Rain Gauge

A rain gauge should be installed in the vicinity of a site under investigation in order
to know exactly when precipitation occurred, how much fell, and its intensity.

From: Groundwater Remediation and Treatment Technologies, 1997

Related terms:

Turbulence, Radio Wave, Wavelength, Management Information, Rain Rate, Rainfall

Intensity, Rainfall Rate

View all Topics

Learn more about Rain Gauge

Tropospheric impairments: Measure-

ments and mitigation
Rajat Acharya, in Satellite Signal Propagation, Impairments and Mitigation, 2017

7.1.1.3 Rain gauge

A rain gauge is a meteorological instrument to measure the precipitating rain in a
given amount of time per unit area. The instrument consists of a collection container
which is placed in an open area. The precipitation is measured in terms of the
height of the precipitated water accumulated in the container per given time and
is expressed in millimetres. Since the same amount of rain precipitation is assumed
to be occurring around the container, the area of collection is not a factor. However,
it should not be too small, neither should it be too large. Due to spatial uniformity
of rainfall, 1 mm of measured precipitation is the equivalent of 1 L of precipitated
rain water volume per metre squared.

A tipping bucket rain gauge consists of a pair of rainwater collecting buckets. It is

covered by a funnel, with an open collector area at the top where A is the area of
collection. The buckets are so placed on a pivot that only one bucket remains under
the funnel at a time. During rain, rain water is collected in the collecting bucket,
through the funnel. When the water fills up to a known point of the bucket, say
having a volume v, the bucket tips, emptying the water. When one bucket tips, the
other bucket quickly moves into place to collect rainwater. Each time a bucket tips,
an electronic signal is sent to a recorder which is registered by the instrument with
time stamp.

To calculate the total rainfall in a given interval, the total number of tips occurring
in the interval is observed. If this number be ‘N’, then in that time the total volume
of water collected is N × v, where v is the volume of the bucket necessary to be filled
for tipping. Now, if A be the area of collection of the rain at the funnel top, then the
total rain amount RA, occurring in the given time in terms of height is

(7.2)

Therefore, the least count of the instrument is k = v/A which is the rainfall measured
for a single tip. The same arrangement may also be used to calculate the rain rate. If
two subsequent tips have occurred in an interval t, and N × k mm of total rain has
occurred in this time t, then the rain rate occurring in this instant is

(7.3a)

To express the rain rate in the standard form of mm/h, the following expression can
hence be used

(7.3b)

where k is in mm and is given by k = v/A × 10− 3, where v is in cubic centimeter (cc)

and the area is in metre squared. t is in second.

The tipping bucket rain gauge is especially good at measuring drizzle and light
rainfall events. The resolution is better when the least count k is small and the clock
measuring t is precise. However, the least count cannot be made arbitrarily small,
as for such case there will be many tips of the bucket during heavy rain that some of
the rain will go uncollected during the bucket transition leading to an underestimate
of the rainfall and inaccuracy. Fig. 7.1 shows a rain gauge of tipping bucket type.
Fig. 7.1. Tipping bucket rain gauge.

> Read full chapter

Hydrology and Surface Supplies

Malcolm J. Brandt BSc, FICE, FCIWEM, MIWater, ... Don D. Ratnayaka BSc, DIC,
MSc, FIChemE, FCIWEM, in Twort's Water Supply (Seventh Edition), 2017

3.5 Rainfall Measurement

Precipitation is measured with a rain gauge, the majority of which are little more than
standard cylindrical vessels so designed that rainfall is stored within them and does
not evaporate before it can be measured (WMO, 2008). In an effort to ensure that
consistent measurements of the precipitation reaching the ground are obtained,
observers are recommended to use standard instruments, which are set up in a uni-
form manner in representative locations. Many national meteorological institutions
provide pamphlets designed to ensure good standard observation practice and the
World Meteorological Organization (WMO) plays an effective coordinating role.

The standard daily rain gauge in the UK is the Meteorological Office Mark II instru-
ment. It consists of a 127 mm diameter copper cylinder with a chamfered rim made
of brass. Precipitation that falls on the rain gauge orifice drains through a funnel into
a removable container from which the rain may be poured into a graduated glass
measuring cylinder. Monthly storage gauges are designed to measure the rainfall in
remoter areas and are invaluable on the higher parts of reservoir catchments. The
Seathwaite gauge is a monthly storage gauge developed for use in the Lake District
in North West England.

Ideally, rainfall should be measured at ground level but this gives rise to problems
due to rain splashing into the gauge. The higher the rim is placed, the more some
rain will be blown away from the gauge orifice and goes unrecorded. All standard
storage gauges in the United Kingdom are set into the ground with their rims level
and 300 mm above the ground surface, which should be covered by short grass or
gravel to prevent any rain splash. Many international gauges are set with their rims
1 m high; these can be expected to read 3% lower than the standard British gauge.

In the United Kingdom, daily storage gauges are inspected each day at 09:00 hours
and any rainfall collected is attributed to the previous day’s date. If the inner
container of a rain gauge overflows as the result of exceptional rainfall, or possibly
because of irregular emptying, it is important that the surplus water held in the outer
casing should also be recorded. Monthly storage gauges are usually inspected on the
first day of each month to measure the previous month’s rainfall total. Corrections
may need to be made to the measurements taken at any gauges visited later than
the standard time during spells of wet weather.

