Thomas O.

Hi Julia,
will do.
Thanks for getting back to me.
Thomas

Hi again
I think I found a part of the problem.
I have inactive elements in the mesh and Feflow will not let me smooth the mesh if nodes from these inactive elements are selected. I can refine everywhere else in the mesh but as soon as one of these nodes is selected, the element disappears after I hit the smooth button.
The funny thing is I tried to reproduce this behavior in another FEM file (totaly different mesh and project). I set a patch of elements to inactive and tried to smooth the mesh and... it worked.
Don't ask me why!
Anyway - thought it may help someone in the future.
Thanks
T

Hello Feflow Users,
When I smooth the mesh of my current model, everything dissapears. No more features such as geometries or data that are selected (box ticked) in the view components panel are seen in the Slice or Cross-Section View. All I am left with is the outer shell of the model (see attachment).
Anyone experienced this before?
Any solutions?
Thanks
T

Hey Blair!
thanks so much!
It worked.
(I used an elemental distribution as it is an elemental property, but it all worked thanks to your explanations).
Best regards,
Thomas

Hi,
with the option "use parameter expression" to control in/outflow on top/bottom so it is dependent on the simulated pressure, how can I visualize the values assigned to the model at each time step in a transient simulation?
If I double click  in/outflow on top/bottom in the data panel of the DAC file, I only see the previously assigned  "use parameter value".
Anyone had this problem before or knows how I can see the transient  in/outflow on top/bottom values&
Regards,
Thomas

Thanks Bastian,
sorry for the late reply - I was away.
Have a nice day.

Hi everyone,
is it possible that once I use T-List to assign parameters varying with time to a model, it prevents 3D mesh refinement (or mesh nesting at the location of a well boundary condition)?
Has anyone experienced this before?
Best regards,
Thomas

Hi Pete,
Thanks for the discrete feature suggestion Pete.Never thought of it.  Much appreciated.
Thomas

Thank you Giovanni,
you've probably experienced numerical instability in one of your model. ;)
It seems like many factors can create instability in a numerical model. For layer thickness, I can't confirm. This might be just one of several things I started  believe with time in my modelling career... there is a lot of controls I'm using in Feflow thinking it will have the models running smooth.
I might give it a try anyway.
Thanks again,
Thomas

Hi everyone,

I was wondering how to deal with very thin geomembrane/liners in rather large 3D models (eg.: a geomembrane underneath mining tailings) ? Here is an approach, but I would definitely appreciate sharing thoughts with you on this one...

1. Slices
+ using a couple slices to represent the liner (eg.: be 3 nodal slices / 2 elemental layers)
+ assign thickness to individual slice much greater than the actual thickness of the liner (may be on the order of 0.5m per layer) - I believe this is much more stable numerically than trying to implement millimeter-thick elemental layer
2. Hydraulic conductivity (K) value of the liner
+ determine K of the liner using Bonaparte and Giroud and considering typical liner defects density and size --> what else do you use to determine the equivalent K of liners?
+ scaling the hydraulic conductivity of the liner on the elements using thickness weighted geometric mean of K liner and soil above the liner
+ performing a sensitivity analysis performed for poor vs. good liner installation cases

Do you have any suggestion to improve this?

Best regards,
Thomas