Difference between revisions of "Select catchment model"
(Set PropertyValue: Type = low) |
|||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Category:Task]] | [[Category:Task]] | ||
| − | We decided to use [[Document_the_PIHM_catchment_model | PIHM]] as the basic model | + | This task started in January 2014 and was completed Feb 2014. The goal was to choose a strategy for catchment-lake coupling that would serve as an initial prototype and that could evolve efficiently in the future (e.g. more advanced lake and catchment processes (stable isotopes, transport processes, ecosystem variables). We decided to use [[Document_the_PIHM_catchment_model | PIHM]] as the basic model and will incorporate a new strategy to embed lake hydrography in pihm.In the 2nd half of 2014 we will test a new version of pihm that explicitly allows 2-D surface-water bodies in a reasonable time (~6 months). The criteria we used to decide on the modeling framework was our need to be able to couple the lake hydrodynamic model code with the catchment code efficiently. Although pihm is quite flexible for integrating new physics modules there still are important criteria such as the ability to use a common solver and and the amount of work necessary for harmonizing the input/output data and formats for visual-analytics. In the future we intend to evaluate other catchment-lake physics codes but GLM-PIHM makes the best choice for the prototype given the science we wish to achieve. |
: <span style="color:#5F9EA0"> @ChrisDuffy: We should have some text in this page justifying the choice. Also, we should have begin and end dates, and show that the task has ended and is 100% completed. -- -- [[Yolanda_Gil | Yolanda]] </span> | : <span style="color:#5F9EA0"> @ChrisDuffy: We should have some text in this page justifying the choice. Also, we should have begin and end dates, and show that the task has ended and is 100% completed. -- -- [[Yolanda_Gil | Yolanda]] </span> | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
Participants=Gopal_Bhatt| | Participants=Gopal_Bhatt| | ||
Participants=Xuan_Yu| | Participants=Xuan_Yu| | ||
| + | Progress=100| | ||
StartDate=2014-01-28| | StartDate=2014-01-28| | ||
TargetDate=2014-02-28| | TargetDate=2014-02-28| | ||
Type=Low}} | Type=Low}} | ||
Latest revision as of 11:16, 27 August 2014
This task started in January 2014 and was completed Feb 2014. The goal was to choose a strategy for catchment-lake coupling that would serve as an initial prototype and that could evolve efficiently in the future (e.g. more advanced lake and catchment processes (stable isotopes, transport processes, ecosystem variables). We decided to use PIHM as the basic model and will incorporate a new strategy to embed lake hydrography in pihm.In the 2nd half of 2014 we will test a new version of pihm that explicitly allows 2-D surface-water bodies in a reasonable time (~6 months). The criteria we used to decide on the modeling framework was our need to be able to couple the lake hydrodynamic model code with the catchment code efficiently. Although pihm is quite flexible for integrating new physics modules there still are important criteria such as the ability to use a common solver and and the amount of work necessary for harmonizing the input/output data and formats for visual-analytics. In the future we intend to evaluate other catchment-lake physics codes but GLM-PIHM makes the best choice for the prototype given the science we wish to achieve.
- @ChrisDuffy: We should have some text in this page justifying the choice. Also, we should have begin and end dates, and show that the task has ended and is 100% completed. -- -- Yolanda
