2012
DOI: 10.2166/nh.2012.078
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of digital and manual methods of snow particle size estimation

Abstract: Maintaining long time series of observations of the Cryosphere is a key issue in climate research. Long observational time series involve problems due to change in methodology or observers. In order to extend time series and introduce new methods, careful comparisons must be made to ensure homogeneity in the observational data. We have compared an established method for snow grain-size observations used by the Abisko Scientific Research Station (ASRS) in northern Sweden, based on visual interpretation, with a … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

4
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…
Fig. 6. Physical parameters retrieved from the snow pit in 2010: (a) temperature sampled by PT100; (b) density sampled manually by weighing samples with 3 cm increments (solid line) and using the snow fork with 3 cm resolution (dots); (c) electrical conductivity measurements using the snow fork with 3 cm resolution; (d) stratigraphy based on manual observation and (e) the particle sizes determined using the DSPP method (Ingvander and others, 2012); and (f) EC sampled with 8cm increments and analyzed in the OCEC instrument, and the concentrations calculated based on the sample volume.
…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…
Fig. 6. Physical parameters retrieved from the snow pit in 2010: (a) temperature sampled by PT100; (b) density sampled manually by weighing samples with 3 cm increments (solid line) and using the snow fork with 3 cm resolution (dots); (c) electrical conductivity measurements using the snow fork with 3 cm resolution; (d) stratigraphy based on manual observation and (e) the particle sizes determined using the DSPP method (Ingvander and others, 2012); and (f) EC sampled with 8cm increments and analyzed in the OCEC instrument, and the concentrations calculated based on the sample volume.
…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1b), and density and conductivity with 3 cm resolution (Sugiyama et al 2012). Snow particle size was analysed using the DSPP method (Ingvander et al 2012(Ingvander et al , 2013. The method is based on digital camera images (Canon EOS 350D) and object-oriented image analysis (Definiens Developer 7.0 software; Definiens 2008).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The ASRS grain size observations are based on reference objects (flour, semolina, rice, peas, and nuts), or can be classified as flakes. In Ingvander et al (2011), a quantitative value for each class is given. Here, the original classification will be used (Table 1).…”
Section: Study Area and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The same was found for grain compactness category ''ice hard'' (C6, Table 1). In the following analysis R5 will denote observations of both very hard snow layers and ice layers, and The size estimates given for the ASRS grain size are described in Ingvander et al (2011). The snow layer hardness observations follow the a hand test described in Colbeck et al (1990) and Fierz et al (2009) similarly C6 will also include observations of ice.…”
Section: Study Area and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%