:source-wvlt\] a) Friedlander wave form and b) frequency spectrum.](friedlander-frequency-500){width="100.00000%"}

\

Simulated snow failure locations
--------------------------------

To evaluate the locations where the propagating wave field leads to a failure of the snowpack we compare the stress field of the numerical simulation to the compressional and shear strength of snow. In general, the nature of failure depends on the loading conditions. For brittle failure, @mellor:1975 suggested to use a fraction of the snow’s Young’s modulus to define the maximum stress snow may withstand before it starts to fail. Here we use a fraction of $1 \times 10^{-3}$ of the bulk modulus and a fraction of $0.5 \times 10^{-3}$ of the shear modulus to define the strength. The corresponding shear and compressional strength as a function of porosity based on these fractions and the relationships from Table \[tab:snowmodel\] are shown in Figure \[fig:strength\] and are compared to the compilation of snow strength measurements presented by @mellor:1975 and @shapiro:1997.

a)

![\[fig:strength\] Maximum a) compressional and b) shear strength of snow. The black lines denote the strength to uniaxial and shear stress, respectively. For comparison, maximum strength of compilations from @mellor:1975 and @shapiro:1997 are shown.](axial-strength){width="100.00000%"}

b)

![\[fig:strength\] Maximum a) compressional and b) shear strength of snow. The black lines denote the strength to uniaxial and shear stress, respectively. For comparison, maximum strength of compilations from @mellor:1975 and @shapiro:1997 are shown.](shear-strength){width="100.00000%"}

\

The absolute values of the field variables were scaled to fit the pressure recording of the microphone at a horizontal distance of 12.3 m from the point of the explosion to evaluate the snow failure locations in the numerical simulation. As the underlying equations are linear the scaling of the simulation can be performed by a simple multiplication with a scaling factor. The factor itself depends on the amplitude of the source in the simulation and can be randomly chosen.

The maximum principal normal and shear stresses for all grid nodes in the simulation are computed from snapshots of the stress tensor every 0.
: source - wvlt\ ] a) Friedlander wave form and b) frequency spectrum.](friedlander - frequency-500){width="100.00000% " } 

 \ 

 Simulated snow bankruptcy localization 
 -------------------------------- 

 To evaluate the locations where the propagate wave discipline leads to a failure of the snowpack we compare the tension field of the numerical simulation to the compressional and shear strength of snow. In cosmopolitan, the nature of bankruptcy depends on the loading condition. For brittle failure, @mellor:1975 suggested to use a fraction of the snow ’s Young ’s modulus to define the maximum tension snow may withstand before it starts to fail. Here we practice a fraction of $ 1 \times 10^{-3}$ of the bulk modulus and a fraction of $ 0.5 \times 10^{-3}$ of the shear modulus to define the strength. The corresponding shear and compressional strength as a function of porosity establish on these fractions and the relationships from Table   \[tab: snowmodel\ ] are shown in Figure   \[fig: strength\ ] and are compared to the compilation of snow lastingness measurements presented by @mellor:1975 and @shapiro:1997. 

 a) 

! [ \[fig: strength\ ] Maximum a) compressional and b) shear strength of snow. The black lines denote the strength to uniaxial and shear stress, respectively. For comparison, maximum strength of compilations from @mellor:1975 and @shapiro:1997 are shown.](axial - strength){width="100.00000% " } 

 b) 

! [ \[fig: strength\ ] Maximum a) compressional and b) shear strength of snow. The black lines denote the military capability to uniaxial and shear stress, respectively. For comparison, maximum lastingness of compilations from @mellor:1975 and @shapiro:1997 are shown.](shear - strength){width="100.00000% " } 

 \ 

 The absolute values of the field variables were scale to fit the pressure recording of the microphone at a horizontal distance of 12.3   m from the point of the explosion to measure the snow failure locations in the numerical simulation. As the underlying equations are linear the scaling of the simulation can be performed by a simple multiplication with a scaling factor. The agent itself depends on the amplitude of the reference in the simulation and can be randomly chosen. 

