Keith (Southend) wrote:
Howard Neil wrote:


But do we need such precision?


Probably not, the important thing is that it records accurately overall,
+0.2 for every say 2.0mm is a 10% over read. It is this calibrating
process that is more important.


I would agree that accuracy better than +10% is important. My earlier
comment was a little short for what I was trying to say. It was
suggested that several gauges be used and the amounts averaged out. All
that would achieve is an average of inaccurate readings. However, there
will still be natural differences in actual rainfall within a locality
and I don't see extreme precision as being necessary. What I think is
more important is consistency along with reasonable accuracy (say + or -
1%?)

--
Howard Neil