The global precipitation measurement mission (GPM) has been in operation for seven years and continues to provide a vast quantity of global precipitation data at finer temporospatial resolutions with improved accuracy and coverage. GPM’s signature algorithm, the integrated multisatellite retrievals for GPM (IMERG) is a next-generation of precipitation product expected for wide variety of research and operational applications. This study evaluates the latest version (V06B) of IMERG and its predecessor, the tropical rainfall measuring mission (TRMM) multisatellite precipitation (TMPA) 3B42 (V7) using ground-based and gauge-corrected multiradar multisensor system (MRMS) precipitation products over the conterminous United States (CONUS). The spatial distributions of all products are analyzed. The error characteristics are further examined for 3B42 and IMERG in winter and summer by an error decomposition approach, which partitions total bias into hit bias, biases due to missed precipitation and false precipitation. The volumetric and categorical statistical metrics are used to quantitatively evaluate the performance of the two satellite-based products. All products show a similar precipitation climatology with some regional differences. The two satellite-based products perform better in the eastern CONUS than in the mountainous Western CONUS. The evaluation demonstrates the clear improvement in IMERG precipitation product in comparison with its predecessor 3B42, especially in reducing missed precipitation in winter and summer, and hit bias in winter, resulting in better performance in capturing lighter and heavier precipitation.

Given the decade-long and highly successful Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM), it is now possible to provide quantitative comparisons between ground-based radars (GRs) and the spaceborne TRMM precipitation radar (PR) with greater certainty over longer time scales in various tropical climatological regions. This study develops an automated methodology to match and compare simultaneous TRMM PR and GR reflectivities at four primary TRMM Ground Validation (GV) sites: Houston, Texas (HSTN); Melbourne, Florida (MELB); Kwajalein, Republic of the Marshall Islands (KWAJ); and Darwin, Australia (DARW). Data from each instrument are resampled into a three-dimensional Cartesian coordinate system. The horizontal displacement during the PR data resampling is corrected. Comparisons suggest that the PR suffers significant attenuation at lower levels, especially in convective rain. The attenuation correction performs quite well for convective rain but appears to slightly overcorrect in stratiform rain. The PR and GR observations at HSTN, MELB, and KWAJ agree to about ±1 dB on average with a few exceptions, whereas the GR at DARW requires +1 to −5 dB calibration corrections. One of the important findings of this study is that the GR calibration offset is dependent on the reflectivity magnitude. Hence, it is proposed that the calibration should be carried out by using a regression correction rather than by simply adding an offset value to all GR reflectivities. This methodology is developed to assist TRMM GV efforts to improve the accuracy of tropical rain estimates, but can also be applied to the proposed Global Precipitation Measurement and other related activities over the globe.

Ground-validation (GV) radar-rain products are often utilized for validation of the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) space-based rain estimates, and, hence, quantitative evaluation of the GV radar-rain product error characteristics is vital. This study uses quality-controlled gauge data to compare with TRMM GV radar rain rates in an effort to provide such error characteristics. The results show that significant differences of concurrent radar–gauge rain rates exist at various time scales ranging from 5 min to 1 day, despite lower overall long-term bias. However, the differences between the radar area-averaged rain rates and gauge point rain rates cannot be explained as due to radar error only. The error variance separation method is adapted to partition the variance of radar–gauge differences into the gauge area–point error variance and radar-rain estimation error variance. The results provide relatively reliable quantitative uncertainty evaluation of TRMM GV radar-rain estimates at various time scales and are helpful to understand better the differences between measured radar and gauge rain rates. It is envisaged that this study will contribute to better utilization of GV radar-rain products to validate versatile space-based rain estimates from TRMM, as well as the proposed Global Precipitation Measurement satellite and other satellites.

This study evaluates space-based rain estimates from the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) satellite using ground-based measurements from the radar (GR) and tipping-bucket rain gauges (TG) over the TRMM Ground Validation (GV) site at Melbourne, Florida. The satellite rain products are derived from the TRMM Microwave Imager (TMI), precipitation radar (PR), and combined (COM) rain algorithms using observations from both instruments. The TRMM satellite and GV rain products are spatiotemporally matched and are intercompared at multiple time scales over the 12-yr period from 1998 to 2009. On monthly and yearly scales, the TG agree excellently with the GR because the GR rain rates are generated using the TG data as a constraint on a monthly basis. However, large disagreements exist between the GR and TG at shorter time scales because of their significantly different spatial and temporal sampling modes. The yearly biases relative to the GR for the PR and TMI are generally negative, with a few exceptions. The COM bias fluctuates from year to year over the 12-yr period. The PR, TMI, and COM are in good overall agreement with the GR in the lower range of rain rates, but the agreement is notably worse at higher rain rates. The diurnal cycle of rainfall is captured well by all products, but the peak satellite-derived rainfall (PR, TMI, and COM) lags the peak from the ground measurements (GR and TG) by ~1 h.

The integrated Multi-satellitE Retrievals for GPM (IMERG) Version V05B and V06B precipitation products from the Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) mission are validated against ground-based observations from the Kwajalein Polarimetric S-band Weather Radar (KPOL) deployed at Kwajalein Atoll in the central Pacific Ocean. Such a validation is particularly important as comprehensive surface measurements over the oceans are practically infeasible, which hampers the identification of possible errors, and improvement of future versions of IMERG and other satellite-based retrieval algorithms. The V05B and V06B IMERG products are validated at their native 0.1°, 30 min resolution from 2014 to 2018 based on both volumetric and categorical metrics. This validation study indicates that precipitation rates from both IMERG V05B and V06B are underestimated with respect to radar surface estimates, but the underestimation is much reduced from V05B to V06B. IMERG V06B outperforms V05B with reduced systematic bias and improved precipitation detectability. The IMERG performance is further traced back to its individual sensors and morphing-based algorithms. The overall underestimation in V05B is mainly driven by the negative relative biases from morphing-based algorithms which are largely corrected in V06B. Imagers perform generally better than sounders because of the usage of low-frequency channels in imagers which can better detect emission signals by the hydrometeors. Among imagers, the GPM Microwave Imager (GMI) and Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer Version 2 (AMSR2) are the best, followed by Special Sensor Microwave Imager/Sounder (SSMIS). Among sounders, the Microwave Humidity Sounder (MHS) is the best, followed by Advanced Technology Microwave Sounder (ATMS) and the Sounder for Atmospheric Profiling of Humidity in the Intertropics by Radiometry (SAPHIR) for V06B. Among all categories, morph-only and IR + morph only perform better than SAPHIR. SAPHIR shows the worst performance among all categories, likely due to its limited channel selection. It is envisaged that these results will improve our understanding of IMERG performance over oceans and aid in the improvement of future versions of IMERG.