Articles | Volume 24, issue 6
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 3157–3188, 2020
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 3157–3188, 2020

Research article 19 Jun 2020

Research article | 19 Jun 2020

The accuracy of weather radar in heavy rain: a comparative study for Denmark, the Netherlands, Finland and Sweden

Marc Schleiss et al.

Related authors

A year of attenuation data from a commercial dual-polarized duplex microwave link with concurrent disdrometer, rain gauge, and weather observations
Anna Špačková, Vojtěch Bareš, Martin Fencl, Marc Schleiss, Joël Jaffrain, Alexis Berne, and Jörg Rieckermann
Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 13, 4219–4240,,, 2021
Short summary
Something fishy going on? Evaluating the Poisson hypothesis for rainfall estimation using intervalometers: results from an experiment in Tanzania
Didier de Villiers, Marc Schleiss, Marie-Claire ten Veldhuis, Rolf Hut, and Nick van de Giesen
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 14, 5607–5623,,, 2021
Short summary
A new discrete multiplicative random cascade model for downscaling intermittent rainfall fields
Marc Schleiss
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 3699–3723,,, 2020
Short summary
How intermittency affects the rate at which rainfall extremes respond to changes in temperature
Marc Schleiss
Earth Syst. Dynam., 9, 955–968,,, 2018
Short summary
Towards identification of critical rainfall thresholds for urban pluvial flooding prediction based on crowdsourced flood observations
Christian Bouwens, Marie-Claire ten Veldhuis, Marc Schleiss, Xin Tian, and Jerôme Schepers
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss.,,, 2018
Revised manuscript not accepted
Short summary

Related subject area

Subject: Hydrometeorology | Techniques and Approaches: Uncertainty analysis
Uncertainty of gridded precipitation and temperature reference datasets in climate change impact studies
Mostafa Tarek, François Brissette, and Richard Arsenault
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 3331–3350,,, 2021
Short summary
Bias-correcting individual inputs prior to combined calibration leads to more skillful forecasts of reference crop evapotranspiration
Qichun Yang, Quan J. Wang, Kirsti Hakala, and Yating Tang
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss.,,, 2021
Revised manuscript accepted for HESS
Short summary
At which timescale does the complementary principle perform best in evaporation estimation?
Liming Wang, Songjun Han, and Fuqiang Tian
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 25, 375–386,,, 2021
Short summary
Uncertainties and their interaction in flood risk assessment with climate change
Hadush Meresa, Conor Murphy, Rowan Fealy, and Saeed Golian
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. Discuss.,,, 2020
Revised manuscript accepted for HESS
Uncertainty in nonstationary frequency analysis of South Korea's daily rainfall peak over threshold excesses associated with covariates
Okjeong Lee, Jeonghyeon Choi, Jeongeun Won, and Sangdan Kim
Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 24, 5077–5093,,, 2020
Short summary

Cited articles

Anagnostou, M. N., Kalogiros, J., Anagnostou, E. N., Tarolli, M., Papadopoulos, A., and Borga, M.: Performance evaluation of high-resolution rainfall estimation by X-band dual-polarization radar for flash flood applications in mountainous basins, J. Hydrol., 394, 4–16,, 2010. a
Andréassian, V., Perrin, C., Michel, C., Usart-Sanchez, I., and Lavabre, J.: Impact of imperfect rainfall knowledge on the efficiency and the parameters of watershed models, J. Hydrol., 250, 206–223,, 2001. a
Aronica, G., Freni, G., and Oliveri, E.: Uncertainty analysis of the influence of rainfall time resolution in the modelling of urban drainage systems, Hydrol. Process., 19, 1055–1071,, 2005. a, b
Baeck, M. L. and Smith, J. A.: Rainfall Estimation by the WSR-88D for Heavy Rainfall Events, Weather Forecast., 13, 416–436,<0416:REBTWF>2.0.CO;2, 1998. a
Bech, J., Codina, B., Lorente, J., and Bebbington, D.: The Sensitivity of Single Polarization Weather Radar Beam Blockage Correction to Variability in the Vertical Refractivity Gradient, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 20, 845–855,<0845:TSOSPW>2.0.CO;2, 2003. a
Short summary
A multinational assessment of radar's ability to capture heavy rain events is conducted. In total, six different radar products in Denmark, the Netherlands, Finland and Sweden were considered. Results show a fair agreement, with radar underestimating by 17 %-44 % on average compared with gauges. Despite being adjusted for bias, five of six radar products still exhibited strong conditional biases with intensities of 1–2% per mm/h. Median peak intensity bias was significantly higher, reaching 44 %–67%.