Problems occur in snow prone areas. Small quantities of sleet or snow which fall
into a rain gauge will usually melt to yield their water equivalent, but if the snow
remains in the collecting funnel it must be melted to combine with any liquid in the
gauge. If there is deep fresh snow lying on the ground at the time of measurement,
possibly burying the gauge, a core of the snow should be taken on level ground and
melted to find the equivalent rainfall. Countries with snow cover throughout the
winter months require regular snow course surveys (Hudleston, 1933) to measure
precipitation.

Continuously recording rain gauges are invaluable for flood studies. The original
type gives a daily chart recording of the accumulated contents of a rain-filled
container, which empties by a tilting siphon principle each time 5 mm has collected.
A more recent development is the tilting bucket gauge linked to a logger, which
runs for at least 1 month. Each time the bucket tilts to discharge 2 mm the event is
recorded in a computer compatible form. A daily or monthly storage gauge is often
installed on the same site as a recording gauge to serve as a check gauge and to
avoid the possibility of loss of data due to instrument failure. Plate 2(d) shows an
automatic rain gauge with telemetry for remote monitoring.

Particular care must be taken when siting a new rain gauge from which the resulting
records are to be published. The gauge should be placed on level ground, ideally
in a sheltered location with no ground falling away steeply on the windward side.
Obstructions such as trees and buildings, which affect local wind flow, should be a
distance away from the gauge of at least twice their height above it. In particularly
exposed locations, such as moorlands, it used to be standard British practice to
install a turf wall (Hudleston, 1933) around the gauge but it has proved difficult
to sustain the level of turf maintenance that is needed.

Rain gauges provide a spot sample of the rain falling over a catchment area. The
number of gauges required to give a reliable estimate of catchment rainfall increases
where rainfall gradients are marked. A minimum density of 1 per 25 km2 should be
the target, bearing in mind that significant thunderstorm systems may be only
about 20 km2 in size. In hilly country, where orographic effects may lead to large
and consistent rainfall variations in short distances, it may be necessary to adopt the
high densities suggested in Table 3.1 for the first few years. Thereafter high densities
are only required where control accuracy necessitates it.

Table 3.1. Rain gauges required in a hill area (IWE, 1937)

Catchment 4 20 80 160
area (km2)

Number of 6 10 20 30
gauges

In large areas of the tropics, there is great variation in rainfall from place to place on
any one day but only a relatively small variation in annual totals. In such areas the
rain gauge densities of Table 3.1 will be excessive and it is better to concentrate on
obtaining homogeneous records of long duration at a few reliable sites.

Measurement of Catchment Rainfall

There are several methods for computing catchment precipitation from rain gauge
measurements. The more frequently used techniques include simple numerical pro-
cedures (averaging or interpolation), interpolation from isohyetal maps or Thiessen
polygons and trend surfaces.

The simplest objective method of calculating the average monthly or annual catch-
ment rainfall is to sum the corresponding measurements at all gauges within or
close to the catchment boundaries and to divide the total by the number of gauges.
The arithmetic mean provides a reliable estimate provided the whole catchment is
of similar topography and the rain gauge stations are fairly evenly distributed. If
accurate values of area rainfall are obtained first from a large number of rainfall
stations, by one or other of the more time-consuming methods described below,
the mean of the corresponding measurements from a smaller number of stations
may provide equally acceptable results. In the Thames basin, for example, it was
found that the annual catchment rainfall for the 9980 km2 area derived from the
arithmetic mean of 24 well distributed representative gauges was within ±2% of
the value computed by a more elaborate method using measurements from 225
stations.

The isohyetal method is generally considered to be the most accurate method of

computing catchment rainfall although a good understanding of the rainfall of
a region is needed to ensure its reliability. The monthly or annual rainfall total
recorded by each gauge within or close to the catchment boundaries is plotted on
a contour base map. Isohyetal lines (lines joining points of equal rainfall) are then
drawn on the map taking into account the likely effects of topography on the rainfall
distribution. The total precipitation over the catchment for the period considered
is obtained by measuring the areas between isohyets by GIS techniques or by
planimeter. The mean catchment rainfall is calculated by summing the products of
the areas between each pair of isohyets and the corresponding mean rainfall between
them, and then dividing by the total catchment area.

The most popular method of weighting gauge readings objectively by area has
been that of Thiessen (Thiessen polygons). An area around each gauge is obtained by
drawing a bisecting perpendicular to the lines joining gauges, as shown in Figure
3.1. The portion of each resulting polygon lying within the catchment boundary is
measured and the rainfall upon each is assumed to equal the gauge reading. The
total precipitation is the weighted average of these values. One drawback is that,
if the gauges are altered in number or location, major alterations to the polygonal
pattern ensue. To maintain homogeneity it is better to estimate any missing indi-
vidual gauge values. The gauges must also be reasonably evenly distributed if the
results are to lie within a few per cent of the isohyetal method. The approach is not
particularly good for mountainous areas because no account is taken of the effects of
altitude on rainfall when deriving the Thiessen coefficients for individual polygons.
Figure 3.1. Thiessen’s method of estimating general rainfall over an area.

In mountainous areas, where there may be few stations, the main difficulty is to
allow for the influence of topography. One widely used approach for such areas is to
develop a multivariate regression model using parameters such as elevation, orien-
tation, exposure or distance from the sea, and then to use a numerical interpolation
procedure such as Kriging (Creutin, 1982) to smooth out residual discrepancies from
the regression correlation.

