From frank.koormann at intevation.de Mon Aug 23 11:13:26 2004 From: frank.koormann at intevation.de (Frank Koormann) Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 11:13:26 +0200 Subject: GREAT-ER Class Concept Message-ID: <20040823091326.GC13100@intevation.de> Dear all, as you may have noticed a new CEFIC LRI Project has started to add a first and rather simple sediment component to GREAT-ER: Simple equilibrium concentration in sediment as described for the WATER model (which is implemented by GREAT-ER). The parameters needed for this approach are already in the GREAT-ER database, as fields in the stretch class table. Some of these have to be made editable by the user. I will illustrate our plans from the parameter editing point of view, describe some consequences to the class concept and I would like to ask for your comments on this: The class concept (implemented by GREAT-ER 2.0 as well as 1.0) allows to define distinct parameter sets for different types of stretches in a catchment. However, in personal communication it always has been considered as somewhat experimental and not of much use since the parameters have to be defined during catchment preprocessing. They cannot be changed/displayed later on. For the sediment module at least the suspended solids concentration (SS_RIVER) has to be editable by the user, we will add this to the environmental parameters. As a consequence a single SS_RIVER probability density function will be applied for the entire catchment. We are planning to add also the other parameters needed for the equilibrium calculation to the environmental parameters: f_oc: Organic carbon fraction of suspended solids in river rho_sed: Dry sediment density eps_sed: Volumetric water fraction of the sediment As for all environmental parameters default values will be defined which will overwrite the values from river classes. For users who really want to work with classes will will add a choice to the model mode dialog: - Use class parameters - Use environmental parameters Your thoughts? Thanks in advance, Frank -- Frank Koormann Professional Service around Free Software (http://intevation.net/) FreeGIS Project (http://freegis.org/) From frederik.verdonck at euras.be Tue Aug 24 08:47:56 2004 From: frederik.verdonck at euras.be (Frederik Verdonck) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 08:47:56 +0200 Subject: GREAT-ER Class Concept Message-ID: Dear Frank, Not sure if I understand your question correctly but letting the user decide between "class parameters" and "environmental parameters" may not be straightforward as the user will probably not know what you mean with "class parameters" and "environmental parameters". You may want to use more TGD-wording as "site-specific" and "generic" or "local" and "regional" parameters. I would even argue it may be helpful to encourage/guide the user to use distinct parameter sets (if sensitive to PEC) for different types of stretches in a catchment (if allowed by data availability) because what is the added-value of using a GIS-system if no georeferenced data are inputted? Just some thoughts, hope this helps, Frederik EURAS Rijvisschestraat 118, Box 3 9052 Gent, Belgium T: 32 9 257 13 94 F: 32 9 257 13 98 www.euras.be The information in this e-mail and any attachments is confidential and is intended for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advice the sender by return e-mail. EURAS is neither liable for the proper and complete transmission of the information contained in this e-mail nor for any delay in its receipt. > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- > Van: great-er-list-bounces at intevation.de > [mailto:great-er-list-bounces at intevation.de] Namens Frank Koormann > Verzonden: maandag 23 augustus 2004 11:13 > Aan: great-er-list at intevation.de > Onderwerp: GREAT-ER Class Concept > > > Dear all, > > as you may have noticed a new CEFIC LRI Project has started > to add a first and rather simple sediment component to > GREAT-ER: Simple equilibrium concentration in sediment as > described for the WATER model (which is implemented by GREAT-ER). > > The parameters needed for this approach are already in the > GREAT-ER database, as fields in the stretch class table. Some > of these have to be made editable by the user. I will > illustrate our plans from the > parameter editing point of view, describe some consequences to the > class concept and I would like to ask for your comments on this: > > The class concept > (implemented by GREAT-ER 2.0 as well as 1.0) allows to define > distinct parameter sets for different types of stretches in a > catchment. However, in personal communication it always has > been considered as somewhat experimental and not of much use > since the parameters have to be defined during catchment > preprocessing. They cannot be changed/displayed later on. > > For the sediment module at least the suspended solids concentration > (SS_RIVER) has to be editable by the user, we will add this to the > environmental parameters. As a consequence a single SS_RIVER > probability density function will be applied for the entire > catchment. We are planning to add also the other parameters > needed for the equilibrium calculation to the environmental > parameters: > f_oc: Organic carbon fraction of suspended solids in river > rho_sed: Dry sediment density > eps_sed: Volumetric water fraction of the sediment > > As for all environmental parameters default values will be > defined which will overwrite the values from river classes. > For users who really want to work with classes will will add > a choice to the model mode dialog: > - Use class parameters > - Use environmental parameters > > Your thoughts? > > Thanks in advance, > > Frank > > -- > Frank Koormann > > Professional Service around Free Software > (http://intevation.net/) > FreeGIS Project > (http://freegis.org/) > > _______________________________________________ > Great-er-list mailing list > Great-er-list at intevation.de > https://intevation.de/mailman/listinfo/great-> er-list > From frank.koormann at intevation.de Tue Aug 24 15:55:13 2004 From: frank.koormann at intevation.de (Frank Koormann) Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 15:55:13 +0200 Subject: GREAT-ER Class Concept In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20040824135512.GA1881@intevation.de> Dear Frederik, thank you very much for your comments! * Frederik Verdonck [040824 08:49]: > Not sure if I understand your question correctly but letting the user > decide between "class parameters" and "environmental parameters" may not > be straightforward as the user will probably not know what you mean with > "class parameters" and "environmental parameters". You may want to use > more TGD-wording as "site-specific" and "generic" or "local" and > "regional" parameters. Applying more common names for the different concepts is a good point. However, we will have to select this carefully: The class concept is positioned somewhere between "site-specific" and "generic". You classify river (stretches) like brook, mountain stream or large river. N.B.: The flow, flow velocity, length etc is never class based but always site-specific! > I would even argue it may be helpful to encourage/guide the user to use > distinct parameter sets (if sensitive to PEC) for different types of > stretches in a catchment (if allowed by data availability) because what > is the added-value of using a GIS-system if no georeferenced data are > inputted? Checking the classes currently stored in GREAT-ER show that there only a default river and a default lake class are defined which don't differ much. My experience from preparing new catchments is that the required data is rarely available for specific stretches. Maybe a task for a master thesis to define more different classes :) > Just some thoughts, hope this helps, Yes, thanks again. I will think about naming. Best regards, Frank -- Frank Koormann Professional Service around Free Software (http://intevation.net/) FreeGIS Project (http://freegis.org/)