It is demonstrated that a comprehensive analysis of rainfall data to give useful agronomic results

should use the daily measurements. Simple methods of analysis are described and are illustrated using

daily rainfall records of 34 years (1951-84) for Kota Bharu ini the north-eastern state of Kelantan

Hassan, Mohamad Nooh

Stern, Rogern N.

Universiti Putra Malaysia Institutional Repository

Pertanika 11(1), f01 - 106 (1988)A Simple Method for Analysing Daily Rainfall DataA Case Study for Kota BharuMOHAMAD NOOH HASSAN I and ROGER D. STERNDepartment ofApplied Statistics,University ofReading, England, RG6 2ANKey words: Gamma distribution; percentage point; dry spell; rainfall totals; threshold.ABSTRAKDitunjukkan bahawa analisis data sukatan hujan yang menyeluruh memerlukan data harlan untukmenghasilkan beberapa keputusan penting dalam bidang agronomi. Kaedah-kaedah analisis cara mudahdihurai dan dijelaskan menggunakan rekod sukatan hujan harian selama 34 tahun (1951-84) bagi KotaBharu, Kelatan.ABSTRACTIt is demonstrated that a comprehensive analysis of rainfall data to give useful agronomic resultsshould use the daily measurements. Simple methods of analysis are described and are illustrated usingdaily rainfall records of34 years (1951-84) for Kota Bharu ini the north-eastern state ofKelantan.INTRODUCTIONRainfall is one of the principal controlling ele-ments in agriculture in the tropics. The success ofcrop establishment and growth depend largely onthe availability of adequate rainfall. The amountof rainfall that is received determines the type ofagriculture that can be carried out and the cropthat can be cultivated in a region.Various aspects of rainfall pattern in Penin-sular Malaysia have been studied by Dale (1959,1960), Nieuwolt (1966), Wycherley (1966) andmore recently by Nieuwolt (1981) and Nieuwoltet al. (1982). In addition, specific investigationsof the occurrence and pattern of rainfall withina specific area have been carried out by arayanan(1967), Chia (1968) and Yap (1973).For agriculture, important aspects whichrelate to rainfall include the days of the startand the end of the rainy season, and hence itslength, plus the rainfall amounts and the risk ofdry spells within the season. In this paper, a 34-year' record (1951-84) of daily rainfall data forKota Bharu are used to illustrate a simple methodof analysis (Stern et al., 1982) to consider aspectssuch as these.MATERIALS AND METHODSThe seasonal distribution of rainfall in PeninsularMalaysia is influenced by the two monsoons. Thenortheast monsoon brings considerable rain tothe eastern part of Peninsular Malaysia in Novem-ber and Decem ber. There is normally little rainduring February and March. From about June toSeptember the general circulation is dominatedby the southwest monsoon which, despite havingcrossed the high mountains of Sumatra, bringsconsiderable rain to all parts of the Peninsula.The Department of Meterological ServicesMalaysia in Petaling Jaya keeps a data bank on291 meterological stations. Thirty-five of thesestations are operated by the Department with19 stations having records of over 30 years. Thelongest record is 56 years and the shortest is justIOn study leave from the Department of Mathematics, Universiti Pertanian Malaysia.Key to authors' name; Hassan, M.N. and Stem, R. D.MOHAMAD NOOH HASSAN AND ROGER D. STERNone year. There are also 114 'agromet' stationsof which all but 38 stations have rainfall recordsof more than 15 years. Another thirty-one stationsare operated by estate managements of which onlytwo have rainfall records as long as 15 years. Therest of the stations are operated by other govern-ment agencies.The daily rainfall data from Kota Bharu weresupplied by the Department of MeteorologicalServices Malaysia. Kota Bharu is located in thenortheastern region of Peninsular Malaysia at alatitude of 6 degrees 10 minutes, longitude of102 degrees 17 minutes. It is 5 meters above sealeve1. The mean annual rainfall for this period(1951-84) was 2961 mm from an average of 138rain days.RESULTSRainfall data are often analysed by calculatingtotals on an annual, monthly, 10- or 7-<lay basisand using these totals as the 'raw' data for subse-quent summaries. We first reviewed methods bywhich such totals could be processed. Thesemethods are equally applicable to the othercharacteristics, such as the start and the end ofthe rains.Analysis ofRainfall TotalsInitial time series plots are useful to indicate anyo!----,-----,-----,----o....-----.-~---,-----,---20:1~~1960 mo 1980 YearFig. 