Precipitation

1. Introduction to Precipitation

     Precipitation, largely in the form of rain and snow, is the source of moisture coming
to the earth. It is a key source parameter in the water balance equation. The ability to
accurately measure and compute precipitation determines to a considerable extent the
reliability of all water balance computations (Sokolov and Chapman, 1974). 

     The rainfall and snowfall at any location are measured by self-recording or manual
observation gages. These gages record the depth of rainfall or snowfall in inches or
millimeters at any place within a given time frame. Snow measurements are made by
standard rain gages equipped with shields to reduce the effect of wind. Snow boards
and stakes also are used. The direct method of measuring snowfall is, however, not
entirely satisfactory. It is supplemented by snow surveying. For this purpose, snow
courses are established. Each course comprises a series of sampling points from which
the samples of snowpack are taken by core-cutting equipment on a regular basis. In
addition to surveying on ground, aerial snow surveying is performed in remote places.
Snow surveying provides information on snow depth variation, water equivalent,
density, and snow quality. Each gage catches the precipitation falling within a circle 8
inches in diameter and hence indicates only a point measurement. 

     To obtain the precipitation for an area on a representative basis, a number of gages

are needed.   

     The measured precipitation data are subject to errors due to the amount of rain
water (1) displaced by the dipstick, (2) retained on wetting of gage surface, (3)
evaporated in between the time of rain and manual readings, (4) affected by the height
of the gage above the ground, and (5) swayed by the wind.

     The density and arrangement of the network and the method of analysis influence
the estimate of areal distribution of rainfall from point data. Numerous papers have been
published on precipitation measurement errors. Studies indicate that wind is the major
cause of error in precipitation gage measurements (Larson and Peck, 1974). The errors
increase with wind speed and are much greater for snowfall than for rainfall. 

     A properly selected and well protected site can reduce wind errors considerably.
Gage shields can further reduce catch deficiency for snow, although they have very little
effect on rain measurement. However, shields are not effective at wind speeds above
20 mph. Larson and Peck have summarized the catch deficiency versus wind speed
based on studies at two National Weather Service gages, as shown in Figure 2.1. At 20
mph, a catch deficiency of 70% can be experienced in snow measurement by an
unshielded gage. A shield can reduce the error to about 50%. For rainfall, a deficiency
of about 20% is expected with or without the shield at 20 mph. The curves of Figure 2.1
can be used to apply corrections to observed precipitation data.
Reference:  Gupta, R.S. (2017).  Hydrology and Hydraulic Systems.  Fourth Edition.
Wavelend Press Inc.

2. ANALYSIS OF POINT PRECIPITATION DATA

     The point observations from a precipitation gage are subject to two regular problems.
A gage site (station) may have a short break in the record because of instrument failure
or absence of the observer. It is often necessary to estimate the missing record.
Another problem is that the recording conditions at a gage site may have changed
significantly some time during the period of record, due to relocation or upgrading of a
station in the same vicinity, difference in observational procedure, or any other reason.
The problem is resolved in both cases by comparison with neighboring gage sites.

2. ANALYSIS OF POINT PRECIPITATION DATA

2.1. Estimating Missing Data

     The precipitation value missing at a site can be estimated from concurrent
observations at three or more neighboring stations, known as index stations, located as
close to and evenly spaced from the missing data station as possible. The normal-ratio
method is used, according to which Equation (2.14) also can be applied for estimating
the missing storm depth at a site by treating P1, P2, . . . as related to a particular storm.
Also, N1, N2, . . . can be taken as the average values for a particular month for all years
on record for index stations.

2.2. Checking Consistency of Data: Double-Mass Analysis

     Double-mass analysis is a consistency check used to detect whether the data at a
site have been subjected to significant change in magnitude due to external factors
such as tampering with the instrument, a change in recording conditions, or a shift in
observation practices. The change due to meteorological factors will equally affect all
stations involved in the test and thus will not cause a lack of consistency. The analysis
also provides a means of adjusting the inconsistent data. 

     In the analysis, a plot is made of accumulated annual or seasonal precipitation

values at the site in question (being checked for consistency) against the concurrent
accumulated values of several surrounding stations. More conveniently, the mean of the
surrounding stations is used in the accumulation and the plot, as shown in Figure 2.2. 
 If the data are consistent, the plot will be a straight line. On the other hand, inconsistent
data will exhibit a change in slope or break at the point where the
inconsistency occurred. This is shown by point V in Figure 2.2 for the year 1981. If the
slope of the line UV is a, and of the line VW is b, the adjustment of the inconsistent data
is made by the ratio of the slopes of the two line segments. Two ways of adjustment are
possible.

1. The data are adjusted to reflect the conditions that existed prior to the indicated
break. This is done by multiplying each recent precipitation value after breakpoint
V of station X (being tested) by the ratio a/b.
2. The data are adjusted to reflect recent conditions following the break. This is
achieved by multiplying each value of the precipitation before the breakpoint by
the ratio of b/a.

     An adjustment of the second type usually is made. In certain cases, more than
one break (change in the slope) in the data is observed. Sometimes an apparent
change in slope is noticed because of a natural variation in the data and is unassociated
with changes in gage location, gage environment, or observation procedure. If doubt
exists, a test of hypothesis should be performed by the Fisher distribution on the two
sets of data (before and after the apparent break) to check whether the data are
homogeneous and the break is purely by chance. Searcy and Hardison of the U.S.
Geological Survey (1960) recommended that if fewer than 10 stations are grouped
together to check the consistency of a station, the record of each station should be
tested by double-mass analysis for consistency by plotting it against the group of all
other stations, and those records that are inconsistent should be eliminated from the
group.

     The double-mass curve technique should seldom be used in mountainous areas.

It also is not suitable for adjusting daily or storm precipitation. When the records of the
stations have different starting dates, the mass curve can be formed by accumulating
the data starting with the most recent values, in the reverse order from that indicated
earlier.
3. CONVERSION OF POINT PRECIPITATION TO AREAL PRECIPITATION

     The representative precipitation over a defined area is required in engineering

applications, whereas the gaged observation pertains to point precipitation. The areal
precipitation is computed from the record of a group of rain gages within the area by the
following methods.

1. Arithmetic or station average method

2. Weighted average method

           - Thiessen polygon method

           - Isohyetal method

Reference:  Gupta, R.S. (2017).  Hydrology and Hydraulic Systems.  Fourth Edition.
Wavelend Press Inc.

3.1. Arithmetic Average Method

     This simple method consists of computing the arithmetic average of the values of the
precipitation for all stations within and in proximity to the area. This method assigns
equal weight to all stations irrespective of their relative spacings and other factors.

3.2. Thiessen Polygon Method

     In this method, weight is assigned to each station in proportion to its representative
area defined by a polygon. These polygons are formed as follows:

1. The stations are plotted on a map of the area drawn to a scale (Figure 2.4). 
2. The adjoining stations are connected by dashed lines.
3. Perpendicular bisectors are constructed on each of these dashed lines, as shown
by the solid lines in Figure 2.4.  
4. These bisectors form polygons around each station. Each polygon is
representative of the effective area for the station within the polygon. For stations
close to the boundary, the boundary forms the closing limit of the polygons. 
5. The area of each polygon is determined* and then multiplied by the rainfall value
for the station within the polygon. 
6. The sum of item 5 divided by the total drainage area provides the weighted
average precipitation.
3.3. Isohyetal Method
     This is the most accurate of the three methods and provides a means of considering
the orographic (mountains) effect. The procedure is as follows:

1. The stations and rainfall values are plotted on a map to a suitable scale. 
2. The contours of equal precipitation (isohyets) are drawn as shown in Figure 2.5.
The accuracy depends on the construction of the isohyets and their intervals. 
3. The area between successive isohyets is computed and multiplied by the
numerical average of the two contour (isohyets) values. 
4. The sum of item 3 divided by the drainage area provides the weighted average
precipitation.

