• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Adjustment of precipitation measurements using Total Rain weighing Sensor (TRwS) gauges in the cryospheric hydrometeorology observation (CHOICE)system of the Qilian Mountains, Northwest China

    2022-03-26 02:30:38ZHAOYanniCHENRenshengHANChuntanWANGLei
    Journal of Arid Land 2022年3期

    ZHAO Yanni, CHEN Rensheng, HAN Chuntan, WANG Lei

    1 Qilian Alpine Ecology and Hydrology Research Station, Northwest Institute of Eco-Environment and Resources, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou 730000, China;

    2 University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China;

    3 College of Urban and Environment Sciences, Northwest University, Xi'an 710127, China;

    4 College of Geography and Environment, Shandong Normal University, Jinan 250014, China

    Abstract: Precipitation is one of the most important indicators of climate data, but there are many errors in precipitation measurements due to the influence of climatic conditions, especially those of solid precipitation in alpine mountains and at high latitude areas. The measured amount of precipitation in those areas is frequently less than the actual amount of precipitation. To understand the impact of climatic conditions on precipitation measurements in the mountainous areas of Northwest China and the applicability of different gauges in alpine mountains, we established a cryospheric hydrometeorology observation (CHOICE) system in 2008 in the Qilian Mountains, which consists of six automated observation stations located between 2960 and 4800 m a.s.l. Total Rain weighing Sensor (TRwS) gauges tested in the World Meteorological Organization-Solid Precipitation Intercomparison Experiment(WMO-SPICE) were used at observation stations with the CHOICE system. To study the influence of climatic conditions on different types of precipitation measured by the TRwS gauges, we conducted an intercomparison experiment of precipitation at Hulu-1 station that was one of the stations in the CHOICE system. Moreover, we tested the application of transfer functions recommended by the WMO-SPICE at this station using the measurement data from a TRwS gauge from August 2016 to December 2020 and computed new coefficients for the same transfer functions that were more appropriate for the dataset from Hulu-1 station. The new coefficients were used to correct the precipitation measurements of other stations in the CHOICE system. Results showed that the new parameters fitted to the local dataset had better correction results than the original parameters. The environmental conditions of Hulu-1 station were very different from those of observation stations that provided datasets to create the transfer functions. Thus, root-mean-square error (RMSE) of solid and mixed precipitation corrected by the original parameters increased significantly by the averages of 0.135 (353%) and 0.072 mm (111%), respectively. RMSE values of liquid, solid and mixed precipitation measurements corrected by the new parameters decreased by 6%, 20% and 13%, respectively. In addition, the new parameters were suitable for correcting precipitation at other five stations in the CHOICE system. The relative precipitation (RP)increment of different types of precipitation increased with rising altitude. The average RP increment value of snowfall at six stations was the highest, reaching 7%, while that of rainfall was the lowest, covering 3%. Our results confirmed that the new parameters could be used to correct precipitation measurements of the CHOICE system.*Corresponding author: CHEN Rensheng (E-mail: crs2008@lzb.ac.cn)

    Keywords: automatic weather stations; Total Rain weighing Sensors; precipitation correction; transfer function;Qilian Mountains

    1 Introduction

    Precipitation is one of the essential data for climatology, ecology, hydrology, weather forecasting and cryosphere research (Barnett et al., 2005; Christensen et al., 2008; Buisán et al., 2020;Kochendorfer et al., 2021). Accurate precipitation data are necessary for the estimations of water balance, the studies of glacier changes and hydrological processes, and the protection of ecology in mountainous areas (Sheffield et al., 2004; Rasmussen et al., 2012; Nitu et al., 2018; Ding et al.,2020). However, there are significant errors in the observed data of precipitation (Goodison,1978). Previous studies have proved that systematic errors in the measurements of precipitation are mainly caused by wind-induced loss, wetting loss and evaporation loss (Goodison et al., 1981;Sevruk and Klemm, 1989). Factors leading to the undercatch of precipitation include wind speed,different types of gauges, wind shields and the crystal types of precipitation, in which wind is one of the primary reasons for snow undercatch (Sevruk et al., 1991; Sevruk and Nespor, 1994; Yang et al., 1995; Theriault et al., 2012). Moreover, precipitation in high-altitude mountains and boreal regions with long winter seasons is significantly undercatched (Yang et al., 1991; Nalder and Wein, 1998; Chen et al., 2015). To solve the precipitation undercatch issue in the manual measurements and derive standard methods for solid precipitation measurement, World Meteorological Organization (WMO) carried out the intercomparison of solid precipitation measurement from 1985 to 1993. During this experiment, International Organizing Committee(IOC) designated the double fence intercomparison reference (DFIR) as a reference standard for measuring solid precipitation, which includes a manual Tretyakov gauge surrounded by an octagonal vertical double fence. In addition, researchers created transfer functions (adjustments)to correct the measurements of different types of precipitation, which are mainly expressed as a function of wind speed for different types of precipitation (Goodison, 1978; Goodison et al., 1998;Yang et al., 1998, 1999).

    After the first study of WMO solid precipitation measurement intercomparison, various automatic systems measuring snowfall have been designed and used. Weighing gauges are one of the primary types of automated precipitation gauges available (Kochendorfer et al., 2018). The results of WMO's Commission for Instruments and Methods of Observation (CIMO) survey in 2008 showed that there were five types of automatic weighing gauges operated at that time: OTT Pluvio2, T-200B Geonor, TRwS MPS system, VRG101 Vaisala and MRW500 Meteoservis (Nitu and Wong, 2010). Although automatic instruments have many advantages in measuring precipitation, such as real-time and accurate monitoring, the measurement errors of snowfall are often ignored and frequently range from 20% to 50% in windy conditions (Rasmussen et al.,2012). To assess the performance of automated systems in measuring solid precipitation and snow depth in different climate regimes and recommend appropriate automated field reference systems for unattended stations, CIMO initiated and guided the Solid Precipitation Intercomparison Experiment (SPICE) in 2010 (Nitu et al., 2018; Kochendorfer et al., 2021). Compared with previous study of WMO's solid precipitation intercomparison, more experimental fields with various climate regimes and automatic observation instruments were used in the SPICE. In the SPICE, a single-Alter shielded automatic gauge surrounded by an octagonal double fence was named as double fence automatic reference (DFAR) standard for an automatic system (Nitu et al.,2012). In addition, transfer functions for automated measurements have been developed as a function of wind speed and air temperature (Wolff et al., 2015; Kochendorfer et al., 2017a, b). A continuous adjustment function was created by Wolff et al. (2015) to correct the winter precipitation measurement of the Norwegian site of the SPICE. Kochendorfer et al. (2017b)developed and tested the ''universal'' transfer functions using datasets of eight separate sites of the SPICE during winter periods from 2013-2014 to 2014-2015 to minimize errors in the precipitation measurements of single-Alter shielded and unshielded weighing gauges. Moreover,the methods for data quality control and selection of precipitation events were described in detail in Reverdin et al. (2016). Kochendorfer et al. (2018) tested and recommended transfer functions for all WMO-SPICE weighing gauges and shield configurations, which have not been evaluated before. They indicated that previously developed transfer functions could be widely used. The WMO-SPICE transfer functions were evaluated by Smith et al. (2020) using additional data of winter seasons from 2015-2016 to 2016-2017, which were not used to develop transfer functions.The results showed that the performance of these functions varied with sites and shield configurations.

