundary conditions
> must be there.
>
> Remember that the line connecting your XY points must be close to the
> computational grid (The (straight) line connecting two points must be close
> to grid lines of the computational grid (the maximum distance is one
> hundredth of the length of the straight line).
>
>
> Regards,
> Xavier
>
> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
> On Tuesday 23 February de 2021 a les 0:24, Samantha Maticka <
> sma...@gm...> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> The wave boundary condition that I assign to SWAN does not match the
> results, and I can't figure out where the miscommunication is.
>
> When I plot the results and the grid that SWAN uses, you can see the
> mismatch.
>
> Below is a plot of significant wave height results, with the grid (white
> points) and segment endpoints (red) overlain. It's the first time step
> before any waves propagate, but it shows where the boundary is applied.
>
>
> [image: image.png]
>
> The second plot shows the next time step with the missing boundary
> condition enforcement from the second segment.
>
> [image: image.png]
>
> In the *.swn file, I specify 4 SEGMent boundaries as:
>
>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>  BOUN SEGM XY   575331.000   8177408.000    575391.000   8177348.000    &
>                      CON  FILE 'spectral.bnd'  1
>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>  BOUN SEGM XY   575401.000   8177348.000    575451.000   8177298.000    &
>                      CON  FILE 'spectral1.bnd'  1
>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>  BOUN SEGM XY   575461.000   8177298.000    575501.000   8177258.000    &
>                      CON  FILE 'spectral2.bnd'  1
>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>  BOUN SEGM XY   575511.000   8177258.000    575551.000   8177218.000    &
>                      CON  FILE 'spectral3.bnd'  1
>
>
> Thank you in advance to anyone who is familiar with what might be the
> cause !
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Samantha
>
>
>

Re: [swanmodel-users] SEGMent boundary mismatch - file and results

[Nabi A. <nab...@gm...>]

Samantha

I think you need to more carefully introduce the coordinates of BC segments
along the open boundary. Try more continuous order since I see some gaps
between your boundary coordinates(if it is not in purpose). Looks like for
the second boundary segment, the start and end points are very close, so
actually, no wave propagates into the model.  Although, some of the BC
points are actually inside the model that may cause instability of
incorrect results. Note that the start and end of the boundary segments do
not need to necessarily be on the grid. It wouldn't hurt if you use the
segments with a little bit of buffer out of the modeling area. Always check
if the BC data are applied to your model correctly by plotting the wave
vectors.

Nabi

On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 4:16 AM Samantha Maticka <sma...@gm...> wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> The wave boundary condition that I assign to SWAN does not match the
> results, and I can't figure out where the miscommunication is.
> When I plot the results and the grid that SWAN uses, you can see the
> mismatch.
>
> Below is a plot of significant wave height results, with the grid (white
> points) and segment endpoints (red) overlain. It's the first time step
> before any waves propagate, but it shows where the boundary is applied.
>
> [image: image.png]
>
> The second plot shows the next time step with the missing boundary
> condition enforcement from the second segment.
>
> [image: image.png]
>
> In the *.swn file, I specify 4 SEGMent boundaries as:
>
>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>  BOUN SEGM XY   575331.000   8177408.000    575391.000   8177348.000    &
>                      CON  FILE 'spectral.bnd'  1
>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>  BOUN SEGM XY   575401.000   8177348.000    575451.000   8177298.000    &
>                      CON  FILE 'spectral1.bnd'  1
>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>  BOUN SEGM XY   575461.000   8177298.000    575501.000   8177258.000    &
>                      CON  FILE 'spectral2.bnd'  1
>  BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
>  BOUN SEGM XY   575511.000   8177258.000    575551.000   8177218.000    &
>                      CON  FILE 'spectral3.bnd'  1
> Thank you in advance to anyone who is familiar with what might be the
> cause !
> Best Regards,
>
> Samantha
> _______________________________________________
> swanmodel-users mailing list
> swa...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/swanmodel-users
>


-- 
Nabi Allahdadi, Ph.D.
Coastal Engineer and Oceanographer

Re: [swanmodel-users] SEGMent boundary mismatch - file and results

[Javi R. <ja...@pr...>]

Hi Samantha,

Have you checked the print file (.PRT extension) that SWAN generated when running the model? Any warnings or errors with your boundary conditions must be there.

Remember that the line connecting your XY points must be close to the computational grid (The (straight) line connecting two points must be close to grid lines of the computational grid (the maximum distance is one hundredth of the length of the straight line).

Regards,
Xavier

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Tuesday 23 February de 2021 a les 0:24, Samantha Maticka <sma...@gm...> wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> The wave boundary condition that I assign to SWAN does not match the results, and I can't figure out where the miscommunication is.
>
> When I plot the results and the grid that SWAN uses, you can see the mismatch.
>
> Below is a plot of significant wave height results, with the grid (white points) and segment endpoints (red) overlain. It's the first time step before any waves propagate, but it shows where the boundary is applied.
>
> The second plot shows the next time step with the missing boundary condition enforcement from the second segment.
>
> In the *.swn file, I specify 4 SEGMent boundaries as:
>
> BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP 3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
> BOUN SEGM XY 575331.000 8177408.000 575391.000 8177348.000 &
> CON FILE 'spectral.bnd' 1
> BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP 3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
> BOUN SEGM XY 575401.000 8177348.000 575451.000 8177298.000 &
> CON FILE 'spectral1.bnd' 1
> BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP 3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
> BOUN SEGM XY 575461.000 8177298.000 575501.000 8177258.000 &
> CON FILE 'spectral2.bnd' 1
> BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP 3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
> BOUN SEGM XY 575511.000 8177258.000 575551.000 8177218.000 &
> CON FILE 'spectral3.bnd' 1
>
> Thank you in advance to anyone who is familiar with what might be the cause !
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Samantha

