How does a dynamic surface roughness affect snowpack modeling?

被引:0
|
作者
Sanow, Jessica E. [1 ]
Fassnacht, Steven R. [1 ,2 ]
Suzuki, Kazuyoshi [3 ]
机构
[1] Colorado State Univ, ESS Watershed Sci, Ft Collins, CO 80523 USA
[2] Colorado State Univ, CIRA, Ft Collins, CO 80523 USA
[3] Japan Agcy Marine Earth Sci & Technol JAMSTEC, 3173-25 Showamachi,Kanazawa Ku, Yokohama, Kanagawa 2360001, Japan
基金
日本学术振兴会;
关键词
Geometric measurements; Aerodynamic roughness length; Terrestrial lidar; SNOWPACK model; Snow surface topography; SCALAR TRANSFER; LIDAR; DEPTH; GLACIER; LENGTH;
D O I
10.1016/j.polar.2024.101110
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
The SNOWPACK model is a cryosphere model which incorporates several environmental model parameters, one of which being the aerodynamic roughness length (z(0)). The z(0) is considered a static parameter, however, research has shown that the z(0) of the surface is variable due to the changing nature of the snowpack surface throughout the winter season. This study highlights the sensitivity of the z(0) within the SNOWPACK model based on the outputs of sublimation, SWE, and sensible heat. The z(0) values were calculated in two ways, anemometrically (z(0-A)), using a wind profile, and geometrically (z(0-G)), measuring surface geometry. Calculated z(0-A) values were between 1.03 x 10(-6) to 0.12 m. The z(0-G) values were calculated from a terrestrial lidar scan using various resolution values of post-process resolutions. These resolutions of 0.01, 0.1, and 1 m resulted in z(0-G) values of 0.26, 0.08, and 0.01 m, respectively. Therefore, as the resolution coarsened, the z(0-G) values decreased. Lastly, these calculated z(0-G) values, a variable run, using weekly measured z(0-G) values, and 0.002 (SNOWPACK default), 0.02, and 0.2 m values were incorporated into the SNOWPACK model. When applied, cumulative sublimation, SWE, and sensible heat outputs varied by 131%, -71%, and -49%, when compared to the default z(0) value used within the model.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] HOW DOES SURFACE-ROUGHNESS AFFECT POLYMER SURFACE INTERACTIONS
    DOUGLAS, JF
    MACROMOLECULES, 1989, 22 (09) : 3707 - 3716
  • [2] HOW ADDITIVES AFFECT FLOW AND SURFACE ROUGHNESS OF PVC
    SHAH, PL
    SPE JOURNAL, 1971, 27 (01): : 49 - &
  • [3] DOES STYLUS RADIUS AFFECT SURFACE-ROUGHNESS MEASUREMENTS
    RADHARKRISHNAN, V
    TRIBOLOGY INTERNATIONAL, 1977, 10 (02) : 101 - 103
  • [4] How does substrate roughness affect the service life of a superhydrophobic coating?
    Zhang, Xin
    Mo, Jiliang
    Si, Yifan
    Guo, Zhiguang
    APPLIED SURFACE SCIENCE, 2018, 441 : 491 - 499
  • [5] How does a multiwalled carbon nanotube atomic force microscopy probe affect the determination of surface roughness statistics?
    Hudspeth, QM
    Nagle, KP
    Zhao, YP
    Karabacak, T
    Nguyen, CV
    Meyyappan, M
    Wang, GC
    Lu, TM
    SURFACE SCIENCE, 2002, 515 (2-3) : 453 - 461
  • [6] How does waterjet cleaning affect the surface and surface preparation?
    Frenzel, Lydia M.
    Journal of Protective Coatings and Linings, 2009, 27 (01): : 44 - 55
  • [7] Geometric Versus Anemometric Surface Roughness for a Shallow Accumulating Snowpack
    Sanow, Jessica E.
    Fassnacht, Steven R.
    Kamin, David J.
    Sexstone, Graham A.
    Bauerle, William L.
    Oprea, Iuliana
    GEOSCIENCES, 2018, 8 (12)
  • [8] How does learning intent affect interlocking directorates dynamic?
    Simoni, Michele
    Caiazza, Rosa
    LEARNING ORGANIZATION, 2012, 19 (05): : 388 - +
  • [9] How does the choice of DEMs affect catchment hydrological modeling?
    Moges, Desalew Meseret
    Virro, Holger
    Kmoch, Alexander
    Cibin, Raj
    Rohith, A. N.
    Martinez-Salvador, Alberto
    Conesa-Garcia, Carmelo
    Uuemaa, Evelyn
    SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT, 2023, 892
  • [10] HOW ROLL ERRORS AND SURFACE-ROUGHNESS AFFECT ROLLED GEAR ACCURACY
    BELKORETSKII, NL
    RUSSIAN ENGINEERING JOURNAL, 1980, 60 (01): : 40 - 41