| description abstract | Simultaneous observations made with optical- and impact-type disdrometers were analyzed to broaden knowledge of these instruments. These observations were designed to test how accurately they measure drop size distributions (DSDs). The instruments' use in determining radar rainfall relations such as that between reflectivity and rainfall rate also was analyzed. A unique set of instruments, including two video and one Joss?Waldvogel disdrometer along with eight tipping-bucket rain gauges, was operated within a small area of about 100 ? 50 m2 during a 2-month-long field campaign in central Florida. The disdrometers were evaluated by comparing their rain totals with the rain gauges. Both disdrometers underestimated the rain totals, but the video disdrometers had higher readings, resulting in a better agreement with the gauges. The disdrometers underreported small- to medium-size drops, which most likely caused the underestimation of rain totals. However, more medium-size drops were measured by the video disdrometer, thus producing higher rain rates for that instrument. The comparison of DSDs, averaged at different timescales, showed good agreement between the two types of disdrometers. A continuous increase in the number of drops toward smaller sizes was only evident in the video disdrometers at rain rates above 20 mm h?1. Otherwise, the concentration of small drops remained the same or decreased to the smallest measurable size. The Joss?Waldvogel disdrometer severely underestimated only at very small drop size (diameter ≤ 0.5 mm). Beyond the Joss?Waldvogel disdrometer measurement limit were very large drops that fell during heavy and extreme rain intensities. The derived parameters of exponential and gamma distributions reflect the good agreement between the disdrometers' DSD measurements. The parameters of fitted distributions were close to each other, especially when all the coincident measurements were averaged. The low concentrations of very large drops observed by the video disdrometers did not have a significant impact on reflectivity measurements in terms of the relationships between reflectivity and other integral parameters (rain rate, liquid water content, and attenuation). There was almost no instrument dependency. Rather, the relations depend on the method of regression and the choice of independent variable. Also, relationships derived for S-band radars and Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) precipitation radar (PR) differ from each other primarily because of the higher reflectivities at the shorter PR wavelength at high rain-rate regime. | |
