Comparison of precipitation measurements by OTT Parsivel<sup>2</sup> and Thies LPM optical disdrometers
Optical disdrometers are present weather sensors with the ability of providing detailed information on precipitation such as rain intensity, radar reflectivity or kinetic energy, together with discrete information on the particle size and fall velocity distribution (PSVD) of the hydrometeors. Di...
Main Authors: | , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Copernicus Publications
2018-05-01
|
Series: | Hydrology and Earth System Sciences |
Online Access: | https://www.hydrol-earth-syst-sci.net/22/2811/2018/hess-22-2811-2018.pdf |
Summary: | Optical disdrometers are present weather sensors with the ability of
providing detailed information on precipitation such as rain intensity, radar
reflectivity or kinetic energy, together with discrete information on the
particle size and fall velocity distribution (PSVD) of the hydrometeors.
Disdrometers constitute a step forward towards a more complete
characterization of precipitation, being useful in several research fields
and applications. In this article the performance of two extensively used
optical disdrometers, the most recent version of OTT Parsivel<sup>2</sup> disdrometer
and Thies Clima Laser Precipitation Monitor (LPM), is evaluated. During
2 years, four collocated optical disdrometers, two Thies Clima LPM and two
OTT Parsivel<sup>2</sup>, collected up to 100 000 min of data and up to
30 000 min with rain in more than 200 rainfall events, with intensities
peaking at 277 mm h<sup>−1</sup> in 1 minute. The analysis of these records shows
significant differences between both disdrometer types for all integrated
precipitation parameters, which can be explained by differences in the raw
PSVD estimated by the two sensors. Thies LPM recorded a larger number of
particles than Parsivel<sup>2</sup> and a higher proportion of small particles than
OTT Parsivel<sup>2</sup>, resulting in higher rain rates and totals and differences
in radar reflectivity and kinetic energy. These differences increased greatly
with rainfall intensity. Possible causes of these differences, and their
practical consequences, are discussed in order to help researchers and users
in the choice of sensor, and at the same time
pointing out limitations to be addressed in future studies. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1027-5606 1607-7938 |