Why Do Some Researchers Use [mm a-1] Instead of [mm yr-1]?

  • Thread starter Thread starter travroth
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Unit
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the use of the unit [mm a-1] in hydrological contexts, particularly regarding recession rates or trends in aquifer storage. Participants express confusion over why this unit is preferred over the more common [mm yr-1], with suggestions that it could represent millimeters per annum. The context of aquifer fluctuations during droughts raises questions about the appropriateness of the unit. Some participants speculate it might be a typo or misinterpretation, while others find references in literature that support its usage. Overall, the unit [mm a-1] appears to be recognized in specific hydrological studies despite the confusion surrounding its application.
travroth
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
1. I am reviewing a paper and came across a unit that I am having a hard time understanding. Has anyone ever seen the unit [mm a-1] as used for a recesssion rate or trend?

My assumption is that is could be mm per annum but then why wouldn't they just use mm yr-1?

Thanks.

T
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What is the context? What you're suggesting makes some sense, but I don't know if it fits the context at all.
 
This unit is found in a hydrological context, specifically when expressing the rate of change in aquifer storage, i.e. when a shallow aquifer in a hillslope decline during periods of drought. This makes the mm per yr guess seem quite small considering aquifer water storage levels are fluctuating orders of magnitude more than that each year. Could the unit [a] be a unit of area? that doesn't make much sense to me either though...

Thanks for the interest and response.
 
Hmm, that is odd. Let me ask a civil engineering friend of mine. I'll get back to you soon. If you find out what it is, let me know.

My initial inclination is that maybe mm doesn't refer to millimeters. Could be it be a typo for mM (milliMolar)? But I don't immediately see how that would be referenced in this context.

Cheers.
 
travroth said:
1. I am reviewing a paper and came across a unit that I am having a hard time understanding. Has anyone ever seen the unit [mm a-1] as used for a recesssion rate or trend?

My assumption is that is could be mm per annum but then why wouldn't they just use mm yr-1?

Thanks.

T


I did a google search on your term, and got a few hits. This paper/book uses the unit, starting on page 21:

http://books.google.com/books?id=hu...=X&oi=book_result&resnum=9&ct=result#PPA21,M1

and this one, starting on page 32:

http://books.google.com/books?id=gB...=X&oi=book_result&resnum=6&ct=result#PPA32,M1

the first one uses the term "isobases" in association with the units, and adding that term to the search, gives this (see page 317):

http://books.google.com/books?id=2KlSteO7tiUC&pg=PA317&dq="[mm+a-1]"++isobase

It sure looks like a "mm per annum" kind of unit, which turns out to be pretty commonly used:

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGLL_enUS301US302&q="mm+per+annum"

.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 64 ·
3
Replies
64
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
35
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K