Quality Check on Rainfall

I know this has been talked about before, but… why on earth would anyone want to enable that feature?

Doesn’t that remove the weather station’s high resolution network function completely?

It’s summer time and highly local rainfall events can be fun to track, but my station has it checked off and shows the deluge that hit me one day, while the other station owners all have a smoothed (quality checked) rainfall measurement FAR below mine.

Can anyone give me a good reason why that should be included in this system? Mine will stay OFF.

1 Like

If you are talking about NearCast (fka RainCheck), then some places it is useful and some it is not.

When you say other’s rainfall measurement for an event was FAR below yours, how do you know yours is right? How do you know theirs isn’t right, too. You mention “highly local rainfall events” and then try to use that to claim your local rain event is more accurate than somewhere that is not “highly local” to you.

Different mounting methods can have an effect on the haptic sensor’s measuring accuracy. WF has made changes to the design since the original SKY was introduced to improve the accuracy but it still isn’t perfect, but then neither is my CoCoRaHS manual gauge.

You might consider setting up a CoCoRaHS manual gauge to compare your station with. That would give you a different recording method for comparison.

For me, I have been recording both readings on two of my stations and comparing to my CoCoRaHS readings. So far this calendar year, the non-NC values are closer to my CoCoRaHS total than the NC values are, but then I’ve been reporting my CoCoRaHS daily totals to WF for quite some time (since before the Tempest Field Test started).

2 Likes

it helps in suppressing false rain measurements from vibrations (birds, very strong wind (depending on how you mounted it)).