1999
DOI: 10.2151/jmsj1965.77.1b_335
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

New Snow-Physics to Complement SSiB

Abstract: In evaluation(s) as a part of the Global Soil Wetness Project using ISLSCP Initiative-I data, the snowmelt in SSiB in the Russian Wheat Belt region (RWB) was found to be substantially delayed, with very deficient meltwater infiltration as compared to observations. Furthermore, most of the meltwater emerged as runoff, as opposed to soil moisture recharge. The deficiency emanated from the crudeness of snowphysics of the combined snow and ground layer of SSiB. In the current work, a new snow model employing a sep… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

1
2
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
1
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Their new model melts less in the early season but tends to ablate the snowpack at a more appropriate time. With respect to the influence of model structure on snow simulation, results presented here are consistent with those of Sud and Moko (1999) and Lynch et al (1998).…”
Section: Model Structure and Thermal Properties Of The Snowsupporting
confidence: 85%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Their new model melts less in the early season but tends to ablate the snowpack at a more appropriate time. With respect to the influence of model structure on snow simulation, results presented here are consistent with those of Sud and Moko (1999) and Lynch et al (1998).…”
Section: Model Structure and Thermal Properties Of The Snowsupporting
confidence: 85%
“…Because of the higher heat capacity of the single-layer model, snowmelt is delayed when compared with the three-layer models, and the impact on subsurface hydrological behavior is also evident. Sud and Moko (1999) incorporated a bulk-layer snow model in SSiB to overcome problems such as a lack of response to forcing perturbations and a lagged melt (e.g., 1967/68; Fig. 1) in the old composite model.…”
Section: Model Structure and Thermal Properties Of The Snowmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many physically based models for the mass and energy balance in the snowpack have been developed for their coupling with hydrological models or atmospheric models. Boone and Etchevers (2001) divided these snow models into three main categories: (i) simple force-restore schemes with the snow modeled as the composite snow-soil layer (Pitman et al, 1991;Douville et al, 1995;Yang et al, 1997) or a single explicit snow layer (Verseghy, 1991;Tarboton & Luce, 1996;Slater et al, 1998;Sud & Mocko, 1999;Dutra et al, 2010); (ii) detailed internal snow process schemes with multiple snow layers of fine vertical resolution (Jordan, 1991;Lehning et al, 1999;Vionnet et al, 2012;Leroux & Pomeroy, 2017); and (iii) intermediate-complexity schemes with physics from the detailed schemes but with a limited number of layers, which are intended for coupling with atmospheric models (e.g., Sun et al, 1999;Boone & Etchevers, 2001). The intercomparison results of the abovementioned snow models at an alpine site indicated that all three types of schemes are capable of representing the basic features of the snow cover over the 2-year period but behaved differently on shorter timescales.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%