    In China, a precipitation intercomparison experiment between the Chinese standard precipitation gauge (CSPG) and the Hellmann gauge was first carried out at the Tianshan Mountains during the WMO solid precipitation measurement intercomparison from 1985 to 1993(Yang, 1988). During this experiment, Yang et al. (1991) developed the transfer functions of CSPG using the wind speed at the height of 10 m at the Daxigou meteorological station. The achievements of this international precipitation intercomparison experiment laid a foundation for later correction work of observed errors in the precipitation measurements in China. Ren and Li(2007) determined the range of various errors in precipitation measurements by carrying out a precipitation intercomparison experiment at 30 reference stations in China and created a correction method, especially for wind-induced errors. Ye et al. (2007) corrected the measurement errors of CSPG using the long-term daily data during 1951-2004 at 726 meteorological stations in China. In 2008, Chen et al. (2014) established a precipitation intercomparison field (Hulu-1 station) in the Hulu Watershed of the Qilian Mountains to study the influence of complex and variable climatic and environmental conditions on different types of precipitation measurements.At Hulu-1 station, Chen et al. (2015) compared the measurements of rain, snow and mixed precipitation of CSPG with various shields and established adjusted functions for unshielded and single-Alter shielded CSPG using a DFIR shield (CSPGDF) as a reference standard. In 2014, a Total Rain weighing Sensor 204 (TRwS204) equipped with a single-Alter shield (TRwSSA) was installed at Hulu-1 station. After that, Zheng et al. (2018) tested the application of transfer functions of Kochendorfer et al. (2017a) at Hulu-1 station using a TRwSSAgauge, and the reference standard was CSPGDF. However, the performance of functions was difficult to evaluate because of different types of gauges and random errors. The study by Zheng et al. (2018) on the correction of observed errors for TRwS204 was limited by the observation frequency of CSPGDF.Thus, only daily precipitation data can be corrected. In addition, different gauges may produce errors in precipitation measurements, which may increase the uncertainty of correction results.Therefore, an automatic reference standard was necessary to increase the accuracy of correction results for TRwSSAgauges.

    After a reference standard of TRwS204 gauges is constructed in 2016, the hourly measurement of precipitation of TRwSSAgauges can be corrected, and the errors caused by different gauges can be eliminated. To increase the measurement accuracy of TRwS204 gauges and understand the influence of climatic conditions on TRwS204 precipitation measurements, we carried out a precipitation observation intercomparison experiment of TRwS204 gauges at Hulu-1 station in the Hulu Watershed. This experiment was important to correct the measurements of automatic weighing gauges in the Qilian Mountains and to understand observation errors in high mountainous areas. Since previous study only tested the transfer functions of wind speed and air temperature variables, the applicability of all ''universal'' transfer functions recommended by the WMO was tested at this station. This study aimed to understand the impact of climatic conditions on the measurements of TRwS204 gauges of all precipitation types, including rain, snow and the mixture of them. In addition, the application of the ''universal'' transfer functions from Kochendorfer et al. (2017b) was tested using the dataset from TRwSSAgauges. Moreover, we computed new coefficients of the same transfer functions that were more suitable for TRwSSAgauges at the study site. These new parameters could correct the precipitation measurements of other TRwS204 and TRwS504 gauges in the CHOICE system in the Hulu Watershed of the Qilian Mountains, China.

    2 Data and methods

    2.1 CHOICE system

    CHOICE system was established in 2008 in the Hulu Watershed of the Qilian Mountains. The CHOICE system can provide long-term and dense meteorological datasets at altitudes of 2960-4800 m a.s.l., including the datasets of glacier, snow and permafrost hydrology (Han et al.,2018). TRwS gauges including three TRwS204 gauges and four TRwS504 gauges were commonly used to measure precipitation. Each station of this system has a meteorological tower(Fig. 1). These six observation stations, named as Hulu-1-Hulu-6, are shown in Table 1. All seven TRwS gauges were not heated because the batteries would be quickly consumed when gauge inlets were heated, and they could not be replaced in time due to the dangerous road conditions in winter. Antifreeze is necessary for all weighing gauges to ensure that the water collected in the bucket remains in a liquid form and will not damage the instrument (bucket) or induce incorrect data. Machine oil is also needed to reduce evaporation. One of seven TRwS gauges was surrounded by a DFIR shield, and the others were equipped with single-Alter shields. The capacity of TRwS504 was 250 mm, and that of TRwS204 was 750 mm. The orifice areas for TRwS504 and TRwS204 were 500 and 200 cm2, respectively. The wind speed (1405-PK-052, Gill Instruments Limited, UK), air temperature and relative humidity (HMP155A, Vaisala, Inc.,Finland) at 1.5 and 2.5 m heights were measured by automatic instruments at each station.

    Fig. 1 (a), distribution of the six automatic observation stations in the CHOICE system; (b), the layout of the CHOICE system; (c), a single-Alter shielded Total Rain weighing Gauge 204 (TRwSSA); (d), a single-Alter shielded Total Rain weighing Gauge 204 with an octagonal double fence (TRwSDF); (e), an automated meteorological tower (AMT) measuring wind speed, air temperature and relative humidity at 1.5 and 2.5 m heights.

    2.2 Hulu-1 station

    Hulu-1 station (38°16′N, 99°52′E; 2980 m a.s.l.) of the CHOICE system, is located in the flat grassland in the valley and close to the Qilian Alpine Ecology and Hydrology Research Station,Northwest Institute of Eco-Environment and Resources (NIEER) of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, making it convenient for manual precipitation observations. Therefore, we chose this station to carry out the intercomparison experiment of precipitation measurements between manual and automatic gauges and different types of automatic weighing gauges. The altitude difference around this station can reach approximately 1860 m. The average wind speed is low at the station(Table 1), and the average snow depth from August 2016 to December 2020 was about 2 cm.Blowing or drifting snow is rarely observed at the station (Chen et al., 2015). In the present work,we carried out an intercomparison experiment of precipitation measurements using TRwS204 at the station (Chen et al., 2014; Han et al., 2018; Fig. 1a).

    Table 1 Description of each station of the CHOICE system

    The instruments at Hulu-1 station (Fig. 1b) included three CSPGs equipped with different shields,two CSPGs in pits, a single-Alter shielded TRwS204 (TRwSSA; Fig. 1c), a single-Alter shielded TRwS204 surrounded by a DFIR shield (TRwSDF; Fig. 1d) as a reference standard, a Tretyakov shielded Geonor T-200B weighing gauge and two automatic weather stations (Fig. 1b). The height of TRwSSAwas about 0.7 m. The installation height of TRwSDFwas 3 m. The wind speed, air temperature and relative humidity (at 1.5 and 2.5 m heights were measured by automatic sensors in a meteorological tower (AMT-1 in Figure 1e)). Another meteorological tower was used to collect wind speed, air temperature and relative humidity at 0.7 and 10.0 m heights (AMT-2 in Figure 1b).The installation heights of TRwS gauges (about 0.7 m) at other five stations differed from the measurement heights of auxiliary meteorological data (1.5 and 2.5 m in heights), according to the China Meteorological Administration (CMA) standard (CMA, 2007). To correct the measurements of all TRwS gauges in the CHOICE system, all stations used the auxiliary meteorological data at the height of 1.5 m.

