Sensitivity analysis of DSD retrievals from polarimetric radar in stratiform rain based on the μ–Λ relationship

Journal Article (2022)
Author(s)

Christos Gatidis (TU Delft - Atmospheric Remote Sensing)

M.A. Schleiss (TU Delft - Atmospheric Remote Sensing)

CMH Unal (TU Delft - Atmospheric Remote Sensing)

Research Group
Atmospheric Remote Sensing
Copyright
© 2022 C. Gatidis, M.A. Schleiss, C.M.H. Unal
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-4951-2022
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2022
Language
English
Copyright
© 2022 C. Gatidis, M.A. Schleiss, C.M.H. Unal
Research Group
Atmospheric Remote Sensing
Issue number
16
Volume number
15
Pages (from-to)
4951-4969
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Raindrop size distributions (DSDs) play a crucial role in quantitative rainfall estimation using weather radar. Thanks to dual polarization capabilities, crucial information about the DSD in a given volume of air can be retrieved. One popular retrieval method assumes that the DSD can be modeled by a constrained gamma distribution in which the shape (μ) and rate (Λ) parameters are linked together by a deterministic relationship. In the literature, μ-Λ relationships are often taken for granted and applied without much critical discussion. In this study, we take another look at this important issue by conducting a detailed analysis of μ-Λ relations in stratiform rain and quantifying the accuracy of the associated DSD retrievals. Crucial aspects of our research include the sensitivity of μ-Λ relations to the temporal aggregation scale, drop concentration, inter-event variability, and adequacy of the gamma distribution model. Our results show that μ-Λ relationships in stratiform rain are surprisingly robust to the choice of the sampling resolution, sample size, and adequacy of the gamma model. Overall, the retrieved DSDs are in a rather decent agreement with ground observations (correlation coefficient of 0.57 and 0.74 for μ and Dm). The main sources of errors and uncertainty during the retrievals are calibration offsets in reflectivity (Zhh) and differential reflectivity (Zdr). Measurement noise and differences in scale between radars and disdrometers also play a minor role. The raindrop concentration (NT) remains the most difficult parameter to retrieve, which can be off by several orders of magnitude. After careful data filtering and removal of problematic Zhh/Zdr pairs, the correlation coefficient for the retrieved NT values remained low, only slightly increasing from 0.12 into 0.24.