Does MUSICX have any new capability or science?

This question answers several questions around new functionality and incorporating new technology or science, such as the type of contaminants, sediment and nutrient models, rainfall-runff models, treatment methods and new science.

MUSICX has the same underlying science and capability as MUSIC 6.3, including types of contaminants, treatment nodes, source nodes, rainfall-runoff and infiltration models.

eWater is a not-for-profit, Government-owned company, tasked with the ongoing development and adoption of Australia’s hydrology modelling tools. All our revenue, from licences, support and maintenance agreements and project work are re-invested into maintaining and improving our tools.

Over time, we envision that together with the MUSIC user community we will add new science and capability through the creation of plugins. Similar to our approach for developing the Source platform, we will work with the MUSIC community to identify priority areas and opportunities to co-invest in projects that support the ongoing development of MUSICX. Potential areas for plugin development include:

·        new contaminants

·        customized pollutant generation algorithms

·        new treatment types, such as a separate treatment pit

·        reflect the seasonality of nutrient treatment

·        additional rainfall-runoff models

We recognize the importance of gaining widespread acceptance from the MUSIC community on how to best include new features. Plugins will allow the community to test new approaches and treatments, from which we can work together to determine the best approach for representing new science and capability in MUSICX.

Products - MUSIC X

  1. What are the main benefits of MUSICX versus MUSIC 6.3.0?
  2. What new opportunities will MUSICX support?
  3. Does MUSICX have any new capability or science?
  4. How can unique or local conditions be incorporated?
  5. How do I write a plugin?
  6. Licensing, pricing and support
  7. Compatibility between MUSICX and MUSIC 6.3 and transitioning to MUSICX
  8. Is MUSIC-link available?
  9. Does MUSICX have Source functionality like inbuilt calibration and optimisation?
  10. Has the "edit all nodes of this type" functionality been retained?
  11. Does MUSICX have the ability to model sub-timestep scale routing along MUSIC links?
  12. Have extra routing models been added other than ‘none’, ‘translation’ and ‘muskingum-cunge’ that are in MUSIC 6.3?
  13. When you run a grassed swale in MUSIC 6.3 it has 100% removal efficiency for gross pollutants. The performance of the swale is also the same, regardless of whether it is 2% grade or 15% grade. Is this fixed in MUSICX?
  14. Does the flow transfer function within a generic node still ‘loose’ water from the model, or can I now account for this ‘lost’ water within a secondary link?
  15. Have the source node input properties been changed from MUSIC 6.3 or are many of the Source nodes still the same (residential, commercial, industrial) with the only variation in the nodes being their name?
  16. When a file is sent to a regulator to review, will it include the met-data or will they have to specify it separately?
  17. Do secondary links exist in MUSICX?
  18. Previous versions of MUSIC were not well accepted for use in WA due to unique soil conditions in the Swan Coastal Plain. Will MUSIC X be compatible for use in WA?
  19. How does the program know how to read the rainfall xls? Does it need to be in particular column etc. or can it work it out for itself?
  20. Has the MUSIC 6.3 bug relating to a maximum custom storage depth within a wetland been fixed

Feedback and Knowledge Base