You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I set up a quick experiment using a 100ft pipe with 10ft sub-sections and slopes of 1% and 5% to see the impact of using the constant S/R ratio of 1.56 versus the correct ratio on depth and velocities given the same flows. The results showed some differences. There were larger deviations for the smaller pipes than for the larger pipes as one would expect.
Also, the deviations tended to be larger when depths approached the crowns of the pipes, which is also to be expected. Finally, the vertical ellipses showed larger deviations in depth than the horizontal ellipses as changes in flow lead to relatively larger changes in depth.
In light of these differences, it makes sense to me to keep the status-quo. Users have the option of selecting one of the standard sizes or they could prescribe their own rise and span values which will lead to more accurate and precise calculations.
GUI should only either accept rise or span. The other can be calculated use S/R factors.
This issue is related to [this one] (USEPA/Stormwater-Management-Model#144) raised by @LRossman
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: