Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2020-554
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-2020-554
26 Nov 2020
 | 26 Nov 2020
Status: this preprint was under review for the journal HESS. A revision for further review has not been submitted.

Unshielded Precipitation Gauge Collection Efficiency with Wind Speed and Hydrometeor Fall Velocity. Part II: Experimental Results

Jeffery Hoover, Michael E. Earle, and Paul I. Joe

Abstract. Five collection efficiency transfer functions for unshielded precipitation gauges are presented that compensate for wind-induced collection loss. Three of the transfer functions presented are dependent on wind speed and precipitation fall velocity, and were derived through computational fluid dynamics modelling in Part 1 (CFD function) and from measurement data (HE1 function with fall velocity threshold and HE2 function with linear fall velocity dependence). These functions are evaluated alongside universal (KUniversal) and site-specific (KCARE) transfer functions with wind speed and temperature dependence. Their performance was assessed using 30-minute precipitation event accumulations reported by unshielded and shielded Geonor T-200B3 precipitation gauges over two winter seasons. The latter gauge was installed in a Double Fence Automated Reference (DFAR) configuration comprising a single-Alter shield within an octagonal, wooden double fence. Estimates of fall velocity were provided by a Precipitation Occurrence Sensor System (POSS).

The CFD function reduced the RMSE (0.08 mm) relative to KUniversal, KCARE, and the unadjusted measurements, with a bias error of 0.011 mm. The HE1 function provided a RMSE of 0.09 mm and bias error of 0.006 mm, capturing well the collection efficiency trends for rain and snow. The HE2 function better captured the overall collection efficiency, including mixed precipitation, resulting in a RMSE of 0.07 mm and bias error of 0.006 mm. The improved agreement demonstrates the importance of fall velocity for collection efficiency.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.
Jeffery Hoover, Michael E. Earle, and Paul I. Joe
 
Status: closed (peer review stopped)
Status: closed (peer review stopped)
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement
 
Status: closed (peer review stopped)
Status: closed (peer review stopped)
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement
Jeffery Hoover, Michael E. Earle, and Paul I. Joe
Jeffery Hoover, Michael E. Earle, and Paul I. Joe

Viewed

Total article views: 1,155 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
930 201 24 1,155 31 28
  • HTML: 930
  • PDF: 201
  • XML: 24
  • Total: 1,155
  • BibTeX: 31
  • EndNote: 28
Views and downloads (calculated since 26 Nov 2020)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 26 Nov 2020)

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 1,112 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 1,110 with geography defined and 2 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 

Cited

Latest update: 20 Nov 2024
Download
Short summary
Transfer functions with dependence on wind speed and precipitation fall velocity are evaluated alongside transfer functions with wind speed and temperature dependence for unshielded precipitation gauges. The transfer functions with fall velocity dependence reduced the RMSE of unshielded gauge measurements relative to the functions based on wind speed and temperature, demonstrating the importance of fall velocity for precipitation gauge collection efficiency and transfer functions.