Performance of the Thies Clima 3D Stereo Disdrometer: Evaluation during Rain and Snow Events

Abstract

Imaging disdrometers are widely used in field campaigns to provide information on the shape of hydrometeors, together with the diameter and the fall velocity, which can be used to derive information on the shape–size relations of hydrometeors. However, due to their higher price compared to laser disdrometers, their use is limited to scientific research purposes. The 3D stereo (3DS) is a commercial imaging disdrometer recently made available by Thies Clima and on which there are currently no scientific studies in the literature. The most innovative feature of the 3DS is its ability in capturing images of the particles passing through the measurement volume, crucial to provide an accurate classification of hydrometeors based on information about their shape, especially in the case of solid precipitation. In this paper. the performance of the new device is analyzed by comparing 3DS with the Laser Precipitation Monitor (LPM) from the same manufacturer, which is a known laser disdrometer used in many research works. The data used in this paper were obtained from measurements of the two instruments carried out at the Casale Calore site in L’Aquila during the CORE-LAQ (Combined Observations of Radar Experiments in L’Aquila) campaign. The objective of the comparison analysis is to analyze the differences between the two disdrometers in terms of hydrometeor classification, number and falling speed of particles, precipitation intensity, and total cumulative precipitation on an event basis. As regards the classification of precipitation, the two instruments are in excellent agreement in identifying rain and snow; greater differences are observed in the case of particles in mixed phase (rain and snow) or frozen phase (hail). Due to the different measurement area of the two disdrometers, the 3DS generally detects more particles than the LPM. The performance differences also depend on the size of the hydrometeors and are more significant in the case of small particles, i.e., D < 1 mm. In the case of rain events, the two instruments are in agreement with respect to the terminal velocity in still air predicted by the Gunn and Kinzer model for drops with a diameter of less than 3 mm, while, for larger particles, terminal velocity is underestimated by both the disdrometers. The agreement between the two instruments in terms of total cumulative precipitation per event is very good. Regarding the 3DS ability to capture images of hydrometeors, the raw data provide, each minute, from one to four images of single particles and information on their size and type. Their number and coarse resolution make them suitable to support only qualitative analysis of the shape of precipitating particles.

Keywords

• laser disdrometer
• imaging disdrometer
• rain microphysics
• snow