Progress has been made in rainfall estimation by both weather radar (Lau, 2006)
and satellite although the establishment and operation of such networks is the
domain of national meteorological organizations rather than individual projects.
The strength of both approaches lies in the spatial view they afford with the former
being particularly useful for flood forecasting. Radar images for low altitude scans
are calibrated to ground measurements of actual rainfall and rainfall values assigned
to each pixel of the image, normally at 5 or 15 minute intervals. Pixels cover
1 km squares close to the radar increasing to 2 or 5 km squares further away. GIS
techniques can be used to compute catchment rainfall for each time step when
digital catchment boundaries are applied to the gridded data. Satellite estimates are
far more approximate, being related to cloud top temperature and only indirectly
to actual rainfall amount. For large basins in the tropics it is now possible to obtain
public domain estimates of 0.5°×0.5° grid satellite ‘monthly rain estimates’ from the
Climate Analysis Center, Washington, DC.

> Read full chapter

Hydrology and Surface Supplies

Don D. Ratnayaka, ... K. Michael Johnson, in Water Supply (Sixth Edition), 2009

3.5 Rainfall Measurement

Precipitation is measured with a rain gauge, the majority of which are little more than
standard cylindrical vessels so designed that rainfall is stored within them and does
not evaporate before it can be measured (WMO, 1983). In an effort to ensure that
consistent measurements of the precipitation reaching the ground are obtained,
observers are recommended to use standard instruments, which are set up in a uni-
form manner in representative locations. Many national meteorological institutions
provide pamphlets designed to ensure good standard observation practice and the
World Meteorological Organization (WMO) plays an effective co-ordinating role.
The standard daily rain gauge in UK is the Meteorological Office Mark II instrument.
It consists of a 127 mm diameter copper cylinder with a chamfered rim made of
brass. Precipitation that falls on the rain gauge orifice drains through a funnel into
a removable container from which the rain may be poured into a graduated glass
measuring cylinder. Monthly storage gauges are designed to measure the rainfall in
remoter areas and are invaluable on the higher parts of reservoir catchments. The
Seathwaite gauge is a monthly storage gauge developed for use in the Lake District
in north-west England.

Ideally, rainfall should be measured at ground level but this gives rise to problems
due to rain splashing into the gauge. The higher the rim is placed, the more some
rain will be blown away from the gauge orifice and goes unrecorded. All standard
storage gauges in the United Kingdom are set into the ground with their rims level
and 300 mm above the ground surface, which should be covered by short grass or
gravel to prevent any rain splash. Many international gauges are set with their rim
one metre high: these can be expected to read 3% lower than the standard British
gauge.

In the United Kingdom, daily storage gauges are inspected each day at 09.00
hours and any rainfall collected is attributed to the previous day's date. If the inner
container of a rain gauge should overflow as the result of exceptional rainfall, or
possibly because of irregular emptying, it is important that the surplus water held
in the outer casing should also be recorded. Monthly storage gauges are usually
inspected on the first day of each month to measure the previous month's rainfall
total. Corrections may need to be made to the measurements taken at any gauges
visited later than the standard time during spells of wet weather.

Specialized problems occur in snow prone areas. Small quantities of sleet or snow
which fall into a rain gauge will usually melt to yield their water equivalent, but if
the snow remains in the collecting funnel it must be melted to combine with any
liquid in the gauge. If there is deep fresh snow lying on the ground at the time of
measurement, possibly burying the gauge, a core of the snow should be taken on
level ground and melted to find the equivalent rainfall. Countries with snow cover
throughout the winter months require regular snow course surveys (Hudleston,
1933) to measure precipitation.

Continuously recording rain gauges are invaluable for flood studies. The original
type gives a daily chart recording of the accumulated contents of a rain-filled
container, which empties by a tilting siphon principle each time 5 mm has collected.
A more recent development is the tilting bucket gauge linked to a logger, which runs
for at least one month. Each time the bucket tilts to discharge 2 mm the event is
recorded in a computer compatible form. A daily or monthly storage gauge is often
installed on the same site as a recording gauge to serve as a check gauge and to
avoid the possibility of loss of data due to instrument failure.

Particular care must be taken when siting a new rain gauge from which the resulting
records are to be published. The gauge should be placed on level ground, ideally
in a sheltered location with no ground falling away steeply on the windward side.
Obstructions such as trees and buildings, which affect local wind flow, should be a
distance away from the gauge of at least twice their height above it. In particularly
exposed locations, such as moorlands, it used to be standard British practice to
install a turf wall (Hudleston, 1933) around the gauge but it has proved difficult
to sustain the level of turf maintenance that is needed.

Rain gauges provide a spot sample of the rain falling over a catchment area. The
number of gauges required to give a reliable estimate of catchment rainfall increases
where rainfall gradients are marked. A minimum density of 1 per 25 km2 should be
the target, bearing in mind that significant thunderstorm systems may be only
about 20 km2 in size. In hilly country, where orographic effects may lead to large
and consistent rainfall variations in short distances, it may be necessary to adopt the
high densities suggested in Table 3.1 for the first few years. Thereafter high densities
are only required where control accuracy necessitates it.

Table 3.1. Rain gauges required in a hill area (IWE, 1937)

Catchment 4 20 80 160
area (km2)

Number of 6 10 20 30
gauges

In large areas of the tropics, there is great variation in rainfall from place to place on
any one day but only a relatively small variation in annual totals. In such areas the
rain gauge densities of Table 3.1 will be excessive and it is better to concentrate on
obtaining homogeneous records of long duration at a few reliable sites.