* This is done by a graphic tool like AutoCAD or a planimeter or, alternatively, by

drawing the figure to a scale on graph paper, counting the total number of squares
covered by the polygon, and multiplying by the square of the map scale.
4. INTENSITY-DURATION-FREQUENCY (IDF) ANALYSIS OF POINT
PRECIPITATION

     The point precipitation data of various storms are analyzed in an IDF study. Since
the precipitation data serve the purpose of estimating the streamflows in many
instances, not only the total quantity of precipitation but its rate, known as the intensity
(expressed in in./hr or mm/hr), and duration (in min or hr) are important in a peak-flow
study. A point or gaged observation can be considered to be representative of a 10-mi2
drainage area. Hence the studies of point-rainfall extremes are extensively used in the
design of small-area drainage systems comprising storm sewers, drains, culverts, and
so on. The application of intensity, duration, and frequency data in the rational method
will be discussed later. The intensity- duration-frequency analysis can be carried out
only where the data from a recording rain gage are available. The procedure of analysis
is as follows:

1. A specific duration of rainfall, such as 5 min, is selected.

2. From the record of the rain gage, which indicates the accumulated amount of
precipitation with respect to time, the maximum rainfall of this duration in each
year is noted. This is the maximum incremental precipitation (difference between
accumulated precipitation values) for the selected (5 min) duration obtained from
the gage record. For a partial duration series, all values in the record that exceed
a level given by the excessive precipitation for the selected duration are noted.
 The excessive precipitation as defined as precipitation that falls at a rate equaling
or exceeding that indicated by the following formula:                 

3. The precipitation values are arranged in descending order and the return period
for each value is obtained using the formula T = n + 1/m, where m is the rank of
the data and n is the total number of years of data in the record. For partial
duration series (Section 11.5), the adjustment in the precipitation values is made
by applying the following empirical multiplication factors:    

4. Similar analyses are carried out for other selected durations (10, 15, 20, min), as
shown in Example 2.6. 
5. For each frequency level computed, the precipitation amounts (depths) are
plotted for different durations. These are the depth-duration-frequency curves.
The precipitation depths can be converted to intensities by i = 60 p/t. For
instance, a precipitation of 0.5 in. of 30 min duration has an intensity of 1 in. /hr.
These values are plotted as the intensity- duration-frequency curve on arithmetic
(ordinary) graph paper as in Figure 2.6, or on log-log paper. Interpolation
between the return periods can be done from the curves of the lower and higher
return periods.
5. DEPTH-AREA-DURATION (DAD) ANALYSIS OF A STORM

     DAD is an areal precipitation analysis of a single storm. The analysis is performed to

determine the maximum amounts of precipitation of various durations over areas of
various sizes. The procedure is, as such, applied to a storm that produces an excessive
depth of precipitation. In a study of the probable maximum precipitation (PMP), which is
defined as a rational upper limit of precipitation of a given duration over a particular
basin, several severe storms are analyzed and the maximum values for various
durations are selected for each size of area. 

     The information from a recording gage is needed for this study. The procedure
consists of first determining the depth-area relation for the total depth of a storm and
then breaking down the overall depth relating to each area among different durations.
The points of equal duration on the depth and area graph produce curves of the depth-
area-duration. The steps are explained below.

1. Prepare the accumulated precipitation or mass curves resulting from a storm for
each station in the basin, which, in fact, are the records from the rain gages. 
2. From the total amounts of precipitation from the storm at various stations,
prepare an isohyetal map. The simpler storms present a single isohyetal pattern.
The complex storms that are produced by two or more closely spaced bursts of
rainfall have closed isohyetal patterns divided into zones. 
3. The isohyets are assumed to be the boundaries of individual areas. Determine
the average depth of precipitation for the areas enclosed by successive isohyets.
This provides the total storm depth and area relation. 
4. Start with the smallest isohyet. Within an area enclosed by this isohyet, there will
be a certain number of gage stations. Determine the weight of each station by
drawing the Thiessen polygons for these stations. 
5. For each of the above stations, using the mass curve from step 1 determine the
incremental (difference of) precipitation values for various durations. Multiply
these values by the respective weight of each station. 
6. For all stations within the area enclosed by the smallest isohyet, sum up the
values of step 5 for different durations separately, with the last duration equal to
the storm period. 
7. The ratio of the average depth of precipitation from step 3 to the value from step
6 for the total storm period, corresponding to the area within the smallest isohyet,
is the factor by which all station values of different durations in step 6 are
multiplied to derive the adjusted values for this isohyet. 
8. Steps 4 through 7 are repeated for successive isohyetal areas of the map
created in step 2. The values are plotted on semilog paper and the lines through
the similar durations are drawn as shown in Figure 2.8 on the following page.