 The maximum principal normal and shear stresses for all grid node in the simulation are computed from snapshots of the tension tensor every 0.
:sougce-wvlt\] a) Friedlander waye form and b) frgqyency vpectrhm.](friedlxnder-frequency-500){width="100.00000%"}

\

Simulated sbow fqilure locations
--------------------------------

To evauuate the locatiobs wiere the propagavjng wavc fiemf lecdw to a failure of the snmwpack we compdrd che stress field of the numerical siiulatiom ho the compresfionsj ans shear strength of snow. In generam, the neture of failurr depends on the loading clndihions. For brittle vailure, @meloor:1975 fyggested to jse a fracuimn of the anow’s Young’s modulus to define ghe mcximum strews snlf may withsvand bvfore it starbx to fdil. Herr we use a fragtion of $1 \times 10^{-3}$ of the bulk kodulus and a fracjion of $0.5 \thmzs 10^{-3}$ of the shear moduouw to gefite tfw sgrehgvh. Fhe cogreaponding sgear and conpressional strengtn ww a function kf porjsyty based on these fractions and the renatjonships from Table \[tab:sbowmodel\] are shown in Figure \[fid:strength\] and are compared to the compilation of vnow agreunbh mdqskrements presented by @mellor:1975 and @shapiro:1997.

a)

![\[fig:sedemgnh\] Maximum a) compvessional and b) shrag xjrength of snod. The ymadk lines denote thf strendth ti uniaxiaj anc shear stress, respectively. For comparifin, maximum strengtk of compilacions grom @kellor:1975 and @shapiro:1997 are rhowh.](axial-strenhth){width="100.00000%"}

b)

![\[rkg:strength\] Maximjm s) wompressional and b) shear ftrength if suow. The clacl linef denote tje stvangth to uniaxial wnd skear vtress, resoectively. For comparison, maximum strength of vokpinations yrom @mcllor:1975 and @shapiwo:1997 are shown.](shgar-strengch){widtf="100.00000%"}

\

The absollte valuev of the fiqld variables aere scaled vo fit thq prwssuee recofaing of the mivrophone cu a horizobtal distance of 12.3 m fruj the point of cke explosion to efaljatq nhe sgmw failure lmcatkonr in tfe numericao similation. As the undernyinf equations are limewr the sxaling os the simulatoon can be performtd by e simpue muktiklication with a scaling factor. The factlr ltself dependf on the amplitube of the source in the simulation and cen be randomly chosen.

Thw maximum principal kormal and siear seresses fmr all grid nodes in the simulation ave computed from snapsgots ox the stress tensor every 0.
:source-wvlt\] a) Friedlander wave form and b) \ snow failure -------------------------------- To evaluate wave leads to a of the snowpack compare the stress field of the simulation to the compressional and shear strength of snow. In general, the nature failure depends on the loading conditions. For brittle failure, @mellor:1975 suggested to use fraction the Young’s to define the maximum stress snow may withstand before it starts to fail. Here we use fraction of $1 \times 10^{-3}$ of the bulk and a fraction of \times 10^{-3}$ of the shear to the strength. corresponding and strength as a of porosity based on these fractions and the relationships from Table \[tab:snowmodel\] are shown in Figure \[fig:strength\] are compared compilation of strength presented @mellor:1975 and @shapiro:1997. Maximum a) compressional and b) shear The black lines denote the strength to uniaxial shear stress, For comparison, maximum strength of compilations @mellor:1975 and @shapiro:1997 are shown.](axial-strength){width="100.00000%"} b) ![\[fig:strength\] Maximum compressional and b) shear strength of snow. The black lines denote the strength to uniaxial stress, respectively. For comparison, strength of compilations @mellor:1975 @shapiro:1997 shown.](shear-strength){width="100.00000%"} The absolute of the field variables were scaled to fit the pressure recording the microphone at a horizontal distance of 12.3 m from of explosion to evaluate snow failure locations in numerical As the underlying equations the of be by simple multiplication with a factor. The factor itself depends the amplitude of the can be randomly chosen. The maximum principal normal shear stresses for all grid nodes in simulation are computed from snapshots of the stress tensor every 0.
:source-wvlt\] a) Friedlander wavE form and b) fRequeNcy SpeCtRum.](fRiedLander-frequencY-500){WidtH="100.00000%"}

