The first Field Intercomparison of Rainfall Intensity (RI) gauges was organised by WMO (the World Meteorological Organisation) from October 2007 to April 2009 in Vigna di Valle, Rome (Italy). The campaign is held at the Centre of Meteorological Experimentations (ReSMA) of the Italian Meteorological Service. A group of 30 previously selected rain gauges based on different measuring principles are involved in the Intercomparison. Installation of the instruments in the field was preceded by the laboratory calibration of all submitted catching-type rain gauges at the University of Genoa. Additional meteorological sensors (ancillary information) and the observations and measurements performed by the Global Climate Observing System/Global Atmosphere Watch (GCOS/GAW) meteorological station of Vigna di Valle were analyzed as metadata. All catching-type gauges were tested after installation using a portable calibration device specifically developed at the University of Genoa, simulating an ordinary calibration inspection in the field. This paper is dedicated to the summary of preliminary results of the Intercomparison measurements. It offers a view on the main achievements expected from the Intercomparison in evaluating the performance of the instruments in field conditions. Comparison of several rain gauges demonstrated the possibility to evaluate the performance of RI gauges at one-minute resolution in time, as recommended by the WMO Commission for Instruments and Methods of Observations (WMO-CIMO). Results indicate that synchronised tipping-bucket rain gauges (TBR), using internal correction algorithms, and weighing gauges (WG) with improved dynamic stability and short step response are the most accurate gauges for one-minute RI measurements, since providing the lowest measurement uncertainty with respect to the assumed working reference.

The WMO Field Intercomparison of Rain Intensity Gauges

LANZA, LUCA GIOVANNI;
2009-01-01

Abstract

The first Field Intercomparison of Rainfall Intensity (RI) gauges was organised by WMO (the World Meteorological Organisation) from October 2007 to April 2009 in Vigna di Valle, Rome (Italy). The campaign is held at the Centre of Meteorological Experimentations (ReSMA) of the Italian Meteorological Service. A group of 30 previously selected rain gauges based on different measuring principles are involved in the Intercomparison. Installation of the instruments in the field was preceded by the laboratory calibration of all submitted catching-type rain gauges at the University of Genoa. Additional meteorological sensors (ancillary information) and the observations and measurements performed by the Global Climate Observing System/Global Atmosphere Watch (GCOS/GAW) meteorological station of Vigna di Valle were analyzed as metadata. All catching-type gauges were tested after installation using a portable calibration device specifically developed at the University of Genoa, simulating an ordinary calibration inspection in the field. This paper is dedicated to the summary of preliminary results of the Intercomparison measurements. It offers a view on the main achievements expected from the Intercomparison in evaluating the performance of the instruments in field conditions. Comparison of several rain gauges demonstrated the possibility to evaluate the performance of RI gauges at one-minute resolution in time, as recommended by the WMO Commission for Instruments and Methods of Observations (WMO-CIMO). Results indicate that synchronised tipping-bucket rain gauges (TBR), using internal correction algorithms, and weighing gauges (WG) with improved dynamic stability and short step response are the most accurate gauges for one-minute RI measurements, since providing the lowest measurement uncertainty with respect to the assumed working reference.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11567/219467
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 104
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 91
social impact