My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WMOD00268
CWCB
>
Weather Modification
>
DayForward
>
WMOD00268
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/28/2009 2:31:50 PM
Creation date
10/22/2007 11:46:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Weather Modification
Title
Exploratory Analysis of Climatic Rainage Data for Evidence of Effects of the North Dakota Cloud Modification Project on Rainfall in the Target Area
Prepared For
North Dakota Atmospheric Resource Board
Prepared By
Paul Smith, Paul Mielke Jr., Fred Kopp
Date
2/1/2004
State
ND
Weather Modification - Doc Type
Report
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
except 1990, and so was included in the analysis – treating 1990 as among the “seeded” <br />years, even though no seeding actually occurred. Slope County was out of the program in <br />1990 and again in 1999, and since 2000 only the eastern part of the county has <br />participated. Consequently only the eastern part, containing two climatic gages, was <br />included in the analysis, on the same basis as was Bowman County. <br />2.1Adjustment for missing data <br />Beyond the difficulties already noted, the climatic gage records include three <br />types of entries in addition to the actual gage readings. These are notations concerning <br />“missing”, “incomplete”, and “estimated” data. The “incomplete” values represent cases <br />where data from a few days during the month, evidently a maximum of nine, are lacking; <br />those values were incorporated as is into the analysis, there being no reason to anticipate <br />any systematic bias resulting from their occurrence. “Incomplete” values affect some data <br />from about one-third of the stations, but only one station had more than four <br />“incomplete” months (out of the total of 159 months included in the analysis). In that <br />instance, all nine “incomplete” months were August data, a period of generally light <br />rainfall in the region and possibly when the observers tended to take vacation. Overall, <br />there were 13 “incomplete” gage-months in the target area, out of a possible 1,590 gage- <br />months (10 gages over 3 months for 53 years) – that is, less than 1%. For the control area <br />the comparable numbers are 15 incomplete gage-months out of a possible total of 3,339 – <br />less than 0.5%. <br />The process for arriving at the “estimated” values is not known to us, but as it is <br />evidently satisfactory to the National Weather Service we also used those values as is in <br />the analysis. All the “estimated” values were for control-area gages, with 22 gage-months <br />affected (less than 0.7%). Once again a single station was responsible for more than half <br />of those cases. <br />“Missing” monthly values appeared in the records for most of the stations, with <br />up to six monthly values missing for any one station. For the target area there were 20 <br />“missing” gage-months out of 1,590 possible, or 1.26%, while there were 31 “missing” <br />out of 3,339, or 0.93%, for the control area. Whereas the “incomplete” and “estimated” <br />values were used directly in the analysis, some means was needed to replace the <br />“missing” entries with values that represented plausible estimates of missing data. <br />For that purpose, area by area, station by station, and month by month multiple <br />LAD regression relationships were used. That is, for missing June 19xx data for Station <br />A in the target area, June data for all target stations and for all other years with June data <br />were used to develop a regression relationship to predict the June values for Station A. <br />Then the existing data values for the other stations for June 19xx were used as predictors <br />to obtain an estimate for the missing value for Station A. In two, out of the 51 total, <br />instances the predictand value turned out to be negative, so the entry in the database was <br />set to 0. <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.