Sensitivity of soil surface temperature in a force-restore equation to heat fluxes and deep soil temperature

Mihailoviĉ, Dragutin T.; Kallos, George; Arsenić, Ilija; Lalić, Branislava; Rajkovic, Borivoj; Παπαδόπουλος, Αναστάσιος

doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0088(19991130)19:14<1617::aid-joc448>3.0.co;2-b

Cited by 18 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 27 publications

(34 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This formulation is, in essence, different from the force‐restore formulation of the evolution of soil temperatures [see, e.g., Hu and Islam , 1995; Mihailovic et al , 1999; Jacobs et al , 2000; Savijarvi , 1992; Dickinson , 1988] and represents a discretization of the soil diffusion equation. High‐frequency response of the soil would be truncated with coarser soil surface discretization.…”

Section: Physical Interpretation: Circuit Analogymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Harmonic propagation of variability in surface energy balance within a coupled soil‐vegetation‐atmosphere system

Gentine

Polcher

Entekhabi

2011

Water Resources Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

[1] The response of a soil-vegetation-atmosphere continuum model to incoming radiation forcing is investigated in order to gain insights into the coupling of soil and atmospheric boundary layer (ABL) states and fluxes. The response is characterized through amplitude and phase propagation of the harmonics in order to differentiate between the response of the system to forcing at different frequencies (daily to hourly to near instantaneous). Stochastic noise is added to the surface energy balance. The amplitude of the noise is maximum at midday when the incoming radiative forcing is also at its peak. The temperatures and turbulent heat fluxes are shown to act as low-pass filters of the incoming radiation or energy budget noise variability at the surface. Conversely, soil heat flux is shown to act as a high-pass filter because of the strong contrast in the soil and air heat capacities and thermal conductivities. As a consequence, heat diffusion formulations that numerically dampen such forcing are potentially incapable of representing rapid fluctuations in soil heat flux (≤30 min) and therefore introduce errors in the land-surface energy partitioning. The soil-vegetation-ABL continuum model and an electrical analogy for it are used to explain the frequency-dependent differences in the relative effectiveness of turbulent heat fluxes versus ground heat flux in dissipating noise in radiative forcing.Citation: Gentine, P., J. Polcher, and D. Entekhabi (2011), Harmonic propagation of variability in surface energy balance within a coupled soil-vegetation-atmosphere system, Water Resour. Res., 47, W05525,

show abstract

Section: Physical Interpretation: Circuit Analogymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[65] These results point to a potential limitation of the classical force-restore soil thermal model [see, e.g., Hu and Islam, 1995;Mihailovic et al, 1999;Jacobs et al, 2000;Savijarvi, 1992;Dickinson, 1988]. The restoring term at lower daily frequencies should be less than the value at higher frequencies.…”

Section: Physical Interpretation: Circuit Analogymentioning

confidence: 99%

Harmonic propagation of variability in surface energy balance within a coupled soil‐vegetation‐atmosphere system

Gentine

Polcher

Entekhabi

2011

Water Resources Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The FRM can be applied from to estimate variations in ground surface temperature, however its extension to calculation of soil temperature has been restricted for several reasons. It has been maintained that determining the daily mean ground surface temperature is problematic in that a value of is required before solving for the diurnal variations of soil temperature using the FRM [ Deardorff , 1978; Dickinson , 1988; Kimura , 1994; Mihailovic et al , 1999]. In addition, is required at depth to provide a lower boundary condition for diurnal calculations.…”

Section: Extension Of the Frmmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other methods treat as a deep reference soil temperature [e.g., Deardorff , 1978; Noihan and Planton , 1989]. Mihailovic et al [1999] examined how important the deep soil temperature is to the force‐restore calculation and they proposed a new procedure for calculating the deep soil temperature based, on climatological data of soil temperature and its exponential attenuation. Although the mean daily ground surface temperature and mean daily soil temperature differ, by assuming that is a deep soil temperature and that , then can be estimated using the extended FRM ().…”

