Is it worth keeping this in SimplySed? Including this gave a marginal improvement in performance in the Tarland catchment in Scotland. Need to test in a few more areas and see whether it is worth including in the general SimplySed release.
If it is left in, then it needs improving. At present, the dynamic cover factor is negative if the user-supplied VegetationCoverFactor parameter is less than around 0.091. It should always be above this, as the cover factor for arable land is around 0.2. However, need to either add in checks when the parameter file is loaded to ensure this, or (preferably) re-do the cover factor equation so that it never goes negative (e.g. by just setting the dynamic cover factor to the user-supplied parameter outside the higher erodibility period). Leave this for now, until testing has shown that it is worth keeping the dynamic cover functionality in.
Is it worth keeping this in SimplySed? Including this gave a marginal improvement in performance in the Tarland catchment in Scotland. Need to test in a few more areas and see whether it is worth including in the general SimplySed release.
If it is left in, then it needs improving. At present, the dynamic cover factor is negative if the user-supplied VegetationCoverFactor parameter is less than around 0.091. It should always be above this, as the cover factor for arable land is around 0.2. However, need to either add in checks when the parameter file is loaded to ensure this, or (preferably) re-do the cover factor equation so that it never goes negative (e.g. by just setting the dynamic cover factor to the user-supplied parameter outside the higher erodibility period). Leave this for now, until testing has shown that it is worth keeping the dynamic cover functionality in.