1: Monthly totals for April, May and June at KotaBharu 1951-84 (mm).trends or obvious serial correlation in the data.Figure 1 which uses the rainfall totals for April,May and June is one illustration. No structurewith time was apparent and hence simple sum-maries of the data should be adequate.The boxplots shown in Figure 2 are a con-venient summary of the pattern of rainfall throughthe year. In Figure 2, the main 'box' in eachmonth is from roughly the lower to the upperquartile of the data. The line within the box is forthe median. The points marked '+' indicate valuesthat are sufficiently far from the centre that thesedata should be examined in more detail in casethey correspond to errors. Boxplots are simpleexamples of a move in statistics towards a greateremphasis on the exploration and presentation ofdata before summary models are fitted. Otherexamples in climatology are given by Graedel andKleines (1985).~1600140011001000800600400100May .iIIl .lJI ALI) Sep lkt HoY DecMonthsFig. 2: Boxplots for monthly totals at Kota Bharu 1951-84 (mm).Empirical percentage points may be obtainedby simply ordering the totals (Davy et al., 1976).Conventionally the 20th percentile is that valuewhich has 20% of the observations below it, andthe proportion of years receiving more than thisvalue is thus 0.8. From Table 1 it can be seen thatthe 20% point for April totals at Kota Bharu was26 mm. The median (i.e. 50% point) was 72 mmand the 80% point was 115 mm. This method ofsummarising the data is straightforward but, asindicated by the confidence interval in Table 1, theresults are not precisely estimated. Confidencelimits for these percentage points are only given102 PERTANIKA VOL. 11 NO.1, 1988A SIMPLE METHOD FOR ANALYSING DAILY RAINFALL DATArarely, although they are straightforward tocalculate (Bradley, 1968). As an example, theThe monthly data at Kota Bharu based onthe 34 observations derived from each year on theTABLE 1Percentage points and confidence intervals for selected monthlyand annual totals at Kota Bharu for 34 years.TotalusedPercentile(%)Distribution-fitted IAmounts(mm)Distribution-free methodAmounts 95% Conf. lntv.(mm) (mm)April 20 32 26 oto 4250 70 72 38 to 8680 129 115 85 to 226May 20 51 55 25 to 7650 97 115 70 to 15580 166 169 149 to 200June 20 73 56 42 to 9850 120 121 86 to 16780 185 193 162 to 260Annual 20 2245 2135 1846 to 246050 2691 2627 2406 to 298980 3137 3240 2963 to 35881 : Gamma distribution fitted to monthly totals and normal distribution fined to annual totals.Fig. 3: Histograms of rainfall totals (a) annual pnd (b)monthly at Kota Bharu 1951-84 (mm).record, were clearly not symmetrically distributed(e.g Figure 3). Gamma distributions are often used.to fit such data. The results of fitting a gammadistribution to selected monthly rainfall totalsat Kota Bharu are given in Table 1. As an example,the 80% point of April totals is estimated as 129mm after fitting a gamma distribution with a meanof 85 mm and a k value of 1.76.r--r---I-104000nvnllOO(al20Jlapproximate 95% confidence intervals for the 20%point for April totals is 0 mm to 42 mm. Thewidth of such intervals depends on the numberof years of data . It is important that this uncer-tainty is allowed for when interpreting results,particularly when comparing the pattern ofrainfall at different sites.It is alternatively possible to fit a suitabledistribution to the rainfall totals and then toestimate percentage points from this distributionAnnual rainfall totals are often found to beapproximately normally distributed. Figure 3shows that the histogram of annual totals forKota Bharu is fairly symmetrical with a mean of2691 mm and a standard deviation of 530 mm.Using the properties of normal distribution,selected percentage points are calculated (Table 1).The estimates are similar to those from the distri-bution-free method. For example, the 20% pointis estimated as 2245 mm and 2135 mm for thetwo methods, respectively.PERTANlKA YOLo 11 NO.1, 1988 103MOHAMAD NOaH HASSAN AND ROGER D. STERNThe assumption of normality is not approp-riate for 1O-<iay totals. Transformation to normali-ty can be used (Hill and Morgan, 1981). However,this is rarely statisfactory because different trans-formations are usually required for different pe-riods of the year. Some results from using the dis-tribution-free approach to estimate various percen-tage points for 10-<iay totals are shown in Figure4. An alternative is again to fit a gamma distri-bution to the non-zero totals.Fig. 4: Percentage points for 1D-day rainfall total fromKota Bharu 1951-84.Start of the RainsThe analysis of rainfall totals is useful and providesvaluable information but, sadly, this is often allthat is done Many other characteristics of impor-tance to agriculture can be studied by making useof the daily data. The date of the start of the rainsis considered for illustration and a particular exam-ple is used to indic;lte how the results relate toagricultural planning. It is assumed that a recom-mendation is to be made to the tobacco growersto transplant seedlings at the earliest possibledate such that harvesting must be completed by16th September. After this date heavy rains areanticipated, resulting in poor leaf quality.It is assumed that the growth period oftobacco from transplanting to harvesting is appro-xi~ately 110 