0% found this document useful (0 votes)
8 views29 pages

Soil Temperature Damping Depth Analysis

The document discusses the comparison of measured soil temperature damping depths in boreal plain forest stands and clear cuts against predictions made using SWAT algorithms. It highlights the need for modifications in damping depth calculations to better represent boreal forest conditions, suggesting an absolute temperature range definition rather than a percentage of average air temperature. The findings indicate that improved damping depth representation significantly affects soil temperature calculations at greater depths while having minimal impact on near-surface temperatures.

Uploaded by

jhgwdhwej
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
8 views29 pages

Soil Temperature Damping Depth Analysis

The document discusses the comparison of measured soil temperature damping depths in boreal plain forest stands and clear cuts against predictions made using SWAT algorithms. It highlights the need for modifications in damping depth calculations to better represent boreal forest conditions, suggesting an absolute temperature range definition rather than a percentage of average air temperature. The findings indicate that improved damping depth representation significantly affects soil temperature calculations at greater depths while having minimal impact on near-surface temperatures.

Uploaded by

jhgwdhwej
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Soil Temperature Damping Depth in Boreal Plain Forest Stands

and Clear Cuts: Comparison of Measured Depths versus


Predicted based upon SWAT Algorithms
G. Putz and B.M. Watson
Civil & Geological Engineering, University of Saskatchewan
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
J.A. Bélanger
Faculty of Engineering, Lakehead University
Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada
E.E. Prepas
Faculty of Forestry & the Forest Environment
Lakehead University, Thunder Bay
FORWARD Project: Boreal Plain Watersheds

14 long term forest watersheds


6 reference, 3 burned, 5
harvested
2 Large Scale (129 & 247 km2)
12 Small Scale (2.6 to 15.6 km2)
6 additional MPB watersheds

Boreal Plain
Boreal Plain forest

 325 to 625 mm ppt annually


 1/4 as snow, spring melt
 Sporadic storms May to Sept.
 Upland dominated by lodgepole pine,  Predominantly deep clay till soils
trembling aspen, white spruce and (luvisols)
balsam poplar  Wetlands and organic soils in
 Lowlands dominated by black spruce low areas (histosols)
and tamarack
Watershed Harvest – Winter of 2003/2004
Soil Temperature and Water Content Monitoring

18 Automated Sites (2005/06)


• 3 Upland Harvest Sites
• 3 Upland Wildfire Sites
• 3 Upland Deciduous Sites
• 3 Upland Conifer Sites
• 3 Lowland Shallow Peat Sites
• 3 Lowland Deep Peat Site
Continuous Monitoring
• Temperature @ +2000, 0, 100,
300, 500, 1000, 2000 & 3000 mm
• Water Content @ 100, 500 &
1000 mm
Soil Temperature versus Time and Depth
20
Harvested Site - H1
4 years post harvest

15
Soil Temperature ( C )

100 mm
o

10
300 mm 1000 mm
2000 mm

3000 mm 3000 mm
5

100 mm

labels indicate depth in soil profile


-5
01-Jan-08 20-Feb-08 10-Apr-08 30-May-08 19-Jul-08 07-Sep-08 27-Oct-08 16-Dec-08

Date
Soil Water Content versus Time and Depth
60%
Harvested Site - H1
4 years post harvest
50%

1000 mm
Soil Water Content (%)

40%

500 mm

30%

20%

10%
100 mm

labels indicate depth in soil profile


0%
01-Jan-08 20-Feb-08 10-Apr-08 30-May-08 19-Jul-08 07-Sep-08 27-Oct-08 16-Dec-08

Date
Soil Temperature Equation in SWAT

Tsoil  z , d n     Tsoil  z , d n 1   1     df  TAAir  Tssurf   Tssurf 

Tsoil(z, dn) soil temperature at a specific depth z (in mm) on the current day
Tsoil(z, dn-1) previous day’s soil temperature
λ lag coefficient
df depth factor
TAAir average annual air temperature based on long-term data
Tssurf soil surface temperature on the current day

