jochim.walter

I tested the calibration with some simple models as well. It shows same problem again and again. FePEST 6.2 does not give the good results and objestive function does not drop after some value. please help me with this manner.

Hello,
I have about 3000 conductivity polygons and I need to convert each of them into element selection at once without selecting one by one and save as element selection for the calibration.(selecting one by one and saving is time consuming and problematic  process for huge amount of selections )
Do you have any idea?
Your help is highly appreciated
jochim

who has similar experiences as mine? please share....

Hi Carlo,
Thanks for the respond,
Regarding my work,I'm working with highly heterogeneous, fractured, about 5000sqkm area,  6 layer model.I calibrated the model several times to understand the influence of changing boundary conditions because of the the groundwater dynamics of the area is not well understood.

I used Feflow 6.1 (PEST- pilot point) earlier and I could calibrate the model accurately (perfectly with groundwater heads) although It took very long time for inversion. After releasing the Feflow 6.2 last December,I started to use FePEST. I have access Server and with the aid of BEOPEST parallel processing, the calibration is very fast. But,objective function start to not to fall down and calibration stops without achieving good fit.However ,Fepest 6.1 gives best mach for the same model and I'm fully satisfied with the results.Actually,I have followed the calibration procedure more than 500 times with different boundary conditions.

I do not need any calibration regularization method at this moment,I use only initial parameter,Upper-lower levels only for the Hydraulic conductivity calibration.Logically,As I think,If I use manual calibration,  fepest 6.1 ,or fepest  6.2  to get the parameters and the parameters fits to manage observed heads with modelled heads,It does not have any effect on final results.

Earlier,I thought new FePEST uses regularization method in default setup to adjust and have smooth distribution without bumpy appearance of conductivity in space.

Please let me know the  suggestions.

Thanks

hello,
Im working both Fepest 6.1 and 6.2  .  However,I encountered that the 6.1(default setup) is more flexible for highly heterogeneous  calibration than newest 6.2. I think the problem is with Regularization setup change in new  version, might be Correlation length or co variance matrix.Please help me to make changes in regularization setup, similar to 6.1 setup. Thanks
Walter

Hello,
Im new to Feflow,I have calibrated steady state model and I need to start transient simulation.but my problem is Hydraulic Head BC(1st kind) varies with time and it is unknown,can I import it from steady state model and allow it to change during transient simulation with out defining into transient model domain,please help me.
jochim