    From 2017 to 2020, the average annual precipitation was 497.7 mm, mainly in the warm season(from May to September). At 1.5 m height, the annual mean temperature was 0.9°C, the mean annual relative humidity was 56.2% and the mean annual maximum wind speed was 7.8 m/s.

    2.3 Data analysis

    The manual quality control for all data was performed as follows: (1) data with repeated timestamps were deleted and missing values were filled with ''null'' values; (2) values that exceeding the specified output range of instruments were deleted; (3) 30-min precipitation data recorded by weighing gauges were removed when relative humidity was less than 50%; and (4) 30-min precipitation data less than 0.01 mm were screened out to reduce the effect of other weather types like fog and precipitation in previous hour. In addition, according to the datasets recorded by an observer, we checked whether any data were deleted by mistake. For example, precipitation occasionally occurred when the relative humidity was less than 50%.

    We determined precipitation types manually according to CMA standard (CMA, 2007), and observations were conducted twice a day at 08:00 and 20:00 (LST) at Hulu-1 station of the CHOICE system. However, precipitation and other meteorological data were at half-hourly time scales. The manually observed precipitation types could not meet the needs of this paper. Moreover,because the measurements of precipitation types were not performed in other observation stations,we used 30-min average air temperature (Tair) to determine the precipitation types. This paper evaluated solid precipitation (Tair< -2℃), mixed precipitation (-2℃≤Tair≤2℃) and liquid precipitation (Tair>2℃) (Wolff et al., 2015; Kochendorfer et al., 2017a).

    Because catch efficiency (CE) is the ratio of precipitation measured by TRwSSAto that by TRwSDF, a minimum threshold is needed to constrain errors in TRwSDFmeasurements (Kochendorfer et al., 2017a). This result can reduce the impact of measurement noise while maintaining a large sample size of precipitation events. In the study of Kochendorfer et al. (2017a), precipitation threshold of DFIR iteratively increased from zero in 0.01 mm increase, and the simple linear transfer function was calculated to test each threshold. As shown in Figure 2, for each 0.01 mm increase in the threshold, the number of 30-min rainfall events (n) and standard deviation (σ) of CE function were estimated, and the minimum standard error (SE=σ/n) was found at 0.50 mm.Therefore, the minimum threshold of 30-min rainfall events was 0.50 mm. The minimum TRwSDFthresholds of snowfall and mixed precipitation were also examined using the same method.Using 30-min periods of snow and mixed precipitation recorded by TRwSDFat Hulu-1 station of the CHOICE system, the minimum 30-min thresholds of snow and mixed precipitation were 0.13 and 0.17 mm, respectively. After the above steps, the rain, snow and mixed precipitation events were determined.

    Fig. 2 Impacts of minimum 30-min precipitation threshold on developing transfer functions at Hulu-1 station of the CHOICE system. (a), number of 30-min precipitation events (n) above the threshold; (b), standard deviation(σ) of the linear transfer function error; (c) standard error (SE) of transfer functions. Only rainfall results are shown here.

    By determining the range of CE values, precipitation events were filtered and representative precipitation measurements were selected. Precipitation events with CE values less than 1.30 and greater than 0.50 were selected to test the transfer functions, which could prevent large errors in the correction of results.

    From August 2016 to December 2020, a total of 1551 precipitation events were collected to test and evaluate the transfer functions at Hulu-1 station of the CHOICE system (Table 2). The proportions of rainfall, snowfall and mixed precipitation were 71%, 7% and 22%, respectively.

    2.4 Transfer functions

    The ''universal'' transfer functions were developed with datasets from single-Alter shielded and unshielded Geonor T-200B3 and OTT Pluvio2gauges at eight test stations. Equation 1 is a function of air temperature and wind speed and a simple transformation of sigmoidal transfer function tested by Wolff et al. (2015). The function was introduced by Kochendorfer et al.(2017b):

    wherevis the average wind speed (m/s) andTairis the average air temperature (℃), both measured at the same height. a, b and c are the coefficients fitted to the data. The precipitation types were not needed to discriminate rain, snow and mixed precipitation because the air temperature was used as a parameter in Equation 1. The coefficients a=0.0348, b=1.366 and c=0.779 from Kochendorfer et al. (2017b) were used.The exponential function was developed with wind speed for solid and mixed precipitation.The form of Equation 2 was described as follows (Kochendorfer et al., 2017b):

    Table 2 Comparison of 30-min precipitation accumulations between single-Alter shielded TRwS204 gauge(TRwSSA) and TRwS204 gauge with a DFIR shield (TRwSDF) from August 2016 to December 2020 at Hulu-1 station of the CHOICE system

    where a, b and c are the coefficients fitted to the data. Some observation stations did not include the measurements of precipitation types, and thus30-min averageTairwas used to determine the precipitation types (rain, snow and mixed precipitation) for Equation 2: snowfall appeared atTair<-2°C,rainfall occurred atTair>2°C and mixed precipitation happened at -2°C≤Tair≤2°C(Kochendorfer et al., 2017b).We applied coefficients of mixed-phase (a=0.668, b=0.132 and c=0.339) and snow (a=0.728, b=0.230 and c=0.336) according to Kochendorfer et al. (2017b).

    In addition, the threshold of average wind speed of the two functions was also considered. The threshold of mean wind speed at a gauge height was 7.2 m/s, which can replace the measurements of 30-min mean wind speed exceeding the threshold (Kochendorfer et al., 2017b).

    2.5 Testing for transfer functions

    This paper used different statistics to evaluate the performance of the ''universal'' transfer functions depending on whether the observation station was equipped with the reference standard(TRwSDF).

    Four statistics were used to estimate the errors of corrected measurements at Hulu-1 station:root-mean-square error (RMSE), mean bias (bias), Pearson's coefficient (r) and the percentage of precipitation event with error less than 0.1 mm (PE0.1mm). RMSE could estimate the uncertainty of 30-min observed, corrected TRwSSAmeasurements relative to TRwSDFand evaluated the relative performance of transfer functions. Bias was the difference between average precipitation measurements using test gauge and those using DFAR gauge. Pearson's coefficient was used to evaluate the linear correlation between 30-min TRwSSAmeasurements and TRwSDFreference measurements before and after correction. PE0.1mmwas defined as the percentage of total event counts within threshold of 0.1 mm to the total number of events (Kochendorfer et al., 2017b).This statistic can show how adjustments affect bias and uncertainty in the assessment from event-based perspectives. Kochendorfer et al. (2018) used a 10-fold cross validation when gauges were only tested at one station. This method was used at Hulu-1 station of the CHOICE system and carried out in ten independent iterations. Each iteration used 90% of the data to produce function parameters and the remaining 10% of the data to test transfer functions.The error statistics were taken as the average of all ten iterations.

    Because other five observation stations did not install DFIR standards, the RP increment was used as an indicator to evaluate the correction results from other stations. The equation was described as follows (Zhao et al., 2021):

    where RPsiteis the relative precipitation increment of different stations;Pcoris the corrected precipitation (mm); andPmeais the measured precipitation (mm).

