Topic: Texas Electronics TR-525USH or siphoning gauge?

[WX4GPS]

I was wondering if anyone had any opinions, trying to determine if I should go with siphoning or a regular TR-525USW.    I think the USGS is using non siphoning but I am not sure, I will have to take a drone over one.  But it seems spec wise the siphoning is 2% error across the board and the non is 1% up to 2" per hour.   Now I do see a lot of heavy rain showers were we pick up .3" in 15 minutes, but they really dont go into how inaccurate the regular one becomes outside of the 2"/ hr spec.

Curious what any of you went with using this type of gauge and your findings, the price difference is not an issue.

[doubleohwhatever]

If you are going to log or care about rain intensity then a standard bucket is ideal. However, if you care more about total rain received then a siphon bucket is the way to go. Our standard buckets under-report during downpours all the time. During these events, our siphon buckets are always closer to our manual gauges.

The above is assuming you can do routine cleaning. If your station is going to be in the middle of nowhere and won't be cleaned but once or twice a year then I'd go with a standard bucket. Siphon buckets can clog easier.

[DaleReid]

As to general siphon (not the brand you are talking about specifically) there was a Peet Brother's a couple decades ago that emptied with a siphon and a friend who had one was constantly futzing with it to keep it clean of nesting creatures of all sorts.  Maybe the implementation by your manufacturer has eliminated many of those concerns.

I have an RM Young siphon that is pretty good when it rains occasionally (none for over two weeks here) and while evaporation is small, it is a factor especially when temps are in the 90s a lot.  Measuring it when it falls is a great idea (tipping bucket) but I know one of the reasons that Young made a siphon was for unstable platforms, like buoys and such where tipping buckets wouldn't work.

In some instances the contact sonic method (Vaisala WXT sensors) which are amazingly accurate in my experience, measure instantly and no emptying required.  Also there was a variation of having collected water run past a sensor (continuity drop or light beam) which measured a known sized amount of water in a different way.  I can't even give you any names at this time since I don't know if those are even produced any more, or got left in the dust by more reliable methods.

Great discussion, and I appreciate learning from those who comment here.
Dale