Brad Pierce
My feedback
16 results found
-
7 votesBrad Pierce
supported this idea
·
-
9 votesBrad Pierce
supported this idea
·
-
9 votesBrad Pierce
supported this idea
·
-
21 votesBrad Pierce
supported this idea
·
-
1 voteBrad Pierce
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment -
6 votesBrad Pierce
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Brad Pierce
commented
For compatibility with SWMM, this is probably a good feature to add, but why not improve it, too? Implement it just like in SWMM, but allow the user the option to enter a max flow or max head. Also, add the max head option to the ICM 'Fixed' pump type.
Why? Both pump types ('Fixed' and 'Ideal') have one similar characteristic that can cause issues, Once turned on, both pumps will achieve whatever head pressure is required (even ridiculous values) in order to pump the amount they're supposed to pump. If there's a problem downstream, the pumps can achieve thousands of feet/meters of head, preventing initialization. These optional settings would allow the users to enter realistic maximums to prevent the pumps from going rogue. :-)
-
11 votesBrad Pierce
supported this idea
·
-
10 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Brad Pierce
commented
This could be implemented as a single value, or better yet, a user-definable table of slopes for various diameters or height/width combinations. That way the user could enter minimum regulatory slopes or better for each pipe/conduit size.
Brad Pierce
supported this idea
·
-
15 votes
Thank you for the addition of this request, we are in discussions about how this might be achieved as the level of awareness of tasks is varied between agents. Would a dashboard showing who sent which simulation where (which are still ongoing) be sufficient? This would be without the progress those simulations have already made available as a first step.
Brad Pierce
supported this idea
·
-
6 votesBrad Pierce
supported this idea
·
-
5 votesBrad Pierce
supported this idea
·
-
19 votesBrad Pierce
supported this idea
·
-
3 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Brad Pierce
commented
This could be useful in more instances than just importing for 2D Mesh zones. AutoCAD .dwg or .dxf files usually have little information other than the object type (line, polyline, point, area, circle, etc) and name of the layer the object is on to help distinguish objects. AutoCAD uses named layers to distinguish (and often color) objects of a common type, like ICM and InfoAsset Manager use tables for nodes, conduits, etc.
So all the lines representing pipes might be one layer, circles or blocks on another layer might represent manholes or valves, etc. -
8 votes
Interesting idea.
We need more information on the problem of pipe clashes. Are these unconnected pipes in the model or are they referencing Asset networks, or Water networks?
How granular of a view does one need? I.e. are you interesting in generally where these crossing occur, or are you trying to identify how close you can cross something else?
Brad Pierce
supported this idea
·
-
6 votesBrad Pierce
supported this idea
·
-
12 votesBrad Pierce
supported this idea
·
Multiple subcatchments should always be allowed to drain to a single node (or now a single 2D point source).