You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hydrological forcing data in model type sediment is stored as part of the SoilLoss, OverlandFlowSediment and RiverSediment components, independently. In commit 8b38fb2 this data is now shared (in memory) between the SoilLoss and OverlandFlowSediment components. The same hydrological forcing time series are also present in the sbm and sbm_gwf model types stored at different internal model locations, compared to the sediment model. Because of this two different mappings (between the standard name and internal model name) are required.
Possible improvements:
Store hydrological forcing data at one location in the sediment model (two mappings are required).
Share the hydrological forcing data for SoilLoss and OverlandFlowSediment components (commit 8b38fb2, two mappings are required).
Store the hydrological forcing data at the same internal model locations as the sbm and sbm_gwf models. One mapping is required and is likely most future-proof (e.g. run sbm and sediment in a combined wflow simulation).
Implementation Description
No response
Additional Context
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Feature type
Changing existing functionality
Improvement Description
Hydrological forcing data in model type
sediment
is stored as part of theSoilLoss
,OverlandFlowSediment
andRiverSediment
components, independently. In commit 8b38fb2 this data is now shared (in memory) between theSoilLoss
andOverlandFlowSediment
components. The same hydrological forcing time series are also present in thesbm
andsbm_gwf
model types stored at different internal model locations, compared to the sediment model. Because of this two different mappings (between the standard name and internal model name) are required.Possible improvements:
sbm
andsbm_gwf
models. One mapping is required and is likely most future-proof (e.g. runsbm
andsediment
in a combined wflow simulation).Implementation Description
No response
Additional Context
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: