<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0" article-type="research-article"><?xmltex \makeatother\@nolinetrue\makeatletter?>
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">AMT</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Atmospheric Measurement Techniques</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">AMT</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Atmos. Meas. Tech.</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1867-8548</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/amt-16-2381-2023</article-id><title-group><article-title>Calibrating radar wind profiler reflectivity factor using <?xmltex \hack{\break}?>surface disdrometer observations</article-title><alt-title>Calibrating radar wind profilers</alt-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Calibrating radar wind profilers}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{C. R. Williams et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Williams</surname><given-names>Christopher R.</given-names></name>
          <email>christopher.williams@colorado.edu</email>
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9394-8850</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Barrio</surname><given-names>Joshua</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2 aff3">
          <name><surname>Johnston</surname><given-names>Paul E.</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff4">
          <name><surname>Muradyan</surname><given-names>Paytsar</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6903-9435</ext-link></contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff5">
          <name><surname>Giangrande</surname><given-names>Scott E.</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8119-8199</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Smead Aerospace Engineering Sciences Department, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80303, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80316, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>NOAA Physical Sciences Laboratory, Boulder, CO 80305, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff4"><label>4</label><institution>Argonne National Laboratory, Lemont, IL 60439, USA</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff5"><label>5</label><institution>Environmental and Climate Sciences Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11793, USA</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Christopher R. Williams (christopher.williams@colorado.edu)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>9</day><month>May</month><year>2023</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>16</volume>
      <issue>9</issue>
      <fpage>2381</fpage><lpage>2398</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>5</day><month>December</month><year>2022</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>10</day><month>January</month><year>2023</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>21</day><month>March</month><year>2023</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>24</day><month>March</month><year>2023</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2023 Christopher R. Williams et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2023</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/2381/2023/amt-16-2381-2023.html">This article is available from https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/2381/2023/amt-16-2381-2023.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/2381/2023/amt-16-2381-2023.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/2381/2023/amt-16-2381-2023.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>

      <p id="d1e147">This study uses surface disdrometer reflectivity factor estimates to calibrate the vertical and off-vertical pointing radar beams produced by an
ultra high frequency (UHF) band radar wind profiler (RWP) deployed at the US Department of Energy (DOE) Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM)
program Southern Great Plains (SGP) Central Facility in northern Oklahoma from April 2011 through July 2019. The methodology consists of five
steps. First, the recorded Doppler velocity power spectra are adjusted to account for Nyquist velocity aliasing and coherent integration filtering
effects. Second, the spectrum moments are calculated. The third step increases the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) due to inflated noise power estimates
during convective rain events that cause <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to be biased low. The fourth step determines the RWP calibration constant for one radar beam (called
the “reference” beam) by comparing uncalibrated RWP reflectivity factors at 500 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> above the ground to 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> resolution surface
disdrometer reflectivity factors. The last step uses the calibrated reference beam reflectivity factor to calibrate the other radar beams during
precipitation. There are two key findings. The RWP sensitivity decreased by approximately 3 to 4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">yr</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> as the hardware aged. This drift was slow enough that
the reference calibration constant can be estimated over 3-month intervals using episodic rain events. The calibrated moments are available on the DOE
ARM data archive, and the Python processing code is available on public repositories.</p>
  </abstract>
    
<funding-group>
<award-group id="gs1">
<funding-source>Biological and Environmental Research</funding-source>
<award-id>DE-SC0021345</award-id>
</award-group>
</funding-group>
</article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

      <?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e202">Ultra high frequency (UHF) band (900–1290 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MHz</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) radar wind profiler (RWP) technology was developed in the 1980s by the US National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Aeronomy Laboratory and Wave Propagation Laboratory to study the horizontal wind motions from near the surface
to approximately 5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi><mml:mo>.</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mo>.</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">l</mml:mi><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Ecklund et al., 1988; Angevine et al., 1996, 1998; Carter et al., 1995). When raindrops are not in the radar
resolution volume, the radar return power during this “clear-air” condition is due to Bragg scattering from changes in the refractive index caused by
temperature and humidity gradients (Gage and Balsley, 1978). When raindrops are in the radar
resolution volume, the long radar wavelength of 0.25 to 0.33 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> implies that Rayleigh scattering dominates the return signal, providing a vertical
structure of precipitation without any signal attenuation (Rogers et al., 1993). Calibration procedures for radars operating at higher frequencies
will need to account for attenuation through the precipitation (Williams, 2022).</p>
      <p id="d1e242">Radars measure the return signal power as a function of range. For meteorological applications, the signal power needs to be converted to radar
reflectivity factor. In general, there are two methods to convert signal power to radar reflectivity factor. The first method directly converts the
measured power and range information into radar reflectivity factor. This method requires rigorous characterization of every radar hardware component
using best engineering practices. For radars with steerable antennas, rigorous engineering practices include recording the transmitted power in
real time and<?pagebreak page2382?> performing balloon-mounted sphere calibrations to characterize the antenna beam pattern and beam-pointing hardware (Chandrasekar et al.,
2015). For radars that are not end-to-end rigorously characterized (e.g. radar wind profilers), the radar reflectivity factor can be estimated
indirectly by using the noise relative signal power (i.e. signal-to-noise ratio, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and an external reference to determine the radar calibration
constant. For vertically pointing radars, the external reference has come from ground-based radars (e.g. Hogan et al., 2000; Williams, 2012; Kneifel
et al., 2015; Radenz et al., 2018), from nearby surface disdrometer observations (Gage et al., 2000; Williams et al., 2005; Myagkov et al., 2020),
from nearby rain gauges (Hartten et al., 2019), and from satellite radar statistics (Protat et al., 2011; Kollias et al., 2019; Hartten et al., 2019;
Protat et al., 2022).</p>
      <p id="d1e253">Since RWPs were originally designed for horizontal wind profile measurements, the NOAA Doppler velocity power spectra processing routines were
optimized to estimate mean radial velocity and did not estimate radar reflectivity factor (Merritt, 1995). Even today, real-time processed NOAA RWP
datasets do not estimate radar reflectivity factor but include the spectrum moments of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, mean radial velocity, spectrum width, and noise power
(NOAA, 2022). The radar reflectivity factor is estimated from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> as shown in Gage et al. (1994, 2000) and described in more detail in Tridon
et al. (2013) and Hartten et al. (2019). One limitation of RWP signal processing routines is that increased noise power occurs at range gates that
have large backscattered signal power. This overestimated noise power leads to underestimated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which leads to underestimated radar reflectivity
factor. The elevated noise power in RWPs was discussed in Tridon et al. (2013) and mitigated by using the measured noise power at far range gates as a
new noise power at all range gates. The adjusted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is then used to estimate the radar reflectivity factor. The work presented herein builds on the
concepts discussed in Tridon et al. (2013) but includes additional <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> biases not discussed in that work. Specifically, this study includes signal
power biases due to Nyquist velocity aliasing and coherent integration filtering. Also, this study uses a daily median noise power in the adjusted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
estimate to account for RWP operating modes that do not have range gate sampling above intense precipitation such that the noise power is still
biased high at the “far” range gates.</p>
      <p id="d1e305">As discussed above, an external reference is needed to determine a radar calibration constant, and this study uses surface disdrometer reflectivity
factors to calibrate RWP radar reflectivity factors obtained at 500 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The surface disdrometer was about 100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from the RWP, and the
calibration procedure includes shifting the time-series data to account for the 500 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> vertical displacement and 100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> horizontal
separation between the measurement locations. Depending on the wind speed and direction, disdrometer time-series data could lead or lag the RWP
time-series data. An overarching aim of this study is to standardize the RWP signal processing steps to remove known biases in radar reflectivity
factor estimates and provide those codes to the radar community on a public repository.</p>
      <p id="d1e341">The radar and disdrometer datasets used in this study are described in Sect. 2 (Datasets). Spectrum adjustment methods are discussed in Sect. 3
(Methods) and include adjustments due to Nyquist velocity aliasing, coherent integration filtering, and increased noise power. Section 3 also includes
calibration methods derived from surface disdrometer observations. In Sect. 4 (Results), the radar calibration constant is shown to vary over an
8-year dataset, with decreased sensitivity caused by degrading hardware and sudden increases in sensitivity due to installing new hardware. Conclusions
are presented in Sect. 5, and Appendix A provides additional processing code details.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Datasets</title>
      <p id="d1e352">This study uses radar observations from a UHF-band radar wind profiler (RWP) operating at 915 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">MHz</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and a surface disdrometer located at the
US Department of Energy (DOE) Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) program (Mather and Voyles, 2013) Southern Great Plains (SGP) Central Facility
in northern Oklahoma, USA, from 22 March 2011 to 18 August 2019. All datasets used in this study are available online using the ARM data discovery
tool (ARM 1998a, b, c, d, 2011).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d1e366">Pertinent RWP operating parameters (SGP Central Facility, 22 March 2011 through 18 August 2019).</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="6">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Operating frequency (MHz)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">915</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col3" nameend="col6" align="center"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Operating wavelength (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.328</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col3" nameend="col6" align="center"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Precip. short pulse</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Precip. long pulse</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col4" nameend="col6" align="center">Wind mode </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Observation start date</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">22 March 2011</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">22 March 2011</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry namest="col4" nameend="col6" align="center">1 April 2014 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Observation end date</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col2">18 August 2019</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col3">18 August 2019</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col4" nameend="col6" align="center">10 March 2019 </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Beam V</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Beam A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Beam B</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Pulse duration (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ns</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">417</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2833</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">708</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">708</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">708</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Range resolution (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">62.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">425</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">106</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">106</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">106</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Distance between range gates (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">125 then 62.5<inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">212.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">62.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">62.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">62.5</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Number of range gates</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">75 then 150<inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">75</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">60</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">60</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">60</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Range to first gate (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">327</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">327</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">373</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">373</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">373</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Range to last gate (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">9.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">16.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">4.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">4.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">4.0</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Elevation angle (degree)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">90</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">90</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">90</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">77</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">77</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Azimuth angle (degree)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">22</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">22</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">22</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">22</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">292</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Inter-pulse period (Tipp) (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">100</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">120</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">41</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">41</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">41</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Number of coherent integrations (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">56</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">34</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">200</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">200</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">200</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Number of points in spectrum (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>pts</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">128</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">128</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">64</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">64</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">64</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Number of averaged spectra (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>spc</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">4</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">12</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">12</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Number of transmitted pulses per dwell<inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">21 504</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">17 408</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">153 600</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">153 600</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">153 600</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Nyquist velocity (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>Nyquist</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">14.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">19.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">9.99</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">9.99</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">9.99</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Velocity resolution (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mi>v</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.228</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.306</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.312</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.312</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.312</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Dwell<inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">2.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">2.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">6.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">6.3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">6.3</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e369"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Distance between range gates and the number of range gates changed on 4 April 2014. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">b</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Number of transmitted pulses per dwell: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>npts</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>spc</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> Dwell is the time needed to transmit all pulses: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Dwell</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mtext>ipp</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>pts</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>spc</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p></table-wrap-foot><?xmltex \gdef\@currentlabel{1}?></table-wrap>

<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>Radar wind profiler</title>
      <p id="d1e1121">The ARM SGP Central Facility RWP was a Vaisala Meteorological Systems Inc. LAP-3000 wind profiler (Muradyan and Coulter, 2020) and is a commercial
version of the NOAA UHF wind profiler developed under an industry–government 1991 Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA). From 22 March 2011 to 31 March 2014, the RWP operated in a <italic>precipitation mode</italic>
observing only in the vertical direction. The precipitation mode sampled the atmosphere with a short and long pulse, yielding low-sensitivity
short-range measurements and high-sensitivity long-range measurements, respectively. On 1 April 2014, a <italic>wind mode</italic> was added to the RWP and
consisted of transmitting pulses in three different directions in order to estimate the horizontal wind as a function of height. The RWP collected
data in both precipitation and wind modes for 5 years. On 11 March 2019, the wind mode operating parameters changed, and on 19 August 2019, the RWP
hardware failed and was eventually replaced with a wind profiler produced by a different radar manufacturer. The LAP-3000 RWP can only collect data in
one beam direction with one pulse configuration at a time. Thus, during the 2011 to 2014 period, the radar alternated between two vertically pointing
precipitation mode radar beams, requiring approximately 5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to collect both beams of data. During the 2014 to 2019 period, the radar
sequentially collected data in five unique radar beams (i.e.<?pagebreak page2383?> two precipitation mode beams and three wind mode beams), requiring approximately 25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to
complete one observation cycle. Table 1 lists pertinent RWP operating parameters for both modes.</p>
      <p id="d1e1146">The ARM RWP uses the manufacturer's default processing routines (Muradyan and Coulter, 2020). For each mode, the RWP transmits a sequence of pulses
and performs coherent integrations, fast Fourier transforms (FFTs), and spectra averages. Using the precipitation short-pulse mode as an example, the
RWP transmits 56 radar pulses (represented by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and integrates the in-phase and quadrature voltages (also called <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mi>I</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> voltages) to produce one in-phase and one quadrature voltage
(i.e. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>I</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). After collecting 128 (represented by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>pts</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) coherently averaged <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>I</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> voltages, a von Hann window is applied to the time series and a complex FFT is performed to produce a Doppler velocity power
spectrum. Another sequence of 7168 pulses (calculated as <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>npts</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) is transmitted and processed to produce another Doppler
velocity power spectrum. After producing three power spectra (represented by <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>spc</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), the three power spectra are averaged and saved to disc. The
option of calculating a median spectrum or statistically averaging the three spectra (as discussed in Merritt, 1995) in order to remove transient signals
(e.g. birds or other flying objects passing through the radar beam) was not implemented. A total of 21 504 pulses <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>pts</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>spc</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are transmitted per dwell and a 100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> inter-pulse period yields a 2.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> dwell. For each Doppler velocity spectrum,
the first three spectrum moments (i.e. signal-to-noise ratio, mean radial velocity, and spectrum width) are estimated using the manufacturer's single
peak processing routine with integration limits bounded by the Nyquist velocities <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>Nyquist</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The average spectra and the moments are
saved to disc.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d1e1322">RWP operating periods with consistent hardware.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Period</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Start</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">End</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Hardware version</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Operating modes</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">22 March 2011</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">31 March 2014</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Radar hardware #1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Precipitation</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">B</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1 April 2014</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">14 July 2015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Radar hardware #1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Precipitation and wind</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">15 July 2015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">24 September 2015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Hardware failure</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">No data collected</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">C</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">25 September 2015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">10 April 2017</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Radar hardware #2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Precipitation and wind</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">–</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">11 April 2017</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">5 June 2017</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Hardware failure</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">No data collected</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">D</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">6 June 2017</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">10 March 2019</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Radar hardware #3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Precipitation and wind</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">E</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">11 March 2019</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">18 August 2019</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Radar hardware #3</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Precipitation</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><?xmltex \gdef\@currentlabel{2}?></table-wrap>

      <p id="d1e1493">Between 2011 and 2019, the RWP had two hardware failures. In 2015, the phase shifter module controlling the beam-pointing direction failed due to age
and overuse. A new phase shifter module was installed. In 2017, the final amplifier in the transmitter module failed, and several relays failed in the
phase shifter module. The transmitter module was replaced with a used Vaisala unit scavenged from a newer RWP, and the relays were replaced. Since
calibration constants change with ageing and changing hardware, the RWP dataset is divided into five calibration periods as listed in Table 2.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>Surface disdrometer</title>
      <?pagebreak page2384?><p id="d1e1505">A 2-dimensional video disdrometer (VDIS) manufactured by Joanneum Research in Graz, Austria (Schönhuber et al., 2008), was deployed about
100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from the RWP at the SGP Central Facility (Wang et al., 2021; ARM, 2011). The VDIS uses two orthogonal pointing cameras in the horizontal
plane to detect raindrops falling through a 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> square opening and then estimates the raindrop number concentration with a 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
temporal resolution (Tokay et al., 2001, 2013). Radar reflectivity factors assuming Rayleigh scattering were calculated using PyDisdrometer routines
(Hardin and Guy, 2014), as used in previous studies using VDIS observations (Giangrande et al., 2019).</p>
      <p id="d1e1532">The calibration procedure uses the 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> surface disdrometer radar reflectivity factor to estimate a RWP calibration constant for the
precipitation short-pulse mode using 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> averaged RWP observations at 500 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> altitude. The other RWP modes could be calibrated
directly with the 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> surface disdrometer observations, but to increase the number of samples, the other RWP modes are calibrated using the
precipitation short-pulse mode as a reference and using multiple range gates and nearest-in-time observations. The calibration procedure described
herein is only valid for RWP modes that collect data while it is raining. If the RWP is adaptive and collects precipitation mode data when it is
raining and wind mode data otherwise, then there are not any nearest-in-time precipitation mode observations nor surface disdrometer observations
available to calibrate the wind mode observations. In this situation, the precipitation mode data can be calibrated, but the wind mode data cannot be
calibrated with the disdrometer observations.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Methods</title>
      <p id="d1e1576">The ARM RWP records the average Doppler velocity power spectra, and real-time spectrum moments are calculated on the RWP host computer using the RWP
manufacturer processing routines. These real-time spectrum moments are labelled “a0”  using ARM's file
naming protocols (ARM, 2022) and saved on the ARM archive in netCDF format (ARM 1998a, b, c, d). The recorded spectrum moments are not calibrated
and do not include a radar reflectivity factor estimate. To illustrate the motivation for reprocessing the recorded spectra and recalculating the
spectrum moments, Fig. 1 shows time–height cross-sections of recorded moments including signal-to-noise ratio (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mtext>a0</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)
(Fig. 1a), mean radial velocity (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>mean</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>a0</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (Fig. 1b), and spectrum noise power (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mtext>noise</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>a0</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)
(Fig. 1c) for a rain event on 7 June 2018 using the precipitation short-pulse mode. Examination of the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mtext>a0</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> time–height structure in
Fig. 1a suggests convective rain near 11:45 to 12:00 UTC, followed by stratiform rain after about 12:15 UTC. There are a couple questionable features
in this figure between 11:35 and 12:10 UTC that raise concern about the quality of the real-time spectrum moments. First, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mtext>a0</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
contains speckles of low-magnitude <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> above the height of about 3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Second, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>mean</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>a0</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> has large, unphysical jumps in
velocity over several range gates and over several profiles due to Nyquist velocity aliasing. Third, the spectrum noise power <inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mtext>noise</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>a0</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
which is the denominator in estimating <inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, has large and variable magnitudes at nearly all range gates. The first two features are due to the
online processing codes incorrectly estimating the spectrum moments, and the third feature is due to the broad signal velocity power spectra
occupying a large portion of the velocity power spectrum, causing the noise level estimate to be contaminated by the signal power.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1"><?xmltex \currentcnt{1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d1e1728">Radar wind profiler (RWP) spectrum moments calculated with the real-time processing algorithms and downloaded from the DOE ARM archive. RWP is located at the SGP Central Facility. Observations are from the vertically pointing beam using the precipitation short-pulse mode on 7 June 2018 between 11:20 and 12:40 UTC. <bold>(a)</bold> Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), <bold>(b)</bold> mean radial velocity with positive values moving downward toward the radar (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), and <bold>(c)</bold> spectrum noise power (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/2381/2023/amt-16-2381-2023-f01.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e1780">This section describes the five-step RWP calibration procedure. First, the raw Doppler velocity power spectra are adjusted to account for both Nyquist
velocity aliasing (see Sect. 3.1.1) and coherent integration filtering (see Sect. 3.1.2). Second, the spectrum moments are recalculated (see
Sect. 3.1.3). Third, the recalculated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is increased to account for leaking signal power into the noise power to yield an adjusted signal-to-noise
ratio (see Sect. 3.2). Fourth, a calibration constant is determined for the precipitation short-pulse radar beam (defined as the “reference” beam)
by comparing radar reflectivity factors with surface disdrometer observations (see Sect. 3.3). The last step determines relative calibration offsets
between the reference beam and the other four radar beams. The calibration constant for each beam is the combination of the reference beam calibration
constant and that beam's relative calibration offset (see Sect. 3.4). To differentiate between the real-time processed moments and the reprocessed
moments, the former estimates are labelled “a0” and the latter are labelled “revised”.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Doppler velocity power spectrum adjustments and calculating spectrum moments</title>
      <p id="d1e1799">This subsection describes three processing steps: (1) spectrum adjustments due to Nyquist velocity aliasing, (2)<?pagebreak page2385?> spectrum adjustments due to coherent
integration, and (3) recalculating the spectrum moments. Appendix A presents a flow diagram illustrating how these processing steps are applied to a
profile of radar observations.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1.SSS1">
  <label>3.1.1</label><title>Eliminating Nyquist velocity aliasing</title>
      <p id="d1e1809">Nyquist velocity aliasing is when the target radial velocity exceeds the Nyquist velocity, and the target appears to be moving in the opposite
direction. One velocity aliasing mitigation technique is to concatenate two copies of the same Doppler velocity spectrum to remove the artificial
boundary at the Nyquist velocity (Williams et al., 2018). Figure 2 shows an example of velocity aliasing between 5 and 8 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> using
precipitation short-pulse mode Doppler velocity power spectra for a single profile collected on 7 June 2018 at 11:58:20 UTC. The original power
spectra are plotted within the Nyquist velocity (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>Nyquist</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) range of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 14.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, with downward motions having positive
values consistent with raindrop gravitational fall speeds. The original spectra are copied in Fig. 2 to visualize and to mitigate Nyquist velocity
aliasing. Specifically, the original downward motions between 0 and 14.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are copied to upward motions between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>29.2 and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>14.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The original upward motions between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>14.6 and 0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are copied to downward motions between 14.6 and
29.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The red circles in Fig. 2 designate real-time mean radial velocity moments <inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>mean</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>a0</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Note the jump in
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>mean</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>a0</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> near 5.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from downward to upward motion, which is due to the assumption in the real-time signal processing
routines that all signal power is within the Nyquist interval of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>Nyquist</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{2}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d1e1995">Spectra profile at time 11:58:20 UTC on 7 June 2018. Downward velocities have positive values and are approaching the ground-based radar. Original spectra are plotted between Nyquist velocities <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>14.6 and 14.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and are indicated with solid lines. The portion of original spectra with downward motion is copied to be more upward than the Nyquist velocity (i.e. portion labelled “a”), and the portion of original spectra with upward motion is copied to be more downward than the Nyquist velocity (i.e. portion labelled “b”). Red circles designate real-time estimated mean radial velocities, and blue squares denote revised mean radial velocities. Dashed line indicates 0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> velocities. Spectra magnitudes are uncalibrated spectral power density units expressed in decibels (i.e. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mtext>log</mml:mtext><mml:mo>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with units <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/2381/2023/amt-16-2381-2023-f02.png"/>

          </fig>

      <p id="d1e2075">For spectra that have velocity aliasing, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is biased low when using the assumption that all of the signal power is within
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>Nyquist</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. This issue can be visualized in Fig. 3 and shows individual spectra at 6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 3a) and 3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
(Fig. 3b). The signal-to-noise ratio can be estimated using (Riddle et al., 2012):
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><label>1</label><mml:math id="M111" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mtext>log</mml:mtext><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mo>∑</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mtext>start</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mtext>end</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>]</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>v</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>pts</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>v</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mtext>start</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mtext>end</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) are the integration limits indicating the start and end velocities of the power
spectrum <inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) containing signal power (uncalibrated power per (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the velocity bin, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>v</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)
is the velocity bin resolution, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math></inline-formula> is the spectrum mean noise level (uncalibrated power per (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)) (Hildebrand and Sekhon,
1974), and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>pts</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the number of points in the spectrum. The real-time processing routine uses only the spectrum between
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>Nyquist</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to determine the spectrum moments. In Fig. 3b, the maximum magnitude is near 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (downward), the
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mtext>start</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> integration limit is near 0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mtext>end</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> limit stops at the Nyquist velocity of
14.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The spectrum between these integration limits is shaded red and labelled a0 spectrum in Fig. 3. The revised
processing routine uses the extended spectrum that spans between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>Nyquist</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Since the original spectrum is copied into the extended
spectrum, the maximum magnitude peak that occurs near 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (downward) also occurs near <inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>19 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (upward). The revised
processing routine uses information from the previous range gate to select which of the two peaks to process. Appendix A describes the processing
steps using a prior velocity <inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>prior</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to select one of the two peaks. After a peak is selected, the revised processing routine uses the same
search technique as the real-time processing routine, except it uses the extended spectrum illustrated in Figs. 2 and 3. For the spectrum shown in
Fig. 3b, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mtext>start</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> integration limit is the same determined from the real-time processing routine, but the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mtext>end</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> limit extends
past the Nyquist velocity and ends where the spectrum crosses the mean noise level near 20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (downward). The different integration
limits cause the real-time processing method to underestimate both the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and mean radial velocity relative to the dealiased method by 0.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
and 0.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively. As will be seen in the next section, including the incoherent averaging filtering effects will increase these
differences.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d1e2595">Example of integration limits used in the real-time and revised spectrum moment estimation algorithms. Uncalibrated spectral power density expressed in decibels (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) for profile at 11:58:20 UTC on 7 June 2018 at <bold>(a)</bold> 6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <bold>(b)</bold> 3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M144" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Red shading and horizontal blue bars indicate spectral power density used to estimate a0 and revised moments, respectively.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/2381/2023/amt-16-2381-2023-f03.png"/>

          </fig>

      <?pagebreak page2386?><p id="d1e2634">In Fig. 2, between 5.5 and 9 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M145" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>mean</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>a0</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> appears to have upward motion. This is because the true maximum spectrum magnitude
has a downward velocity occurring outside the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>Nyquist</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> boundaries, and the aliased peak has an upward velocity. Figure 3a shows the
velocity power spectrum at 6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the real-time processing routine found integration limits that bound the upward spectrum maximum magnitude
peak near <inline-formula><mml:math id="M150" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>12 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M151" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The integration limits are <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>14.6 (at the Nyquist boundary) and approximately <inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. This
a0 spectrum region is shaded red in Fig. 3a. In contrast, the revised processing routine selected the downward moving peak in the dealiased
spectrum and found integration limits of approximately 11 and 24 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> downward (spectrum region with blue strips). The different
integration limits produce significantly different mean radial velocities of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>mean</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>a0</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> equal to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>10.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>mean</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>revised</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> equal to 17.9 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1.SSS2">
  <label>3.1.2</label><title>Coherent integration adjustment</title>
      <p id="d1e2833">Coherent integration is a signal processing technique that accumulates the radar measured in-phase and quadrature voltages (a.k.a. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mi>I</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> voltages)
over consecutive transmitted pulses. Sinusoidal oscillations with slowly varying phase over the accumulation interval are said to be coherent, and
their accumulated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M163" display="inline"><mml:mi>I</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M164" display="inline"><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> voltages cause an increase in signal power. Conversely, accumulating <inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mi>I</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> voltages over high-frequency
oscillations, including noise fluctuations, will produce lower-magnitude accumulated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M167" display="inline"><mml:mi>I</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M168" display="inline"><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> voltages resulting in smaller signal power. Thus,
coherent integration increases radar detection by acting as a low-pass filter that increases low-frequency signal powers and decreases high-frequency
noise power (Farley, 1985).</p>
      <?pagebreak page2387?><p id="d1e2893">Coherent integration is also known as time-domain averaging (TDA) and is implemented by changing the number of coherent integration samples
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which changes the effective time between transmitted samples and decreases the Nyquist velocity using
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><label>2</label><mml:math id="M170" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>Nyquist</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mtext>IPP</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">λ</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the radar operating wavelength and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M172" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>T</mml:mi><mml:mtext>IPP</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the inter-pulse period (a.k.a. time between transmitted pulses). Coherent
integration also applies a boxcar filter to the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mi>I</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M174" display="inline"><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> voltage time-series samples before integrating, which is equivalent to applying a low-pass
filter to the integrated time series (Wilfong et al., 1999). Since coherent integration is performed before computing the FFT on the complex <inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mi>I</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> voltage samples, the low-pass filter manifests as a reduction in FFT signal power magnitude as a function of velocity <inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and has the form
(Schmidt et al., 1979)
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E3" content-type="numbered"><label>3</label><mml:math id="M178" display="block"><mml:mtable rowspacing="0.2ex" class="split" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>recorded</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>signal</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>expected</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>signal</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mfenced close="]" open="["><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mtext>sin</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>v</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>pts</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mtext>sin</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mfenced close="]" open="["><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>v</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>pts</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>recorded</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>signal</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) is the recorded signal power spectrum at velocity bin <inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>expected</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>signal</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) is the
expected signal power spectrum without any time-domain low-pass filtering effects, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>pts</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the number of complex <inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mi>I</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:mi>Q</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> samples
after coherent integration, which is also the number of velocity bins in the power spectrum after performing the FFT calculation. The ratio
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>v</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> yields integers from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>pts</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>pts</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:math></inline-formula>. Note that the low-pass filter response
function (the expression within the square brackets in Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E3"/>) has a magnitude of one when <inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and decreases with increasing <inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
      <p id="d1e3295">The impact of the TDA low-pass filter can be mitigated by applying a correction factor to the recorded Doppler velocity power spectra, as discussed in
Wilfong et al. (1999). Since the low-pass filter only affects coherent signals, the correction factor should only be applied to the signal portion of
the power spectrum and not to the random noise power. Thus, the TDA-corrected power spectrum <inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>TDA</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) is estimated using
              <disp-formula id="Ch1.E4" content-type="numbered"><label>4</label><mml:math id="M191" display="block"><mml:mtable class="split" rowspacing="0.2ex" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mtext>TDA</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mfenced close="]" open="["><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mtext>sin</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mfenced close="]" open="["><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>v</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>pts</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mtext>sin</mml:mtext><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">π</mml:mi><mml:mfenced close=")" open="("><mml:mfrac><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>v</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>pts</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
            where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>S</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the recorded Doppler velocity power spectrum. For the precipitation short-pulse mode, the correction factor magnitude (the
expression in the square brackets in Eq. <xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E4"/>) at <inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>Nyquist</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is 2.47 in natural units as in Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E4"/>) or 3.9 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in
decibels. Figure 4 shows the recorded power spectra shown in Fig. 3, with the revised spectrum corrected for the TDA filtering expressed in
Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E4"/>). The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and mean radial velocity moments for real-time moments and the revised spectrum are listed in Fig. 4. Comparing the
non-TDA- and TDA-corrected moments for the dealiased spectra at 6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (see Figs. 3a and 4a, respectively) indicates that the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
increased by 7.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the mean radial velocity became more downward by 1.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> when including the TDA filter correction. Note
that the difference in a0 and TDA-corrected mean radial velocities at 6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is 30 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (see Fig. 4a) and is not a
multiple of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>Nyquist</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 29.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). This indicates that simple integer <inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>Nyquist</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> adjustments, as
proposed by Tridon et al. (2013), will not account for improper integration limits used in the real-time processing routines.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 4</label><caption><p id="d1e3649">Similar to Fig. 3, except the revised spectra (blue line and horizontal blue bars) have been TDA-corrected using Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E4"/>).</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/2381/2023/amt-16-2381-2023-f04.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1.SSS3">
  <label>3.1.3</label><title>Calculating spectrum moments</title>
      <p id="d1e3668">After adjusting the recorded spectrum due to Nyquist velocity aliasing and coherent integration effects, the<?pagebreak page2388?> spectrum moments are calculated following
the method and equations presented in Williams et al. (2018) Appendix A. The calculated revised spectrum moments include spectrum signal power
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mtext>signal</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>revised</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), spectrum noise power (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mtext>noise</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>revised</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), signal-to-noise ratio
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mtext>revised</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), spectrum mean radial velocity (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>mean</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>revised</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), spectrum SD
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mtext>revised</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), spectrum width (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>W</mml:mi><mml:mtext>revised</mml:mtext></mml:msup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">σ</mml:mi><mml:mtext>revised</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), spectrum skewness,
and spectrum kurtosis. The dealiasing procedure described in Sect. 3.1.1 produces a spectrum with two peaks (e.g. see Figs. 2 and 3). To determine
which peak to analyse, the processing routine starts at the lowest range gate and calculates a prior velocity <inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>prior</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> that is used to select
a peak in the next range gate. More details of the processing steps are provided in Appendix A.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title>Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) adjustment</title>
      <p id="d1e3850">Signal power is estimated relative to the estimated mean noise power and is quantified with the signal-to-noise ratio <inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. If the noise power
estimate is too large, then the signal-to-noise ratio and the inferred signal power are underestimated. The a0 processed noise power
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mtext>noise</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>a0</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> shown in Fig. 1c had increased magnitudes at nearly all range gates during the convective rain event between approximately 11:35
and 12:10 UTC. This increased noise power is not expected for RWPs because the gain is constant with range so that noise power should be independent
of range. Also, Fig. 2 shows signal power spread over a large fraction of the velocity spectrum. These two features are linked: the broad signal
spectra are causing increased noise power estimates. Specifically, as the signal velocity power spectrum broadens and occupies more of the velocity
spectrum, the noise estimator is biased by the inclusion of signal power. The RWP online signal processing uses the Hildebrand and Sekhon (1974) noise
level estimator to separate noise-only spectral bins from signal-plus-noise spectral bins based on the statistical properties of both populations (for
more details see Merritt, 1995, and Wilfong et al., 1999). If the signal-plus-noise spectral bins are included in the noise-only population, then the
noise level estimate will be biased high, leading to an underestimated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. To correct for this low <inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> bias, a reference noise power
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mtext>noise</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>reference</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) is determined and an adjusted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is estimated using
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E5" content-type="numbered"><label>5</label><mml:math id="M229" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mtext>adjusted</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>revised</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mtext>revised</mml:mtext></mml:msup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mtext>noise</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>revised</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mtext>noise</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>reference</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mtext>revised</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M231" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mtext>noise</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>revised</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are moments calculated in Sect. 3.1.3.</p>
      <p id="d1e3994">The noise power for every spectrum is estimated using the method outlined in Hildebrand and Sekhon (1974). The reference noise power
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mtext>noise</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>reference</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the median noise power derived from all spectra collected on a given day. Figure 5 shows the daily median noise power
for the precipitation short pulse (black plusses) and long pulse (red crosses) for the 8-year dataset. The jump in daily median noise power in
mid-2017 corresponds to replacing the transmitter with a used, yet updated version, from the same RWP vendor. It is interesting to note that the
seasonal noise variation decreased with the updated transmitter and not when the equipment shelter air conditioning system was updated in mid-2016.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5"><?xmltex \currentcnt{5}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 5</label><caption><p id="d1e4012">Daily median noise level for the precipitation short-pulse (black plusses) and long-pulse (red crosses) mode for observations between 2011 and 2019.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/2381/2023/amt-16-2381-2023-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4022">Figure 6 illustrates the impact of adjusting the signal-to-noise ratio with the reference noise power. Figure 6a shows the real-time estimated
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M233" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mtext>a0</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (thick line) and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mtext>noise</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>a0</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (thin line) profiles. The large variations in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mtext>noise</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>a0</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> between 4
and 5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> appear as large and inverse variations in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mtext>a0</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Figure 6b shows the adjusted signal-to-noise ratio using two
methods. The method described in Tridon et al. (2013) uses the real-time moments (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mtext>a0</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>P</mml:mi><mml:mtext>noise</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>a0</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) to estimate the
adjusted signal-to-noise ratio <inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mtext>adjusted</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>a0</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (thick blue line in Fig. 6b). The method described herein recalculates the moments
and then estimates the adjusted signal-to-noise ratio <inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mtext>adjusted</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>revised</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> using Eq. (5) (thin red line). The profile offset in
Fig. 6b is due to different reference noise powers used in the two methods. The <inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mtext>adjusted</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>a0</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> has more variability than
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mtext>adjusted</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>revised</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, indicating that the revised spectra reprocessing method produces smoother, more vertically consistent
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M244" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> vertical profiles than the Tridon et al. (2013) method.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6"><?xmltex \currentcnt{6}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 6</label><caption><p id="d1e4176">Moment profiles at time 11:48:25 UTC on 7 June 2018. <bold>(a)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M245" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and spectrum noise power from real-time spectrum processing routines. <bold>(b)</bold> Adjusted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M246" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> using the a0 moments shown in panel <bold>(a)</bold> (thick blue line) and adjusted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M247" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> using the revised spectral method (thin red line). The adjusted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M248" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> profiles are offset because of different reference noise values.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/2381/2023/amt-16-2381-2023-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<?pagebreak page2389?><sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title>Calibrating reference beam to surface disdrometer</title>
      <p id="d1e4235">The precipitation short-pulse beam is defined as the RWP reference beam, and the radar reflectivity factor <inline-formula><mml:math id="M249" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M250" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dBZ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) for this
beam is estimated from the adjusted signal-to-noise ratio <inline-formula><mml:math id="M251" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mtext>adjusted</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> using
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E6" content-type="numbered"><label>6</label><mml:math id="M252" display="block"><mml:mtable rowspacing="0.2ex" class="split" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mtext>adjusted</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn><mml:mtext>log</mml:mtext><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dBZ</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M253" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M254" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) is range from the radar, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M255" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M256" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) is the calibration constant. To estimate the calibration constant
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M257" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, an initial value of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M258" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> equal to 0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M259" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is selected, and Eq. (6) is used to estimate the RWP
reflectivity factor at all range gates. These initial RWP reflectivity factors at 500 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M260" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">a</mml:mi><mml:mo>.</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mo>.</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">l</mml:mi><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> are averaged into 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M261" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> quantities and
then compared with the 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M262" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> surface disdrometer radar reflectivity factors. Using only disdrometer reflectivity factors between
20 and 40 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M263" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dBZ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, the reflectivity factor differences are calculated for RWP lags between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M264" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M265" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Both positive and negative lags
are needed because the two instruments are separated by approximately 100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M266" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the horizontal wind speed and direction can cause the surface
rain observations to occur before the radar observations at 500 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M267" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> altitude. Figure 7 shows scatter plots and statistics of mean, SD, and
Pearson's correlation coefficient for the 7 June 2018 rain event at nine different lags. For this rain event, the distribution in Fig. 7d is selected
for calibration because it has the highest Pearson's correlation coefficient of 0.95.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><fig id="Ch1.F7" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{7}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 7</label><caption><p id="d1e4480">Scatter plots of reflectivity factor differences between RWP precipitation short-pulse mode (with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M268" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M269" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M270" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and surface disdrometer for different minute lags for the rain event on 7 June 2018. Positive lags indicate RWP shifted to a later time. Lag times for each panel are <bold>(a)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M271" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M272" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>(b)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M273" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M274" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>(c)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M275" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M276" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>(d)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M277" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M278" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>(e)</bold> 0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M279" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>(f)</bold> 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M280" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>(g)</bold> 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M281" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>(h)</bold> 3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M282" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <bold>(i)</bold> 4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M283" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. This rain event had 153 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M284" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> samples with surface disdrometer reflectivity factor between 20 and 40 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M285" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dBZ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Each panel indicates rain event mean difference, standard deviation (SD), and Pearson's correlation coefficient (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M286" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>). Panel <bold>(d)</bold> has the largest Pearson's correlation coefficient and is used for calibrating this event. The calibration constant for this event is <inline-formula><mml:math id="M287" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M288" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M289" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>49 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M290" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=341.433071pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/2381/2023/amt-16-2381-2023-f07.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4706">Using the calibration constant and lag determined from Fig. 7d (i.e. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M291" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M292" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M293" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>49.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M294" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M295" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M296" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">lag</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>),
Fig. 8a shows the time–height cross-section of calibrated RWP precipitation short-pulse mode radar reflectivity factor. Figure 8b shows a time series
of RWP reflectivity factor at 500 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M297" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (red crosses) and the surface disdrometer reflectivity factor (black plusses). The thin blue lines in
Fig. 8b at 20 and 40 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M298" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dBZ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> indicate the reflectivity factor range used for calculating the RWP and disdrometer differences, which are shown in
Fig. 8c. Also shown in Fig. 8c are the statistics for this lag, including lag, number of samples, calibration constant, SD, and Pearson's correlation
coefficient. Figure 8d shows surface disdrometer rain rate <inline-formula><mml:math id="M299" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and mass-weighted mean diameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M300" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The SD of 1.9 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M301" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for
this event is due to spatiotemporal mismatch between the surface disdrometer and radar sample volume as well as measurement uncertainties of both
instruments and is comparable to 1 to 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M302" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> measurement uncertainties of side-by-side surface disdrometers (Tapiador et al., 2017; Wang
et al., 2021). Note that the lag is only used in the calibration procedure and not used as a time offset for any other purpose.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F8"><?xmltex \currentcnt{8}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 8</label><caption><p id="d1e4816">RWP precipitation short-pulse mode and surface disdrometer observations from 7 June 2018 between 11:00 and 16:00 UTC. <bold>(a)</bold> RWP radar reflectivity factor with calibration constant of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M303" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>49.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M304" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>; <bold>(b)</bold> RWP radar reflectivity factor (red crosses) at 500 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M305" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> range with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M306" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M307" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">lag</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and surface VDIS radar reflectivity factor (black plusses); <bold>(c)</bold> reflectivity factor difference (RWP – VDIS) for samples with VDIS reflectivity factor within 20 to 40 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M308" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dBZ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, as indicated with blue thin lines in panel <bold>(b)</bold>; and <bold>(d)</bold> disdrometer rain rate <inline-formula><mml:math id="M309" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and mean diameter <inline-formula><mml:math id="M310" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>D</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Statistics of lag, number of samples, calibration constant, standard deviation (SD), and Pearson's correlation coefficient (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M311" display="inline"><mml:mi>r</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) are shown in panel <bold>(c)</bold>.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/2381/2023/amt-16-2381-2023-f08.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e4920">Figure 9 shows improved moments and calibrated reflectivity factors for the same rain event shown in Fig. 1. The top panel (Fig. 9a) shows the revised
adjusted signal-to-noise ratio (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M312" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mtext>adjusted</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), and the middle panel (Fig. 9b) shows the revised mean radial velocity
(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M313" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>mean</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). Compared to the a0 real-time processed moments, the reprocessed moments in Fig. 9a and b
show improved data quality and uniformity. The calibrated radar reflectivity is shown in Fig. 9c.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F9"><?xmltex \currentcnt{9}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 9</label><caption><p id="d1e4952">Similar to Fig. 1 except RWP spectrum moments for the precipitation short-pulse mode calculated with the revised processing algorithms. <bold>(a)</bold> Signal-to-noise ratio <inline-formula><mml:math id="M314" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mtext>adjusted</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M315" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), <bold>(b)</bold> mean radial velocity <inline-formula><mml:math id="M316" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>mean</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M317" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) with positive values moving downward consistent with raindrop gravitation fall speeds, and <bold>(c)</bold> surface disdrometer calibrated radar reflectivity factor <inline-formula><mml:math id="M318" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M319" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dBZ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/2381/2023/amt-16-2381-2023-f09.png"/>

        </fig>

<?xmltex \floatpos{p}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T3" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{3}?><label>Table 3</label><caption><p id="d1e5045">Expected relative sensitivity of other radar beams compared with the reference precipitation short-pulse beam. Relative sensitivity has four terms in Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E7"/>) and is dependent on range resolution <inline-formula><mml:math id="M320" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, coherent integration <inline-formula><mml:math id="M321" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, number of averaged Doppler velocity power spectra <inline-formula><mml:math id="M322" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>spc</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and elevation angle.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="5">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Radar sensitivity</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Precipitation mode</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col3" nameend="col5" align="center">Wind mode </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Long pulse</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Beam V</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Beam A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Beam B</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Elevation angle</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">90<inline-formula><mml:math id="M323" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">90<inline-formula><mml:math id="M324" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">77<inline-formula><mml:math id="M325" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">77<inline-formula><mml:math id="M326" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Azimuth angle</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">22<inline-formula><mml:math id="M327" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">22<inline-formula><mml:math id="M328" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">22<inline-formula><mml:math id="M329" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">292<inline-formula><mml:math id="M330" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M331" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn><mml:mtext>log</mml:mtext><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mtext>MUT</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mtext>precipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M332" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">16.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">4.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">4.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">4.6</oasis:entry>
       <?xmltex \interline{[5.690551pt]}?></oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M333" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mtext>log</mml:mtext><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>MUT</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M334" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M335" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>2.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">5.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">5.5</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">5.5</oasis:entry>
       <?xmltex \interline{[5.690551pt]}?></oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M336" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn><mml:mtext>log</mml:mtext><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>spc</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>MUT</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>spc</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M337" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.6</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">3.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">3.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">3.0</oasis:entry>
       <?xmltex \interline{[5.690551pt]}?></oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M338" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn><mml:mtext>log</mml:mtext><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>sin⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mtext>el</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M339" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">0.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.0</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M340" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.2</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M341" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>0.2</oasis:entry>
       <?xmltex \interline{[5.690551pt]}?></oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M342" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mtext>relative</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>OtherMode</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M343" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">14.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">13.1</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">12.9</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">12.9</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><?xmltex \gdef\@currentlabel{3}?></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <label>3.4</label><title>Relative calibration constants for other radar beams</title>
      <p id="d1e5508">The radar sensitivity can be adjusted by changing the transmitted pulse length, the number of coherent integrations, and the number of averaged
Doppler velocity spectra. Using the precipitation short-pulse mode as the reference beam, the expected relative change in sensitivity for the other
four radar beams can be estimated using
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E7" content-type="numbered"><label>7</label><mml:math id="M344" display="block"><mml:mrow><?xmltex \hack{\hbox\bgroup\fontsize{9.1}{9.1}\selectfont$\displaystyle}?><mml:mtable rowspacing="0.2ex" class="split" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mtext>relative</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>OtherMode</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn><mml:mtext>log</mml:mtext><mml:mfenced close="]" open="["><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mtext>MUT</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mtext>log</mml:mtext><mml:mfenced open="[" close="]"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>MUT</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn><mml:mtext>log</mml:mtext><mml:mfenced close="]" open="["><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>spc</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>MUT</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>spc</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn><mml:mtext>log</mml:mtext><mml:mo>[</mml:mo><mml:mi>sin⁡</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mtext>el</mml:mtext></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>]</mml:mo><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable><?xmltex \hack{$\egroup}?></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>
          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M345" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Δ</mml:mi><mml:mi>R</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the range resolution, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M346" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>coh</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the number of coherent samples, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M347" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mtext>spc</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the number of averaged power spectra,
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M348" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mtext>el</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the elevation angle from the horizon, and the superscripts PrecipShort and MUT represent the precipitation
short-pulse mode and the mode under test (MUT), respectively. Using the values from Table 1 and Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E7"/>), Table 3 lists the expected relative
sensitivities for the precipitation long-pulse mode and the wind mode. The last term in Eq. (<xref ref-type="disp-formula" rid="Ch1.E7"/>) represents the decrease in gain associated
with beam-pointing direction in phased-array antennas (Balanis, 1997). As the beam-pointing direction deviates from broadside (a.k.a. vertical direction
in the RWP), the projected antenna area decreases, causing the gain to decrease and beam width to increase (Balanis, 1997; Palmer et al., 2022). System
losses and variations in antenna gain cause the measured relative sensitivities to deviate from the expected values listed in Table 3.</p>
      <p id="d1e5684">The reflectivity factor for the other four radar beams follows Eq. (6) with the addition of the relative calibration constant
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M349" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mtext>relative</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>OtherMode</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M350" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and is estimated using
            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E8" content-type="numbered"><label>8</label><mml:math id="M351" display="block"><mml:mtable rowspacing="0.2ex" class="split" displaystyle="true" columnalign="right left"><mml:mtr><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mtext>OtherMode</mml:mtext></mml:msup><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mspace width="0.25em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mtext>adjusted</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>OtherMode</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">20</mml:mn><mml:mtext>log</mml:mtext><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>r</mml:mi><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr><mml:mtr><mml:mtd/><mml:mtd><mml:mrow><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mtext>relative</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>OtherMode</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dBZ</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>.</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:mtd></mml:mtr></mml:mtable></mml:math></disp-formula></p>
      <p id="d1e5783">The negative sign in the bracketed term is because a positive <inline-formula><mml:math id="M352" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mtext>relative</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>OtherMode</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> indicates that this mode is more sensitive than the
precipitation short-pulse mode and will produce a larger <inline-formula><mml:math id="M353" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mtext>adjusted</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>OtherMode</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for the same radar reflectivity factor. Note
that weaker radar reflectivity factors will be detected at further ranges at the expense of possible receiver saturation from large reflectivity
factor targets at close range.</p>
      <?pagebreak page2391?><p id="d1e5813">To estimate relative sensitivities between the other beams and the reference beam, reflectivity factors are estimated at all profiles and range gates
using Eq. (8) with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M354" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mtext>relative</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>OtherMode</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> set to zero and then estimating the differences from nearby precipitation short-pulse mode
observations. Figure 10 shows scatter plots and histograms of reflectivity factor differences for the precipitation long-pulse beam during the 7 June
2018 rain event. Valid observations are constrained to be within the height interval of 800 and 2100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M355" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and precipitation short-pulse
reflectivity factors greater than 30 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M356" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dBZ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Over 13 000 valid samples are used from this event to calibrate the precipitation long-pulse
beam. The mean relative offset is 15.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M357" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for this event, with a SD of 1.3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M358" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The relative calibration constant
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M359" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mtext>relative</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>PrecipLong</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is set to 15.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M360" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and implies that the long-pulse mode is more sensitive and produces a larger
signal-to-noise ratio for the same radar reflectivity factor as expressed in Eq. (8).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F10"><?xmltex \currentcnt{10}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 10</label><caption><p id="d1e5886">Reflectivity factor differences between precipitation long-pulse beam with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M361" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mtext>relative</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>PrecipLong</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M362" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and disdrometer calibrated precipitation short-pulse beam observations for the rain event on 7 June 2018. Observations are limited to heights between 800 and 2100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M363" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and precipitation short-pulse beam reflectivity greater than 30 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M364" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dBZ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. <bold>(a)</bold> Histogram of reflectivity difference (long pulse – short pulse) indicating relative calibration offset, <bold>(b)</bold> relative 2-dimensional count of reflectivity difference, and <bold>(c)</bold> histogram of disdrometer calibrated precipitation short-pulse reflectivity.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/2381/2023/amt-16-2381-2023-f10.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?pagebreak page2392?><p id="d1e5946">Figure 11a and b show the time–height cross-sections of cross-calibrated precipitation short- and long-pulse
reflectivity factors at their native resolution for the 7 June 2018 rain event. Figure 11c shows the precipitation long-pulse relative calibration
offset for each matched short- and long-pulse observation. The relative calibration offsets shown in Fig. 11c are the same samples used to produce
Fig. 10 and indicate the limited height interval used in the comparison to avoid large reflectivity gradients near the radar bright band caused by
melting particles.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F11"><?xmltex \currentcnt{11}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 11</label><caption><p id="d1e5951">Time–height cross-sections for the 7 June 2018 rain event. <bold>(a)</bold> Surface disdrometer calibrated precipitation short-pulse reflectivity factor <inline-formula><mml:math id="M365" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>(b)</bold> cross-calibrated precipitation long-pulse reflectivity factor <inline-formula><mml:math id="M366" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mtext>PrecipLong</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> with <inline-formula><mml:math id="M367" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mtext>relative</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>PrecipLong</mml:mtext></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M368" display="inline"><mml:mo>=</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 15.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M369" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and <bold>(c)</bold> the precipitation long-pulse relative calibration offset for each matched short- and long-pulse observation. Relative calibration offset is only calculated for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M370" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M371" display="inline"><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 30 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M372" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dBZ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and for heights between 800 and 2100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M373" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/2381/2023/amt-16-2381-2023-f11.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e6055">Estimating the relative calibration offsets for the three wind beams follows the same procedure used for estimating the precipitation long-pulse beam
relative calibration offset. As expected, the calibration offsets for the oblique beams have more event-to-event variability than the vertically
pointing wind mode beam and will be discussed further in the next section and shown in Fig. 14.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Results</title>
      <p id="d1e6068">This section explores how the individual rain event precipitation short-pulse beam calibration constants varied over the 8-year record from 22 March
2011 to 18 August 2019. The variation of the relative calibration constants is examined as a function of ageing hardware and a function of changing
radar hardware after equipment failures.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <label>4.1</label><title>Reference beam calibration: event, monthly, and 3-month intervals</title>
      <p id="d1e6078">From 22 March 2011 to 18 August 2019, the precipitation short-pulse beam calibration constant <inline-formula><mml:math id="M374" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was estimated on 340 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M375" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>,
each having at least 120 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M376" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of surface disdrometer reflectivity factor greater than 20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M377" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dBZ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Figure 12 shows <inline-formula><mml:math id="M378" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
for every valid precipitation event using black plus symbols. The calibration constant is approximately <inline-formula><mml:math id="M379" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>50 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M380" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at the beginning of this
record in 2011 and then increases to about <inline-formula><mml:math id="M381" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>35 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M382" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> near the beginning of 2015. There is an abrupt drop in calibration constant near the end
of 2015, and then the calibration constant steadily increases until the end of this dataset in 2019. Snow events were not included in the calibration
procedure.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F12"><?xmltex \currentcnt{12}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 12</label><caption><p id="d1e6160">Precipitation short-pulse beam calibration constant <inline-formula><mml:math id="M383" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M384" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) from March 2011 through July 2019 estimated using individual rain events (black plusses), 1-month interval (blue squares), and 3-month interval (red triangles). Vertical blue and red lines are <inline-formula><mml:math id="M385" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> SD for 1- and 3-month interval calculations, respectively. Mean SDs over the 9-year dataset were 3.6 and 3.0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M386" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for the 1- and 3-month intervals, respectively.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/2381/2023/amt-16-2381-2023-f12.png"/>

        </fig>

      <p id="d1e6203">An increase in calibration constant, without changing operating parameters, indicates the radar sensitivity is degrading. Referring to Eq. (6), if the
reflectivity factor is constant and the measured <inline-formula><mml:math id="M387" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> decreases because of ageing radar hardware, then the calibration constant must
increase. Thus, from early 2011 to mid-2015, the calibration was stable until early 2013, then increased approximately 15 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M388" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> over the next
2 years, indicating a rapid change in calibration. There was a hardware failure in mid-2015.</p>
      <p id="d1e6223">The gaps in measurements in mid-2015 and early 2017 are when the radar was not operating. A new antenna phase shifter module was installed in
September 2015, and the calibration constant dropped by about 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M389" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> relative to the old hardware. In mid-2017, a new radar transmitter and
receiver module was installed, and the mean noise level dropped by about 7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M390" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (see Fig. 5), but the short-pulse beam calibration constant did
not change significantly. The steady increase in calibration constant from 2016 through 2019 suggests an approximate 3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M391" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">yr</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> decrease in
sensitivity for this modified radar. Though not documented publicly, similar decreasing sensitivity rates have been estimated in other NOAA UHF wind
profilers and have been attributed to delamination of the fibreglass patch antenna (Ecklund et al., 1988).</p>
      <p id="d1e6259">The slow change in calibration constant between precipitation events suggests that the disdrometer-to-RWP calibration procedure could be performed
using fixed time intervals instead of individual rain events. To test this hypothesis, calibration constants were determined using all rain events
during 1-month and 3-month intervals (i.e. months of JFM,<?pagebreak page2393?> AMJ, JAS, and OND). The 1- and 3-month calibration constants are plotted in Fig. 12 using
blue squares and red triangles, respectively. The vertical blue and red lines represent 1- and 3-month calibration constant SDs, with mean SDs over the
9-year record equal to 3.6 and 2.9 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M392" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively. These SDs represent variations due to spatiotemporal mismatch of surface disdrometer and
radar measurements, instantaneous measurement uncertainties of both instruments, and ageing hardware over the sampling interval.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <label>4.2</label><title>Relative calibration for each hardware calibration period</title>
      <p id="d1e6278">Since the radar operating parameters did not change during the 2011 to 2019 interval, variations in relative calibration constants will depend on
changes to the radar hardware. This section examines how the precipitation long-pulse and wind mode relative calibration constants evolved with
hardware changes.</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T4" specific-use="star"><?xmltex \currentcnt{4}?><label>Table 4</label><caption><p id="d1e6284">RWP relative calibration constants (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M393" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (SD) relative to precipitation short-pulse mode.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="7">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Period</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Start</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">End</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">Precipitation</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col5" nameend="col7" align="center">Wind mode </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">long pulse</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">Beam V</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">Beam A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">Beam B</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">22 March 2011</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">31 March 2014</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">14.5 (0.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">B</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">1 April 2014</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">14 July 2015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">14.8 (0.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">9.3 (0.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">12.9 (3.1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">19.9 (2.3)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">C</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">25 September 2015</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">10 April 2017</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">14.5 (0.3)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">8.7 (0.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">7.8 (1.1)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">6.5 (1.5)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">D</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">6 June 2017</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">10 March 2019</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">15.4 (0.7)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">9.0 (0.9)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">8.1 (2.6)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">2.1 (2.9)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">E</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">11 March 2019</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">18 August 2019</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">15.5 (0.2)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"/>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><?xmltex \gdef\@currentlabel{4}?></table-wrap>

<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2.SSS1">
  <label>4.2.1</label><title>Changes in precipitation long-pulse relative calibration constants</title>
      <p id="d1e6487">The relative calibration constants for the precipitation long-pulse beam were estimated for every day with at least 1000 precipitation short- and
long-pulse range gate samples between 800 and 2100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M394" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> range and with precipitation short-pulse reflectivity factor greater
than 30 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M395" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dBZ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The lower height limit of 800 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M396" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is to ensure the long-pulse beam observations are beyond the radar blind zone, and the
2100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M397" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> limit is to avoid reflectivity factor gradients near the melting layer. The precipitation long-pulse relative calibration constants were
estimated for the 690 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M398" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> meeting these criteria and are shown in Fig. 13 using black crosses. The dashed lines are the mean relative
calibration values for each stable hardware interval labelled A through E (see Table 2). The relative calibration constant mean and SD for each
interval are listed in Table 4.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F13"><?xmltex \currentcnt{13}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 13</label><caption><p id="d1e6532">Precipitation long-pulse beam relative calibration constant <inline-formula><mml:math id="M399" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>C</mml:mi><mml:mtext>PrecipLong</mml:mtext></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M400" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) from 22 March 2011 through 18 August 2019, estimated using individual rain events (black crosses). Thick dashed lines are mean relative calibration constants (listed in Table 4) for stable hardware intervals labelled A through E as described in Table 2.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/2381/2023/amt-16-2381-2023-f13.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2.SSS2">
  <label>4.2.2</label><title>Changes in wind mode relative calibration constants</title>
      <p id="d1e6569">Similar to the conditions applied when estimating the precipitation long-pulse beam relative calibration constants, the wind mode beams were estimated
for every day with at least 1000 range gate samples between 500 and 2100 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M401" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> range and with precipitation short-pulse reflectivity factor
greater than 30 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M402" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dBZ</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The wind mode has a shorter pulse length than the precipitation long-pulse beam, which enables valid wind observations
down to 500 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M403" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Figure 14 shows the daily relative calibration constants for the three wind beams (black crosses), with thick dashed lines
representing the mean relative calibration constant for each hardware interval. The vertical beam relative calibration constant is fairly stable over
the 2014 to 2019 observation period, with values listed in Table 4. There is more event-to-event variability in the oblique beam relative calibration
constants compared to the vertical beam because there is more horizontal distance between the vertical pointing reference beam and the oblique
beams. A 14<inline-formula><mml:math id="M404" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> off-vertical pointing angle causes approximately 250 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M405" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> horizontal distance between the vertical beam and oblique beam at
1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M406" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> height. Aside from the larger event-to-event variability, the oblique beam mean relative calibration constants change for each radar
hardware configuration. This is probably due to changes in the antenna phase shift module that controls the antenna beam pattern and pointing
direction. Table 4 lists the mean oblique beam relative calibration constants for each hardware configuration.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F14"><?xmltex \currentcnt{14}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure 14</label><caption><p id="d1e6624">Relative calibration constants for wind mode for every rain event from March 2014 through February 2019. <bold>(a)</bold> Vertical beam (beam V, az: 22<inline-formula><mml:math id="M407" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, el: 90<inline-formula><mml:math id="M408" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), <bold>(b)</bold> oblique beam (beam A, az: 22<inline-formula><mml:math id="M409" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, el: 76<inline-formula><mml:math id="M410" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>), and <bold>(c)</bold> oblique beam (beam B, az: 292<inline-formula><mml:math id="M411" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>, el:y76<inline-formula><mml:math id="M412" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>). The thick dashed lines are mean relative calibration constants (listed in Table 4) for stable hardware intervals labelled B, C, and D as described in Table 2.</p></caption>
            <?xmltex \igopts{width=241.848425pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/2381/2023/amt-16-2381-2023-f14.png"/>

          </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<?pagebreak page2394?><sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>5</label><title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d1e6707">This work describes a procedure to calibrate a UHF-band radar wind profiler (RWP) reflectivity factor to surface disdrometer observations. The revised
procedure builds on the method described in Tridon et al. (2013) by correcting the recorded Doppler velocity power spectra due to Nyquist velocity
aliasing and coherent integration bias effects, before recalculating the spectrum moments. The revised method also calibrates the oblique pointing RWP
beams that are used to measure horizontal wind motions.</p>
      <p id="d1e6710">This cross-calibration procedure uses precipitation measurements from one instrument (i.e. surface disdrometer) as the reference dataset and then
calibrates another instrument (i.e. the RWP) using measurements from the same precipitation event. This method cannot identify any biases in
measurements from either instrument, and the difference in measurements also includes instrument measurement uncertainties. To address biases, the
calibration procedure is structured so that a single calibration constant establishes the disdrometer-to-radar calibration. Then, if future
comparisons with another instrument determine that the disdrometer-to-radar calibration is biased, a simple offset can be added to the radar reflectivity
factor.</p>
      <p id="d1e6713">Regarding measurement uncertainties, the SD of the reflectivity factor difference (i.e. SD<inline-formula><mml:math id="M413" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>[</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mtext>PrecipShort</mml:mtext></mml:msup><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mi>Z</mml:mi><mml:mtext>Disdrometer</mml:mtext></mml:msup><mml:mo>]</mml:mo><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> includes
variability due to different measurement technologies and due to spatiotemporal differences between measurements made at the surface and 500 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M414" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
above the ground. The radar-to-disdrometer reflectivity factor difference SDs were similar in magnitude (i.e. approximately 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M415" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) to SDs from
side-by-side surface disdrometers measuring the same precipitation event (Tapiador et al., 2017; Wang et al., 2021). Thus, the reflectivity factor
difference SD is a relative measure indicating the quality of the comparison and is larger than a calibration constant uncertainty.</p>
      <p id="d1e6756">The calibration procedure determined an absolute calibration constant for the precipitation short-pulse beam, which was then called the reference
beam. The relative calibration between this reference beam and all other beams was determined, enabling all beams to be cross-calibrated to the surface
disdrometer, including the RWP oblique pointing beams. The horizontal distance between the vertically pointing reference and oblique pointing beams
caused an increase in event-to-event variability in the oblique beam relative calibration constant, as the two radar beams were observing different
regions of the same precipitation event.</p>
      <p id="d1e6760">The precipitation short-pulse calibration constant changed over the 8-year dataset. The calibration constant tended to increase over time,
corresponding to a decrease in radar sensitivity, consistent with hardware degrading over time. Referencing Eq. (6), degrading hardware will produce
lower <inline-formula><mml:math id="M416" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for the same radar reflectivity factor, which is compensated with a larger calibration constant. The radar sensitivity increased
significantly (i.e. over 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M417" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) when degraded hardware was replaced with new hardware. Between early 2013 and mid-2015, the RWP sensitivity
decreased by about 15 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M418" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, for a rate of about 7 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M419" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">yr</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, before a hardware failure in mid-2015. Between 2016 and 2019, the RWP
radar sensitivity decreased at a rate of about 3 to 4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M420" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">yr</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The approximate 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M421" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">dB</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> calibration SD and the slow change in radar
sensitivity implies that the calibration constant can be computed using many rain events over a 1- or 3-month interval.</p>
      <p id="d1e6830">To promote the calibration of radar wind profilers and other radar systems, the processing codes used in this study are available on a public GitHub
repository (Williams, 2023a) and a public Zenodo repository (Williams, 2023b). This code is being incorporated into the ARM RWP processing suite with
the intent of ARM RWP spectra being reprocessed using this calibration procedure. Also, the 8 years of data processed in this study are available on
the ARM Archive as a PI product (Williams, 2023c).</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><app-group>

<app id="App1.Ch1.S1">
  <?xmltex \currentcnt{A}?><label>Appendix A</label><title/>
      <p id="d1e6843">This appendix describes the processing steps applied to a spectra profile needed to account for Nyquist velocity aliasing (Sect. 3.1.1), account for coherent
integration bias (Sect. 3.1.2), and calculate the spectrum moments (Sect. 3.1.3). As discussed in Sect. 3.1.1, spectrum power from targets with true
radial velocities greater than the Nyquist velocity will appear to be moving in the opposite direction due to velocity aliasing. The Python code
provided in public repositories eliminates velocity aliasing by extending the original spectrum from 0 to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M422" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>Nyquist</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to the velocity range
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M423" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>Nyquist</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M424" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>Nyquist</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (this segment is called “a” in Fig. 2) and copying the segment from <inline-formula><mml:math id="M425" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>Nyquist</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to 0 to the
velocity range <inline-formula><mml:math id="M426" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>Nyquist</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M427" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>Nyquist</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (this segment is called “b”<?pagebreak page2395?> in Fig. 2). One problem created by copying and appending the
original spectrum to itself is that the new spectrum now has two peaks with the same maximum magnitude. One peak is in the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M428" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>Nyquist</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
velocity range, and the other peak is in one of the two extended spectrum velocity ranges. To determine which peak to process, the provided Python code
utilizes a prior velocity <inline-formula><mml:math id="M429" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>prior</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> derived from the previous range gate to select one of the two peaks, which ensures continuity between range
gates.</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{b!}?><fig id="App1.Ch1.S1.F15"><?xmltex \currentcnt{A1}?><?xmltex \def\figurename{Figure}?><label>Figure A1</label><caption><p id="d1e6949">Flow diagram to process one spectra profile as implemented in the provided Python code.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \hack{\hsize\textwidth}?>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=483.69685pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://amt.copernicus.org/articles/16/2381/2023/amt-16-2381-2023-f15.png"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e6960">Figure A1 shows the flow diagram to process one spectra profile as implemented in the provided Python code. The processing diagram starts in box 1 in
the upper left corner of Fig. A1. In box 2, the original spectrum at the lowest range gate is read into memory. The prior velocity <inline-formula><mml:math id="M430" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>prior</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is
set to zero (box 3), which effectively assumes the spectrum velocity peak is not velocity aliased in this first range gate. The original spectrum is
extended to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M431" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>Nyquist</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in box 4. Box 5 identifies the two peaks in the extended spectrum. Using <inline-formula><mml:math id="M432" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>prior</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> as the reference, the
peak closest to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M433" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>prior</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is selected for further processing (box 6). The integration limits <inline-formula><mml:math id="M434" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mtext>start</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M435" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>v</mml:mi><mml:mtext>end</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> define the
region containing signal power and are needed to estimate the spectrum moments (e.g. see Eq. 1). Box 7 estimates the integration limits by
starting at the spectrum peak and moving down both sides of the peak until the spectrum magnitude drops below the mean noise level <inline-formula><mml:math id="M436" display="inline"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math></inline-formula>
(Carter et al., 1995). Box 8 performs the time-domain averaging (TDA) correction, which is only applied to the signal power above <inline-formula><mml:math id="M437" display="inline"><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo mathvariant="normal">‾</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math></inline-formula>
between the integration limits. The spectrum moments are calculated in box 9, and the prior velocity <inline-formula><mml:math id="M438" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mtext>prior</mml:mtext></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is updated in box 10. If the
current range gate is not the last range gate in the profile (box 11), then the next range gate original spectrum is read into memory (box 12), and
processing continues in box 4. If the current range gate is also the last range gate in the profile (box 11), then box 13 is executed and estimates
the adjusted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M439" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at all range gates using Eq. (5). Box 14 estimates the radar reflectivity factor at all range gates. The next profile is
selected in box 15, and processing resumes in box 1.</p><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
</app>
  </app-group><notes notes-type="codeavailability"><title>Code availability</title>

      <p id="d1e7078">The Python code that processes the raw Doppler velocity power spectra is available on GitHub: <uri>https://github.com/ChristopherRWilliams/RWP_Python_moments</uri> (last access: 5 April 2023, Williams, 2023a). This Python source code is also stored in an open repository with digital object identifier <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/Zenodo.7734427" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/Zenodo.7734427</ext-link> (Williams, 2023b).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="dataavailability"><title>Data availability</title>

      <p id="d1e7090">All raw observations used in this study are available online using the DOE ARM data discovery tool: <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1025128" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5439/1025128</ext-link> (ARM, 1998a), <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1025129" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5439/1025129</ext-link> (ARM, 1998b), <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1025136" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5439/1025136</ext-link> (ARM, 1998c), <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1025137" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5439/1025137</ext-link> (ARM, 1998d), and <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1025315" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5439/1025315</ext-link> (ARM, 2011). The calibrated RWP moments produced in this study are available using the DOE ARM data discovery tool:   <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1969962" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5439/1969962</ext-link> (Williams, 2023c).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d1e7115">CRW, PM, and SG conceptualized the study. CRW developed the spectral processing software in the MATLAB language and performed the analysis. JB converted the MATLAB code into Python code. PEJ developed the coherent integration and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M440" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">SNR</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> adjustment methodologies. CRW wrote the paper, and all authors reviewed and edited the paper.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d1e7129">The contact author has declared that none of the authors has any competing interests.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="disclaimer"><title>Disclaimer</title>

      <p id="d1e7135">Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e7141">This research received funding through the US Department of Energy (DOE) Atmospheric System Research (ASR) program under award DE-SC0021345. Additionally, Paul E. Johnston was supported by the NOAA Physical Sciences Laboratory and CIRES through the NOAA cooperative agreement NA17OAR4320101. We recognize and appreciate the work of field technicians deployed year-round to the Southern Great Plains and tasked with keeping these instruments running. The datasets used in this research were provided by the Office of Biological and Environmental Research of the US Department of Energy as part of the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Climate Research Facility.</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d1e7147">This research has been supported by the US Department of Energy Office of Biological and Environmental Research (grant no. DE-SC0021345) and the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Physical Sciences Laboratory (cooperative agreement no. NA17OAR4320101).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d1e7153">This paper was edited by Stefan Kneifel and reviewed by three anonymous referees.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>
Angevine, W. M., Buhr, M. P., Holloway, J. S., Trainer, M., Parrish, D. D., MacPherson, J. I., Kok, G. L., Schillawski, R. D., and Bowlby, D. H.:
Local meteorological features affecting chemical measurements at a North Atlantic coastal site, J. Geophys. Res., 101, 28935–28945, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><?label 2?><mixed-citation>
Angevine, W. M., Grimsdell, A. W., McKeen, S. A., and Warnock, J. M.:
Entrainment results from the Flatland boundary layer experiments, J. Geophys. Res., 103, 13689–13701, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><?label 3?><mixed-citation>ARM: Radar Wind Profiler (915RWPPRECIPMOM), 2011-03-22 to 2019-08-18, Southern Great Plains (SGP) Central Facility, Lamont, OK (C1), Compiled by Muradyan, P., Atmospheric Radiation Measurement user facility, ARM Data Center [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1025128" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5439/1025128</ext-link>, 1998a.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><?label 4?><mixed-citation>ARM:
Radar Wind Profiler (915RWPPRECIPSPEC), 2011-03-22 to 2019-08-18, Southern Great Plains (SGP) Central Facility, Lamont, OK (C1), Compiled by Muradyan, P., Atmospheric Radiation Measurement user facility, ARM Data Center [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1025129" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5439/1025129</ext-link>, 1998b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><?label 5?><mixed-citation>ARM:
Radar Wind Profiler (915RWPWINDMOM), 2014-03-06 to 2019-03-10, Southern Great Plains (SGP) Central Facility, Lamont, OK (C1), Compiled by Muradyan, P., Atmospheric Radiation Measurement user facility, ARM Data Center [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1025136" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5439/1025136</ext-link>, 1998c.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><?label 6?><mixed-citation>ARM:
Radar Wind Profiler (915RWPWINDSPEC), 2014-03-06 to 2019-03-10, Southern Great Plains (SGP) Central Facility, Lamont, OK (C1), Compiled by Muradyan, P., Atmospheric Radiation Measurement user facility, ARM Data Center [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1025137" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5439/1025137</ext-link>, 1998d.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><?label 7?><mixed-citation>ARM:
Video Disdrometer (VDIS), 2011-03-22 to 2019-08-18, Southern Great Plains (SGP) Central Facility, Lamont, OK (C1), Compiled by Wang, D., Atmospheric Radiation Measurement user facility, ARM Data Center [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1025315" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5439/1025315</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><?label 8?><mixed-citation>ARM: Formatting and file naming protocols, Atmospheric Radiation Measurement user facility, <uri>https://www.arm.gov/guidance/datause/formatting-and-file-naming-protocols</uri>, last access: 25 April 2023.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><?label 9?><mixed-citation>
Balanis, C. A.:
Antenna Theory, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 959 pp., ISBN 0-471-59268-4, 1997.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><?label 10?><mixed-citation>
Carter, D. A., Gage, K. S., Ecklund, W. L., Angevine, W. M., Johnston, P. E., Riddle, A. C., Wilson, J. S., and Williams, C. R.:
Developments in UHF lower tropospheric wind profiling at NOAA's Aeronomy Laboratory, Radio Sci., 30, 977–1001, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><?label 11?><mixed-citation>
Chandrasekar, V., Baldini, L., Bharadwaj, N., and Smith, P. L.:
Calibration procedures for global precipitation-measurement ground-validation radars, URSI Radio Science Bulletin, 355, 45–73, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><?label 12?><mixed-citation>Ecklund, W. L., Carter, D. A., and Balsley, B. B.:
A UHF wind profiler for the boundary layer: Brief description and initial results, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 5, 432–441, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(1988)005&lt;0432:AUWPFT&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0426(1988)005&lt;0432:AUWPFT&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 1988.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><?label 13?><mixed-citation>
Farley, D. T.:
On-line data processing techniques for MST radars, Radio Sci., 20, 1177–1184, 1985.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><?label 14?><mixed-citation>
Gage, K. S. and Balsley, B. B.: Doppler radar probling of the clear atmosphere, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 59, 1074–1093, 1978.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><?label 15?><mixed-citation>
Gage, K. S., Williams, C. R., and Ecklund, W. L.:
UHF wind profilers: A new tool for diagnosing tropical convective cloud systems, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 75, 2289–2294, 1994.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><?label 16?><mixed-citation>
Gage, K. S., Williams, C. R., Johnston, P. E., Ecklund, W. L., Cifelli, R., Tokay, A. and Carter, D. A.:
Doppler radar profilers as calibration tools for scanning radars, J. Appl. Meteorol., 39, 2209–2222, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><?label 17?><mixed-citation>Giangrande, S. E., Wang, D., Bartholomew, M. J., Jensen, M. P., Mechem, D. B., Hardin, J. C., and Wood, R.:
Midlatitude oceanic cloud and precipitation properties as sampled by the ARM Eastern North Atlantic Observatory, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 124, 4741–4760, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JD029667" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2018JD029667</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><?label 18?><mixed-citation>Hardin, J. and Guy, N.: PyDisdrometer (PyDSD), Zenodo [code], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.9991" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.9991</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><?label 19?><mixed-citation>Hartten, L. M., Johnston, P. E., Castro, V. M. R., and Pérez, P. S. E.:
Postdeployment calibration of a tropical UHF profiling radar via surface- and satellite-based methods, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 36, 1729–1751, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-18-0020.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JTECH-D-18-0020.1</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><?label 20?><mixed-citation>
Hildebrand, P. H. and Sekhon, R. S.:
Objective determination of the noise level in Doppler spectra, J. Appl. Meteorol., 13, 808–811, 1974.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><?label 21?><mixed-citation>Hogan, R. J., Illingworth, A. J., and Sauvageot, H.:
Measuring crystal size in cirrus using 35- and 94-GHz radars, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 17, 27–37, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(2000)017&lt;0027:MCSICU&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0426(2000)017&lt;0027:MCSICU&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><?label 22?><mixed-citation>Kneifel, S., von Lerber, A., Tiira, J., Moisseev, D., Kollias, P., and Leinonen, J.: Observed relations between snowfall microphysics and triple-frequency radar measurements, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 120, 6034–6055, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023156" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015JD023156</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><?label 23?><mixed-citation>Kollias, P., Puigdomènech Treserras, B., and Protat, A.:
Calibration of the 2007–2017 record of Atmospheric Radiation Measurements cloud radar observations using CloudSat, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 4949–4964, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-4949-2019" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-12-4949-2019</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><?label 24?><mixed-citation>
Mather, J. H. and Voyles, J. W.:
The ARM climate research facility: A review of structure and capabilities, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 94, 377–392, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><?label 25?><mixed-citation>Merritt, D. A.: A Statistical Averaging Method for Wind Profiler Doppler Spectra, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 12, 985–995, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(1995)012&lt;0985:ASAMFW&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0426(1995)012&lt;0985:ASAMFW&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><?label 26?><mixed-citation>Muradyan, P and Coulter, R.:
Radar Wind Profiler (RWP) and Radio Acoustic Sounding System (RASS) instrument handbook, U. S. Department of Energy, Atmospheric Radiation Measurement user facility, DOE/SC-ARM-TR-044, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2172/1020560" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2172/1020560</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><?label 27?><mixed-citation>Myagkov, A., Kneifel, S., and Rose, T.:
Evaluation of the reflectivity calibration of W-band radars based on observations in rain, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 5799–5825, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-5799-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-13-5799-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><?label 28?><mixed-citation>NOAA:
Physical System Laboratory Wind Profiler Network Data and Image Library, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, <uri>https://psl.noaa.gov/data/obs/datadisplay/</uri>, last access: 17 October 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><?label 29?><mixed-citation>Palmer, R., Bodine, D., Kollias, P., Schvartzman, D., Zrnić, D., Kirstetter, P., Zhang, G., Yu, T-Y, Kumjian, M., Cheong, B., Collis, S., Frasier, S., Fulton, C., Hondl, K., Kurdzo, J., Ushio, T., Rowe, A., Salazar-Cerreño, J., Torres, S., Weber, M., and Yeary, M.: A primer on phased array radar technology for atmospheric sciences, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 103, E2391–E2416, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-21-0172.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/BAMS-D-21-0172.1</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><?label 30?><mixed-citation>Protat, A., Bouniol, D., O'Connor, E. J., Baltink, H. K., Verlinde, J., and Widener, K.:
CloudSat as a global radar calibrator, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 28, 445–452, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JTECHA1443.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/2010JTECHA1443.1</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><?label 31?><mixed-citation>Protat, A., Louf, V., Soderholm, J., Brook, J., and Ponsonby, W.:
Three-way calibration checks using ground-based, ship-based, and spaceborne radars, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 915–926, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-915-2022" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-15-915-2022</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><?label 32?><mixed-citation>Radenz, M., Bühl, J., Lehmann, V., Görsdorf, U., and Leinweber, R.:
Combining cloud radar and radar wind profiler for a value added estimate of vertical air motion and particle terminal velocity within clouds, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 5925–5940, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-5925-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-11-5925-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><?label 33?><mixed-citation>Riddle, A. C., Hartten, L. M., Carter, D. A., Johnston, P. E., and Williams, C. R.:
A minimum threshold for wind profiler signal-to-noise ratios, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 29, 889–895, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-11-00173.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JTECH-D-11-00173.1</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><?label 34?><mixed-citation>Rogers, R. R., Ecklund, W. L., Carter, D. A., Gage, K. S., and Ethier, S. A.:
Research applications of a boundary-layer wind profiler, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 74, 567–580, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(1993)074&lt;0567:RAOABL&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0477(1993)074&lt;0567:RAOABL&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 1993.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><?label 35?><mixed-citation>
Schmidt, G., Rüster, R., Czechowsky, P.:
Complementary codes and digital filtering for detection of weak VHF radar signals from the mesosphere, IEEE T. Geosci. Elect., GE-17, 154–161, 1979.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><?label 36?><mixed-citation>Schönhuber, M., Lammer, G., and Randeu, W. L.:
The 2D-Video-Disdrometer, in: Precipitation: Advances in Measurement, Estimation and Prediction, Springer, Heidelberg, Germany, 3–31, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-77655-0_1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/978-3-540-77655-0_1</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><?label 37?><mixed-citation>Tapiador, F. J., Navarro, A., Moreno, R., Jiménez-Alcázar, A., Marcos, C., Tokay, A., Durán, L, Bodoque, J. M., Martín, R., Petersen, W., and de Castro, M.:
On the optimal measuring area for pointwise rainfall estimations: A dedicated experiment with 14 laser disdrometers, J. Hydrometeorol., 18, 753–760, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-16-0127.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JHM-D-16-0127.1</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><?label 38?><mixed-citation>Tokay, A., Kruger, A., and Krajewski, W. F.:
Comparison of drop size distribution measurements by impact and optical disdrometers, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 40, 2083–2097, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(2001)040&lt;2083:CODSDM&gt;2.0.CO;2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/1520-0450(2001)040&lt;2083:CODSDM&gt;2.0.CO;2</ext-link>, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><?label 39?><mixed-citation>Tokay, A., Petersen, W. A., Gatlin, P., and Wingo, M.:
Comparison of raindrop size distribution measurements by collocated disdrometers, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 30, 1672–1690, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-12-00163.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JTECH-D-12-00163.1</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><?label 40?><mixed-citation>Tridon, F., Battaglia, A., Kollias, P., Luke, E., and Williams, C. R.:
Signal postprocessing and reflectivity calibration of the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Program 915-MHz Wind Profilers, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 30, 1038–1054, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-12-00146.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JTECH-D-12-00146.1</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <?pagebreak page2398?><ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><?label 42?><mixed-citation>Wang D., Bartholomew, M., Giangrande, S. E., and Hardin, J. C.:
Analysis of three types of collocated disdrometer measurements at the ARM southern great plains observatory, U. S. Department of Energy, Atmospheric Radiation Measurement user facility, DOE/SC-ARM-TR-275, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2172/1828172" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2172/1828172</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><?label 43?><mixed-citation>
Wilfong, T. L., Merritt, D. A., Lataitis, R. J., Weber, B. L., Wuertz, D. B. and Strauch, R. G.:
Optimal generation of radar wind profiler spectra. J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 16, 723–733, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><?label 44?><mixed-citation>Williams, C. R.: Vertical air motion retrieved from dual-frequency profiler observations, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 29, 1471–1480, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-11-00176.1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1175/JTECH-D-11-00176.1</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><?label 1?><mixed-citation>Williams, C. R.: How much attenuation extinguishes mm-wave vertically pointing radar return signals?, Remote Sens., 14, 1305, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14061305" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/rs14061305</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><?label 45?><mixed-citation>Williams, C. R.: Radar Wind Profiler (RWP) processing codes in Python, GitHub [code], <uri>https://github.com/ChristopherRWilliams/RWP_Python_moments</uri> (last access: 5 April 2023), 2023a.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><?label 46?><mixed-citation>Williams, C. R.: Radar Wind Profiler (RWP): Calculate spectrum moments using Python code, Zenodo [code], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7734427" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5281/zenodo.7734427</ext-link>, 2023b.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><?label 47?><mixed-citation>Williams, C. R.: Calibrated Radar Wind Profiler (RWP) moments from SGP,
Atmospheric Radiation Measurement user facility, ARM Data Center [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1969962" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5439/1969962</ext-link>, 2023.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><?label 48?><mixed-citation>
Williams, C. R., Gage, K. S., Clark, W., and Kucera, P.: Monitoring the reflectivity calibration of a scanning radar using a profiling radar and a disdrometer, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 22, 1004–1018, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><?label 49?><mixed-citation>Williams, C. R., Maahn, M., Hardin, J. C., and de Boer, G.:
Clutter mitigation, multiple peaks, and high-order spectral moments in 35 GHz vertically pointing radar velocity spectra, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 4963–4980, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-4963-2018" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/amt-11-4963-2018</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Calibrating radar wind profiler reflectivity factor using surface disdrometer observations</article-title-html>
<abstract-html/>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
      
Angevine, W. M., Buhr, M. P., Holloway, J. S., Trainer, M., Parrish, D. D., MacPherson, J. I., Kok, G. L., Schillawski, R. D., and Bowlby, D. H.:
Local meteorological features affecting chemical measurements at a North Atlantic coastal site, J. Geophys. Res., 101, 28935–28945, 1996.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
      
Angevine, W. M., Grimsdell, A. W., McKeen, S. A., and Warnock, J. M.:
Entrainment results from the Flatland boundary layer experiments, J. Geophys. Res., 103, 13689–13701, 1998.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
      
