Effect of Housing Shape on the Catch of Recording Gages

Abstract

The reduction in catch due to the shape of the housing of the U.S. Weather Bureau standard recording gage was explored using data from Weather Bureau stations with both recording and nonrecording gages, a gaging site which included both a standard nonrecording gage and a Stevens recording gage, and gages on the East Central Raingage Network. It was found that, on the average, the standard 8.0-in. diameter orifice recording gage caught 2.5 to 6 percent less rain than the nonrecording gage and 2.5 percent less rain than the recording gage fitted with a 12-in. diameter orifice. The Stevens recording gage caught 5.5 percent less rain than the nonrecording gage. It is concluded that proximity of a sloping portion of the gage housing on the 8-in. diameter orifice recording gages is responsible for the catch reduction.

Hydrology and related changes after harvesting native forest catchments and establishing pinus radiata plantations. Part 1. Introduction to study

“…The rainfall data were analysed for any significant variations over the study area. As raingauge catch is influenced by gauge shape (Huff, 1955;Jones, 1969;Clarkson, 1971;Neff, 1977) and height above ground level (Green, 1970a;1970b: Newson andClarke, 1976), the analysis was restricted to the three Lambrecht recording raingauges at LM, UM and RT. Mass curves of rainfall with UM and RT plotted against LM showed no significant degree of deviation from straight lines (Figure 3).…”

correspondence

“…The results listed by Holzman and Thom for the La Porte stick gage and recorders in their Table 2 imply that the stick gage totals are too high; however, comparative studies of the catch efficiency of the standard non-recording stick gage and the standard recording gage show that the annual catch of a recorder can vary from 2 to 9% less than that of the stick gage, with an average of 6% less (Jones, 1969). These differences are not unlike those shown for the paired La Porte gages.…”

Reply [to “Comments on ‘Seasonal Variation in Rain Gage Catch’ by J. L. McGuinness and G. W. Vaughan”]

“…He ascribed the bias to wind and drop size variations but was not able to establish a numerical relation between catch and wind. Jones [1969] showed that a recording gage caught 2.5% to 6% less in the growing season than • USWB standard gage and concluded that the proximity of • sloping portion of the recording gage housing was responsible for the catch reduction.…”