Comparative Analyses of Physically Based Snowmelt Models for Climate Simulations
A comparative study of three snow models with different complexities was carried out to assess how a physically detailed snow model can improve snow modeling within general circulation models. The three models were (a) the U.S. Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory Model (SNTHERM), w...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of climate 1999-08, Vol.12 (8), p.2643-2657 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 2657 |
---|---|
container_issue | 8 |
container_start_page | 2643 |
container_title | Journal of climate |
container_volume | 12 |
creator | Jin, J. Gao, X. Yang, Z.-L. Bales, R. C. Sorooshian, S. Dickinson, R. E. Sun, S. F. Wu, G. X. |
description | A comparative study of three snow models with different complexities was carried out to assess how a physically detailed snow model can improve snow modeling within general circulation models. The three models were (a) the U.S. Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory Model (SNTHERM), which uses the mixture theory to simulate multiphase water and energy transfer processes in snow layers; (b) a simplified three-layer model, Snow–Atmosphere–Soil Transfer (SAST), which includes only the ice and liquid-water phases; and (c) the snow submodel of the Biosphere–Atmosphere Transfer Scheme (BATS), which calculates snowmelt from the energy budget and snow temperature by the force–restore method. Given the same initial conditions and forcing of atmosphere and radiation, these three models simulated time series of snow water equivalent, surface temperature, and fluxes very well, with SNTHERM giving the best match with observations and SAST simulation being close. BATS captured the major processes in the upper portion of a snowpack where solar radiation provides the main energy source and gave satisfying results for seasonal periods. Some biases occurred in BATS surface temperature and energy exchange due to its neglecting of liquid water and underestimating snow density. Ice heat conduction, meltwater heat transport, and the melt–freeze process of snow exhibit strong diurnal variations and large gradients at the uppermost layers of snowpacks. Using two layers in the upper 20 cm and one deeper layer at the bottom to simulate the multiphase snowmelt processes, SAST closely approximated the performance of SNTHERM with computational requirements comparable to those of BATS. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1175/1520-0442(1999)012<2643:CAOPBS>2.0.CO;2 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_18094049</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>26244601</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>26244601</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c395t-3f5e87c0b9c80050aaf012cfa5bc048280d55456394aa6a81ecb41be94c0d2333</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkN-LEzEQx4MoWKt_gpAHEX3Y3uTXbqIi9BY9hZMWqs8hTbO4R3ZTM1ul_71ZepyPPs3DfOY7Mx9CrhisGGvUFVMcKpCSv2HGmLfA-AdeS_GuXW-217uPfAWrdvOePyKLB_IxWYA2stKNUk_JM8Q7KGM1wIJs2zQcXXZT_zvQ9ejiGQPS1NHtzzP23sV4ptcOw4HuxvRnCHGi39IhRKRdyrSN_eCmQHf9cIolI434nDzpXMTw4r4uyY_Pn763X6rbzc3Xdn1beWHUVIlOBd142BuvARQ415WTfOfU3oPUXMNBKalqYaRztdMs-L1k-2CkhwMXQizJ60vuMadfp4CTHXr0IUY3hnRCyzQYCdL8H2xkY5qyaUluLqDPCTGHzh5zeS-fLQM7q7ezUDsLtbN6Ww62s3p7UW-5BdtuLC9Jr-5XOiwKu-xG3-O_OCO5Fk3BXl6wO5xSfmjzmktZAxN_AZN3kIk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>17479756</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparative Analyses of Physically Based Snowmelt Models for Climate Simulations</title><source>American Meteorological Society</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><creator>Jin, J. ; Gao, X. ; Yang, Z.-L. ; Bales, R. C. ; Sorooshian, S. ; Dickinson, R. E. ; Sun, S. F. ; Wu, G. X.</creator><creatorcontrib>Jin, J. ; Gao, X. ; Yang, Z.-L. ; Bales, R. C. ; Sorooshian, S. ; Dickinson, R. E. ; Sun, S. F. ; Wu, G. X.</creatorcontrib><description>A comparative study of three snow models with different complexities was carried out to assess how a physically detailed snow model can improve snow modeling within general circulation models. The three models were (a) the U.S. Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory Model (SNTHERM), which uses the mixture theory to simulate multiphase water and energy transfer processes in snow layers; (b) a simplified three-layer model, Snow–Atmosphere–Soil Transfer (SAST), which includes only the ice and liquid-water phases; and (c) the snow submodel of the Biosphere–Atmosphere Transfer Scheme (BATS), which calculates snowmelt from the energy budget and snow temperature by the force–restore method. Given the same initial conditions and forcing of atmosphere and radiation, these three models simulated time series of snow water equivalent, surface temperature, and fluxes very well, with SNTHERM giving the best match with observations and SAST simulation being close. BATS captured the major processes in the upper portion of a snowpack where solar radiation provides the main energy source and gave satisfying results for seasonal periods. Some biases occurred in BATS surface temperature and energy exchange due to its neglecting of liquid water and underestimating snow density. Ice heat conduction, meltwater heat transport, and the melt–freeze process of snow exhibit strong diurnal variations and large gradients at the uppermost layers of snowpacks. Using two layers in the upper 20 cm and one deeper layer at the bottom to simulate the multiphase snowmelt processes, SAST closely approximated the performance of SNTHERM with computational requirements comparable to those of BATS.