Search

High-resolution datasets offer the potential to improve our understanding of spatial and temporal precipitation patterns and storm structures. The goal of this study is to evaluate the similarities and differences of object-based storm characteristics as observed using space- or land-based sensors. The Method of Object-based Diagnostic Evaluation (MODE) Time Domain (MTD) is used to identify and track storm objects in two high-resolution merged datasets: the Integrated Multisatellite Retrievals for Global Precipitation Measurement (IMERG) final product V06B and gauge-corrected ground-radar-based Multi-Radar Multi-Sensor (MRMS) quantitative precipitation estimations. Characteristics associated with landfalling hurricanes were also examined as a separate category of storm. The results reveal that IMERG and MRMS agree reasonably well across many object-based storm characteristics. However, there are some discrepancies that are statistically significant. MRMS storms are more concentrated, with smaller areas and higher peak intensities, which implies higher flash flood risks associated with the storms. On the other hand, IMERG storms can travel longer distances with a higher volume of precipitation, which implies higher risk of riverine flooding. Agreement between the datasets is higher for faster-moving hurricanes in terms of the averaged intensity. Finally, MRMS indicates a higher average precipitation intensity during the hurricane's lifetime. However, in non-hurricanes, the opposite result was observed. This is likely related to MRMS having higher resolution; monitoring the hurricanes from many viewing angles, leading to different signal saturation properties compared to IMERG; and/or the dominance of droplet aggregation effects over evaporation effects at lower altitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ground observation absence in many parts of the world highlights the importance of merged satellite precipitation products. In this study, we aim to evaluate the effect of different sources of data in the uncertainties of a merged satellite product, by comparing the Integrated Multi-satellitE Retrievals for GPM (IMERG) Final product (V06B) with a ground-based radar product, Multi-Radar Multi-Sensor (MRMS), using both pixel-based and object-based approaches. This study is focused on the eastern United States (land-only) during the hurricane days that occurred in 2016–2018. The results showed that IMERG had better agreement in terms of the average precipitation intensity and area with a bias reduction of 75% and 65%, respectively, when the passive microwave (PMW) sensor overpass is matched instantaneously with MRMS compared to temporally averaged MRMS data (MRMS-Averaged). PMW observations tend to show storms with smaller areas in the IMERG Final product in comparison with MRMS, possibly due to the effect of light precipitation not detected properly by PMW sensors. However, by removing the light precipitation (less than 1 mm/h) in the object-based approach, hurricane objects in the IMERG Final product tend to be larger during the PMW observations, which might be related to different viewing angles of sensors contributing to MRMS and IMERG products. Precipitation estimates have smaller areas with higher average intensity during the PMW observations in the IMERG Final product compared to data estimated by Morphed or IR (morph/IR) observations, which is probably related to the effect of morphing technique, leading to homogenization of the varying rainstorm characteristics. In addition, with the longer absence of PMW observations, the quality of morph/IR estimates in IMERG Final product deteriorates with a decreasing correlation coefficient, a growth in precipitation area and a downward trend in average precipitation intensity. Finally, the inter-comparison of PMW sensors showed the priority of imagers over sounders with GMI as the best among imagers and MHS as the best among sounders in terms of correlation and average intensity compared to MRMS; however, SSMIS was the best in capturing the precipitation area. • PMW estimates in IMERG have better agreement with MRMS when matched instantaneously. • PMW sensors often represent the storms with smaller areas in IMERG compared to MRMS. • PMW sensors show the storms smaller with higher intensity compared to morphed/IR • Morphed/IR data quality in IMERG decreases with the longer absence of PMW sensors. • PMW sensors in IMERG should be prioritized based on the precipitation properties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]