the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Rain gauge aerodynamic design to minimise wind-induced bias in precipitation measurement
Abstract. The presence of wind introduces biases in precipitation measurements obtained from traditional rain gauges due to the interaction between the airflow and the outer shell of the instrument, which acts like a bluff body immersed in a wind stream. The airflow is diverted, creating an updraft and accelerating the flow velocity. This interacts with the fall trajectories of hydrometeors near the gauge rim, causing some to deviate out of the collector. The resulting wind-induced undercatch can be minimised by adopting a suitable design for the outer shell of the gauge. While the effectiveness of an inverted conical shape for the outer walls of the gauge has already been demonstrated in the literature, this work proves that the size and geometric profile of the collector's rim are crucial in reducing the effect of wind on precipitation measurements. Building on the construction requirements derived from operational constraints, various single and dual inclination rim profiles were tested using computational fluid dynamics simulation and Lagrangian particle tracking to identify the most effective design. The proposed rim profile is then thoroughly tested in numerical simulations performed over an extended range of wind speeds and precipitation intensities. The scalability of the rim profile to suit different sizes of the collector area is demonstrated, and adjustment curves are obtained to address residual bias. A comparison with existing high-performance gauges on the market revealed that the proposed design significantly outperforms existing solutions.
- Preprint
(1678 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-2108', Anonymous Referee #1, 09 Sep 2026
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2026/egusphere-2026-2108/egusphere-2026-2108-RC1-supplement.pdfCitation: https://doi.org/
10.5194/egusphere-2026-2108-RC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Enrico Chinchella, 15 Oct 2026
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2026/egusphere-2026-2108/egusphere-2026-2108-AC1-supplement.pdf
-
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Enrico Chinchella, 15 Oct 2026
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2026-2108', Anonymous Referee #2, 14 Sep 2026
Comments on “Rain gauge aerodynamic design to minimise wind-induced bias in precipitation measurement” by Chinchella E., Cauteruccio A., Chan P-W, and Lanza L.G.
General comments.
The manuscript presents results from numerical estimates regarding the effects of rain gauge shapes on the rainfall measurements as wind intensity increases. The subject of the manuscript covers an important problem in the precipitation measurements performed during high windy intervals. Nonetheless, the paper shows only numerical outcomes but not any comparison between the proposed design and other rain gauges during natural events. By this, I suggest that the title should be changed to indicate that the conclusions are based on numerical simulations.
Specific comments.
Section 2.1
- Figure 1 caption. The symbols of the angles must be changed (to greek letters) to match what is indicated in the figure.
Section 3.
Here are presented the results from the performed simulations but no contrast (discussion) with respect to previous studies. So, the section should be renamed as “Results”.
Section 3.1
- Lines 234 and 235. Change the symbols corresponding to the angles for the Greek letter (tetha) of Figure 1a.
Section 3.2
- Lines 266 and 267. The indicated panels do not correspond to the beta angles indicated. The panel 4a has a beta value of 45 degrees. Please modify the text.
- Please explain the reason for the overestimation for drops with D>1 mm of the six cases with respect to the SBS-500 gauge.
Section 4
- Lines 326-330. Explain the reason by these results are not presented in Section 3.
- Lines 347-354. How do the authors estimate the number of collected drops? Testik and Pei (2017), Bolek and Testik (2022), and Testik and Bolek (2023) have shown that during windy episodes (horizontal wind < 10 m/s), raindrops can get considerable horizontal speeds. Are those results considered in your estimates? The effect on the falling behavior of raindrops should be larger when wind speed has larger values, especially when wind speed is greater than the raindrop terminal velocity, which should be reflected on the CR values of Figure 9.
Conclusions
- Lines 472-474. There is not any result in the manuscript that supports such conclusion. So, the residual is eliminated completely or how much is reduced?
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-2108-RC2 -
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Enrico Chinchella, 15 Oct 2026
The comment was uploaded in the form of a supplement: https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2026/egusphere-2026-2108/egusphere-2026-2108-AC2-supplement.pdf
Viewed
| HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 143 | 97 | 25 | 265 | 28 | 28 |
- HTML: 143
- PDF: 97
- XML: 25
- Total: 265
- BibTeX: 28
- EndNote: 28
Viewed (geographical distribution)
| Country | # | Views | % |
|---|
| Total: | 0 |
| HTML: | 0 |
| PDF: | 0 |
| XML: | 0 |
- 1