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0894-8755</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1520-0442</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1175/1520-0442(1999)012<2643:CAOPBS>2.0.CO;2</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Boston, MA: American Meteorological Society</publisher><subject>Atmospheric models ; Climate models ; Earth, ocean, space ; Exact sciences and technology ; External geophysics ; Geophysics. Techniques, methods, instrumentation and models ; Hydrological modeling ; Ice ; Liquids ; Simulations ; Snow ; Snowmelt ; Snowpack ; Surface temperature</subject><ispartof>Journal of climate, 1999-08, Vol.12 (8), p.2643-2657</ispartof><rights>1999 American Meteorological Society</rights><rights>1999 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26244601$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26244601$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,3667,27903,27904,57995,58228</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=1942837$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jin, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gao, X.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, Z.-L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bales, R. C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sorooshian, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dickinson, R. E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sun, S. F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wu, G. X.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparative Analyses of Physically Based Snowmelt Models for Climate Simulations</title><title>Journal of climate</title><description>A comparative study of three snow models with different complexities was carried out to assess how a physically detailed snow model can improve snow modeling within general circulation models. The three models were (a) the U.S. Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory Model (SNTHERM), which uses the mixture theory to simulate multiphase water and energy transfer processes in snow layers; (b) a simplified three-layer model, Snow–Atmosphere–Soil Transfer (SAST), which includes only the ice and liquid-water phases; and (c) the snow submodel of the Biosphere–Atmosphere Transfer Scheme (BATS), which calculates snowmelt from the energy budget and snow temperature by the force–restore method. Given the same initial conditions and forcing of atmosphere and radiation, these three models simulated time series of snow water equivalent, surface temperature, and fluxes very well, with SNTHERM giving the best match with observations and SAST simulation being close. BATS captured the major processes in the upper portion of a snowpack where solar radiation provides the main energy source and gave satisfying results for seasonal periods. Some biases occurred in BATS surface temperature and energy exchange due to its neglecting of liquid water and underestimating snow density. Ice heat conduction, meltwater heat transport, and the melt–freeze process of snow exhibit strong diurnal variations and large gradients at the uppermost layers of snowpacks. Using two layers in the upper 20 cm and one deeper layer at the bottom to simulate the multiphase snowmelt processes, SAST closely approximated the performance of SNTHERM with computational requirements comparable to those of BATS.</description><subject>Atmospheric models</subject><subject>Climate models</subject><subject>Earth, ocean, space</subject><subject>Exact sciences and technology</subject><subject>External geophysics</subject><subject>Geophysics. Techniques, methods, instrumentation and models</subject><subject>Hydrological modeling</subject><subject>Ice</subject><subject>Liquids</subject><subject>Simulations</subject><subject>Snow</subject><subject>Snowmelt</subject><subject>Snowpack</subject><subject>Surface temperature</subject><issn>0894-8755</issn><issn>1520-0442</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1999</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkN-LEzEQx4MoWKt_gpAHEX3Y3uTXbqIi9BY9hZMWqs8hTbO4R3ZTM1ul_71ZepyPPs3DfOY7Mx9CrhisGGvUFVMcKpCSv2HGmLfA-AdeS_GuXW-217uPfAWrdvOePyKLB_IxWYA2stKNUk_JM8Q7KGM1wIJs2zQcXXZT_zvQ9ejiGQPS1NHtzzP23sV4ptcOw4HuxvRnCHGi39IhRKRdyrSN_eCmQHf9cIolI434nDzpXMTw4r4uyY_Pn763X6rbzc3Xdn1beWHUVIlOBd142BuvARQ415WTfOfU3oPUXMNBKalqYaRztdMs-L1k-2CkhwMXQizJ60vuMadfp4CTHXr0IUY3hnRCyzQYCdL8H2xkY5qyaUluLqDPCTGHzh5zeS-fLQM7q7ezUDsLtbN6Ww62s3p7UW-5BdtuLC9Jr-5XOiwKu-xG3-O_OCO5Fk3BXl6wO5xSfmjzmktZAxN_AZN3kIk</recordid><startdate>19990801</startdate><enddate>19990801</enddate><creator>Jin, J.</creator><creator>Gao, X.</creator><creator>Yang, Z.-L.</creator><creator>Bales, R. C.</creator><creator>Sorooshian, S.</creator><creator>Dickinson, R. E.</creator><creator>Sun, S. F.</creator><creator>Wu, G. X.</creator><general>American Meteorological Society</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>KL.