4.7 Article

Correcting C-band radar reflectivity and differential reflectivity data for rain attenuation: A self-consistent method with constraints

Journal

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON GEOSCIENCE AND REMOTE SENSING
Volume 39, Issue 9, Pages 1906-1915

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/36.951081

Keywords

attenuation; dual-polarized; radar; rain

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Quantitative use of C-band radar measurements of reflectivity (Z(h)) and differential reflectivity (Z(dr)) demands the use of accurate attenuation-correction procedures, especially in convective rain events. With the availability of differential phase measurements (Phi (dp),) with a dual-polarized radar, it is now possible to improve and stabilize attenuation-correction schemes over earlier schemes which did not use Phi (dp). The recent introduction of constraint-based correction schemes using Phi (dp) constitute an important advance [8], [9]. In this paper, a self-consistent, constraint-based algorithm is proposed and evaluated which extends the previous approaches in several important respects. Radar data collected by the C-POL radar during the South China Sea Monsoon Experiment (SCSMEX) are used to illustrate the correction scheme. The corrected radar data are then compared against disdrometer-based scattering simulations, the disdrometer data being acquired during SCSMEX. A new algorithm is used to retrieve the median volume diameter from the corrected Zh, corrected Z(dr), and K-dp radar measurements which is relatively immune to the precise drop axis ratio versus drop diameter relation. Histograms of the radar-retrieved D-o compared against D-o from disdrometer data are in remarkable good agreement lending further validity to the proposed attenuation-correction scheme, as well as to confidence in the use of C-band radar for the remote measurement of rain microphysics.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available