1 / 13

P2.13 Validation of daily satellite precipitation estimates over the U. S J

P2.13 Validation of daily satellite precipitation estimates over the U. S J John Janowiak, Pingping Xie, Robert Joyce, Mingyue Chen, Yelena Yarosh Climate Prediction Center/NCEP/NWS. INTRODUCTION The International Precipitation Working Group has organized several national-scale

evelyn-navarro
Download Presentation

P2.13 Validation of daily satellite precipitation estimates over the U. S J

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. P2.13Validation of daily satellite precipitation estimates over the U. S J John Janowiak, Pingping Xie, Robert Joyce, Mingyue Chen, Yelena Yarosh Climate Prediction Center/NCEP/NWS INTRODUCTION The International Precipitation Working Group has organized several national-scale validation activities to evaluate satellite-derived precipitation estimates. The first such effort was developed by Dr. Beth Ebert at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology for validation over the Australian continent. Dr. Chris Kidd (University of Birmingham, UK) is conducting a similar validation activity over parts of Europe. The results presented here are for the U.S. using CPC’s daily rain gauge analysis and radar as the validation reference data sets.

  2. Validation Data Set • - 7000+ station reports daily • 12Z – 12Z accumulation period • Data analyzed using a Cressman-type • scheme • Error characteristics of validation data are • NOT known • - Validation area matched for all estimates • (if missing in one, made missing in all)

  3. “PMW”: passive microwave

  4. “PMW”: passive microwave

  5. Difference Between Gauge Analysis & four Satellite Estimates During the Cool Season

  6. Difference Between Gauge Analysis & four Satellite Estimates During the WARMSeason

  7. west east BIAS Ratio (estimated mean / gauge mean)

  8. west Bias Ratio (areal coverage) east

  9. CONCLUSIONS • 1. Merging passive microwave (PMW) & IR information results in more accurate • precipitation estimates than when used individually • TWO systematic biases in all satellite estimates: • - OVER estimation over snow-covered regions • - OVER estimation in semi-arid regions during warm season • Better results obtained when using IR to transport PMW-derived rainfall than • estimate precip. Directly from IR • NWP forecasts generally outperform satellite estimates (and radar) during • winter over the US

More Related