</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19990801</creationdate><title>Comparative Analyses of Physically Based Snowmelt Models for Climate Simulations</title><author>Jin, J. ; Gao, X. ; Yang, Z.-L. ; Bales, R. C. ; Sorooshian, S. ; Dickinson, R. E. ; Sun, S. F. ; Wu, G. X.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c395t-3f5e87c0b9c80050aaf012cfa5bc048280d55456394aa6a81ecb41be94c0d2333</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1999</creationdate><topic>Atmospheric models</topic><topic>Climate models</topic><topic>Earth, ocean, space</topic><topic>Exact sciences and technology</topic><topic>External geophysics</topic><topic>Geophysics. Techniques, methods, instrumentation and models</topic><topic>Hydrological modeling</topic><topic>Ice</topic><topic>Liquids</topic><topic>Simulations</topic><topic>Snow</topic><topic>Snowmelt</topic><topic>Snowpack</topic><topic>Surface temperature</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jin, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gao, X.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yang, Z.-L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bales, R. C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sorooshian, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dickinson, R. E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sun, S. F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wu, G. X.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of climate</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jin, J.</au><au>Gao, X.</au><au>Yang, Z.-L.</au><au>Bales, R. C.</au><au>Sorooshian, S.</au><au>Dickinson, R. E.</au><au>Sun, S. F.</au><au>Wu, G. X.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparative Analyses of Physically Based Snowmelt Models for Climate Simulations</atitle><jtitle>Journal of climate</jtitle><date>1999-08-01</date><risdate>1999</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>2643</spage><epage>2657</epage><pages>2643-2657</pages><issn>0894-8755</issn><eissn>1520-0442</eissn><abstract>A comparative study of three snow models with different complexities was carried out to assess how a physically detailed snow model can improve snow modeling within general circulation models. The three models were (a) the U.S. Army Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory Model (SNTHERM), which uses the mixture theory to simulate multiphase water and energy transfer processes in snow layers; (b) a simplified three-layer model, Snow–Atmosphere–Soil Transfer (SAST), which includes only the ice and liquid-water phases; and (c) the snow submodel of the Biosphere–Atmosphere Transfer Scheme (BATS), which calculates snowmelt from the energy budget and snow temperature by the force–restore method. Given the same initial conditions and forcing of atmosphere and radiation, these three models simulated time series of snow water equivalent, surface temperature, and fluxes very well, with SNTHERM giving the best match with observations and SAST simulation being close. BATS captured the major processes in the upper portion of a snowpack where solar radiation provides the main energy source and gave satisfying results for seasonal periods. Some biases occurred in BATS surface temperature and energy exchange due to its neglecting of liquid water and underestimating snow density. Ice heat conduction, meltwater heat transport, and the melt–freeze process of snow exhibit strong diurnal variations and large gradients at the uppermost layers of snowpacks. Using two layers in the upper 20 cm and one deeper layer at the bottom to simulate the multiphase snowmelt processes, SAST closely approximated the performance of SNTHERM with computational requirements comparable to those of BATS.</abstract><cop>Boston, MA</cop><pub>American Meteorological Society</pub><doi>10.1175/1520-0442(1999)012<2643:CAOPBS>2.0.CO;2</doi><tpages>15</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0894-8755 |
ispartof | Journal of climate, 1999-08, Vol.12 (8), p.2643-2657 |
issn | 0894-8755 1520-0442 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_18094049 |
source | American Meteorological Society; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Jstor Complete Legacy |
subjects | Atmospheric models Climate models Earth, ocean, space Exact sciences and technology External geophysics Geophysics. Techniques, methods, instrumentation and models Hydrological modeling Ice Liquids Simulations Snow Snowmelt Snowpack Surface temperature |
title | Comparative Analyses of Physically Based Snowmelt Models for Climate Simulations |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-26T03%3A17%3A05IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparative%20Analyses%20of%20Physically%20Based%20Snowmelt%20Models%20for%20Climate%20Simulations&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20climate&rft.au=Jin,%20J.&rft.date=1999-08-01&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=2643&rft.epage=2657&rft.pages=2643-2657&rft.issn=0894-8755&rft.eissn=1520-0442&rft_id=info:doi/10.1175/1520-0442(1999)012%3C2643:CAOPBS%3E2.0.CO;2&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E26244601%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=17479756&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=26244601&rfr_iscdi=true |