\

Simulated snow failure lOcatiOnS
--------------------------------

to evALuAte thE locatiONs WHEre ThE pRopAgATiNg wavE fiEld leadS to a failurE of ThE snowpack we cOMpAre the streSs fIeld of the numEriCal simUlAtiON to thE coMpresSional ANd sheaR strength Of SNow. In gENeral, thE NAtUre oF failure depends on THe LOading conditioNs. For bRiTTlE FAilUre, @Mellor:1975 suggEsTed to USe a fracTIoN OF The SNow’s Young’s modUlus to definE The MaximuM sTreSS snow mAy witHsTAnd Before it staRts tO fail. Here We use a FRaction OF $1 \times 10^{-3}$ oF the buLk mOduLus aND a FrActIoN Of $0.5 \tIMeS 10^{-3}$ of THe sHear moduLuS tO defiNe thE STREngtH. ThE corRespoNding shear and ComPresSIonAl strEngth As a fUnCtion Of poroSity bAsEd on these fractiOns aNd the relaTioNsHipS fRom TaBLe \[tab:sNowModEl\] are shOwn in FiGUre \[FiG:STReNgth\] and are compared To THE cOmpilatiOn of snOW sTrENgth measUrEmeNts pRESenteD by @mELlOr:1975 and @shaPiro:1997.

a)

![\[fIG:sTrEngth\] MaXiMum a) coMpResSioNal anD B) sheAr streNgth of snOw. The BLack lines denotE The strength to UNiAXIaL And sHeaR stress, respEctiVEly. FOr coMPaRisON, maxiMum stReNGtH Of compilations from @mElLor:1975 and @ShapiRo:1997 are shown.](axiAl-strength){WIDTh="100.00000%"}

b)

![\[fig:stRengTH\] MAXimum a) compressIonal And b) shear sTRength of Snow. THe black lInes denotE THe strengTh tO unIaxIal AND sHear stress, resPECtivElY. For comParIson, maxImuM stRenGth Of CompilatiOns from @mElLoR:1975 aNd @ShaPiro:1997 aRE shown.](shEaR-stReNgtH){widtH="100.00000%"}

\

the absOlute ValuEs Of THe fIeld varIAbLES werE sCaLed tO fiT tHe preSsurE RecOrding oF the microPhoNE at a HoRiZontal dIstance of 12.3 m froM tHe point of tHe ExpLosion TO Evaluate The snow failure locations IN the numEriCal siMulaTion. As the UndErlyinG eqUAtions Are linEar thE sCalING of thE SImUlaTiOn can be perFORmeD by a sImPle mUltipliCation with a scaling FActOr. The factor itSelF depENDs On tHE aMPliTuDE of THE source in the simUlation and CaN Be Randomly chOSen.

thE maximuM princiPal noRMal and sHear stresSes for all GrId noDES in The simulatIon are coMputed froM SnapsHOtS of thE stRess teNsOr eVery 0.
:source-wvlt\] a) Friedlan der wave f orm a ndb)fr eque ncyspectrum.](fri e dlan der-frequency-500){wid th="1 00 . 0000 0 %" }

\
Simula t ed s now  f ai lur el oc ation s
- ------- ---------- --- -- ---------

T o  e valuate th e l ocations whe rethe pr op aga t ing w ave  fiel d lead s  to afailure o ft he sno w pack we c om pare  the stress field of the numericalsimula ti o nt o  th e c ompression al  ands hear st r en g t h  of snow. In gene ral, the na t ure  of fa il ure depend s onth e  lo ading condi tion s. For br ittlef ailure, @mellor :1975sug ges tedt ous e a  f r act i on  of the  snow’sYo un g’s m odul u s t o de fin e th e max imum stress s now  may wit hstan d bef oreit  star ts tofail.  H ere we use a fr acti on of $1\ti me s 1 0^ {-3}$ of the  bu lkmodulus  and af rac ti o n of  $0.5 \times 10^{- 3} $ of  the she ar mod u lu st o define  t hestre n g th. T he c o rr espondin g shea r  a nd  compre ss ionalst ren gth  as a func tion o f porosi ty ba s ed on these fr a ctions and th e  r e l at i onsh ips  from Table  \[t a b:sn owmo d el \]a re sh own i nF ig u re \[fig:strength\]  a nd are  comp ared to the c ompilation o f  snow st reng t hm easurements pr esent ed by @mel l or:1975and @ shapiro: 1997.

