1999
DOI: 10.1029/1999jd900228
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Numerical simulation studies of rain gage data correction due to wind effect

Abstract: Abstract. Investigation of the correction of rain gage measurements due to the wind effect is described. The focus is on the effect of the temporal averaging scale on the estimation of the windinduced error correction. Numerically derived correction formulae for a specific class of rain gage types, along with high temporal resolution measurements of rainfall and wind speed, are used to perform the study. The rainfall measurements are corrected on a variety of temporal scales ranging from 1 min to 1 month. The … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
34
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 52 publications
(37 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
34
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Ciach, 2002) or sampling errors (e.g. Habib et al, 2001). These errors can be exacerbated in areas of strong wind speeds, as well as during times of intense rainfall.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ciach, 2002) or sampling errors (e.g. Habib et al, 2001). These errors can be exacerbated in areas of strong wind speeds, as well as during times of intense rainfall.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Rain gauges are relatively inexpensive, reliable instruments, and the uncertainties associated with their observations are fairly well recognized (Habib et al, 1999(Habib et al, , 2001Sieck et al, 2007). However, due to their point-like sampling area, the degree to which they represent larger spatial scales depends on the temporal scale of integration and remains an important subject of hydrologic studies (e.g.…”
Section: Experimental Setup and Instrumentationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is extremely good considering that rain gauges are believed to underestimate precipitation of the order of 10-20% due to the wind speed, precipitation rates, and sometimes the apparatus itself (Bell and Kundu, 2003;Habib et al, 1999;Krajewski et al, 2000;Nespor and Sevruk, 1999;Serra et al, 2001). …”
Section: Article In Pressmentioning
confidence: 93%