Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Implemented a new snow interception module and fixed segfault issue when running crhm-cli #462

Open
wants to merge 16 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

acebulsk
Copy link
Collaborator

A new snow interception module CanopyVectorBased has been added which is described in detail in the manuscript which has been submitted to the Hydrological Processes journal (Cebulski & Pomeroy) available here.

General Description of CanopyVectorBased

  • Calculates initial interception before unloading as a function of snow-leaf contact area
  • Snow-leaf contact area is calculated as a function of hydrometeor fall velocity and horizontal wind speed and the canopy closure from nadir
  • The parameters in this module were derrived from observations at Fortress Mountain around the Powerline and Forest Tower stations

A switch parameter set in the prj file controls the ablation parameterization used in the CanopyVectorBased module:

  • SublimationSwitch == 1 turns on canopy snow sublimation using Pomeroy et al., (1998)
  • SublimationSwitch == 0 turns off sublimation of canopy snow for testing
  • MassUnloadingSwitch == 0 is the mass unloading portion of the latest iteration of the Hedstrom & Pomeroy 1998 unloading with modifications by Ellis et al. (2010) and Floyd (2012)
  • MassUnloadingSwitch == 1 are the new ablation parameterisations developed at fortress mountain based on wind speed, duration, and air temperature.

TODO

  • Still need to partition drip from mass unloading here in the air temp function
  • Implement melt of canopy snow adapted from CLASS or the existing CRHM module PSPnew which currently does not work

Other Important Changes

#460 appears to be resolved for now.

@acebulsk acebulsk requested a review from jhs507 November 23, 2024 17:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant