Eventually I'd like to make SLAMM compatible with compressed GEOTIFF files, but that would likely require porting the whole software to a different development platform where those libraries are available. The model is a bit stuck on Delphi XE3 for now until some funds become available for porting it.
Last post by PCoughlin - March 14, 2022, 01:09:12 PM
I am a master's student who has been working on incorporating models of land use change and hard armoring into the SLAMM framework. Essentially, every 10 years, I: (1) Run SLAMM, (2) model new urban development, (3) model new hard armoring, and then incorporate the results from (2) and (3) into the NWI .asc raster to be protected before running SLAMM for the next timestep.
I am writing to see if it is possible to automate the conversion of .asc files to .SLB and vice-versa. In the .txt parameters for each simulation file, I see the option to save binary GIS files, but as far as I can tell, the only way to convert between them is manually in the "File Setup" window. It would save considerable computation time if there was some way to replicate the "Binary" and "Conv. Binary Files to ASCII" buttons within a given scenario file, but I understand this might not be feasible.
Any guidance would be greatly appreciated! Happy to elaborate if anything above is unclear.
Last post by Catdebbas - July 21, 2021, 06:06:10 PM
I am currently using SLAMM in the Virginia portion of the Chesapeake Bay for the Environmental Resiliency Institute at the University of Virginia. have run SLAMM successfully for a small test site within the Chesapeake Bay without the salinity model (which I am not sure I will include due to the complexity of that portion of the model). I have also ran the R script to obtain the coefficients needed for my estuary in order to run the SAV probability. As of now when I run SLAMM, the km^2 prediction is working in excel, but no maps are being produced even when I chose to save extra maps. I am also not able to see the predicted SAV when setting map attributes. I have double checked my distance to mouth and topo-bathymetric files and do not have any more ideas on how to resolve this issue. Any guidance on this would be greatly appreciated!
Last post by Muhammad - September 14, 2020, 04:42:38 PM
I am new here and i am going to start using the SLAMM 6.7 to analyze the sea level rise in china but before that I want to develop my concepts about the software that how it works and specially which dataset would be required and would be good for such kind of analysis. I would be grateful if someone would recommend me some literature view as on youtube and google am unable to find much data about this SLAMM 6.7 and literature review related to that. Thanks
Hi I am modelling the initial conditions for time-zero and I found some issues in the wetland's conversion. My initial land cover (based on Lidar data) starts with the categories: Dry land >> Transitional >> Irregularly flooded >> Regularly flooded >> tidal flat. I assumed a scenario of protection for all dry land.
The final land cover (after time-zero) ends with the categories: Dry land >> Transitional >> Irregularly flooded >> Regularly flooded >> tidal flat >> Estuarine Open Water. I have a very significant loss of the transitional marsh and a significant gain in estuarine open water category. There are almost no changes in the Regularly flooded and Irregularly flooded categories. According to the manual changes in the transitional marsh should be expected "when it falls below its lower elevation boundary, this category generally converts to "Regularly-Flooded Marsh. (...)" Any idea about what is happening with to the transitional marsh and Estuarine Open Water? Thanks
Last post by JackieRaw - June 23, 2020, 02:09:23 AM
Hi SLAMM forum ,
I am hoping you will be able to help me.
When I view the map from the "Set Map Attributes" tab, select 3D graphing and view MLLW, MTL, MHHW on the map, the MLLW is not visible. I know that changing the MTL = 0 correction as well as the GT (great diurnal tide) changes this, but when I use the known values for these parameters it still does not work. As I am working with an estuary, I have figured out that I will have to change the MTL correction for the upper reaches (as compared to the estuary mouth). Currently the DEM is relative to a land levelling datum so there are elevation values for the estuary surface. The difference between the land datum and the MTL at the nearest tide gauge is 0.204 m. And the GT at the estuary mouth is 1.6 m.
So I think my questions is - is it okay that I can't see the MLLW on the map viewer, or does this mean that SLAMM thinks the estuary is empty at MLLW? Should I try to change the MTL correction so that MLLW is visible, or is it more important that the MHHW is correct. I am quite confident in the tide ranges along the estuary as they come from in-situ water level recordings.
I also wanted to know whether it is possible to get a map of the MLLW, MTL, and MHHW for the whole study site as an output. I have seen the option to save inundation maps from the "Execute" window, but I am not sure this is exactly what I am looking for.
Thanks for your reply and advices, will do. The inundation files are the ... _Inund_Freq_GIS.SLB. How do I open these rasters?
At the end of the simulation a csv file is generated, named with the start and end date, and containing the summary of the modelled scenario. Are the values distributed in columns for each category in ha?
The time-zero run is a very important step. To the extent possible, it should not be any different than the model's initial conditions. It tests that the conceptual model, the wetland coverage, the elevation data, and the tide range data are all consistent. In the results the initial condition is shown as "0" and the "time zero" result is shown as the first date of the simulation.
From the tech doc: SLAMM can also simulate a "time zero" step, in which the conceptual model can be validated against the data inputs for your site. The time-zero model predicts the changes in the landscape given specified model tide ranges, elevation data, and land-cover data. Any discrepancy in time-zero results can provide a partial sense of the uncertainty of the model. There will almost always be some minor changes predicted at time zero due to horizontal off-sets between the land-cover and elevation data-sets, general data uncertainty, or other local conditions that make a portion of your site not conform perfectly to the conceptual model. However, large discrepancies could reflect an error in model parameterization with regards to tide ranges or dike locations, for example, and should be closely investigated.
I would suggest setting up the model to run for a couple of years (photo date, photo date + 1, photo date + 1) with minimal or zero SLR. Any changes predicted should be understood as much as possible in terms of data error (issues with the tide model, DEM, or wetland coverage), lack of dike or seawall accounting, etc. You should also examine the inundation frequency maps to ensure that the wetlands are being regularly wetted. You can consider using the results from the time-zero run as your initial condition for your projection runs to ensure that the effects that you are seeing in the simulation are from the SLR signal and not uncertainty or lack of precision in your input data sets.
Sorry about the long delay in response. -- Jonathan
I am new to SLAMM. I want to conducted model calibration by running the "time zero" step, following the same methodology in Clough et al. (2016). I know already that no sea-level rise, accretion or erosion should be considered, but I am not sure about what to introduce in the last year of simulation. For how long should I run the model? In the SLR scenarios to run' should I apply 0m by 2100? Can you please provide more details on the calibration procedure? Thanks for your help