Search Results

You are looking at 51 - 60 of 67 items for

  • Author or Editor: Witold F. Krajewski x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All Modify Search
Bong-Chul Seo, Brenda Dolan, Witold F. Krajewski, Steven A. Rutledge, and Walter Petersen

Abstract

This study compares and evaluates single-polarization (SP)- and dual-polarization (DP)-based radar-rainfall (RR) estimates using NEXRAD data acquired during Iowa Flood Studies (IFloodS), a NASA GPM ground validation field campaign carried out in May–June 2013. The objective of this study is to understand the potential benefit of the DP quantitative precipitation estimation, which selects different rain-rate estimators according to radar-identified precipitation types, and to evaluate RR estimates generated by the recent research SP and DP algorithms. The Iowa Flood Center SP (IFC-SP) and Colorado State University DP (CSU-DP) products are analyzed and assessed using two high-density, high-quality rain gauge networks as ground reference. The CSU-DP algorithm shows superior performance to the IFC-SP algorithm, especially for heavy convective rains. We verify that dynamic changes in the proportion of heavy rain during the convective period are associated with the improved performance of CSU-DP rainfall estimates. For a lighter rain case, the IFC-SP and CSU-DP products are not significantly different in statistical metrics and visual agreement with the rain gauge data. This is because both algorithms use the identical NEXRAD reflectivity–rain rate (ZR) relation that might lead to substantial underestimation for the presented case.

Full access
Emmanouil N. Anagnostou, Marios N. Anagnostou, Witold F. Krajewski, Anton Kruger, and Benjamin J. Miriovsky

Abstract

The paper presents a rainfall estimation technique based on algorithms that couple, along a radar ray, profiles of horizontal polarization reflectivity (Z H), differential reflectivity (Z DR), and differential propagation phase shift (ΦDP) from X-band polarimetric radar measurements. Based on in situ raindrop size distribution (DSD) data and using a three-parameter “normalized” gamma DSD model, relationships are derived that correct X-band reflectivity profiles for specific and differential attenuation, while simultaneously retrieving variations of the normalized intercept DSD parameter (N w). The algorithm employs an iterative scheme to intrinsically account for raindrop oblateness variations from equilibrium condition. The study is facilitated from a field experiment conducted in the period October–November 2001 in Iowa City, Iowa, where observations from X-band dual-polarization mobile radar (XPOL) were collected simultaneously with high-resolution in situ disdrometer and rain-gauge rainfall measurements. The observed rainfall events ranged in intensity from moderate stratiform precipitation to high-intensity (>50 mm h−1) convective rain cells. The XPOL measurements were tested for calibration, noise, and physical consistency using corresponding radar parameters derived from coincidentally measured raindrop spectra. Retrievals of N w from the attenuation correction scheme are shown to be unbiased and consistent with N w values calculated from independent raindrop spectra. The attenuation correction based only on profiles of reflectivity measurements is shown to diverge significantly from the corresponding polarimetric-based corrections. Several rain retrieval algorithms were investigated using matched pairs of instantaneous high-resolution XPOL observations with rain rates from 3-min-averaged raindrop spectra at close range (∼5 km) and rain-gauge measurements from further ranges (∼10 km). It is shown that combining along-a-ray (corrected ZH, Z DR, and specific differential phase shift) values gets the best performance in rainfall estimation with about 40% (53%) relative standard deviation in the radar–disdrometer (radar–gauge) differences. The case-tuned reflectivity–rainfall rate (ZR) relationship gives about 65% (73%) relative standard deviation for the same differences. The systematic error is shown to be low (∼3% overestimation) and nearly independent of rainfall intensity for the multiparameter algorithm, while for the standard ZR it varied from 10% underestimation to 3% overestimation.

Full access
Luciana K. Cunha, James A. Smith, Witold F. Krajewski, Mary Lynn Baeck, and Bong-Chul Seo

Abstract

The NEXRAD program has recently upgraded the WSR-88D network observational capability with dual polarization (DP). In this study, DP quantitative precipitation estimates (QPEs) provided by the current version of the NWS system are evaluated using a dense rain gauge network and two other single-polarization (SP) rainfall products. The analyses are performed for the period and spatial domain of the Iowa Flood Studies (IFloodS) campaign. It is demonstrated that the current version (2014) of QPE from DP is not superior to that from SP mainly because DP QPE equations introduce larger bias than the conventional rainfall–reflectivity [i.e., R(Z)] relationship for some hydrometeor types. Moreover, since the QPE algorithm is based on hydrometeor type, abrupt transitions in the phase of hydrometeors introduce errors in QPE with surprising variation in space that cannot be easily corrected using rain gauge data. In addition, the propagation of QPE uncertainties across multiple hydrological scales is investigated using a diagnostic framework. The proposed method allows us to quantify QPE uncertainties at hydrologically relevant scales and provides information for the evaluation of hydrological studies forced by these rainfall datasets.