Measurement of Catchment Rainfall

There are several methods for computing catchment precipitation from rain gauge
measurements ranging from simple numerical procedures, interpolation from iso-
hyetal maps or Thiessen polygons and from numerical interpolation procedures
of which Kriging (Creutin, 1982) and trend surface are most frequently used. The
simplest objective method of calculating the average monthly or annual catchment
rainfall is to sum the corresponding measurements at all gauges within or close
to the catchment boundaries and to divide the total by the number of gauges.
The arithmetic mean provides a reliable estimate provided the whole catchment is
of similar topography and the rain gauge stations are fairly evenly distributed. If
accurate values of area rainfall are obtained first from a large number of rainfall
stations, by one or other of the more time consuming methods described below,
the mean of the corresponding measurements from a smaller number of stations
may provide equally acceptable results. In the Thames Basin, for example, it was
found that the annual catchment rainfall, for the 9980 km2 area, derived from the
arithmetic mean of 24 well distributed representative gauges was within ±2% of
the value computed by a more elaborate method using measurements from 225
stations.

The isohyetal method is generally considered to be the most accurate method of

computing catchment rainfall although a good understanding of the rainfall of
a region is needed to ensure its reliability. The monthly or annual rainfall total
recorded by each gauge within or close to the catchment boundaries is plotted on a
contour base map. Isohyetal lines, i.e. lines joining points of equal rainfall, are then
drawn on the map taking into account the likely effects of topography on the rainfall
distribution. The total precipitation over the catchment, for the period considered,
is obtained by measuring the areas between isohyets, by GIS techniques or by
planimeter. The mean catchment rainfall is calculated by summing the products of
the areas between each pair of isohyets and the corresponding mean rainfall between
them, and then dividing by the total catchment area.

The most popular method of weighting gauge readings objectively by area has been
that of Thiessen. An area around each gauge is obtained by drawing a bisecting
perpendicular to the lines joining gauges, as shown in Figure 3.1. The portion of
each resulting polygon lying within the catchment boundary is measured and the
rainfall upon each is assumed to equal the gauge reading. The total precipitation
is the weighted average of these values. One drawback is that, if the gauges are
altered in number or location, major alterations to the polygonal pattern ensue. To
maintain homogeneity it is better to estimate any missing individual gauge values.
The gauges must also be reasonably evenly distributed if the results are to lie within
a few per cent of the isohyetal method. The approach is not particularly good for
mountainous areas because no account is taken of the effects of altitude on rainfall
when deriving the Thiessen coefficients for individual polygons.
FIGURE 3.1. Thiessen's method of estimating general rainfall over an area.

In mountainous areas, where there may be few stations, the main difficulty is to
allow for the influence of topographic. One widely used approach for such areas is to
develop a multivariate regression model using parameters such as elevation, orien-
tation, exposure or distance from the sea, and then to use a numerical interpolation
procedure such as Kriging (Creutin, 1982) to smooth out residual discrepancies from
the regression correlation.

Progress has been made in rainfall estimation by both weather radar (Lau, 2006) and
satellite although the establishment and operation of such networks is the domain of
national meteorological organisations rather than individual projects. The strength
of both lies in the spatial view they afford with the former being particularly useful
for flood forecasting. Radar images for low altitude scans are calibrated to ground
measurements of actual rainfall and rainfall values assigned to each pixel of the
image, normally at 5 or 15 minute intervals. Pixels cover 1 km squares close to the
radar increasing to 2 km or 5 km squares further away. GIS techniques can be used
to compute catchment rainfall for each time step when digital catchment boundaries
are applied to the gridded data. Satellite estimates are far more approximate, being
related to cloud top temperature and only indirectly to actual rainfall amount. For
large basins in the tropics it is now possible to obtain public domain estimates of
0.5° × 0.5° grid satellite ‘monthly rain estimates’ from the Climate Analysis Center,
Washington D.C.

> Read full chapter

High Rainfall, Response-Dominated

Catchments: A Comparative Study
of Experiments in Tropical North-
east Queensland with Temperate New
Zealand
Michael Bonell, ... John Burns, in Isotope Tracers in Catchment Hydrology, 1998

11.4.3 Hillslope instrumentation

The locations of sampling points (rain gauges, wells, suction lysimeters, weirs etc.)
and monitoring points (piezometers, tensiometers etc.) are shown in Figure 11.1b
with a more detailed plan for the South Creek transect included in Figure 11.3.

Figure 11.3. The detailed plan of the hillslope monitoring system in South Creek.

Wells
Wesdata capacitance water level probes were used in conjunction with Wesdata
single channel loggers to record water table elevations at 10 min intervals during
periods of groundwater level fluctuation. Plastic tubing extended to the base of
each well facilitated the extraction of groundwater samples for isotopic analysis.
The depths of the wells ranged between 1.90 - 4.86 m below the surface along the
South Creek hillslope transect and 6.93 - 7.56 m in the corresponding North Creek
monitoring plots. The shallower depths in South Creek reflected the difficulties in
auguring within the underlying weathered rock.

Pressure transducers and piezometers

Honeywell 130 pressure transducers were installed at 15 cm, 30 cm, 45 cm, 60
cm, 90 cm and 120 cm depths at each site on both Creeks for monitoring the
tensiometers. In the case of the piezometers, Wesdata capacitance water level probes
were installed at each site at depths of 30 cm, 60 cm, 100 cm, 200 cm and 300 cm,
except at South Creek site 3, where auguring to 3 mwas not possible (as with the
wells) because of rock, preventing installation of a probe at this depth. Sets of both
pressure transducers and piezometers were linked to multi-channel data loggers at
each site (designed by I. Durham of CSIRO Division of Water Resources).

