• Non ci sono risultati.

WRF and WRF-Hydro fully coupled experiment

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Condividi "WRF and WRF-Hydro fully coupled experiment"

Copied!
9
0
0

Testo completo

(1)

at Foligno station site.

Figure C.18: Soil moisture dynamic for level SM1=0.1 m (panel (a)) and SM2=0.3 m (panel (b)) soil depths and rain and temperature variations (panel (c)) for the year 2012 at Ficulle station site.

(2)

at Cerbara station site.

Figure C.20: Soil moisture dynamic for level SM1=0.1 m (panel (a)) and SM2=0.3 m (panel (b)) soil depths and rain and temperature variations (panel (c)) for the year 2012 at PgIng1 station site.

(3)

at PgIng2 station site.

C.4 Evaluation over 2013

Figure C.22: Soil moisture dynamic for level SM1=0.1 m (panel (a)) and SM2=0.3 m (panel (b)) soil depths and rain and temperature variations (panel (c)) for the year 2013

(4)

at San Benedetto station site.

Figure C.24: Soil moisture dynamic for level SM1=0.1 m (panel (a)) and SM2=0.3 m (panel (b)) soil depths and rain and temperature variations (panel (c)) for the year 2013 at Pieve Santo Stefano station site.

(5)

at Petrelle station site.

Figure C.26: Soil moisture dynamic for level SM1=0.1 m (panel (a)) and SM2=0.3 m (panel (b)) soil depths and rain and temperature variations (panel (c)) for the year 2013 at Monterchi station site.

(6)

at Ficulle station site.

Figure C.28: Soil moisture dynamic for level SM1=0.1 m (panel (a)) and SM2=0.3 m (panel (b)) soil depths and rain and temperature variations (panel (c)) for the year 2013 at Cerbara station site.

(7)

at PgIng1 station site.

Figure C.30: Soil moisture dynamic for level SM1=0.1 m (panel (a)) and SM2=0.3 m (panel (b)) soil depths and rain and temperature variations (panel (c)) for the year 2013 at PgIng2 station site.

(8)

WRF and WRF-Hydro fully coupled experiment

D.1 Days with maximum rainfall differences

Figure D.1: Daily rainfall map comparison for the 24 July 2012 among WRF/WRF- Hydro (panel (a)), WRF (panel (b) and the gauge observations (panel (c)).

Figure D.2: Daily rainfall map comparison for the 3 September 2012 among WRF/WRF- Hydro (panel (a)), WRF (panel (b) and the gauge observations (panel (c)).

(9)

Figure D.4: Daily rainfall map comparison for the 13 October 2012 among WRF/WRF- Hydro (panel (a)), WRF (panel (b) and the gauge observations (panel (c)).

Figure D.5: Daily rainfall map comparison for the 18 November 2012 among WRF/WRF- Hydro (panel (a)), WRF (panel (b) and the gauge observations (panel (c)).

Riferimenti

Documenti correlati

[r]

Monte Carlo simulations show that the proposed approach has three advantages: (i) it avoids the problem of instrument proliferation by adding a single moment condition to

We commence our discussion by describing the models that we will use during the analysis: the first being the multilevel model, that takes into account the hierarchical structure of

D.10 Soil moisture comparison at the Petrelle station site for the different sim- ulations for the SM1 and SM2 soil layers: WRF-Hydro calibration run (blue), WRF/WRF-Hydro (yellow),

[r]

Quali sono gli interventi (non medico-chirurgici) per la presa in carico dei bisogni psico-socio-assistenziali- esistenziali e di engagement durante l’età evolutiva nelle

Raffaella Tancredi Angelo Massagli Giovanni

Panel Evidence Table 6 reports our panel estimates of the effects of volatility, natural resource dependence, financial development and openness as well as investment rates,