preprints.org > environmental and earth sciences > atmospheric science and meteorology > doi: 10.20944/preprints202402.1207.v1

Preprint Article Version 1 Preserved in Portico This version is not peer-reviewed

Version 1 : Received: 20 February 2024 / Approved: 21 February 2024 / Online: 22 February 2024 (01:19:32 CET)

The study of precipitation amount at different time scales constitutes an important issue in climate research and risk assessment. When dealing with daily totals, a frequent but sometimes underestimated problem is at what time the observation day begins. The choice of different starting times may lead to incompatibility between stations and incorrect identification of extreme events. In this work, the problem of temporal misalignment between precipitation datasets characterized by different starting time of the observation day is analyzed. The most widely used adjustment methods (1day and uniform shift) and two methods based on reanalysis (NOAA and ERA5) are evaluated in terms of temporal alignment, precipitation statistics and percentile distributions. As test series, the precipitation amount collected from 9 a.m. local time (09 LT) on the previous day to 09 LT on the target day (9-9 datasets) of the Padua and nearby stations in the period 1993-2022 have been selected. Results show that the reanalysis-based methods, in particular ERA5, outperform the others in temporal alignment, regardless the station. But, for the periods in which reanalysis data are not available, “1day” method, which shifts the daily amount back one calendar day, and “unif” method, which distributes uniformly the daily total from a 2-day moving window surrounding the target date, can be considered valid alternatives. On the other side, concerning the precipitation statistics, the reanalysis-based methods are not the best option, as they increase the precipitation frequency and reduce the mean value over wet days, NOAA much more than ERA5. Nevertheless, the uniform method provides a larger deviation from the original daily series. The use of the series of a station nearby the target one, which is mandatory in case of missing data, gives similar or better results than applying any adjustment method to the 9-9 series. General conclusions can hardly be drawn as they depend on the method and station. For the Padua dataset, the analysis was repeated at monthly and seasonal resolution. In general, the adjustment series show the most relevant changes in the precipitation statistics in summer and less temporal alignment with the original series in summer and autumn, the two seasons mainly affected by heavy rains in Padua. Finally, the percentiles distribution, analyzed for all the methods and stations, indicates that any adjustment method underestimates the percentile values, except ERA5. Only Legnaro, the station most correlated with Padua, gives results like ERA5.

daily precipitation; time of observation; time series; aggregation method; adjustment method; hourly dataset; daily extremes

Environmental and Earth Sciences, Atmospheric Science and Meteorology

* All users must log in before leaving a comment