4.3 Article

Explicit validation of a surface shortwave radiation balance model over snow-covered complex terrain

Journal

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2010JD013970

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Confederation's innovation promotion agency [7723.1 ESPP-ES]
  2. European Commission

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A model that computes the surface radiation balance for all sky conditions in complex terrain is presented. The spatial distribution of direct and diffuse sky radiation is determined from observations of incident global radiation, air temperature, and relative humidity at a single measurement location. Incident radiation under cloudless sky is spatially derived from a parameterization of the atmospheric transmittance. Direct and diffuse sky radiation for all sky conditions are obtained by decomposing the measured global radiation value. Spatial incident radiation values under all atmospheric conditions are computed by adjusting the spatial radiation values obtained from the parametric model with the radiation components obtained from the decomposition model at the measurement site. Topographic influences such as shading are accounted for. The radiosity approach is used to compute anisotropic terrain reflected radiation. Validations of the shortwave radiation balance model are presented in detail for a day with cloudless sky. For a day with overcast sky a first validation is presented. Validation of a section of the horizon line as well as of individual radiation components is performed with high-quality measurements. A new measurement setup was designed to determine terrain reflected radiation. There is good agreement between the measurements and the modeled terrain reflected radiation values as well as with incident radiation values. A comparison of the model with a fully three-dimensional radiative transfer Monte Carlo model is presented. That validation reveals a good agreement between modeled radiation values.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available