Full access
Grace Zalenski, Witold F. Krajewski, Felipe Quintero, Pedro Restrepo, and Steve Buan

Abstract

This paper explores the skill of river stage forecasts produced by the National Weather Service (NWS). Despite the importance of the verification process in establishing a reference that allows advancement in river forecast technology, there is relatively little literature on this topic. This study aims to contribute to this subject. The study analyzed the North Central River Forecast Center’s river stage forecasts for 51 gauges in eastern and central Iowa between 1999 and 2014. The authors explored forecast skill dependence characteristics such as upstream area, water travel time, and the number of gauges located upstream of each forecasting point. They also assessed the influence of rainfall uncertainty on stage error by examining the relationship between the forecast skill and its antecedent 24-h observed rainfall. The results show that when using persistence as a reference for comparison with NWS actual forecasts, the NWS forecasts are better for predictions below and above flood stage. The difference in root-mean-square error (RMSE) between the actual and persistence forecasts ranges between 0.04 and 1.24 ft, and it increases with lead time. Locations with fewer upstream gauges exhibit greater variation in forecast skill than locations that are well gauged, especially at high flood levels. Strong predictive relationships between the physical characteristics of a basin (travel time, upstream drainage area), rainfall quantities, and forecast skill have not been identified.

Full access
Piotr A. Lewandowski, William E. Eichinger, Anton Kruger, and Witold F. Krajewski

Abstract

A significant scale gap between radar and in situ measurements of rainfall using rain gauges and disdrometers indicates a pressing need for improved knowledge of rainfall variability at the spatial scales below those of today’s operational radar rainfall products, that is, ∼1–4 km. Lidar technology has the potential to fulfill this need, but there has been inconsistency in the literature pertaining to quantitative observations of rain using lidar. Several publications have stated that light scattering properties of raindrops could not be correlated with rain rates, while other papers have demonstrated the existence of such relationships. This note provides empirical evidence in support of the latter claim.

The authors conducted a simple experiment using a near-horizontal-pointing elastic lidar to observe rain in Iowa City, Iowa, in the fall of 2005. The lidar signal was used to estimate rainfall quantities that were subsequently compared with independent estimates of the same quantities obtained from an optical disdrometer that was placed about 370 m from the lidar, ∼10 m below the lidar beam. To perform the conversion from the raw lidar signal, the authors used an optical geometry-based procedure to estimate optical extinction data. A theoretical relationship between extinction coefficients and rain rates was derived based on a theoretical drop size distribution. The parameters of the relationship were found through a best-fit procedure using lidar and disdrometer data. The results show that the lidar-derived rain rates correspond to those obtained from the optical disdrometer with a root-mean-square difference of 55%.

The authors conclude that although a great deal remains to be done to improve the inversion algorithm, lidar measurements of rain are possible and warrant further studies. Lidars deployed in conjunction with disdrometers can provide high spatial (<5 m) and temporal (<1 min disdrometer, ∼1 s lidar) resolution data over a relatively long distance for rainfall measurements (1–2 km in the case of the University of Iowa lidar).

Full access
Luciana K. Cunha, James A. Smith, Mary Lynn Baeck, and Witold F. Krajewski

Abstract

Dual-polarization radars are expected to provide better rainfall estimates than single-polarization radars because of their ability to characterize hydrometeor type. The goal of this study is to evaluate single- and dual-polarization radar rainfall fields based on two overlapping radars (Kansas City, Missouri, and Topeka, Kansas) and a dense rain gauge network in Kansas City. The study area is located at different distances from the two radars (23–72 km for Kansas City and 104–157 km for Topeka), allowing for the investigation of radar range effects. The temporal and spatial scales of radar rainfall uncertainty based on three significant rainfall events are also examined. It is concluded that the improvements in rainfall estimation achieved by polarimetric radars are not consistent for all events or radars. The nature of the improvement depends fundamentally on range-dependent sampling of the vertical structure of the storms and hydrometeor types. While polarimetric algorithms reduce range effects, they are not able to completely resolve issues associated with range-dependent sampling. Radar rainfall error is demonstrated to decrease as temporal and spatial scales increase. However, errors in the estimation of total storm accumulations based on polarimetric radars remain significant (up to 25%) for scales of approximately 650 km2.