    3 Results

    3.1 Relationship between CE and wind speed

    Relationships between CE and wind speed for rain, snow and mixed precipitation are shown in Figure 3. For liquid precipitation, CE values remained basically unchanged at first and then decreased with increasing 30-min average wind speed (Fig. 3a). When average wind speed was greater than 3 m/s, CE values decreased with the increase in wind speed. When mean wind speeds were between 4 and 6 m/s, the median value of CE was 0.87, a higher value under the high wind speeds. Moreover, many outliers were found in Figure 3a, especially at low wind speeds, under which CE values were significantly scattered. At this observation station, snowfall could occur at air temperatures higher than 0℃, leading to an increased scatter in the dataset. In addition, the lack of rainfall events under the high wind speeds resulted in a decreasing scatter of data with increasing wind speeds.

    Fig. 3 Catch efficiency under different wind speeds for liquid precipitation (a), solid precipitation (b) and mixed precipitation (c). The dataset was observed from August 2016 to December 2020 at Hulu-1 station of the CHOICE system. n, the number of precipitation events. IQR, inter-quartile range.

    For solid precipitation, CE values decreased slowly with increasing 30-min average wind speed,and the scattered points were mainly concentrated in the wind speeds of 1-3 m/s (Fig. 3b). Under high wind speeds (4-6 m/s), the median value of CE was 0.88, which was higher than that of rainfall. Rainfall might also occur when air temperature was below -2℃, which partially explains the scatter of CE values for snowfall. Additionally, similar to the lack of rainfall events under the high wind speeds, there were few snowfall events under the high wind speeds, resulting in decreased scatter of data with increasing wind speed.

    For mixed precipitation, the lessening of CE values was obvious with increasing 30-min average wind speed, but median values of CE were also high when the mean wind speed exceeded 4 m/s (Fig. 3c). When wind speeds were between 5 and 8 m/s, the median CE value of mixed precipitation was 0.85. In addition, data for CE values were also scattered. Rainfall and snowfall could also occur under the range of 30-min average air temperature of mixed precipitation occurrences. Therefore, data scattering depended on the precipitation types.

    3.2 Correlation between TRwSSA and TRwSDF

    As shown in Figure 4, a strong correlation existed between measurements of TRwSSAand TRwSDF, andR2values for all precipitation types were close to 1. Although the scatter points of rainfall plotted close to 1:1 diagonal slope, RMSE value was 0.134, higher than those of solid and mixed precipitation (Fig. 4b, c and d). Moreover, the points of mixed precipitation were more scattered than those of rainfall and snowfall. In general, significant correlations occurred between TRwSSAand TRwSDFirrespective the precipitation types.

    3.3 Testing results

    The dataset from Hulu-1 station was used to fit the new parameters, which is more suitable for TRwSSAgauges. Significant differences were found between adjusted results of the ''universal''transfer functions and those of the new parameters (Fig. 5).

    For liquid precipitation, only Equation 1 could be used to correct measurements (Fig. 5a). The values of RMSE corrected by the original and new parameters both decreased, with the values of 0.130 and 0.126 mm, respectively; the values of adjusted bias using the original and new parameters were both near to 0.000 mm. These results showed that the data of precipitation corrected with the original and new parameters were improved significantly. Although corrected values ofrand PE0.1mmremained unchanged, total liquid precipitation increased, and the difference of adjusted rainfall from reference rainfall was 7.83 mm.

    For mixed precipitation, the accuracy of the results corrected by original parameters decreased,while those adjusted by the new parameters were improved (Fig. 5b). Using the original parameters, the corrected RMSE of Equations 1 and 2 significantly exceeded 0.1 mm, reaching 0.116 and 0.156 mm, respectively, and adjusted values of bias also significantly increased. In addition, PE0.1mmvalues corrected by Equations 1 and 2 decreased to 0.709 and 0.630,respectively. The great differences in environmental conditions at different stations made the''universal'' transfer functions unsuitable for correcting the measurements at Hulu-1 station.However, the transfer functions with the new parameters presented a better performance. The adjusted RMSEs of Equations 1 and 2 were reduced by 11% and 16%, respectively, and the corrected values of bias were both near to 0.000 mm.

    Fig. 4 Correlation between single-Alter shielded TRwS204 gauge (TRwSSA) and TRwS204 gauge with a DFIR shield (TRwSDF) for (a) all precipitation types, (b) liquid, (c) solid and (d) mixed precipitation

    Fig. 5 Root-mean-square error (RMSE), mean bias (Bias), Pearson's coefficient (r) and percentage of precipitation events within the threshold of 0.1 mm (PE0.1mm) of liquid, mixed and solid precipitations for single-Alter shielded TRwS204 gauge (TRwSSA)

    For solid precipitation, the accuracy of the results corrected by the ''universal'' transfer functions decreased, while those by the new parameters were improved (Fig. 5c). After using the original parameters, the adjusted RMSE was greater than 0.160 mm, and the corrected bias absolute values were greater than 0.100 mm. The adjusted PE0.1mmusing Equation 2 reduced by 25% (Fig. 5d). These results indicated that the ''universal'' transfer functions were unsuitable for correcting solid precipitation at Hulu-1 station. The new parameters fitted by local dataset were more suitable for adjusting snowfall. The RMSEs corrected by the new parameters were both lessened by 20%, and the adjusted bias values were both close to 0.000 mm.

    In general, the new parameters fitted to the precipitation measurements at Hulu-1 station showed a better performance, which was calculated by using solid, liquid and mixed precipitation measured by TRwS204 at the station of the CHOICE system. The new coefficients in Equation 1 were a=0.017, b=0.280 and c=0.714, and the range of 30-min average wind speed at 1.5 m height was 0≤v≤6 m/s. The new coefficients in Equation 2 for snowfall were a=0.010, b=0.888 and c=0.966, and those for mixed precipitation were a= -0.010, b= -0.459 and c=1.012. For snowfall,the range of 30-min average wind speed at 1.5 m height was 0≤v≤5 m/s, and for mixed precipitation, the range was 0≤v≤6 m/s. These new coefficients were applied to the CHOICE system to correct rain, snow and mixed precipitation.

    3.4 Application of the new parameters to the CHOICE system

    We first applied the new parameters to TRwS204 and TRwS504 gauges under similar environmental conditions to evaluate the performance of new transfer functions because TRwS504 gauges were mainly installed above 3500 m a.s.l., while the new parameters were obtained from TRwS204 gauges. Whether the new parameters would be applied to TRwS504 gauges at higher altitudes depended on the corrected results. Because the measurements of all precipitation types in the station of the CHOICE system needed to be corrected, tests were carried out with Equation 1. The results of assessment are as follows. The three observation stations,Hulu-1, Hulu-2 and Hulu-3, were similar in elevation and had a predominantly grassland landscape type (Table 1). In addition, the precipitation type at each station was dominated by liquid precipitation, accounting for more than 70% of the total precipitation. During precipitation,these stations had low wind speed and high air temperature (Tables 2 and 3). The correcting results of measurements of TRwS204 and TRwS504 gauges using the new parameters under similar environmental conditions are shown in Figure 6. As can be seen, the three stations had the highest RP values for snowfall and the lowest RP values for rainfall (Fig. 6). The RP values of solid and mixed precipitation at Hulu-3 station were similar to those of solid and mixed precipitation at Hulu-1 station. However, the RP values of liquid precipitation at both stations were much different. The RP values for all precipitation types at Hulu-2 station were higher than those of other stations, especially the RP values for snowfall.