days. Hence the latest date to trans-plant is 29th May. Different definitions of thestart of the rains may be appropriate for differentsoils or to investigate the sensitivity of the resultsto the definitions used. Here the first definitiondefines the date as the first occasion after 1stMarch with 30 mm or more rain within a 3 dayperiod of which at least 2 days have rain. Thes~cond definition is the same but with 1st Aprilas the earliest possible transplanting date.The results are summarised in Table 2. Iftransplanting is done as soon as possible after 1stMarch then, for example, the median transplantingdate is 26th March. There is a possible trans-planting date before the deadlin.e of 29th Mayin all but 2 of the years. By compariS()n, if trans-plan ting is not undertaken until Ist April, then themedian transplanting date is 1st May and there are6 years which do not meet the deadline. Theseresults merely use a 'distribution free' summary ofthe data. As with the rainfall totals, it is alterna-tively possible to fit a distribution to the plantingdates and then derive results from this distribu-tion. The results above suggest that the I st Marchdefinition is preferred. However in the next sectionwe consider the risk that the transplanting falls,which may change the outcome.Dry SpellsDry spells can be considered in their own right(e.g. Stern et aI., 1982: Stem and Coe, 1982) !Jutare also useful when considering the start of ther~ins. For illustration the latter is considered.We assume tobacco seedlings may need replantmgif a long dry spell occurs in the first 30 days aftertransplanting. A lO-<iay dry spell is chosen and thedefinitions considered in the previous section areextended. Thus the date of successful transplant-ing is defined as the first occasion after I st March(or I st April) with mo~e than 30 mm of rain in3 days of which at least 2 have rain and there isno dry spell of 10 or more days in the next 30days.The overall results from these definitionsare also given in Table 2. For example, with theI st March definition, there is no successful trans-planting date before the 29th May deadline inabout a quarter of the ye.ars, compared with aboutone-third if I st April is the earliest date. However,a comparison of the dates with and without thedry spell condition shows that the first trans-planting failed in almost half of the years withthe I st March definition as compared to about onethird with the I st April. Thus there are alternativerisks to be compared when trying to decide on asuitable transplanting strategy.The above analysis can be taken further since104 PERTANIKA VOL. 11 NO.1, 1988A SIMPLE METHOD FOR ANALYSING DAILY RAINFALL DATATABLE 2Summary of results calculated of the distribution of the dates ofthe start of the rains from the transplanting of tobacco seedlingsTransplanting done afterNo1 MarchConditionalYes1 AprilConditionalNo YesEarliest date 1 Mar 7 Mar 1 Apr 1 Apr20th percentile 9 Mar 22 Mar 9 Apr 30 Apr50th percentile 26 Mar 4 May 1 May 19 May80th percentile 5 May 1 Jun 25 May 20 JunLatest date 29 Jun 7 Sep. 12 Aug 7 SepNo. of years when transplant done after 2 8 6 1229 May (6%) (24%) (18%) (35%)No. of years needing replanting 16 11(47%) (32%)the two definitions used became identical in anyyear when transplanting is not possible untilafter 1st April. Hence to compare them with theI st March definition, it is useful to consider that,there was a transplanting date prior to 1st Aprilin 19 of the 34 years and that replanting was re-quired in 10 of these. In this case the risk of failureis not substantially higher for the early transplan tingdates (i.e. prior to 1st April) compared to the laterdates. The difference in risk is not statisticallysignificant but this may be due to the short lengthof record. The conclusion from this analysis mightbe to recommend the strategy which uses theearlier transplanting date.End of the Growing SeasonDefinitions for the end of the rainy season nor-mally cannot be based solely on rainfall since ameasure of soil water storage is needed to definethe end of the period of crop growth more realisti-cally. Examples are given in Stern et ai. (1982).When that start and end of the rains have beensatisfactorily defined, the length of the rains maybe obtained by subtraction. The pattern of thedistribution of the rainfall lengths can then beinvestigated to provide a guide to the selection ofcrop varieties.DISCUSSIONA comprehensive analysis of rainfall measurementfor agricultural purposes should start with thedaily data. Many aspects of the rainfall regimesuch as the risk of dry spells require this level ofdetail. Some, such as the chance of errosiverainfalls, can benefit from the even greater detailprovided by continuously recording gauges.Unfortunately, published reports on rainfall dataare often based on five-day, ten-day, or monthlyperiods. This applies also to the Malaysian rainfalldata except for a few