Property:Describe numerical limitations
From CSDMS
This is a property of type Text.
A
Some parameter values result in channels that self-intersect. The code outputs both the raw centerline and a simplified centerline with self-intersections removed. +
I
C
Subject to CFL stability condition. Sharp depth changes can cause instability even with low Courant numbers. Pre-processing with depth_ssl is recommended (see Cliffs User Manual at http://arxiv.org/abs/1410.0753 ) +
T
TUGS was developed with a fairly low budget, and thus, bugs may still exist. There are, however, no known numerical limitations at this point. +
S
O
The calculations assume the waves are wind waves with periods in the range of 0-~30 s. If the waves are much larger or produced by a different mechanism, the calculations are not likely to be accurate. +
T
The elevation specific equation of mass conservation is integrated with the Euler method. Thus, the user should carefully choose the spatial distance between computational nodes in the vertical and streamwise direction, as well as the temporal increment, to guarantee the numerical stability and mass conservation. +
C
The fluvial sediment transport equations are quasi-diffusive and typically have orders of magnitude spatial variations in rate coefficient (reflecting differences in water discharge), which makes the system of equations stiff. Small time steps are typically required, which can lead to long compute times for large meshes. +
S
The model cannot yet fully handle complex coastline geometries, such as those that cannot be represented (after rotation) by a single-valued function. +
Q
C
The model handles complex-shaped coastlines, such as cuspate-capes and spits. However, where the shoreline curvature becomes extreme (radius of curvature comparable to the cross-shore shoreface extent), as at the ends of spits, the assumptions of a locally rectilinear coordinate system break down, and sediment is conserved less rigorously locally. See Ashton and Murray (2006a) for details. +
W
M
The model might be unstable if the meander bends are too sharp and/or flow parameters are somehow borderline. +
R
The model was designed for laminar to transitional flows, up to 10 cm/s. Under these conditions, the flow velocity solution is approximate but is realistic and stable. +
L
The profiles should not be spaced too closely in order to avoid an unstable saw-tooth longitudinal profile of the river. +
C
P
This model is limited to ice-rich permafrost exposures, where soil is at least 40% ice by volume and inorganic particles tend to be finer than sand. +
T
This model is only tested in rectangle domains, and compared the results with idealized experiments;
Sediment bed state is affected by the initial condition (mainly due to the frictional stess closure in this model). For 2D or 3D runs, it is suggested that first run 1DV to steady or quasi-steady state, and map the 1DV results to 2DV or 3D, in this way, the initial instability of the sediment bed can be avoided. +
This model/component needs more rigorous testing. +
This model/component needs more rigorous testing. +
