Modeling snow#
R.A. Collenteur, University of Graz / Eawag, November 2021
In this notebook it is shown how to account for snowfall and smowmelt on groundwater recharge and groundwater levels, using a degree-day snow model. This notebook is work in progress and will be extended in the future.
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import pandas as pd
import pastas as ps
ps.set_log_level("ERROR")
ps.show_versions()
Pastas : 2.0.0
Python : 3.14.6
Numpy : 2.4.6
Pandas : 3.0.5
Scipy : 1.18.0
Matplotlib : 3.11.1
Numba : 0.66.0
1. Load data#
In this notebook we will look at some data for a well near Heby, Sweden. All the meteorological data is taken from the E-OBS database. As can be observed from the temperature time series, the temperature regularly drops below zero in winter. Given this observation, we may expect precipitation to (partially) fall as snow during these periods.
head = pd.read_csv("data/heby_head.csv", index_col=0, parse_dates=True).squeeze()
evap = pd.read_csv("data/heby_evap.csv", index_col=0, parse_dates=True).squeeze()
prec = pd.read_csv("data/heby_prec.csv", index_col=0, parse_dates=True).squeeze()
temp = pd.read_csv("data/heby_temp.csv", index_col=0, parse_dates=True).squeeze()
ps.plots.series(head, stresses=[prec, evap, temp]);
2. Make a simple model#
First we create a simple model with precipitation and potential evaporation as input, using the non-linear FlexModel to compute the recharge flux. We not not yet take snowfall into account, and thus assume all precipitation occurs as snowfall. The model is calibrated and the results are visualized for inspection.
# Settings
tmin = "1985" # Needs warmup
tmax = "2010"
ml1 = ps.Model(head)
sm1 = ps.RechargeModel(
ml1, prec, evap, recharge=ps.rch.FlexModel(), rfunc=ps.Gamma(), name="rch"
)
# Solve the Pastas model in two steps
ml1.solve(tmin=tmin, tmax=tmax, fit_constant=False, report=False)
ps.ArNoiseModel(model=ml1)
ml1.set_parameter("rch_srmax", vary=False)
ml1.solve(tmin=tmin, tmax=tmax, fit_constant=False, initial=False)
ml1.plot(figsize=(10, 3));
Fit report Head Fit Statistics
==================================================
nfev 32 EVP 52.11
nobs 590 R2 0.52
noise True RMSE 0.12
tmin 1985-01-01 00:00:00 AICc -3305.81
tmax 2010-01-01 00:00:00 BIC -3275.34
freq D Obj nan
freq_obs None ___
warmup 3650 days 00:00:00 Interp. No
Parameters (7 optimized)
==================================================
optimal initial vary
rch_A 1.471318 0.525948 True
rch_n 0.404834 1.689645 True
rch_a 563.251678 93.906690 True
rch_srmax 197.375057 197.375057 False
rch_lp 0.250000 0.250000 False
rch_ks 1.000022 27.608111 True
rch_gamma 0.617967 4.997388 True
rch_kv 0.666496 0.671541 True
rch_simax 2.000000 2.000000 False
constant_d 77.765490 0.000000 False
noise_alpha 95.146875 15.000000 True
The model fit with the data is not too bad, but we are clearly missing the highs and lows of the observed groundwater levels. This could have many causes, but in this case we may suspect that the occurrence of snowfall and melt impacts the results.
3. Account for snowfall and snow melt#
A second model is now created that accounts for snowfall and melt through a degree-day snow model (see e.g., Kavetski & Kuczera (2007). To run the model we add the keyword snow=True to the FlexModel and provide a time series of mean daily temperature to the RechargeModel. The temperature time series is used to split the precipitation into snowfall and rainfall.
ml2 = ps.Model(head)
sm2 = ps.RechargeModel(
ml2,
prec,
evap,
recharge=ps.rch.FlexModel(snow=True),
rfunc=ps.Gamma(),
name="rch",
temp=temp,
)
# Solve the Pastas model in two steps
ml2.solve(tmin=tmin, tmax=tmax, fit_constant=False, report=False)
ps.ArNoiseModel(model=ml2)
ml2.set_parameter("rch_srmax", vary=False)
ml2.solve(tmin=tmin, tmax=tmax, fit_constant=False, initial=False)
Fit report Head Fit Statistics
==================================================
nfev 29 EVP 56.30
nobs 590 R2 0.56
noise True RMSE 0.11
tmin 1985-01-01 00:00:00 AICc -3362.29
tmax 2010-01-01 00:00:00 BIC -3327.49
freq D Obj nan
freq_obs None ___
warmup 3650 days 00:00:00 Interp. No
Parameters (8 optimized)
==================================================
optimal initial vary
rch_A 0.872568 0.576359 True
rch_n 1.091563 1.408583 True
rch_a 246.291260 107.074787 True
rch_srmax 155.741687 155.741687 False
rch_lp 0.250000 0.250000 False
rch_ks 1000.000000 9.004201 True
rch_gamma 5.000000 4.999657 True
rch_kv 0.796857 0.677661 True
rch_simax 2.000000 2.000000 False
rch_tt 0.000000 0.000000 False
rch_k 1.000000 1.115652 True
constant_d 78.040271 0.000000 False
noise_alpha 97.536696 15.000000 True
Warnings! (3)
==================================================
Parameter 'rch_ks' on upper bound: 1.00e+03
Parameter 'rch_gamma' on upper bound: 5.00e+00
Parameter 'rch_k' on lower bound: 1.00e+00
Compare results#
From the fit_report we can already observe that the model fit improved quite a bit. We can also visualize the results to see how the model improved.
ax = ml2.plot(figsize=(10, 3))
ml1.simulate().plot(ax=ax)
plt.legend(
[
"Observations",
"Model w Snow NSE={:.2f}".format(ml2.stats.nse()),
"Model w/o Snow NSE={:.2f}".format(ml1.stats.nse()),
],
ncol=3,
)
<matplotlib.legend.Legend at 0x72321269eba0>
Extract the water balance (States & Fluxes)#
df = ml2.stressmodels["rch"].get_water_balance(
ml2.get_parameters("rch"), tmin=tmin, tmax=tmax
)
df.plot(subplots=True, figsize=(10, 10));
References#
Kavetski, D. and Kuczera, G. (2007). Model smoothing strategies to remove microscale discontinuities and spurious secondary optima in objective functions in hydrological calibration. Water Resources Research, 43(3).