    The new parameters performed better at higher-altitude stations (Hulu-4, Hulu-5 and Hulu-6)(Fig. 6). The RP value of solid precipitation was the highest, while that of liquid precipitation was the lowest. The RP values of different precipitation types increased with increasing altitudes.Taken together, although different environmental conditions could be found among different stations, the new parameters could improve the measurements of rain, snow and mixed precipitation, indicating their applicability to correct the observation of the whole CHOICE system.

    Table 3 Average wind speed and air temperature, maximum wind speed and different types of precipitation at other five stations during precipitation

    Fig. 6 Relative precipitation (RP) increments for six observation stations (Hulu-1, Hulu-2, Hulu-3, Hulu-4,Hulu-5 and Hulu-6) after the correction of the new parameters fitted to the dataset from Hulu-1 station

    4 Discussion

    4.1 Factors impacting precipitation measurements at Hulu-1 station of the CHOICE system

    Hulu-1 station of the CHOICE system has the lowest elevation in the Hulu Watershed. And it is surrounded by high mountains and has a large altitude span, resulting in a low average wind speed.The low elevation and high air temperature lead to a high percentage of liquid precipitation at Hulu-1 station of the CHOICE system. During precipitation, most wind speeds measured at the orifice of TRwSSAwere lower than that measured at 1.5 m height, resulting in the high CE values for liquid, solid and mixed precipitation. In addition, because the average wind speeds during precipitation were mainly concentrated on 0-3 m/s, the scattering of CE values of different types of precipitation decreased with increasing wind speed. A reason for the scattering at low wind speeds may be the influence of wind on the size distributions of different types of particles. Cai et al. (2019) conducted a numerical simulation of wind turbulence for a CSPG (70 cm in height)equipped with Alter and Tretyakov wind shields. The results showed that the vortex core area at the top of the gauge with a Tretyakov shield was smaller than that with an Alter shield at low wind speeds, which was more beneficial to precipitation collection. At Hulu-1 station of the CHOICE system, more turbulent wind fields may exist above the height of TRwSSAunder low wind speeds, affecting the collection efficiency of TRwSSA. In addition, a light precipitation event is defined as the accumulative precipitation below 0.70 mm within a 30-min period (Wang et al.,2017). The light precipitation events accounted for a high proportion when the average wind speed was between 0 and 3 m/s. Among these light precipitation events, light snow and light mixed precipitation events accounted for 96% and 72% of the total precipitation events,respectively, while light rain events accounted for 43% (Fig. 3a). These results showed that light precipitation events, holding a large proportion, might increase data scatter under the influence of wind field above the height of TRwSSA. Moreover, the relationship between particle size and wind around the gauge had a significant impact on the undercatch (Duchon and Essenberg, 2001;Theriault et al., 2012). However, because we had no instruments to study the influence of particle size and the change of wind field, the resultant errors of precipitation measurement could not be quantified. Another reason could be the classification of precipitation types using average air temperature at Hulu-1 station of the CHOICE system. Since Hulu-1 station was located in a mountainous area with a changeable climate, snowfall might be observed at 30-min average air temperature of above 0℃, and rainfall might also be observed at 30-min average air temperature of below 0°C. Therefore, defining 30-min average air temperature range from -2°C to 2°C as mixed precipitation would produce a high number of mixed precipitation events, increasing data scattering. A study has shown that average air temperature of 30-min solid precipitation and 30-min liquid precipitation in the Hulu Watershed are 0°C and 3°C, respectively (Chen et al.,2014). Liu and Chen (2016) used the results of digital photogrammetry to check and correct the threshold of half-hourly air temperature for separating precipitation into rain, snow and mixed precipitation. After two-year (2012-2013) observations of precipitation types at the basin scale,they concluded that air temperature threshold between rain and snow in the Hulu Watershed was usually 0°C, while air temperature threshold between liquid and mixed precipitation was not significant. This suggested that the range of average temperatures used by Kochendorfer et al.(2017b) to classify precipitation types resulted in some uncertainties to the correction and assessment, and increased the scatter of CE values for observed liquid, solid and mixed precipitation. As a result of the above factors, the accuracy of adjustment results of the ''universal''transfer functions from Kochendorfer et al. (2017b) was reduced, while the new parameters suitable for the local dataset had a better performance.

    4.2 Effects of environmental conditions and gauge types on precipitation measurements

    Compared with Hulu-1 station, Hulu-2 and Hulu-3 stations of the CHOICE system had similar environmental conditions but different automatic weighing gauges: TRwS504 at Hulu-2 station,but TRwS204 at Hulu-1 and Hulu-3 stations. The differences between TRwS204 and TRwS504 gauges are orifice areas and capacities. The orifice area of these common-type gauges had little effect on the increase in wind speed (Sevruk and Nespor, 1994) and thus could be ignored in the CHOICE system. However, the instrument sensitivity might be related to the capacity differences of these weighing gauges (Kochendorfer et al., 2018). Kochendorfer et al. (2017a) found higher values of RMSE and lower values of PE0.1mmfor a 1500-mm single-Alter Geonor T-200B gauge than those for a 600-mm single-Alter Geonor T-200B gauge at the same station. The uncertainty arising from the effect of different capacities on gauges was also likely to present during observation and correction. Since it was not clear what caused this uncertainty, we failed to distinguish it from the influences caused by other factors, such as wind and air temperature.However, the new transfer functions could significantly improve the liquid, solid and mixed precipitation measurements at Hulu-2 station. Therefore, TRwS204 and TRwS504 measurements could be adjusted by the new transfer functions. In addition, because the ''universal'' transfer functions from Kochendorfer et al. (2017b) were mainly used to correct solid precipitation, the RP values of snowfall for the three stations (Hulu-1, Hulu-2 and Hulu-3) were the highest. The main reason for the lowest RP values at Hulu-1 station might be the higher rainfall and lower wind speed during precipitation, causing the high CE values of precipitation measurements at this station. Despite the significantly different environmental conditions between those stations and Hulu-1 station, the higher altitude stations (Hulu-4, Hulu-5 and Hulu-6) presented the better performance of new transfer functions. The main factor affecting CE values of TRwS gauges was wind speed at these six stations. Low wind speed during precipitation might constitute the leading factor that allowed the new parameters to be used to correct the measurements at Hulu-4, Hulu-5 and Hulu-6 stations.

    5 Conclusions

    This paper studied the influence of climatic conditions on the measurements of different types of precipitation by a TRwS204 gauge and tested the applicability of the ''universal'' transfer functions from Kochendorfer et al. (2017b) at Hulu-1 station. Moreover, we calculated the new parameters in transfer function better suited to the local dataset and applied them to the entire CHOICE system for performance evaluation.