ARM: Radar Wind Profiler (915RWPPRECIPMOM), 2011-03-22 to 2019-08-18, Southern Great Plains (SGP) Central Facility, Lamont, OK (C1), Compiled by Muradyan, P., Atmospheric Radiation Measurement user facility, ARM Data Center [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1025128" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5439/1025128</a>, 1998a.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
      
ARM:
Radar Wind Profiler (915RWPPRECIPSPEC), 2011-03-22 to 2019-08-18, Southern Great Plains (SGP) Central Facility, Lamont, OK (C1), Compiled by Muradyan, P., Atmospheric Radiation Measurement user facility, ARM Data Center [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1025129" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5439/1025129</a>, 1998b.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
      
ARM:
Radar Wind Profiler (915RWPWINDMOM), 2014-03-06 to 2019-03-10, Southern Great Plains (SGP) Central Facility, Lamont, OK (C1), Compiled by Muradyan, P., Atmospheric Radiation Measurement user facility, ARM Data Center [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1025136" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5439/1025136</a>, 1998c.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
      
ARM:
Radar Wind Profiler (915RWPWINDSPEC), 2014-03-06 to 2019-03-10, Southern Great Plains (SGP) Central Facility, Lamont, OK (C1), Compiled by Muradyan, P., Atmospheric Radiation Measurement user facility, ARM Data Center [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1025137" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5439/1025137</a>, 1998d.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
      
ARM:
Video Disdrometer (VDIS), 2011-03-22 to 2019-08-18, Southern Great Plains (SGP) Central Facility, Lamont, OK (C1), Compiled by Wang, D., Atmospheric Radiation Measurement user facility, ARM Data Center [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1025315" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5439/1025315</a>, 2011.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
      
ARM: Formatting and file naming protocols, Atmospheric Radiation Measurement user facility, <a href="https://www.arm.gov/guidance/datause/formatting-and-file-naming-protocols" target="_blank"/>, last access: 25 April 2023.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
      
Balanis, C. A.:
Antenna Theory, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 959 pp., ISBN 0-471-59268-4, 1997.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
      
Carter, D. A., Gage, K. S., Ecklund, W. L., Angevine, W. M., Johnston, P. E., Riddle, A. C., Wilson, J. S., and Williams, C. R.:
Developments in UHF lower tropospheric wind profiling at NOAA's Aeronomy Laboratory, Radio Sci., 30, 977–1001, 1995.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
      
Chandrasekar, V., Baldini, L., Bharadwaj, N., and Smith, P. L.:
Calibration procedures for global precipitation-measurement ground-validation radars, URSI Radio Science Bulletin, 355, 45–73, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
      
Ecklund, W. L., Carter, D. A., and Balsley, B. B.:
A UHF wind profiler for the boundary layer: Brief description and initial results, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 5, 432–441, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(1988)005&lt;0432:AUWPFT&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(1988)005&lt;0432:AUWPFT&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 1988.


    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
      
Farley, D. T.:
On-line data processing techniques for MST radars, Radio Sci., 20, 1177–1184, 1985.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
      
Gage, K. S. and Balsley, B. B.: Doppler radar probling of the clear atmosphere, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 59, 1074–1093, 1978.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
      
Gage, K. S., Williams, C. R., and Ecklund, W. L.:
UHF wind profilers: A new tool for diagnosing tropical convective cloud systems, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 75, 2289–2294, 1994.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
      
Gage, K. S., Williams, C. R., Johnston, P. E., Ecklund, W. L., Cifelli, R., Tokay, A. and Carter, D. A.:
Doppler radar profilers as calibration tools for scanning radars, J. Appl. Meteorol., 39, 2209–2222, 2000.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
      
Giangrande, S. E., Wang, D., Bartholomew, M. J., Jensen, M. P., Mechem, D. B., Hardin, J. C., and Wood, R.:
Midlatitude oceanic cloud and precipitation properties as sampled by the ARM Eastern North Atlantic Observatory, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 124, 4741–4760, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JD029667" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JD029667</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
      
Hardin, J. and Guy, N.: PyDisdrometer (PyDSD), Zenodo [code], <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.9991" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.9991</a>, 2014.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
      
Hartten, L. M., Johnston, P. E., Castro, V. M. R., and Pérez, P. S. E.:
Postdeployment calibration of a tropical UHF profiling radar via surface- and satellite-based methods, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 36, 1729–1751, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-18-0020.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-18-0020.1</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
      
Hildebrand, P. H. and Sekhon, R. S.:
Objective determination of the noise level in Doppler spectra, J. Appl. Meteorol., 13, 808–811, 1974.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
      
Hogan, R. J., Illingworth, A. J., and Sauvageot, H.:
Measuring crystal size in cirrus using 35- and 94-GHz radars, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 17, 27–37, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(2000)017&lt;0027:MCSICU&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(2000)017&lt;0027:MCSICU&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 2000.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kneifel, S., von Lerber, A., Tiira, J., Moisseev, D., Kollias, P., and Leinonen, J.: Observed relations between snowfall microphysics and triple-frequency radar measurements, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 120, 6034–6055, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023156" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD023156</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kollias, P., Puigdomènech Treserras, B., and Protat, A.:
Calibration of the 2007–2017 record of Atmospheric Radiation Measurements cloud radar observations using CloudSat, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 12, 4949–4964, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-4949-2019" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-12-4949-2019</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
      
Mather, J. H. and Voyles, J. W.:
The ARM climate research facility: A review of structure and capabilities, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 94, 377–392, 2013.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
      
Merritt, D. A.: A Statistical Averaging Method for Wind Profiler Doppler Spectra, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 12, 985–995, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(1995)012&lt;0985:ASAMFW&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0426(1995)012&lt;0985:ASAMFW&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 1995.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
      
Muradyan, P and Coulter, R.:
Radar Wind Profiler (RWP) and Radio Acoustic Sounding System (RASS) instrument handbook, U. S. Department of Energy, Atmospheric Radiation Measurement user facility, DOE/SC-ARM-TR-044, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2172/1020560" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2172/1020560</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
      
Myagkov, A., Kneifel, S., and Rose, T.:
Evaluation of the reflectivity calibration of W-band radars based on observations in rain, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 13, 5799–5825, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-5799-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-13-5799-2020</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
      
NOAA:
Physical System Laboratory Wind Profiler Network Data and Image Library, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, <a href="https://psl.noaa.gov/data/obs/datadisplay/" target="_blank"/>, last access: 17 October 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
      
Palmer, R., Bodine, D., Kollias, P., Schvartzman, D., Zrnić, D., Kirstetter, P., Zhang, G., Yu, T-Y, Kumjian, M., Cheong, B., Collis, S., Frasier, S., Fulton, C., Hondl, K., Kurdzo, J., Ushio, T., Rowe, A., Salazar-Cerreño, J., Torres, S., Weber, M., and Yeary, M.: A primer on phased array radar technology for atmospheric sciences, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 103, E2391–E2416, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-21-0172.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-21-0172.1</a>, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
      
Protat, A., Bouniol, D., O'Connor, E. J., Baltink, H. K., Verlinde, J., and Widener, K.:
CloudSat as a global radar calibrator, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 28, 445–452, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JTECHA1443.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/2010JTECHA1443.1</a>, 2011.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
      
Protat, A., Louf, V., Soderholm, J., Brook, J., and Ponsonby, W.:
Three-way calibration checks using ground-based, ship-based, and spaceborne radars, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 915–926, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-915-2022" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-915-2022</a>, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
      
Radenz, M., Bühl, J., Lehmann, V., Görsdorf, U., and Leinweber, R.:
Combining cloud radar and radar wind profiler for a value added estimate of vertical air motion and particle terminal velocity within clouds, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 5925–5940, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-5925-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-5925-2018</a>, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
      
Riddle, A. C., Hartten, L. M., Carter, D. A., Johnston, P. E., and Williams, C. R.:
A minimum threshold for wind profiler signal-to-noise ratios, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 29, 889–895, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-11-00173.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-11-00173.1</a>, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
      
Rogers, R. R., Ecklund, W. L., Carter, D. A., Gage, K. S., and Ethier, S. A.:
Research applications of a boundary-layer wind profiler, B. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 74, 567–580, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(1993)074&lt;0567:RAOABL&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0477(1993)074&lt;0567:RAOABL&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 1993.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
      
Schmidt, G., Rüster, R., Czechowsky, P.:
Complementary codes and digital filtering for detection of weak VHF radar signals from the mesosphere, IEEE T. Geosci. Elect., GE-17, 154–161, 1979.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
      
Schönhuber, M., Lammer, G., and Randeu, W. L.:
The 2D-Video-Disdrometer, in: Precipitation: Advances in Measurement, Estimation and Prediction, Springer, Heidelberg, Germany, 3–31, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-77655-0_1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-77655-0_1</a>, 2008.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
      
Tapiador, F. J., Navarro, A., Moreno, R., Jiménez-Alcázar, A., Marcos, C., Tokay, A., Durán, L, Bodoque, J. M., Martín, R., Petersen, W., and de Castro, M.:
On the optimal measuring area for pointwise rainfall estimations: A dedicated experiment with 14 laser disdrometers, J. Hydrometeorol., 18, 753–760, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-16-0127.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-16-0127.1</a>, 2017.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
      
Tokay, A., Kruger, A., and Krajewski, W. F.:
Comparison of drop size distribution measurements by impact and optical disdrometers, J. Appl. Meteorol. Clim., 40, 2083–2097, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(2001)040&lt;2083:CODSDM&gt;2.0.CO;2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0450(2001)040&lt;2083:CODSDM&gt;2.0.CO;2</a>, 2001.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
      
Tokay, A., Petersen, W. A., Gatlin, P., and Wingo, M.:
Comparison of raindrop size distribution measurements by collocated disdrometers, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 30, 1672–1690, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-12-00163.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-12-00163.1</a>, 2013.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
      
Tridon, F., Battaglia, A., Kollias, P., Luke, E., and Williams, C. R.:
Signal postprocessing and reflectivity calibration of the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Program 915-MHz Wind Profilers, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 30, 1038–1054, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-12-00146.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-12-00146.1</a>, 2013.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
      
Wang D., Bartholomew, M., Giangrande, S. E., and Hardin, J. C.:
Analysis of three types of collocated disdrometer measurements at the ARM southern great plains observatory, U. S. Department of Energy, Atmospheric Radiation Measurement user facility, DOE/SC-ARM-TR-275, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2172/1828172" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2172/1828172</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
      
Wilfong, T. L., Merritt, D. A., Lataitis, R. J., Weber, B. L., Wuertz, D. B. and Strauch, R. G.:
Optimal generation of radar wind profiler spectra. J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 16, 723–733, 1999.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
      
Williams, C. R.: Vertical air motion retrieved from dual-frequency profiler observations, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 29, 1471–1480, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-11-00176.1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-11-00176.1</a>, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
      
Williams, C. R.: How much attenuation extinguishes mm-wave vertically pointing radar return signals?, Remote Sens., 14, 1305, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14061305" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14061305</a>, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
      
Williams, C. R.: Radar Wind Profiler (RWP) processing codes in Python, GitHub [code], <a href="https://github.com/ChristopherRWilliams/RWP_Python_moments" target="_blank"/> (last access: 5 April 2023), 2023a.


    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
      
Williams, C. R.: Radar Wind Profiler (RWP): Calculate spectrum moments using Python code, Zenodo [code], <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7734427" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7734427</a>, 2023b.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
      
Williams, C. R.: Calibrated Radar Wind Profiler (RWP) moments from SGP,
Atmospheric Radiation Measurement user facility, ARM Data Center [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.5439/1969962" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5439/1969962</a>, 2023.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
      
Williams, C. R., Gage, K. S., Clark, W., and Kucera, P.: Monitoring the reflectivity calibration of a scanning radar using a profiling radar and a disdrometer, J. Atmos. Ocean. Tech., 22, 1004–1018, 2005.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
      
Williams, C. R., Maahn, M., Hardin, J. C., and de Boer, G.:
Clutter mitigation, multiple peaks, and high-order spectral moments in 35&thinsp;GHz vertically pointing radar velocity spectra, Atmos. Meas. Tech., 11, 4963–4980, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-4963-2018" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-4963-2018</a>, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