Soil moisture suction lysimeters were installed at each site to the same depths
as the pressure transducers to provide for the collection of soil water samples for
isotopic analysis. Sample timing represents the actual time of sampling; for suction
lysimeters this represents the prior time period, in contrast to the procedure for
rainfall. During relatively dry weather, it was often not possible to obtain samples
(especially near the surface); and missing samples also often resulted from failure of
the samplers to maintain a vacuum.

Samples were analyzed for D/H ratios on a VG Micromass 602E mass spectrometer
by on-line reduction of 10 μg aliquots of water over a uranium furnace. External
precisions of about 1‰ on repeated samples were typical.

> Read full chapter

Principles of Hydrogeology
Nicholas P. Cheremisinoff Ph.D., in Groundwater Remediation and Treatment Tech-
nologies, 1997

Recording Precipitation
Precipitation is measured by recording and non-recording rain gauges. Many are
located throughout the country but because of their inadequate density, estimates
of annual, and particularly summer, precipitation probably are too low. Records can
be obtained from Climatological Data, which are published by the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Precipitation is highly variable, both in
time and space. The areal extent is evaluated by means of contour or isohyet maps
(Fig. 3-1).
Figure 3-1. Distribution of annual average precipitation in Oklahoma, 1970-79.

(from Pettyjohn and others, 1983)

A rain gauge should be installed in the vicinity of a site under investigation in order
to know exactly when precipitation occurred, how much fell, and its intensity. Data
such as these are essential to the interpretation of hydrographs of both wells and
streams, and they provide considerable insight into the causes of fluctuations in
shallow groundwater quality.

> Read full chapter

Hydraulic Assessment
A.J. Saul BEng, PhD, in Sewers: Rehabilitation and New Construction Repair and
Renovation, 1997

8.7.3.3 FLOW, VELOCITY AND DEPTH MEASUREMENT

In a similar way to that of the rain gauge site selection procedure it is necessary to
select locations at which the velocity/depth monitors may be installed within the
sewer system. The number of sites will be a function of the type of model under
development. For example, a skeletal planning model may utilise the data from one
site at the outfall. Potential sites are identified and it is usual to inspect all these
sites such that any possible problems in respect of the installation, maintenance
and operation of the monitor may be identified. Such problems are associated
with access, turbulence, non-uniform flow conditions, unsuitable geometry and
sediments and debris in the pipe invert.
The sites selected should include the final pipe or outfall of the system such that
agreement between the measured and simulated flow may be established for the
complete system, in sewers which drain major sub-catchments, at critical points
identified by historic records or highlighted by the application of a simulation
model to the system, and at all major CSO ancillaries, bifurcations and loops in the
system. Dual and triple monitors are usually required to estimate all the inflows and
outflows at such system components. A wide range of products and equipment are
manufactured for use as flow sensors in sewerage systems and a typical field site
installation is shown in Fig. 8.9.

Figure 8.9. Topical flow monitoring installation

(after WRc).

It is preferable to utilise systems which measure both the depth and velocity of
flow. The depth is recorded using either a pressure transducer or an ultrasonic
meter and the velocity of flow is usually estimated using a twin crystal Doppler shift
system which has a known calibration to average flow velocity. For a known shape
of conduit, signal processing and analysis software is used to convert the raw data
into a flowrate. The relationship between the signal from each transducer and the
actual flow depth or average velocity is precalibrated in a laboratory and the same
relationship is assumed to apply at the field site. It is important therefore that in
situ checks are carried out to confirm these relationships when the monitors are
installed at the field site. A change in the flow depths may be simulated by a partial
blocking of the flow to create an increase in the flow depth in the pipe, together
with a simultaneous manually recorded depth measurement. To check the velocity
calibration it is usual to use a small hand-held propeller meter and to record a series
of measurements over the flow cross-section. Should differences appear between
the actual and predicted values of depth or velocity, adjustment to the calibration
relationship should be made such that the performance of the sensor gives an
accurate measure of the field site conditions.

The data logging/signal processing equipment is usually housed within the manhole
chamber and is usually fixed to the wall of the chamber or is suspended from the
cover to the manhole. Similarly the measurement head consisting of a pressure
transducer and a Doppler shift velocity meter is fixed in the invert to the pipe
using either a bolted bracket or an annular ring which is expanded to closely fit
the circumference of the pipe. Where sediments are present it is necessary to fix the
measuring head above the level of sediment and to record the elevation of the mon-
itor above the invert such that the measurement of flow depth may subsequently
be adjusted to give the correct value. All cables connecting the measurement head
and the signal processing/data logging equipment should be neatly fixed around the
circumference of the pipe and along the pipe soffit to prevent any collection of debris
and subsequent blockage which may influence the performance of the meters.

When the depth measurement is recorded ultrasonically the meter head is again
usually fixed to the chamber wall. The ultrasonic signal transmitted by the meter is
reflected from the water surface in the manhole chamber and is received back at
the meter. It is required therefore that the minimum operational distance between
the instrument head and the maximum anticipated water level in the chamber is
maintained at all times. This distance is specified by the equipment manufacturer.
Ultrasonic meters may therefore be unsuitable for use at manholes where surface
flooding or high levels of surcharge may be anticipated.

