01 Dec 2016
01 Dec 2016
Uncertainty budget in snow thickness and snow water equivalent estimation using GPR and TDR techniques
- 1Department of Mathematics and Physics, Roma Tre University, Rome, 00146, Italy
- 2Institute for Applied Remote Sensing, EURAC, Bolzano, 39100, Italy
- 3Department of Land, Environment, Agriculture and Forestry (TeSAF), University of Padova, Legnaro (PD), 35020, Italy
- 4Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, 27100, Italy
- 1Department of Mathematics and Physics, Roma Tre University, Rome, 00146, Italy
- 2Institute for Applied Remote Sensing, EURAC, Bolzano, 39100, Italy
- 3Department of Land, Environment, Agriculture and Forestry (TeSAF), University of Padova, Legnaro (PD), 35020, Italy
- 4Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, 27100, Italy
Abstract. Snow water equivalent is a fundamental parameter for hydrological and climate change studies but its measurement is usually time consuming and destructive. Electromagnetic methods could be a valid alternative to conventional techniques, being fast and non-invasive. In this work we analyze the reliability of a combined GPR/TDR method to estimate snow thickness and snow water equivalent. To estimate GPR accuracy we perform a calibration test where measured and predicted radar data are compared in terms of two-way travel time. Furthermore we implement a complete analysis of the uncertainty budget in order to evaluate the "weight" of each uncertainty on the snow parameters computation chain. We found that GPR, supported by TDR data, is quite reliable as it measures snow thickness and snow water equivalent with an accuracy comparable to that of a traditional method but, in general, with a slightly larger uncertainty.
-
Retraction notice
This preprint has been retracted.
-
Preprint
(1092 KB)
Federico Di Paolo et al.
Interactive discussion


-
RC1: 'Review on Uncertainty budget in snow thickness and snow water equivalent estimation using GPR and TDR techniques', Anonymous Referee #1, 07 Feb 2017
-
AC1: 'Fig.4 - correct', Elena Pettinelli, 17 Feb 2017
-
AC2: 'reply to referee 1', Elena Pettinelli, 21 Feb 2017
-
AC1: 'Fig.4 - correct', Elena Pettinelli, 17 Feb 2017
-
RC2: 'Comments on Uncertainty budget in snow thickness and snow water equivalent estimation using GPR and TDR techniques by Di Paolo et al.', Anonymous Referee #2, 05 Apr 2017
-
EC1: 'Editor decision', Olaf Eisen, 13 Apr 2017
Interactive discussion


-
RC1: 'Review on Uncertainty budget in snow thickness and snow water equivalent estimation using GPR and TDR techniques', Anonymous Referee #1, 07 Feb 2017
-
AC1: 'Fig.4 - correct', Elena Pettinelli, 17 Feb 2017
-
AC2: 'reply to referee 1', Elena Pettinelli, 21 Feb 2017
-
AC1: 'Fig.4 - correct', Elena Pettinelli, 17 Feb 2017
-
RC2: 'Comments on Uncertainty budget in snow thickness and snow water equivalent estimation using GPR and TDR techniques by Di Paolo et al.', Anonymous Referee #2, 05 Apr 2017
-
EC1: 'Editor decision', Olaf Eisen, 13 Apr 2017
Federico Di Paolo et al.
Federico Di Paolo et al.
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
733 | 287 | 110 | 1,130 | 64 | 115 |
- HTML: 733
- PDF: 287
- XML: 110
- Total: 1,130
- BibTeX: 64
- EndNote: 115
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1