Journal cover Journal topic
The Cryosphere An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 4.790 IF 4.790
  • IF 5-year value: 5.921 IF 5-year
    5.921
  • CiteScore value: 5.27 CiteScore
    5.27
  • SNIP value: 1.551 SNIP 1.551
  • IPP value: 5.08 IPP 5.08
  • SJR value: 3.016 SJR 3.016
  • Scimago H <br class='hide-on-tablet hide-on-mobile'>index value: 63 Scimago H
    index 63
  • h5-index value: 51 h5-index 51
Volume 10, issue 1
The Cryosphere, 10, 371-384, 2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-10-371-2016
© Author(s) 2016. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Special issue: Intercomparison of methods to characterise snow...

The Cryosphere, 10, 371-384, 2016
https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-10-371-2016
© Author(s) 2016. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Research article 15 Feb 2016

Research article | 15 Feb 2016

Intercomparison of snow density measurements: bias, precision, and vertical resolution

Martin Proksch1,2, Nick Rutter3, Charles Fierz1, and Martin Schneebeli1 Martin Proksch et al.
  • 1WSL Institute for Snow and Avalanche Research SLF, Flüelastrasse 11, 7260 Davos Dorf, Switzerland
  • 2Institute of Meteorology and Geophysics, University of Innsbruck, Innrain 52, 6020 Innsbruck, Austria
  • 3Department of Geography, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

Abstract. Density is a fundamental property of porous media such as snow. A wide range of snow properties and physical processes are linked to density, but few studies have addressed the uncertainty in snow density measurements. No study has yet quantitatively considered the recent advances in snow measurement methods such as micro-computed tomography (μCT) in alpine snow. During the MicroSnow Davos 2014 workshop, different approaches to measure snow density were applied in a controlled laboratory environment and in the field. Overall, the agreement between μCT and gravimetric methods (density cutters) was 5 to 9%, with a bias of −5 to 2%, expressed as percentage of the mean μCT density. In the field, density cutters overestimate (1 to 6%) densities below and underestimate (1 to 6%) densities above a threshold between 296 to 350kgm−3, dependent on cutter type. Using the mean density per layer of all measurement methods applied in the field (μCT, box, wedge, and cylinder cutters) and ignoring ice layers, the variation between the methods was 2 to 5% with a bias of −1 to 1%. In general, our result suggests that snow densities measured by different methods agree within 9%. However, the density profiles resolved by the measurement methods differed considerably. In particular, the millimeter-scale density variations revealed by the high-resolution μCT contrasted the thick layers with sharp boundaries introduced by the observer. In this respect, the unresolved variation, i.e., the density variation within a layer which is lost by lower resolution sampling or layer aggregation, is critical when snow density measurements are used in numerical simulations.

Publications Copernicus
Special issue
Download
Short summary
Density is a fundamental property of porous media such as snow. During the MicroSnow Davos 2014 workshop, different approaches (box-, wedge- and cylinder-type density cutters, micro-computed tomography) to measure snow density were applied in a controlled laboratory environment and in the field. In general, results suggest that snow densities measured by different methods agree within 9 %. However, the density profiles resolved by the measurement methods differed considerably.
Density is a fundamental property of porous media such as snow. During the MicroSnow Davos 2014...
Citation
Share