    At Hulu-1 station, the measured wind speed was not the actual wind speed that affected the precipitation measurements, resulting in the high CE values for the measurements of different types of precipitation at high wind speeds. In addition, the scatter of data decreased with increasing wind speed due to the lack of precipitation events under high wind speeds. The significant scattering of CE under low wind speeds can be attributed to the wind field above the gauge exerted an influence on the distribution of different types of precipitation; furthermore, air temperature ranging from -2°C to 2°C was used for the classification of precipitation types.Therefore, the new parameters were more suitable for correcting the precipitation measurements at Hulu-1 station. The data correction for other stations in the CHOICE system with the new parameters indicated improved measurements of liquid, solid and mixed precipitation. The new parameters can be used to correct the measurements of precipitation for the entire CHOICE system.

    Acknowledgements

    This study was funded by the National Natural Sciences Foundation of China (42171145, 41690141, 41971041,42101120) and the Joint Research Project of Three-River Headwaters National Park, Chinese Academy of Sciences and Qinghai Province, China (LHZX-2020-11). The authors would also thank all the colleagues participating in the field experiments.

    a在线观看视频网站| 久久国产精品人妻蜜桃| 成人精品一区二区免费| 嫩草影视91久久| 久久精品国产清高在天天线| www.www免费av| 简卡轻食公司| 国产精品电影一区二区三区| 一区二区三区高清视频在线| 亚洲av美国av| 久久午夜亚洲精品久久| 精品一区二区三区av网在线观看| 欧美最新免费一区二区三区| 搡老岳熟女国产| 极品教师在线免费播放| 欧美中文日本在线观看视频| 日本熟妇午夜| avwww免费| 免费观看人在逋| 国产成人av教育| 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久| 欧美绝顶高潮抽搐喷水| 美女大奶头视频| 女生性感内裤真人,穿戴方法视频| 男人的好看免费观看在线视频| 欧美另类亚洲清纯唯美| 小蜜桃在线观看免费完整版高清| 韩国av一区二区三区四区| 国产男人的电影天堂91| 亚洲精品一区av在线观看| 精品久久久久久,| 五月玫瑰六月丁香| 久久人人爽人人爽人人片va| 我要看日韩黄色一级片| 亚洲狠狠婷婷综合久久图片| 国产高清视频在线观看网站| 在线免费观看的www视频| 久久这里只有精品中国| 亚洲精品成人久久久久久| 一进一出好大好爽视频| 男人舔奶头视频| 熟女电影av网| 神马国产精品三级电影在线观看| 最好的美女福利视频网| 国产伦精品一区二区三区视频9| 久久久久久伊人网av| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄 | 欧美在线一区亚洲| 欧美日韩中文字幕国产精品一区二区三区| 久久精品综合一区二区三区| 一夜夜www| 欧美zozozo另类| 99在线视频只有这里精品首页| 日本黄色片子视频| 在线播放国产精品三级| 免费在线观看日本一区| 不卡视频在线观看欧美| 999久久久精品免费观看国产| 国产男靠女视频免费网站| 丰满的人妻完整版| 国产一区二区三区在线臀色熟女| 97热精品久久久久久| 国产69精品久久久久777片| 中文资源天堂在线| 最好的美女福利视频网| 天天躁日日操中文字幕| 十八禁国产超污无遮挡网站| 色哟哟哟哟哟哟| 亚洲熟妇中文字幕五十中出| 午夜爱爱视频在线播放| 欧美+日韩+精品| 深夜a级毛片| 搡老妇女老女人老熟妇| 天堂影院成人在线观看| 成年女人看的毛片在线观看| 91久久精品国产一区二区三区| 可以在线观看的亚洲视频| av专区在线播放| 成人国产一区最新在线观看| 亚洲性夜色夜夜综合| 麻豆精品久久久久久蜜桃| 日韩欧美在线乱码| 国内揄拍国产精品人妻在线| 午夜精品在线福利| 欧美潮喷喷水| 无遮挡黄片免费观看| 亚洲av第一区精品v没综合| 中出人妻视频一区二区| 欧美日韩综合久久久久久 | 桃色一区二区三区在线观看| 91在线观看av| 日本 av在线| 中国美女看黄片| 蜜桃亚洲精品一区二区三区| 人人妻人人看人人澡| 亚洲人成网站在线播放欧美日韩| 日韩欧美 国产精品| 最新中文字幕久久久久| 国产一区二区激情短视频| 成人性生交大片免费视频hd| 免费av观看视频| av天堂在线播放| 欧美一区二区亚洲| 欧洲精品卡2卡3卡4卡5卡区| 国产精品久久久久久久电影| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 国产成人aa在线观看| 在线国产一区二区在线| 少妇丰满av| 久久天躁狠狠躁夜夜2o2o| 精品人妻一区二区三区麻豆 | 又粗又爽又猛毛片免费看| a级毛片免费高清观看在线播放| xxxwww97欧美| 日本成人三级电影网站| 男女边吃奶边做爰视频| 成人二区视频| 在线天堂最新版资源| 国产高清视频在线观看网站| 干丝袜人妻中文字幕| 日韩精品中文字幕看吧| АⅤ资源中文在线天堂| 99久国产av精品| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av| 美女黄网站色视频| 国产视频内射| 国产亚洲精品久久久久久毛片| 国产高清视频在线观看网站| 