2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.atmosres.2004.12.012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Calibration of tipping bucket rain gauges in the Graz urban research area

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
32
0
3

Year Published

2010
2010
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 42 publications
(40 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
32
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…On the other hand, as suggested by Shedekar et al [39] and Vasvári [40], a dynamic calibration for the correction of the under-catch errors caused by the motion of the buckets during precipitation events, was unnecessary given the nature of the overall low rainfall rates in both study areas. It was not possible to apply correction algorithms to the database considering that only a fraction of the dataloggers of the rain gauges were programmed to record the time of tipping.…”
Section: Sensorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the other hand, as suggested by Shedekar et al [39] and Vasvári [40], a dynamic calibration for the correction of the under-catch errors caused by the motion of the buckets during precipitation events, was unnecessary given the nature of the overall low rainfall rates in both study areas. It was not possible to apply correction algorithms to the database considering that only a fraction of the dataloggers of the rain gauges were programmed to record the time of tipping.…”
Section: Sensorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, this was an intensive rainfall event (13.5 mm in 12 min) that could be miscalculated by the automatic tipping bucket rainfall gauge. This type of gauge usually underestimates the high rainfall by not considering the loss of water during the bucket rotation (Marsalek, 1981;Vasvári, 2005). Moreover, this stormy event may generate spatially high, variable rainfall distribution.…”
Section: Pedoelectrical Relationshipsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Manual data collection at the HMSs started in June 2006. Rainfall and snowfall were observed at the first two HMSs, listed and designated KTS in Table 2, using the Siphon rain gauge (Vasvári, 2005) and weighing method (Liu et al, 2002), respectively, on a daily basis (Table 1). The first 12 HMS, designated KTS and GKT in Table 2, were instrumented to measure on a daily basis at sunrise, 08:00 a.m., 02:00 p.m., sunset, and 08:00 p.m., soil temperature and evaporation at belowground depths of 10, 20, and 30 cm.…”
Section: Instrumentation and Data Collectionmentioning
confidence: 99%