search

gusbacos / SuPy---Testing

0 stars 1 forks source link

QE issue #1

Closed sunt05 closed 3 years ago

sunt05 commented 3 years ago

need to explain the large QE at Wisley

image

sunt05 commented 3 years ago

This might just be due to the site characteristics at Wisley.

Take July of 2011 for example, we can see similar available energy across different configurations (note the legend: f for forcing, while s for site; and WS: Wisley; KC: Kings; so fWS_sKC means WS forcing applied to site KC):

image

but remarkably different land cover fractions, where Wisley is dominated by vegetated surfaces (notably grass):

KC KC_WS WS
Bldgs 0.43 0.43 0.001
Paved 0.38 0.38 0.002
DecTr 0 0 0.01
EveTr 0.02 0.02 0.05
Grass 0.03 0.03 0.927
BSoil 0 0 0.01
Water 0.14 0.14 0
biglimp commented 3 years ago

But what about the days in July 2012 that we looks at yesterday?

sunt05 commented 3 years ago

I forgot to mention: situation of July of 2012 is very similar to what we see above.

image

biglimp commented 3 years ago

So the issue with negative Qh is no more?

sunt05 commented 3 years ago

It is still there:

image