> Read full chapter

Precipitation Measurements
Richard J. Doviak, Dušan S. Zrnić, in Doppler Radar and Weather Observations
(Second Edition), 1993

8.5.4 Rain Gauge and Radar

The most direct way to measure the rainfall rate is to use a rain gauge—a catchment
that measures the depth of water per unit time. Although tipping buckets and
weighing gauges are commonly used, they are subject to significant errors caused
by wind (Neff, 1977). Rain gauges measure rainfall only at a point. More often,
interest lies in accurate estimation of rainfall in a unit time averaged over large
catchment areas, and these estimates are usually expressed in millimeters of water
depth. The areal averages find application in hydrology and flash flood forecasting.
Because there may be large errors in the rain depth at any one gauge representing
the areal average, hydrologists have resorted to a network of rain gauges and to radar
to improve areal average rainfall estimates. There is no doubt that a sufficiently
dense network of gauges can measure rainfall better than a radar. In fact, gauge
measurements are accepted as the standard against which other measurement
techniques are compared. Yet no matter how accurate gauges may be for point
measurements (errors are typically 5–10%), their accuracy for areal averages is a
function of the gauge density and the spatial variability of rainfall (Huff, 1970;
Doviak, 1983).

Although the accuracy of the radar–measured rainfall rate is highly suspect, radar
has the decided advantage of being able to survy remotely vast areas and to make
millions of measurements in minutes. The cost of a gauge network to match these
capabilities in spatial continuity and to send data to a central location would be pro-
hibitive. Therefore, meteorologists have combined radar and rain gauge data to take
advantage of the best of each—the accuracy of gauge data and the spatial coverage
of radar data. The combination adjusts the error-prone radar measurements.

Before we can confidently accept radar estimates of rainfall, we should be aware of

the phenomena that can cause variance from gauge estimates. If only reflectivity
factor measurements are available, one needs to choose an appropriate R, Z relation.
Because the parameters of an assumed drop-size distribution vary considerably from
point to point, one may also expect the R, Z relation to vary. On the other hand, for
areal averages of rainfall, there is suggestive evidence that these parameters may
be appropriately chosen to produce an R, Z relation that in the mean predicts the
average rainfall measured by a network of gauges (see Fig. 8.32 and the discussion
in Section 8.4.1.1).

Fig. 8.32. Distribution of the logarithmic ratio of gauge-estimated rainfall to

radar-estimated rainfall, for 300 gauge-hour events in North Dakota during 1972.

(from Cain and Smith, 1976)

Copyright © 1976

Figure 8.33 is a comparison of gauge- and radar-estimated water depths at 65 gauge

locations for a shower measured by a WSR-57 radar located in Central Oklahoma.
Atmospheric gas attenuation accounted for most of the correction seen in Fig. 8.33b.
Although for this day the gauge–estimated rainfall (GER) was 1.38 times higher than
that estimated by radar (RER), the average ratio for 14 rain events is 1.05 when
the relation Z = 200R1.6 is used (Brandes and Sirmans, 1976). Because daily radar
calibrations can be in error, and because different R, Z relations might be appropriate
for different days as well as for different locations surveyed by the same radar, it
becomes mandatory to adjust radar rain estimates in accordance with the in situ
gauge measurements.

Fig. 8.33. Range distribution of G/R ratios using radar measurements that were (a)
uncorrected and (b) corrected for atmospheric absorption, rainfall attenuation, and
biases due to reflectivity gradients. Each point is a radar–gauge comparison, at a
gauge location, of the estimated rainfall rate integrated in time (i.e., the depth of
water) over 24 hours. The relative dispersion is the standard deviation expressed as
a percentage of the mean.

(From Brandes and Sirmans, 1976.)

Copyright © 1976
Brandes (1975) has suggested a technique whereby gauges can be used to adjust
the RER. This methodology minimizes the impact of choosing an inappropriate R,
Z relation and the need for a nearly perfect radar calibration.

The major steps in Brandes's technique are as follows:

1. Radar-estimated rainfall rates are integrated in time for the selected period for
each resolution volume, using Eq. (8.22a).
2. G/R ratios are calculated at each gauge having at least 2.5 mm of rain, using
the radar data from within a fixed radius about the gauge. The radius is chosen
to be small with respect to the gauge spacing and the scale of the precipitation.
3. The G/R data are then used to determine field-of-adjustment factors, which
are applied to the RER field to generate a first-guess corrected radar rainfall
field.
4. Differences between corrected radar-measured rainfall and actual gauge esti-
mates are then used to determine a refinement in the adjustment factors so
that the final corrected RER will agree with the gauge data at gauge locations.

The radar-gauge technique would work better if a single-parameter radar measured

the spatial variability in R rather than the variability in Z or KDP. It is expected,
however, that the KDP parameter would provide a better estimate of the spatial
variability of R because it is better correlated with R, at high rain rate, than is Z
(Section 8.4.3). Furthermore, the Z, R-gauge technique assumes that the gauge
measures an R that fills the resolution volume at the individual gauge location and
that rain alone is responsible for Z. The capability of a single-parameter (especially
KDP) radar to measure variations in R has not been adequately verified. A multi-
parameter radar might map the spatial variations in R better than R from KDP or
Z. A few sparsely sprinkled rain gauges would then be helpful to remove pervasive
biases. In the studies by Wilson (1970) and Brandes (1975), the gauge-radar mean
rainfall estimates were more accurate than the estimates using only gauges for
large-area (29,000 km2), low-gauge density (no more than one gauge per 700 km2)
and long-duration rainfall cases. Brandes (1975) shows that radar-measured rainfall
corrected by gauge data improved the accuracy from 24% for measurements by
gauge alone to 14% for combined radar–gauge measurements with a gauge density
of one gauge per 1600 km2. A summary of improvement in radar-measured rainfall,
corrected by gauge data for denser spacings and smaller areas, is given by Wilson
and Brandes (1979, Table 3).