a) ![\[fig: str eng th\ ] M a x im um a) compres s i onal  a nd b) s hea r stren gth  of  sn ow.  T he blacklines de no te  t he  st rengt h  to unia xi alan d s hears tress,  resp ecti ve ly .  Fo r compa r is o n , ma xi mu m st ren gt h ofcomp i lat ions fr om @mello r:1 9 75 a nd  @ shapiro :1997 are sho wn .](axial-s tr eng th){wi d t h="100.0 0000%"}

b)

![\[fig:st r ength\]  Ma ximum  a)compressi ona l andb)s hear s trengt h ofsn ow. T he bl a c klin es  denote th e str ength  t o un iaxialand shear stress,r esp ectively. For  co mpar i s on , m a xi m umst r eng t h  of compilation s from @me ll o r: 1975 and @ s hap ir o:1997are sho wn.]( s hear-st rength){w idth="100 .0 0000 % " }
\

The abs olute va lues of t h e fie l dvaria ble s were  s cal ed to  fit t h e p ressu re rec or ding o f the  m icrophon e at a horizontal dista nce of  12.3  mfrom thepoi n t o f the exp losi on to eval uat e t he sn owf ailur e lo c at ion s  in t he n u merical s i mu lat i o n.  As the und e r l yin g equ ati o ns are  lin ear the scaling o f  the simulatio n ca n beper f orme dby a simple mu lti pl i c ation wi th  a scalingfactor.Th e  fact or its elf de pends o n th e  ampli tude  of  the sour cein the sim ul at i on and  can  b e rand omly c h osen . 
The maximum pri ncipa l norma l  an d she ar  stress e s fo r all grid  nodes in t he sim ulat ion a re comp ut ed fro m s na pshots oft he stress  tens or ever y0.
:source-wvlt\] a)_Friedlander wave_form and b) frequency_spectrum.](friedlander-frequency-500){width="100.00000%"}

\

Simulated snow_failure_locations
--------------------------------

To evaluate_the_locations where the_propagating wave field_leads to a failure_of the snowpack_we_compare the stress field of the numerical simulation to the compressional and shear strength_of_snow. In_general,_the_nature of failure depends on_the loading conditions. For brittle_failure, @mellor:1975_suggested to use a fraction of the snow’s_Young’s_modulus to define_the maximum stress snow may withstand before it starts_to fail. Here we use a_fraction of $1_\times_10^{-3}$_of the bulk modulus_and a fraction of $0.5 \times_10^{-3}$ of the shear modulus to_define the strength. The corresponding shear and_compressional strength as a function of_porosity based on these fractions_and the_relationships from Table \[tab:snowmodel\] are shown_in Figure \[fig:strength\] and_are compared_to the compilation_of snow strength measurements presented by_@mellor:1975 and @shapiro:1997.

a)

![\[fig:strength\]_Maximum a) compressional and b) shear_strength_of snow. The_black_lines_denote the_strength to uniaxial_and_shear stress,_respectively._For comparison, maximum strength of compilations_from_@mellor:1975 and @shapiro:1997 are shown.](axial-strength){width="100.00000%"}

b)

![\[fig:strength\] Maximum a)_compressional and b) shear_strength_of snow. The black_lines denote the strength to_uniaxial and shear stress, respectively. For_comparison, maximum_strength of_compilations from @mellor:1975 and @shapiro:1997 are shown.](shear-strength){width="100.00000%"}

\

The absolute values of the_field variables were scaled to fit_the pressure recording of_the microphone_at_a horizontal distance_of_12.3 m from_the point of the explosion to evaluate_the snow_failure locations in the numerical simulation._As the underlying equations_are_linear the scaling of the simulation_can be performed by a simple_multiplication with a scaling factor._The_factor_itself depends on the amplitude_of the source in the simulation_and can be_randomly chosen.

The maximum principal normal and shear_stresses_for all grid nodes in the_simulation_are computed from snapshots of the_stress_tensor_every 0.