Full access
Bong-Chul Seo, Witold F. Krajewski, Felipe Quintero, Steve Buan, and Brian Connelly

Abstract

This study assesses streamflow predictions generated by two distributed hydrologic models, the Hillslope Link Model (HLM) and the National Water Model (NWM), driven by three radar-based precipitation forcing datasets. These forcing data include the Multi-Radar Multi-Sensor (MRMS), and the Iowa Flood Center’s single-polarization-based (IFC-SP) and dual-polarization-based (IFC-DP) products. To examine forcing- and model-dependent aspects of the representation of hydrologic processes, we mixed and matched all forcing data and models, and simulated streamflow for 2016–18 based on six forcing–model combinations. The forcing product evaluation using independent ground reference data showed that the IFC-DP radar-only product’s accuracy is comparable to MRMS, which is rain gauge corrected. Streamflow evaluation at 140 U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) stations in Iowa demonstrated that the HLM tended to perform slightly better than the NWM, generating streamflow with smaller volume errors and higher predictive power as measured by Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE). The authors also inspected the effect of estimation errors in the forcing products on streamflow generation and found that MRMS’s slight underestimation bias led to streamflow underestimation for all simulation years, particularly with the NWM. The less biased product (IFC-DP), which has higher error variability, resulted in increased runoff volumes with larger dispersion of errors compared to the ones derived from MRMS. Despite its tendency to underestimate, MRMS showed consistent performance with lower error variability as reflected by the KGE. The dispersion observed from the evaluation metrics (e.g., volume error and KGE) seems to decrease as scale becomes larger, implying that random errors in forcing are likely to average out at larger-scale basins. The evaluation of simulated peaks revealed that an accurate estimation of peak (e.g., time and magnitude) remains challenging, as demonstrated by the highly scattered distribution of peak errors for both hydrologic models.

Restricted access
Grzegorz J. Ciach, Witold F. Krajewski, Emmanouil N. Anagnostou, Mary L. Baeck, James A. Smith, Jeffrey R. McCollum, and Anton Kruger

Abstract

This study presents a multicomponent rainfall estimation algorithm, based on weather radar and rain gauge network, that can be used as a ground-based reference in the satellite Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM). The essential steps are constructing a radar observable, its nonlinear transformation to rainfall, interpolation to rectangular grid, constructing several timescale accumulations, bias adjustment, and merging of the radar rainfall estimates and rain gauge data. Observations from a C-band radar in Darwin, Australia, and a local network of 54 rain gauges were used to calibrate and test the algorithm. A period of 25 days was selected, and the rain gauges were split into two subsamples to apply cross-validation techniques.

A Z–R relationship with continuous range dependence and a temporal interpolation scheme that accounts for the advection effects is applied. An innovative methodology was used to estimate the algorithm controlling parameters. The model was globally optimized by using an objective function on the level of the final products. This is equivalent to comparing hundreds of Z–R relationships using a uniform and representative performance criterion. The algorithm performance is fairly insensitive to the parameter variations around the optimum. This suggests that the accuracy limit of the radar rainfall estimation based on power-law Z–R relationships has been reached. No improvement was achieved by using rain regime classification prior to estimation.

Full access
Ibrahim Demir, Helen Conover, Witold F. Krajewski, Bong-Chul Seo, Radosław Goska, Yubin He, Michael F. McEniry, Sara J. Graves, and Walter Petersen

Abstract

In the spring of 2013, NASA conducted a field campaign known as Iowa Flood Studies (IFloodS) as part of the Ground Validation (GV) program for the Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) mission. The purpose of IFloodS was to enhance the understanding of flood-related, space-based observations of precipitation processes in events that transpire worldwide. NASA used a number of scientific instruments such as ground-based weather radars, rain and soil moisture gauges, stream gauges, and disdrometers to monitor rainfall events in Iowa. This article presents the cyberinfrastructure tools and systems that supported the planning, reporting, and management of the field campaign and that allow these data and models to be accessed, evaluated, and shared for research. The authors describe the collaborative informatics tools, which are suitable for the network design, that were used to select the locations in which to place the instruments. How the authors used information technology tools for instrument monitoring, data acquisition, and visualizations after deploying the instruments and how they used a different set of tools to support data analysis and modeling after the campaign are also explained. All data collected during the campaign are available through the Global Hydrology Resource Center (GHRC), a NASA Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC).

Full access
Benjamin J. Miriovsky, A. Allen Bradley, William E. Eichinger, Witold F. Krajewski, Anton Kruger, Brian R. Nelson, Jean-Dominique Creutin, Jean-Marc Lapetite, Gyu Won Lee, Isztar Zawadzki, and Fred L. Ogden

Abstract

Analysis of data collected by four disdrometers deployed in a 1-km2 area is presented with the intent of quantifying the spatial variability of radar reflectivity at small spatial scales. Spatial variability of radar reflectivity within the radar beam is a key source of error in radar-rainfall estimation because of the assumption that drops are uniformly distributed within the radar-sensing volume. Common experience tells one that, in fact, drops are not uniformly distributed, and, although some work has been done to examine the small-scale spatial variability of rain rates, little experimental work has been done to explore the variability of radar reflectivity. The four disdrometers used for this study include a two-dimensional video disdrometer, an X-band radar-based disdrometer, an impact-type disdrometer, and an optical spectropluviometer. Although instrumental differences were expected, the magnitude of these differences clouds the natural variability of interest. An algorithm is applied to mitigate these instrumental effects, and the variability remains high, even as the observations are integrated in time. Although one cannot explicitly quantify the spatial variability from this experiment, the results clearly show that the spatial variability of reflectivity is very large.

Full access