• ### Re: Thickness of 2D discrete feature

Thanks Peter.
• ### Re: Phi reduction for post-calibrated MC fields

It's difficult to give suggestions without knowing more details about your model. I suggest to contact the support: https://www.mikepoweredbydhi.com/support
• ### Re: Pilot Point Representation

Yes, in principle you could try to generate Pilot Points in a zone representing your area of interest. However, you may run into the risk of having sharp contrasts in material properties at the interface between the zone and the vicinity. Alternatively, you may generate Pilot Points in the entire domain and impose preferred values (since you already have a rough idea about the distribution of the parameters).
• ### Re: TRIANGLE

The current implementation of FEFLOW does not allow you to impose a maximum area constraint on the different Supermesh elements. Instead, a meshing density and proposed number of elements are used. As workaround I suggest to try to use TRIANGLE as a standalone application. FEFLOW is capable to import poly-files.

• ### Re: determining inflow of water in to model

The flux q for NeumannBC's can be approximated by q = -K*grad(h). K is the hydraulic conductivity and grad(h) the gradient of the hydraulic head. The in- and out-transfer rates can be estimated by phi = K / d. d is the resistance between the aquifer and the surface water body. As I am not deep involved in the project I find it difficult to give recommendation on which boundary condition to assign. Therefore a rather general hint. If you use a Fluid-TransferBC, the flow directions (inflow and outflow) may change depending on the dynamics of the system. In contrast, if you use NeumannBC's need to impose a priori the time-constant or time-variable in-/outflow.
• ### Re: Thickness of 2D discrete feature

Hi Christian, the first question can be answered with yes. The thickness can be also considered as the “third dimension”. I am not sure about the second question. I did not use Hagen-Poiseuille for a while. I need to check the FEFLOW book. If I remember correctly, it is written in Chapter 4. I would expect that one parameter is used for the geometry and the other for resistances. If you are in doubt please contact the FEFLOW Support: https://www.mikepoweredbydhi.com/support. At the moment, I am at the airport and next week not in the office.
• ### Re: transient modelling with recharge monthly data

Yes, the dbf-format for storing attribute information of the shapefile has limitations in the number of columns. You could try to use another method to assign time-series for the recharge. Please try to use [b]Use Map Data: Assigning Time Series to Material Data[/b]:
http://www.feflow.info/html/help71/feflow/mainpage.htm#rhtocid=8.2.1.0_6&t=09_Parameters%2FMaterial_Properties%2Ftime_varying_materials.html%23Use_Map_Data%3A_Assigning_Time_Series_to_Material_Data
• ### Re: Release vs. debug IFM template profiles

Thanks for the note.

Could you please provide a snippet of your code which is causing the problem?
• ### Re: Steady-state convergence while changing K in FePEST

For a stability test you could try to use JACTEST. http://www.feflow.info/html/help71/fepest/09_Tools/pest_tools.html
• ### Re: Using MS Visual Studio Community 2015 for IFM Plug-In

Which OS and version are you using? Please let me also the update number of FEFLOW 7.1. Thanks Adam.