[swanmodel-users] SEGMent boundary mismatch - file and results

[Samantha M. <sma...@gm...>]

Hello all,

The wave boundary condition that I assign to SWAN does not match the
results, and I can't figure out where the miscommunication is.
When I plot the results and the grid that SWAN uses, you can see the
mismatch.

Below is a plot of significant wave height results, with the grid (white
points) and segment endpoints (red) overlain. It's the first time step
before any waves propagate, but it shows where the boundary is applied.

[image: image.png]

The second plot shows the next time step with the missing boundary
condition enforcement from the second segment.

[image: image.png]

In the *.swn file, I specify 4 SEGMent boundaries as:

 BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
 BOUN SEGM XY   575331.000   8177408.000    575391.000   8177348.000    &
                     CON  FILE 'spectral.bnd'  1
 BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
 BOUN SEGM XY   575401.000   8177348.000    575451.000   8177298.000    &
                     CON  FILE 'spectral1.bnd'  1
 BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
 BOUN SEGM XY   575461.000   8177298.000    575501.000   8177258.000    &
                     CON  FILE 'spectral2.bnd'  1
 BOUN SHAPE JONSWAP   3.30 PEAK DSPR POWER
 BOUN SEGM XY   575511.000   8177258.000    575551.000   8177218.000    &
                     CON  FILE 'spectral3.bnd'  1
Thank you in advance to anyone who is familiar with what might be the cause
!
Best Regards,

Samantha

Re: [swanmodel-users] running swan in hpc cluster slurm

[Javi R. <ja...@pr...>]

Hi Zoulikha,

Please read the following page of the SWAN Manual:
http://swanmodel.sourceforge.net/online_doc/swanimp/node12.html

You may need to create a 'machinefile' file containing the node names.

Best,
Xavier
-------- Missatge Original --------
A 7 febr. 2021, 21.36, Zoulikha ABBAS via swanmodel-users va escriure:

> hello user's of SWAN,
>
> i try to run my script in HPC but i get this error:
>
> ***ERROR: no machinefile is present in current directory!
>
> this how look my script:
> #!/bin/sh
> #SBATCH -J SWAN # Job name
> #SBATCH -o swan.out # Name of stdout output file (%j expands to jobId)
> #SBATCH -e swan.err # Name of stdout output file (%j expands to jobId)
> #SBATCH -N 2 # Total number of nodes requested
> #SBATCH -n 48 # Total number of mpi tasks requested
> #SBATCH -t 05:00:00 # Run time (hh:mm:ss) - 5 hours
>
> set -xe
> #RAM MEMORY
> ulimit -s unlimited
> # Launch MPI-based executable
> prun swanrun -input test01 -mpi 2
>
> where is the problem ? and how can i solve it ?
> best Regard's
> Zoulikha ABBAS
> PHD STUDENT

[swanmodel-users] running swan in hpc cluster slurm

[Zoulikha A. <abb...@ya...>]

hello user's of SWAN,
i try to run my script in HPC but i get this error:
***ERROR: no machinefile is present in current directory!

this how look my script:#!/bin/sh#SBATCH -J SWAN              # Job name#SBATCH -o swan.out         # Name of stdout output file (%j expands to jobId)#SBATCH -e swan.err         # Name of stdout output file (%j expands to jobId)#SBATCH -N 2                 # Total number of nodes requested#SBATCH -n 48                # Total number of mpi tasks requested#SBATCH -t 05:00:00           # Run time (hh:mm:ss) - 5 hours
set -xe#RAM MEMORYulimit -s unlimited# Launch MPI-based executableprun swanrun -input test01  -mpi 2
where is the problem ? and how can i solve it ?best Regard'sZoulikha ABBASPHD STUDENT 

Re: [swanmodel-users] Installing SWAN using Mac Terminal w g95

[Javi R. <ja...@pr...>]

Hi Veronique,

Try to run the following command in your Terminal to find where "gfortran" is located in your computer:

which gfortran

It should return:

/usr/bin/gfortran

It seems like the "make config" cannot get the Fortran 90 compiler but finds the Fortran 95 (g95) compiler instead.

Regards,
Javier

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Thursday 31 December de 2020 a les 17:48, Veronique Bourgault <ver...@gm...> wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I am experiencing some problems setting up my terminal to be able to run SWAN. I have a 2016 Macbook updated to Big Sur, and have command line tools installed. When I open a terminal on the swan4131 folder, and try to enter in the "make config" command, it says that my current Fortran compiler, "g95" is not supported. Has someone had this issue before? I am hesitant to use this code: "gfortran -c source.f90" because I do not want to create any new folders I don't need to. Is there a way for me to use the g95 compiler I have to run SWAN?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Veronique