Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2rsb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T07:21:33.242Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Local terrain-topography and thermal-properties influence on energy and mass balance of a snow cover

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 September 2017

E.E. Adams
Affiliation:
Department of Civil Engineering, Montana State University, 205 Cobleigh Hall, Bozeman, MT 59717-3900, USA E-mail: eda@ce.montana.edu
A.E. Slaughter
Affiliation:
Department of Civil Engineering, Montana State University, 205 Cobleigh Hall, Bozeman, MT 59717-3900, USA E-mail: eda@ce.montana.edu
L. McKittrick
Affiliation:
Department of Civil Engineering, Montana State University, 205 Cobleigh Hall, Bozeman, MT 59717-3900, USA E-mail: eda@ce.montana.edu
D.A. Miller
Affiliation:
Department of Civil Engineering, Montana State University, 205 Cobleigh Hall, Bozeman, MT 59717-3900, USA E-mail: eda@ce.montana.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstarct

Snow’s interaction with the environment is an important area in environmental science, particularly as climatic conditions change. We consider the local influence at the slope or smaller scale. Near-surface properties drive the dynamic interface with the atmosphere and with surrounding terrain. While accounting for topography, complex interactions involving energy and mass transfer at the snow surface are considered, using a computer simulation (RadTherm/RT). Digital elevation maps are used to numerically fabricate terrain features and vegetation, while applying appropriate thermal properties to specified terrain types. Conduction, convection radiation and phase change (for dry snow) are considered. Particularly relevant to this study are longwave infrared and shortwave radiation, which in the model account for shadowing, multiple reflective and emissive contributions. An example of a north-facing 30˚, snow-covered clearing bounded by trees is examined using measured meteorological conditions. Applying the same weather conditions, the model is used to examine the difference if the trees are assumed bare or covered with snow. Results indicate that, for the conditions considered, when trees are covered with snow, the open slope is cooler and the snow mass loss is less. Spatial variability across the slope is also noted. Differences are largely due to topographic radiation exchange.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © the Author(s) [year] 2011
Figure 0

Fig. 1.Recorded (a) radiation data from a ridge above the study location and (b) air-temperature, wind-speed and relative humidity data from the north study location on 31 March 2010, which were used as input into the energy-balance model.

Figure 1

Fig. 2.Digital elevation map (~125m×131 m) demonstrating an instantaneous spatial temperature and mass flux distributions calculated at 1300 h. (a) Temperature map for the snow slope surrounded by snow-free trees; (b) temperature map for the snow slope with the snow-covered trees scenario; (c) mass flux for the snow-free trees scenario; and (d) mass flux for the snow-covered trees case. The locations of selected points are labeled.

Figure 2

Fig. 3.Difference in calculated temperatures for the two scenarios modeled (snow-free trees minus snow-covered trees); for selected elements and for the average of all elements on the tree-free snow slope. The case with the snow-free trees indicates the snow slope is warmer everywhere. Locations of the individual facets are displayed in Figure 2.

Figure 3

Fig. 4.The average radiation across the snow slope for (a) incident longwave (LW) and shortwave (SW) and (b) net (absorbed) solar and infrared radiation for the snow-free and snow-covered trees settings, respectively labeled as ‘trees’ and ‘snow’ in the legend.

Figure 4

Fig. 5.Selected facets and the average for the snow slope for the calculated incident shortwave radiation for (a) snow-free trees and (b) snow-covered trees. The calculated incident longwave radiation for (c) snow-free trees and (d) snow-covered trees.

Figure 5

Fig. 6.The rate of mass flux averaged for the entire snowpack for the snow-covered trees (snow) and the snow-free trees (trees) scenarios. Positive values indicate mass deposition onto the snow slope, and negative values indicate sublimation.