All temperatures in oC
Damping Factor and Damping Depth Definition

zd
df 
zd  zd  0.867  2.078  zd 
exp
df 
zd  exp 0.867  2.078  zd 

df depth factor for a soil layer


zd unitless depth ratio given by z/dd
z depth at the center of the soil layer
dd damping depth

Neitsch et al. (2005) define dd as the depth in the soil profile


at which the soil temperature is within 5% of TAAir.
Damping Depth Equations

2500  b
dd max  1000 
 b  686 exp 5.63 b 
SW

0.356  0.144 b  ztot
  500  1    2 
dd  dd max  exp ln   
  dd max  1    

ddmax maximum damping depth.


b bulk density of the soil in Mg/m3
  scaling factor based upon the water content of the soil
SW/ztot water content in the soil profile in mm/mm
SW water in the soil profile expressed as depth in mm
ztot depth of the soil profile in mm.
Air and Soil Temperature Range – H3, 2009
-3.0
Harvested Site - H3
2009 Air Temperature @ 2 metres
-2.0

-1.0

Averages
Depth (m)

0.0

Minimums Maximums
1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0
-40.0 -30.0 -20.0 -10.0 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0

Temperature ( oC )
Air and Soil Temperature Range – C2
-3.0
Conifer Site - C2
-2.0

Air Temperature Range


-1.0

Averages
Depth (m)

0.0

Minimums Maximums
1.0

2006Min 2006Max
2.0 2006Avg 2006 Air
2007Min 2007Max
2007Avg 2007 Air Soil Temperature Range
2008Min 2008Max
3.0 2008Avg 2008 Air
2009Min 2009Max
2009Avg 2009 Air
4.0
-40.0 -30.0 -20.0 -10.0 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0

Temperature ( oC )
Revised Damping Depth Definition

average
temperature  Avg. air temp. 20 oC
ground surface
 Within 1 oC
Depth

minimum
temperature maximum
Damping  Avg. air temp. 2 oC
Depth
temperature
 Within 0.1 oC

within 5% of avg.
air temperature  Propose range of
2 oC to define the
damping depth
 Nominally ±1 oC
Temperature
Determination of Largest Damping Depth
9.0
Harvested Site - H3
8.0 2009

7.0

6.0
5.37 m depth for
2 oC range in temperature
Depth, m

5.0

4.0

y = 8.1737e-0.2103x
3.0 R2 = 0.9945

2.0

1.0

0.0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Temperature Range in Active Zone ( oC )


Largest Damping Depth and Average Soil Water Content

Conifer Site - C2 Deciduous Site - D1 Deciduous Site - D3

avg. air WC @ avg. air WC @ avg. air WC @


temp. dd 1m temp. dd 1m temp. dd 1m
o o o
Year C m % C m % C m %
2006 2.3 4.98 39% 2.4 5.61 40% 0.5 4.13 36%
2007 0.6 4.59 41% 1.7 5.80 41% 1.8 3.93 38%
2008 3.4 4.37 41% 1.4 5.11 41% 2.9 4.17 37%
2009 0.8 4.32 39% 0.9 5.16 40% 1.7 4.34 34%
avg. 1.8 4.57 40% 1.6 5.42 41% 1.7 4.14 36%
range 2.8 0.66 2% 1.6 0.69 1% 2.4 0.41 4%
Damping Depth vs. Soil Moisture Content

10000
2500  b
dd max  Base Depth 
9000  b  686 exp  5.63b 
SW

8000 0.356  0.144 b   ztot
  500  1    2 
7000 dd  dd max  exp ln    
  dd max  1    
Damping Depth (mm)