> Read full chapter

Isotopic Variations in Precipitation

Neil L. Ingraham, in Isotope Tracers in Catchment Hydrology, 1998

Rain collection devices

The purpose of a rain collector is to simply obtain a sample for stable isotopic analysis
and not to accurately gage the amount of rain. Thus in catchment basin studies a rain
collector is used rather than a rain gage, and the design and siting of the collector
depends on isotopic considerations rather than meteorological considerations. Rain
collectors might be located in places inappropriate for rain gages. If throughfall is of
interest then a collector might be placed under a forest canopy, or if fog is of interest
then the collector might be outfitted with a fog collecting screen.

Rain collectors are generally simple devices made of a funnel mounted on a col-
lection tank. The size of the funnel and volume of the collection tank should be
matched to accommodate the amount of rain expected during the collection period,
perhaps a year, a season or a storm. The collection tank should be made of glass
or some other material which will not allow isotopic exchange. Most plastics are
not appropriate for this use as isotopic shifts may occur after only several months.
Evaporation is controlled by the addition of an immiscible fluid that is less dense
than water and thus will rise to the top of the mixture covering the water sample to
protect it from evaporation. Mineral oil and silicon oil are common choices as they do
not isotopically exchange with the water so the isotopic integrity of the precipitation
sample is preserved. The water sample in the collection tank should be covered to a
depth of at least 1/4 to 1/2 inch. Antifreeze can not be added to the collection tank
to prevent the collected water sample from freezing as it can not be removed from
the sample without interfering with the stable isotopic composition of the sample.

The practice of heating rain gages has been used to melt the snow on contact
and insure its measurement in the tank. However a recent concern has been that
heated devices may tend to create a thermal updraft effect and blow the smaller
snowflakes or mist up and out of the collector. This would skew the water collected
towards the larger flakes and drops. The smaller and lighter snow flakes that would
be blown up and away, may be the result of colder precipitation, and thus may have
a more depleted isotopic composition. The loss of this precipitation would render
the sampled water isotopically more enriched. The isotopic effects of using a heated
gage, however, have not been documented and thus should be investigated.

Standard tipping bucket and weighing bucket rain gages may be modified and used
as rain collectors for stable isotopic analysis. Both would require the addition of min-
eral or silicon oil to the collection tank to prevent evaporation. It is recommended
that precipitation be collected from both sides of the tipping bucket gage. Collecting
precipitation from only one side of a tipping bucket gage is commonly assumed to
be sufficient, but if variations exist between the accumulated 0.01 increments of
precipitation, as might be expected during small precipitation events created by the
amount affect, both sides of the tipping bucket gage should be piped to a collection
tank and sampled. Comparison of sample volumes between various precipitation
gages have been reported. It is unclear if the amounts collected by the different
style gages translates to an isotopic difference in the collected samples. Indeed any
variations in effectiveness of the gages to obtain accurate amounts may or may not
be reflected in the stable isotopic compositions of the precipitation sample.

For atmospheric water vapor collection, samples are typically collected in vapor
globes evacuated to 10−3 torr and vacuum sealed. Samples are obtained by releasing
the vacuum seal on the globe, allowing the surrounding vapor to enter the globe.
Each sample is allowed to equilibrate for several minutes, and then sealed and
transferred to a laboratory vacuum line for extraction. A simple system for con-
tinuous vapor collection using an electrically operated cooling unit is described in
Schoch-Fischer et al. (1983).

> Read full chapter

Vulnerability of Water Resources to Cli-

mate
J.M. Shepherd, in Climate Vulnerability, 2013

5.07.5.1 Rainfall Intensity and Frequency

Since the URE is primarily associated with convection, it is logical that urban effects
might be observable in other convective-related processes (e.g., heavy rainfall rates,
lightning, and flooding). Rose et al. (2008) used cloud-to-ground (CG) lightning
data and North American Regional Reanalysis (NARR) rainfall data set to reveal
lightning enhancements in the same downwind anomaly region (Figure 6, right
panel) identified by Mote et al. (2007). Stallins and Rose (2008) provided an excellent
review of urban effects on lightning and highlight several global studies on the topic.
The possible mechanism will be discussed later in the text.
Figure 6. Average daily rainfall (shaded and units of millimeters) from Jun.–Aug. 2002
composited for days with weak atmospheric forcing. The 5-mm contour is shown in
blue, and the yellow boxes represent the mean upwind (left), city (center), and down-
wind (right) regions (Left) and lightning flash anomalies (May–Sep. (1995–2003) on
days dominated by weak atmospheric forcing) (right) in Atlanta, Georgia. See Mote
et al. (2007) or Stallins and Rose (2008) for further information on methods and data.

