3
Farouki (1981), p. 136
4
Yu et al. (1993)
5
Guymon, et al. (1993), p. 21, 25, 4759
6
Balick, L.K. et al. (1981), Table B1
4.4 Model Validation
We conducted a comparison of the surface temperatures generated using the model and
measured values for Grayling, MI, during the fall of 1992 and for Yuma, AZ, during the
spring of 1993 and Hanover, NH, during the winter of 2002. The data collected consist of
soil temperature profiles as well as meteorological conditions. Almost no soil properties
data were collected, thus we had to estimate these based on values found in the literature
for the general soil types at the sites. The Yuma and Grayling locations are sandy while
the CRREL site is pavement. The data collected for the first two sites are part of the
SWOE series.
Yuma, AZ
probe 1
probe 2
FASST
330
320
310
300
290
280
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
Day of the Year
Figure 4.3 Comparison of model results and measurements for surface temperature (K)
for Yuma, AZ.
Figure 4.3 demonstrates the capability of FASST. Except for soil type, no other
information was collected. The two temperature probes were placed side by side in the
vicinity of the meteorological station.
The initial soil temperature profile is either input by the user or generated by the model,
which assumes a uniform profile equal to the air temperature. In either case, the model
37
Previous Page
