[CIG-SEISMO] Results difference from rev 18194 to rev 20451 for a simple configuration

[daniel peter]

Hi Camille,

i checked the different revisions with your setup and get the same  
results. maybe you are not comparing the same simulations. i noticed  
that in your setup in Par_file you are using the flag:
...
MOVIE_VOLUME = .true.
...
to generate output for a movie simulation. for movies, the half- 
duration of the source in CMTSOLUTION gets automatically modified with  
HDUR_MOVIE to generate "smooth" looking images. maybe one of your  
simulations was using a non-zero HDUR_MOVIE value while the other did.  
that would explain the differences you see (with MOVIE_VOLUME  
= .false., i get the same results for both revisions as shown in your  
K400_%20rev20451.jpg file).

please check again your simulation setups. also, if you are interested  
in seismograms, turn all movie options off ( MOVIE_VOLUME = .false. in  
your case) to be safe not to modify the source half-duration and  
compare again. you should see that the solutions between the different  
revisions remains the same. if that's not the case, please let me know  
again.

best wishes,
daniel




On Jul 9, 2012, at 10:54 AM, Camille Mazoyer wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> Last year my collegues and I tried SPECFEM3D (rev 18194, April 2011)  
> for a simple configuration.
> This week, we wanted to continue our work. I downloaded rev 20451 to  
> run again my configuration. I was very surprised because the results  
> are very differents. I don't know if I made a mistake in my data  
> files, or if a bug were corrected in between times.
>
> There are very few things to change in the data files between rev  
> 18194 and rev 20451 (can you confirm?).
> Here are the only modifications (the variables) I added:
>
> In Par_file:
> MODEL = default
>
> In Mesh_Par_file
> CREATE_VTK_FILES = .false.
>
> I send you the plot I had with gnuplot, for two stations named in my  
> example K400 and K401 (K400.CE.CXZ.semd, K401.CE.CXZ.semd).
> You can see results are quite differents, eg for a station that I  
> called K400:
> rev 18194: http://pageperso.univ-brest.fr/~mazoyer/guennou/specfem/rev18194/K400_rev18194.jpg
> rev 20451: http://pageperso.univ-brest.fr/~mazoyer/guennou/specfem/rev20451/K400_%20rev20451.jpg
>
> I send you the data files in case you want to have to take a look on  
> them, or rerun the config.
> Here is the link where you can download all: http://pageperso.univ-brest.fr/~mazoyer/guennou/specfem
>
> Any help would be very appreciate,
> Thanks a lot,
>
> Camille Mazoyer
>
> -- 
> Camille Mazoyer-Kervazo
> UMS3113
> Institut Universitaire Européen de la Mer
> Rue Dumont d'Urville
> 29280 Plouzane
>
> Tél Brest : 02 98 49 88 09, Bureau B116
> Tél Toulon: 04 94 14 25 26
> Tél Portable: 06 63 15 13 41
>
> _______________________________________________
> CIG-SEISMO mailing list
> CIG-SEISMO at geodynamics.org
> http://geodynamics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cig-seismo

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://geodynamics.org/pipermail/cig-seismo/attachments/20120720/6bf8c84b/attachment.htm