studies. Narayanan (1967)conducted an analysis of daily rainfall data to lookfor pattern in variatiol1 "f rainfall in the SungeiBuloh area. Daily ranfall Jata from the same areawere used by Yap (1973) to extract spell lengthsand fit distributions to spell lengths. ieuwolt(1981) calculated an Agricultural Rainfall Index(A.R .1.) to classify regions of Peninsular Malaysiaas having long or short term drought and a monthas dry or wet. His classifications were later usedtogether with the combined effects of soil andPERTANIKA VOL. 11 NO.1, 1988 lOSMOHAMAD NOaH HASSAN AND ROGER D. STERNlandform on agricultural activities to establishagro-ecological regions in Peninsular Malaysia(Nieuwolt et al., 1982). These studies clearlyrecognised the importance of analysing dailyrainfall data from which the results should beuseful in agricultural planning.Our aim in this paper is to demonstrate asimple general method of summarising daily rain-fall data which does not involve any new theory.It is merely a recognition that a comprehensiveanalysis of rainfall data can include the summaryof characteristics that are not obtainable fromrainfall totals and that the methods for processingthese characteristics are identical to those usedin the processing of rainfall totals.Some limitations of this method of analysismust also be recognised. It involves finding thevalue of the characteristics of interest for eachyear. Hence, for each characteristic the data foreach year provides just one number. Thus, theonly way to have a large sample is to have a recordthat extends over many years. The method is .simple, but pays for its simplicity by requiringlong records. An example of this limitation wasillustrated above, where the comparison betweenthe two criteria for transplanting could only betentative, from the 34 year record. For furtherdiscussion on the direct method of analysis seeStern et. al. (1982).The limitations of the direct method ofanalysis, particularly given the relatively shortrecords of rainfall data in Malaysia, encourage usto seek an alternative approach. One example ofan alternative approach is described by Sternet al. (1982). This alternative approach emphasizesthe efficient use of the data, permitting a usefulanalysis of short records. The approach is to modelthe daily rainfall itself and, from the model, toderive probabilities of rainfall events. The model-ling approach fitted to Malaysian rainfall datashould be investigated.REFERENCESBRADLEY, J.V. (1968): Distribution-Free StatisticalTest. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.CHIA, L. S. (1968): An analysis of rainfall patterns inSelangor. J. Trap. Geogr., Singapore, 27: 1-18.OALE, W. L. (1959): The rainfall of Malaya, Part 1, J.Trop. Geogr., Sillgapore, 13: 30-32.DALE, W. 1. (1960): The rainfall of Malaya, Part 11.J. Trop. Geogr., Singapore, 14: 11-28.DAVY. E. G., F. MATTEI, and S. I. SOLOMAN, (1976):An Evaluation of Climate and Water Resources forDevelopment in Agriculture in the Sudano-5ahelianZone of West Africa. Special Environmental Report9, World Meteorological Organisation, Geneva,SWitzerland. WMO- 0.459.GRAEDEL, T.E. and B. KLEINER (1985): ExploratoryAnalysis of Atmospheric Data. In Murphy, A, H.and Katz, R. W. (Ed.): Probability, Statistics andDecision Making in the Atmospheric Sciences.Westview Press, London. p. 1-43.HILLS, R. c., and 1. H. T. MORGAN (1981): An in-teractive approach to the analysis of rainfall recordsfor agricultural purposes. Expl. Agric. 17: 1-16.NARAY ANAN, R. (1967): Statistical analysis of rainfallrecords at the PRIM Experimental Station. J. Rubb.Res. Inst. Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 20: 8-22.NIEUWOLT, S. (1966): A comparison of rainfall during1963 and average conditions in Malaya. Erdkunde,20: 171-174.NIEUWOLT, S. (1981): .Agricultural Droughts in Penin-sular Malaysia. M.A.R..DJ., Serdang, 14 pp.NIEUWOLT, S., M. ZAKI GHAZALl, and B. GOPINA·THAN (1982): .Agro-Ecological Regions in Penin- -sular Malaysia. M.A.R.D.I., Serdang. 20 pp.STERN, R. D. and R. COE (1982): The use of rainfallmodels in agricultural planning. Agric. Meteor.26; 35-50.STERN, R.D., M.D. DENNETT and I.C. DALE (1982):Analysis of daily ranfall measurements to give agro-nomically useful results. I. Direct methods. Expl.Agric. 18: 223 -236.WYCHERLEY, P. R. (1966): Rainfall Probability Tablesfor Malaysia. Rubber Research Institute of Malaya.Planting Manual No. 12.YAP, w.e. (1973): The persistence of wet and dry spellsin Sungei Buloh, Selangor. Meteorological Magazine,102 240-245.(Received 24 April, 1987)106 PERTANIKA VOL. 11 NO.1, 1988

A Simple Method for Analysing Daily Rainfall Data

a Case Study for Kota Bharu

http://psasir.upm.edu.my/2532/1/A_Simple_Method_for_Analysing_Daily_Rainfall_Data.pdf

A Simple Method for Analysing Daily Rainfall Data a Case Study for Kota Bharu

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Universiti Putra Malaysia Institutional Repository