Hand and Shepherd (2009) used a blended product called the Tropical Rainfall
Measuring Mission (TRMM) Multisatellite Precipitation Analysis and the Oklahoma
mesoscale observational network to confirm not only a statistically significant rain-
fall anomaly in the north–northeast suburbs of Oklahoma City but also a tendency
for heavier rainfall events to occur in the same region. This study was novel because it
was the first application of a merged satellite product incorporating infrared, passive
microwave, and rain gauge data rather than only satellite precipitation radar data.
Consistent with Rose et al. (2008), Hand and Shepherd (2009) noted a fairly strong
relation between prevailing wind and downwind anomaly regions. More important-
ly, Hand and Shepherd (2009) also established that such satellite-based estimates
are relatively accurate when validated against ground-based rain gauge networks (at
the appropriate scale) and can be useful in investigating rapidly developing urban
regions around the globe. Basara et al. (2009) discussed a new fine-scale Oklahoma
City micronet with observations in the central business district. Such measurements
are rare and will enhance our research capacity going forward.

Kishtawal et al. (2009) used historical gauge networks and the TRMM precipitation
radar to show that heavy rainfall events increased in urbanized regions of India
compared to rural stations (Figure 7). Mitra et al. (2011) also used gauge data
and satellite rainfall estimates to study the oft-neglected pre-monsoonal rainfall
climatology of India. They found that urban stations in the region of Kolkata, India,
have positive trends in pre-monsoonal rainfall. A forthcoming modeling effort by
Mitra and Shepherd (personal communication) further confirms that ‘Nor’westor’
convective systems may interact with the urban landscape to affect the evolution of
rainfall in the region.

Figure 7. Circles represent the location of stations where the frequency of heavy
precipitation events exhibits a positive trend with 99% confidence. The change
in population density between 1990 and 2000 is shown in the background (from
Kishtawal et al. 2009). Darker colors represent larger changes in population density.
The darkest colors are indicators of cities.

Halfon et al. (2009) noted increased cumulative precipitation amounts downwind

of Tel Aviv, Israel. Chang et al. (2009) noted the role that urban land cover played,
through boundary later and flux alterations, on a heavy rainfall event in Mumbai, In-
dia. Meng et al. (2007) also used ground radar-based analysis in an innovative study
which presented evidence that the urban land cover associated with Guangzhou City
(China) intensified thunderstorms associated with a tropical cyclone. Radar echoes
were maximized over the urban area as also noted by Shem and Shepherd (2009)
and Niyogi et al. (2011). Inamura et al. (2011) used ensemble simulations with a
large number of members to investigate the effects of Tokyo’s landscape on heavy
rainfall. They found that the urban effects of Tokyo modified the wind convergence
and rainfall leeward of the urban area. Li et al. (2011) associated rapid urbanization
in the Pearl River Delta region of China with an increase in strong precipitation
and convective events. Miao et al. (2011) used a mesoscale model with high fidelity
representation of urban canopy. Their results confirmed that Beijing can modify
storms by splitting them or enhancing the amount of rainfall. They attributed the
modification to thermal (sensible and latent heat) transport rather than momentum
transport (more on mechanisms later). Zhang et al. (2010) noted in the Yangtze River
Delta Economic Belt that urban areas experience 15% more rainfall over the city and
leeward, but that the effect was most prevalent during the summer.

> Read full chapter

Geomorphological Mapping
Steve Parry, in Developments in Earth Surface Processes, 2011

2 Natural Terrain Landslides in Hong Kong

Natural terrain is defined in Hong Kong as terrain that has not been substantially
modified by human activities but includes areas where grazing, hill fires and defor-
estation may have occurred (Ng et al., 2003). Natural terrain covers over 60% of the
total land area of Hong Kong, with almost 50% of the natural terrain sloping at 30°
or more. Based on a review of high-level (flight height >2400 m) aerial photographs
from 1945 to 2003, over 16,000 landslides have occurred on natural terrain, an
average of 275 landslides per year (MFJV, 2007). However, during intense single
storms, hundreds of landslides can occur in a few hours. For example, during a
severe rainstorm on 7 June 2008, a rain gauge on Lantau Island recorded a peak
rainfall of 384 mm in a 4 h period, whereas the total rainfall for the 24 h period was
622 mm. This storm triggered over 2400 landslides on Lantau Island resulting in
numerous road links being severed and many homes being temporarily evacuated
(Wong, 2009). Figure 15.2a shows a landslide swarm resulting in the closure of both
lanes of Tai O Road, the only access road to south-west Lantau Island. Figure 15.2b
shows a 3000 m3 channelised debris flow (CDF) which resulted in the closure of both
lanes of the Yu Tung Road dual carriageway. This landslide was filmed and can be
viewed at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2uTKyK1c9k.
 Figure 15.2. Landslides following a severe rainstorm on 7 June 2008, Lantau Island,
Hong Kong. Left: Landslide swarm resulting in closure of both lanes of the only
road access to SW Lantau Island. Right: A 3000 m3 CDF closed both lanes of a dual
carriageway.

The consequences of natural terrain landslides to date have been considerably less
than those from man-made slope failures. This is mainly because of the proximity
of man-made slopes to developments with the result that even relatively small land-
slides can have potentially serious consequences. However, with the improvements
to man-made slope safety in Hong Kong, the balance of landslide risk is chang-
ing (Chan and Mak, 2007). Furthermore, whilst the evaluation of high-frequency,
low-magnitude landslides can be undertaken with a reasonable amount of certainty,
natural terrain has the potential for relatively high-magnitude, low-frequency events,
and the evaluation of such failures is a key focus of any engineering assessment.

> Read full chapter

ScienceDirect is Elsevier’s leading information solution for researchers.

Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. or its licensors or contributors. ScienceDirect ® is a registered trademark of Elsevier B.V. Terms and conditions apply.