国产v大片淫在线免费观看| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av| 国产精品人妻久久久影院| 乱系列少妇在线播放| 午夜日韩欧美国产| 亚洲欧美日韩无卡精品| a在线观看视频网站| 美女被艹到高潮喷水动态| 亚洲真实伦在线观看| 国产高清有码在线观看视频| av在线老鸭窝| av中文乱码字幕在线| 制服丝袜大香蕉在线| 99热这里只有精品一区| 国产一区二区三区视频了| 欧美日韩中文字幕国产精品一区二区三区| 亚洲国产精品久久男人天堂| 午夜福利在线观看免费完整高清在 | 精品久久久久久久人妻蜜臀av| 久久人人精品亚洲av| 69av精品久久久久久| 十八禁国产超污无遮挡网站| 久久人人精品亚洲av| 亚洲精品影视一区二区三区av| 男女那种视频在线观看| 色在线成人网| 久久九九热精品免费| 日韩在线高清观看一区二区三区 | 非洲黑人性xxxx精品又粗又长| 国产精品乱码一区二三区的特点| 亚洲18禁久久av| 亚洲欧美激情综合另类| 亚洲成人免费电影在线观看| av在线天堂中文字幕| 亚洲久久久久久中文字幕| 日本黄大片高清| 夜夜看夜夜爽夜夜摸| 欧美又色又爽又黄视频| 午夜老司机福利剧场| 日韩一区二区视频免费看| 国产精品无大码| 一区二区三区免费毛片| 91在线观看av| 欧美黑人欧美精品刺激| 蜜桃亚洲精品一区二区三区| 国产爱豆传媒在线观看| 精品免费久久久久久久清纯| 啦啦啦韩国在线观看视频| 国产精品福利在线免费观看| 在现免费观看毛片| 欧美激情久久久久久爽电影| 亚洲国产欧洲综合997久久,| 中文字幕免费在线视频6| 不卡一级毛片| 一个人观看的视频www高清免费观看| 观看免费一级毛片| 欧美日本亚洲视频在线播放| 高清毛片免费观看视频网站| 熟妇人妻久久中文字幕3abv| 变态另类丝袜制服| 内地一区二区视频在线| 国产精品久久久久久亚洲av鲁大| 春色校园在线视频观看| 国产毛片a区久久久久| 美女高潮喷水抽搐中文字幕| 国产视频内射| 久久精品91蜜桃| 欧美性感艳星| 成人综合一区亚洲| 久久精品国产亚洲av香蕉五月| 亚洲国产色片| 国产视频一区二区在线看| 亚洲精品粉嫩美女一区| 高清在线国产一区| 国产精品无大码| 禁无遮挡网站| 黄色配什么色好看| or卡值多少钱| 精品久久久久久久久久免费视频| 午夜福利欧美成人| 麻豆精品久久久久久蜜桃| 精品不卡国产一区二区三区| 嫩草影院新地址| 久久久精品大字幕| 搡女人真爽免费视频火全软件 | 亚洲精品456在线播放app | 国产视频内射| 身体一侧抽搐| www.www免费av| 尾随美女入室| 99久久中文字幕三级久久日本| 欧美色欧美亚洲另类二区| 欧美最新免费一区二区三区| 校园人妻丝袜中文字幕| 中文字幕高清在线视频| 久久精品国产亚洲av香蕉五月| 午夜激情福利司机影院| 色哟哟哟哟哟哟| 69av精品久久久久久| 看片在线看免费视频| 精华霜和精华液先用哪个| 好男人在线观看高清免费视频| 国产精品乱码一区二三区的特点| 久久久久久大精品| 久久久久久久亚洲中文字幕| 热99在线观看视频| 免费在线观看成人毛片| 国产熟女欧美一区二区| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 别揉我奶头 嗯啊视频| 日韩中文字幕欧美一区二区| 久久精品久久久久久噜噜老黄 | 亚洲最大成人手机在线| 无人区码免费观看不卡| 精品久久久噜噜| 亚洲成av人片在线播放无| 波野结衣二区三区在线| 精品人妻偷拍中文字幕| 黄片wwwwww| 天堂√8在线中文| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器| 国产精品永久免费网站| 99久久九九国产精品国产免费| av中文乱码字幕在线| 欧美日韩乱码在线| 男人狂女人下面高潮的视频| 日本熟妇午夜| 国产真实伦视频高清在线观看 | 免费av观看视频| 大型黄色视频在线免费观看| 露出奶头的视频| 麻豆精品久久久久久蜜桃| 久久久久久久久中文| 男女啪啪激烈高潮av片| 丰满乱子伦码专区| 18禁黄网站禁片午夜丰满| 亚洲精华国产精华液的使用体验 | 人人妻,人人澡人人爽秒播| 俺也久久电影网| 国产探花极品一区二区| 麻豆国产97在线/欧美| 亚洲图色成人| 色噜噜av男人的天堂激情| 韩国av在线不卡| 国产一级毛片七仙女欲春2| 丝袜美腿在线中文| 国产探花极品一区二区| 超碰av人人做人人爽久久| 亚洲欧美日韩高清在线视频| 99久久中文字幕三级久久日本| 中出人妻视频一区二区| 欧美又色又爽又黄视频| 51国产日韩欧美| 日本黄色视频三级网站网址| 日韩高清综合在线| 欧美最新免费一区二区三区| 亚洲黑人精品在线| 国产精品国产高清国产av| 露出奶头的视频| 中文字幕久久专区| 深夜精品福利| 久久人妻av系列| 国产不卡一卡二| 两人在一起打扑克的视频| 悠悠久久av| 久久久久九九精品影院| 在线观看66精品国产| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 18+在线观看网站| 长腿黑丝高跟| 国产色婷婷99| 天堂动漫精品| 欧美一级a爱片免费观看看| 九九久久精品国产亚洲av麻豆| 久久久国产成人精品二区| 日本免费一区二区三区高清不卡| 日韩高清综合在线| 在线观看免费视频日本深夜| 久久天躁狠狠躁夜夜2o2o| 人妻制服诱惑在线中文字幕| 制服丝袜大香蕉在线| 国产精品人妻久久久久久| 天堂动漫精品| 国产色婷婷99| 久久精品影院6| 九色国产91popny在线| 国产伦精品一区二区三区视频9| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色| 波多野结衣高清无吗| 国产淫片久久久久久久久| 亚洲国产高清在线一区二区三| 亚洲五月天丁香| 国产一区二区三区视频了| 午夜福利在线观看吧| 国产精品乱码一区二三区的特点| 亚洲七黄色美女视频| 国产精品亚洲美女久久久| or卡值多少钱| 搡老熟女国产l中国老女人| 色哟哟·www| 人妻丰满熟妇av一区二区三区| 91麻豆精品激情在线观看国产| 精品99又大又爽又粗少妇毛片 | 乱码一卡2卡4卡精品| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 久久久久久久久久久丰满 | 最新在线观看一区二区三区| 国产av在哪里看| 美女 人体艺术 gogo| 久久热精品热| 非洲黑人性xxxx精品又粗又长| 国产爱豆传媒在线观看| 国产麻豆成人av免费视频| 国产女主播在线喷水免费视频网站 | 国产亚洲av嫩草精品影院| 久久久久国产精品人妻aⅴ院| 观看美女的网站| 国产午夜精品论理片| 国产精品自产拍在线观看55亚洲| 日韩欧美在线乱码| 99九九线精品视频在线观看视频| 伦精品一区二区三区| av在线天堂中文字幕| 亚洲午夜理论影院| 国产精品精品国产色婷婷| 国产精品人妻久久久久久| 亚洲无线在线观看| 日韩在线高清观看一区二区三区 | 精品久久久噜噜| 亚洲av美国av| 99热精品在线国产| 久久久久久国产a免费观看| 亚洲三级黄色毛片| 色哟哟·www| 99久久精品一区二区三区| 国产av不卡久久| 国产探花在线观看一区二区| 国国产精品蜜臀av免费| 午夜免费男女啪啪视频观看 | 精品无人区乱码1区二区| 嫩草影视91久久| 