Bulk Density = 1.45 Mg/m3


6000
Base Depth = 7000 mm

5000
Range in damping depth
4000

3000
Range in soil moisture

2000 Range in damping depth

Bulk Density = 1.45 Mg/m3


1000
Base Depth = 1000 mm

0
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
SW/ztot (soil moisture content)
Comparison of Largest Damping Depths
6.0

(3.87 to 5.67 m)
Range based upon 5.0
modified Eq.5 with
constant = 7000 mm
4.0
Largest Annual
Damping Depth (m)
3.0

(1.85 to 2.35 m)
Range based upon
original Eq. 5 with 2.0
constant = 1000 mm

1.0

0.0
Conifer C2 Deciduous D1 Deciduous D3 Harvest H3 Harvest H1
2006 4.98 5.61 4.13
2007 4.59 5.80 3.93 5.32 4.89
2008 4.37 5.11 4.17 5.19 4.87
2009 4.32 5.16 4.34 5.37

Site Type
Predicted vs. Observed Soil Temp., 0.1 m, H3
25
Harvested Site - H3
0.1 m depth
20

15
Soil Temperature ( C)
o

10

Observed
0

-5
Original
Observed Soil Temp

Original dd SWAT
Modified
-10
Modified dd SWAT

-15
19/Aug/06 27/Nov/06 7/Mar/07 15/Jun/07 23/Sep/07 1/Jan/08 10/Apr/08 19/Jul/08 27/Oct/08
Date
Predicted vs. Observed Soil Temp., 1.0 m, H3
20
Harvested Site - H3
Observed Soil Temp
1.0 m depth
Original SWAT
15
Modified SWAT
Soil Temperature ( C)

10
o

Observed

5
Original

0
Modified

-5

-10
19/Aug/06 27/Nov/06 7/Mar/07 15/Jun/07 23/Sep/07 1/Jan/08 10/Apr/08 19/Jul/08 27/Oct/08
Date
Conclusions & Recommendations

 Damping depth calculation modifications are


required for Boreal forest conditions
 increasing the base depth constant improves the
damping depth representation
 a function to modify the base depth constant with latitude
or annual average temperature is suggested
 The damping depth definition should be modified
 abandon the % of TAAir definition
 adopt an absolute definition (eg. 2 oC range in temp.)
 Improved damping depth representation provides
 significant effect upon soil temp. calc deep in soil profife
 little effect upon near surface temperatures
[Link]
 Additional slides not used in presentation!
Photo credit: Tom Plouffe

Toby & Pierre pre-harvest


Watershed Harvest – Winter of 2003/2004
Examples of vegetation 3rd summer post harvest
 Upper elevations
 7 watersheds
 198 sensors (702 tiny
wires) = steady
maintenance
Harvested, Conifer and Deciduous Sites

Site ID Landcover Species Cover (approx %)* Canopy Cover (%) Elevation (m)
H1 Harvested n/a 0 1016
H2 Harvested n/a 0 991
H3 Harvested n/a 0 1043
C1 Conifer PL(90) AW(10) 92 1028
C2 Conifer PL(90) AW(10) 97 1005
C3 Conifer PL(90) AW(10) 89 1054
D1 Deciduous AW(70) SB(20) PL(10) 84 1053
D2 Deciduous AW(60) SB(20) PL(20) 96 1026
D3 Deciduous AW(90) PL(10) 95 1013

* PL: lodgepole pine, AW: trembling aspen, SB: black spruce.


Largest Damping Depth and Average Soil Water Content

Harvest Site - H1 Harvest Site - H3

avg. air WC @ avg. air WC @


temp. dd 1m temp. dd 1m
o o
Year C m % C m %
2006 - - - - - -
2007 2.8 4.89 42% 3.8 5.32 55%
2008 3.2 4.87 43% 2.8 5.19 45%
2009 - - - 3.6 5.37 47%
avg. 3.0 4.88 43% 3.4 5.29 49%
range 0.4 0.02 1% 1.0 0.17 10%

You might also like