Abstract

Abstract. Hydrologic measurements are important for both the short- and long-term management of water resources. Of the terms in the hydrologic budget, precipitation is typically the most important input; however, measurements of precipitation are subject to large errors and biases. For example, an all-weather unshielded weighing precipitation gauge can collect less than 50 % of the actual amount of solid precipitation when wind speeds exceed 5 m s−1. Using results from two different precipitation test beds, such errors have been assessed for unshielded weighing gauges and for weighing gauges employing four of the most common windshields currently in use. Functions to correct wind-induced undercatch were developed and tested. In addition, corrections for the single-Alter weighing gauge were developed using the combined results of two separate sites in Norway and the USA. In general, the results indicate that the functions effectively correct the undercatch bias that affects such precipitation measurements. In addition, a single function developed for the single-Alter gauges effectively decreased the bias at both sites, with the bias at the US site improving from −12 to 0 %, and the bias at the Norwegian site improving from −27 to −4 %. These correction functions require only wind speed and air temperature as inputs, and were developed for use in national and local precipitation networks, hydrological monitoring, roadway and airport safety work, and climate change research. The techniques used to develop and test these transfer functions at more than one site can also be used for other more comprehensive studies, such as the World Meteorological Organization Solid Precipitation Intercomparison Experiment (WMO-SPICE).

Highlights

  • Precipitation measurements are used by policy makers, hydrologists, farmers, and watershed managers to quantify and allocate the water available for society’s needs

  • For example the absolute magnitudes of the unshielded gauge (US UN) root mean square error (RMSE) (0.30 mm or 28.6 %) and bias (−0.17 mm or −16.2 %) at the US site were much larger than the small DFIR (SDFIR) (US SDFIR) RMSE (0.14 mm or 14.7 %) and bias (−0.03 mm or −3.6 %)

  • The RMSE and bias for the combined SA dataset (All SA) that included US and NOR measurements fell between the US SA and the NOR SA results

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Precipitation measurements are used by policy makers, hydrologists, farmers, and watershed managers to quantify and allocate the water available for society’s needs. Kochendorfer et al.: The quantification and correction of wind-induced precipitation measurement errors variable with location, requiring robust and accurate precipitation measurements (Trenberth, 2011). Despite this critical need, precipitation observations are still beset with significant biases and errors (e.g., Adam and Lettenmaier, 2003; Førland and Hanssen-Bauer, 2000; Groisman and Legates, 1994; Scaff et al, 2015; Vose et al, 2014; Yang et al, 2005)

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call