中文字幕精品亚洲无线码一区| 身体一侧抽搐| 国产麻豆成人av免费视频| 国产乱人视频| 免费在线观看成人毛片| 精品人妻视频免费看| 成年免费大片在线观看| 少妇人妻一区二区三区视频| 亚洲人成网站在线播| 婷婷色综合大香蕉| 中文字幕免费在线视频6| 日本 av在线| 亚洲图色成人| 丰满人妻一区二区三区视频av| 中文在线观看免费www的网站| 99热网站在线观看| 成人美女网站在线观看视频| 亚洲熟妇熟女久久| 波多野结衣巨乳人妻| 日韩强制内射视频| 老司机深夜福利视频在线观看| 亚洲性夜色夜夜综合| 国产伦一二天堂av在线观看| а√天堂www在线а√下载| 国产毛片a区久久久久| 免费搜索国产男女视频| 九九在线视频观看精品| 亚洲av免费高清在线观看| 两个人的视频大全免费| 亚洲人成伊人成综合网2020| 美女大奶头视频| 午夜福利成人在线免费观看| 亚洲综合色惰| 成人综合一区亚洲| 日韩强制内射视频| 少妇熟女aⅴ在线视频| 亚洲黑人精品在线| 一区二区三区激情视频| 99在线视频只有这里精品首页| 老熟妇仑乱视频hdxx| 51国产日韩欧美| 国产av在哪里看| 亚洲精品456在线播放app | 免费观看精品视频网站| or卡值多少钱| 欧美激情久久久久久爽电影| 中亚洲国语对白在线视频| 在线天堂最新版资源| 好男人在线观看高清免费视频| 日韩人妻高清精品专区| 免费看av在线观看网站| 国产精品av视频在线免费观看| 国产精品永久免费网站| 国产亚洲91精品色在线| 亚洲成av人片在线播放无| 搡老妇女老女人老熟妇| 国产高清不卡午夜福利| 欧美色视频一区免费| 又粗又爽又猛毛片免费看| 成年免费大片在线观看| 搡女人真爽免费视频火全软件 | 国产亚洲精品av在线| 校园人妻丝袜中文字幕| 三级男女做爰猛烈吃奶摸视频| 久久国内精品自在自线图片| 97碰自拍视频| 婷婷丁香在线五月| 91麻豆精品激情在线观看国产| 人妻丰满熟妇av一区二区三区| 琪琪午夜伦伦电影理论片6080| 色5月婷婷丁香| 欧美成人性av电影在线观看| 在线a可以看的网站| 一本一本综合久久| 婷婷精品国产亚洲av在线| 性欧美人与动物交配| 男人舔女人下体高潮全视频| 久久久久久久亚洲中文字幕| 日韩强制内射视频| 99久久九九国产精品国产免费| 18禁裸乳无遮挡免费网站照片| 国产女主播在线喷水免费视频网站 | 欧美成人免费av一区二区三区| 精品一区二区免费观看| 亚洲三级黄色毛片| 蜜桃亚洲精品一区二区三区| 日本五十路高清| 女的被弄到高潮叫床怎么办 | 日韩一区二区视频免费看| 亚洲性夜色夜夜综合| 黄色配什么色好看| 国产亚洲av嫩草精品影院| 亚洲 国产 在线| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9| 黄色女人牲交| 日日夜夜操网爽| 国产精品自产拍在线观看55亚洲| 国产黄片美女视频| 亚洲国产色片| 美女大奶头视频| 天堂影院成人在线观看| 欧美一区二区国产精品久久精品| 日本熟妇午夜| 久久九九热精品免费| 男人舔奶头视频| 91麻豆av在线| 亚洲av美国av| 亚洲无线观看免费| 欧美成人一区二区免费高清观看| 欧美一区二区精品小视频在线| 成人鲁丝片一二三区免费| 久久精品国产亚洲av香蕉五月| 免费观看精品视频网站| 天美传媒精品一区二区| 成人特级黄色片久久久久久久| 午夜激情欧美在线| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 欧美潮喷喷水| 亚洲欧美日韩卡通动漫| 又黄又爽又刺激的免费视频.| 变态另类丝袜制服| 天天一区二区日本电影三级| 给我免费播放毛片高清在线观看| 日日啪夜夜撸| 久久精品国产鲁丝片午夜精品 | 成人高潮视频无遮挡免费网站| 97热精品久久久久久| 中文字幕av成人在线电影| 精品午夜福利视频在线观看一区| 99热只有精品国产| 中文资源天堂在线| 最后的刺客免费高清国语| 91午夜精品亚洲一区二区三区 | 欧美精品国产亚洲| 色5月婷婷丁香| 亚洲精品久久国产高清桃花| 国产精品久久久久久亚洲av鲁大| 别揉我奶头 嗯啊视频| 精品久久国产蜜桃| 日韩,欧美,国产一区二区三区 | 国产精品无大码| 国产综合懂色| 极品教师在线免费播放| 精品不卡国产一区二区三区| 韩国av在线不卡| 99久久精品热视频| 赤兔流量卡办理| 久久亚洲真实| 91午夜精品亚洲一区二区三区 | 床上黄色一级片| 内射极品少妇av片p| 午夜免费激情av| 2021天堂中文幕一二区在线观| 久久久久久久久久久丰满 | 天堂网av新在线| 日韩欧美免费精品| 国产午夜福利久久久久久| 麻豆av噜噜一区二区三区| 高清日韩中文字幕在线| 日韩欧美在线乱码| 在线观看午夜福利视频| 99国产极品粉嫩在线观看| 在线播放国产精品三级| 中文字幕熟女人妻在线| 国产老妇女一区| 在线看三级毛片| 国产私拍福利视频在线观看| 国产成人一区二区在线| 成年人黄色毛片网站| 亚洲自拍偷在线| 亚洲av成人精品一区久久| 观看美女的网站| 国内精品美女久久久久久| 老司机午夜福利在线观看视频| 亚洲自偷自拍三级| 国产免费男女视频| 国产欧美日韩一区二区精品| 一a级毛片在线观看| 欧美潮喷喷水| 欧美成人a在线观看| 亚洲av中文av极速乱 | 丰满乱子伦码专区| 一级黄色大片毛片| 夜夜夜夜夜久久久久| 88av欧美| 不卡视频在线观看欧美| 别揉我奶头~嗯~啊~动态视频| 国产不卡一卡二| a级一级毛片免费在线观看| 亚洲aⅴ乱码一区二区在线播放| 国内少妇人妻偷人精品xxx网站| 一卡2卡三卡四卡精品乱码亚洲| 免费高清视频大片| 黄色配什么色好看| 亚洲人与动物交配视频| 久久久久久久久大av| 国产成人一区二区在线| 真人一进一出gif抽搐免费| 美女大奶头视频| 国产精品电影一区二区三区| 亚洲精华国产精华精| 国产av在哪里看| 精品久久久久久久久久免费视频| av视频在线观看入口| 国产乱人视频| 亚洲天堂国产精品一区在线| 一夜夜www| 国内少妇人妻偷人精品xxx网站| 色尼玛亚洲综合影院| 俄罗斯特黄特色一大片| 成年女人看的毛片在线观看| 91麻豆av在线| 久久久久久大精品| 一区二区三区激情视频| 女的被弄到高潮叫床怎么办 | 亚洲av五月六月丁香网| 99热6这里只有精品| 精品乱码久久久久久99久播| 国产精品乱码一区二三区的特点| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器| 99热网站在线观看| 国产免费男女视频| 精品人妻熟女av久视频| 久久精品国产清高在天天线| 一个人看视频在线观看www免费| 午夜爱爱视频在线播放| 免费av毛片视频| 不卡视频在线观看欧美| 可以在线观看的亚洲视频| 久久精品国产清高在天天线| 亚洲va日本ⅴa欧美va伊人久久| 久99久视频精品免费| 久久久久久伊人网av| 国产探花极品一区二区| 国产麻豆成人av免费视频| 国产精品国产三级国产av玫瑰| 黄色配什么色好看| 免费在线观看成人毛片| 免费高清视频大片| 亚洲专区国产一区二区| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9| 国产精品日韩av在线免费观看| 久久香蕉精品热| 成人亚洲精品av一区二区| 日韩强制内射视频| 精品一区二区三区人妻视频|