Section: Application Of the Extended Frmmentioning

confidence: 99%

An extension of the force‐restore method to estimating soil temperature at depth and evaluation for frozen soils under snow

et al. 2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

[1] The force-restore method (FRM) was originally developed for estimating diurnal fluctuations in the ground surface temperature. Because of its relatively simple parameterization, it is commonly applied in meteorological and other models for this purpose. Its application to the calculation of deeper soil temperatures, to frozen soils, and to soils under snow covers has heretofore not been possible. This study demonstrates an extension of the FRM that permits accurate estimates of seasonal variation in mean daily deep soil temperature. The extended FRM is shown to provide a lower boundary condition for the heat conduction method, permitting a combination of the two approaches that avoids some limitations of each. The combined approach provides representations of the mean daily soil temperature, soil temperature at depth in frozen soils, and ground surface temperature under a snow cover. Diurnal variations can also be calculated. The extended method and combined approaches are tested using field site measurements collected in cold weather periods in Saskatchewan, Canada, and are found to provide a reasonable representation of measurements.INDEX TERMS: 3322 Meteorology and Atmospheric Dynamics: Land/atmosphere interactions; 3337 Meteorology and Atmospheric Dynamics: Numerical modeling and data assimilation; 1823 Hydrology: Frozen ground; 1878 Hydrology: Water/energy interactions; 1863 Hydrology: Snow and ice (1827); KEYWORDS: soil temperature, force-restore method, frozen soil Citation: Hirota, T., J. W. Pomeroy, R. J. Granger, and C. P. Maule, An extension of the force-restore method to estimating soil temperature at depth and evaluation for frozen soils under snow,

show abstract

“…Specification of

\overset{T}{true}

has an appreciable effect on the performance of the FRM Ts [ Mihailović et al ., ]. Both deep soil temperature and daily mean temperature were used in previous studies [e.g., Bouttier et al ., ; Boone et al ., ; Noilhan and Planton , ; Mahfouf and Noilhan , ; Noilhan and Mahfouf , ].…”

Section: Model Formulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A coupled force‐restore model of surface temperature and soil moisture using the maximum entropy production model of heat fluxes

Huang

Wang

2016

JGR Atmospheres

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A coupled force‐restore model of surface soil temperature and moisture (FRMEP) is formulated by incorporating the maximum entropy production model of surface heat fluxes and including the gravitational drainage term. The FRMEP model driven by surface net radiation and precipitation are independent of near‐surface atmospheric variables with reduced sensitivity to the uncertainties of model input and parameters compared to the classical force‐restore models (FRM). The FRMEP model was evaluated using observations from two field experiments with contrasting soil moisture conditions. The modeling errors of the FRMEP predicted surface temperature and soil moisture are lower than those of the classical FRMs forced by observed or bulk formula based surface heat fluxes (bias 1 ~ 2°C versus ~4°C, 0.02 m3 m−3 versus 0.05 m3 m−3). The diurnal variations of surface temperature, soil moisture, and surface heat fluxes are well captured by the FRMEP model measured by the high correlations between the model predictions and observations (r ≥ 0.84). Our analysis suggests that the drainage term cannot be neglected under wet soil condition. A 1 year simulation indicates that the FRMEP model captures the seasonal variation of surface temperature and soil moisture with bias less than 2°C and 0.01 m3 m−3 and correlation coefficients of 0.93 and 0.9 with observations, respectively.

show abstract

Sensitivity of soil surface temperature in a force-restore equation to heat fluxes and deep soil temperature

Cited by 18 publications

References 27 publications

Harmonic propagation of variability in surface energy balance within a coupled soil‐vegetation‐atmosphere system

Harmonic propagation of variability in surface energy balance within a coupled soil‐vegetation‐atmosphere system

An extension of the force‐restore method to estimating soil temperature at depth and evaluation for frozen soils under snow

A coupled force‐restore model of surface temperature and soil moisture using the maximum entropy production model of heat fluxes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About