NPS61-90-005PR NAVAL SCHOOL · GZ3 NPS61-90-005PR NAVALPOSTGRADUATESCHOOL Monterey,California...

GZ3

NPS61-90-005PR

NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL

Monterey, California

OPTICAL TURBULENCE ANDRAWINSONDE MEASUREMENTS

FOR 17-28 SEPTEMBER 1989AT ANDERSON MESA/

UNITED STATES NAVAL OBSERVATORY,FLAGSTAFF, ARIZONA

by

G.Tirrell Gaucher, C.A. Vaucher,and D.L. Walters

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited

Prepared for: Naval Research LaboratoryWashington, D.C. 20375

FedDocsD 208.14/2NPS-61-9 0-005PR

NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOLMonterey, California

Rear Admiral R.W. West, Jr. H. Shull

Superintendent Provost

The work reported herein was supported in part by the

Naval Research Laboratory Program at the Naval Postgraduate

School with funds provided by the Naval Research Laboratory.

Reproduction of all or part of this report is authorized.

This report was prepared by:

Unclassified

DUDLEYKNOX LIBRARYflAVAl POSTGRADUATE SCHOOLMONTEREY CA 93943-5101

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS 'AGE

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE

la. REPORT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

Unclassified1b RESTRICTIVE MARKINGS

2a. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION AUTHORITY 3 DISTRIBUTION /AVAILABILITY OF REPORT

Approved for public release; distribution isunlimited.2b. DECLASSIFICATION /DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE

4. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S)

NPS61-90-005PR

5. MONITORING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER(S)

NPS61-90-005PR

6a. NAME OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

Naval Postgraduate School

6b. OFFICE SYMBOL(If applicable)

PH

7a NAME OF MONITORING ORGANIZATION

Naval Research Laboratory

6c. ADDRESS (Gty, State, and ZIP Code)

Monterey, CA 93943-5000

7b. ADDRESS (Oty, State, and ZIP Code)

Washington, D.C. 20375

Ba. NAME OF FUNDING /SPONSORINGorganization Naval Research Lab.

(Attn. Dr. Ken Johnston)

8b. OFFICE SYMBOL(if applicable)

Code 4130

9. PROCUREMENT INSTRUMENT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER

N0017389WR90059

8c. ADDRESS (City, State, and ZIP Code) 10. SOURCE OF FUNDING NUMBERS

Washington, D.C. 20375PROGRAMELEMENT NO.

PROJECTNO.

TASKNO

WORK UNIT !

ACCESSION NO. |

tt

11. TITLE (Include Security Classification)

OPTICAL TURBULENCE AND RAWINSONDE MEASUREMENTS FOR 17-28 SEPTEMBER 1989 ATANDERSON MESA/UNITED STATES NAVAL OBSERVATORY, FLAGSTAFF, ARIZONA (Unclassified)

12. PERSONAL AUTHOR(S)Gail Tirrell Vaucher, Christopher A.Vaucher, Donald L. Walters

13a TYPE OF REPORTTechnical Report

13b TIME COVEREDFROM TO

14 DATE OF REPORT (Year, Month, Day)

1990 June 27

15 PAGE COUNTm16. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTAT.ON The views expressed in this technical report are those of the authorsand do not reflect the official policy or position of the Dept of Defense or the US Government

17 COSATI CODES 18 SUBJECT TERMS (Continue on reverse if necessary and identify by block number)

FIELD GROUP SUB-GROUP atmospheric optical turbulence, transverse coherence length,isoplanatic angle, rawinsonde

.ence

19 ABSTRACT (Continue on reverse if necessary and identify by block number)The Naval Postgraduate School Atmospheric Optics Group acquired atmospheric optical turbul<and navaid radiosonde (rawinsonde) data in the Flagstaff, Arizona region as part of a sitesurvey for a large-scale, ground-based, synothetic aperture system (100-300 m baseline stellarinterferometer). From 17 to 25 September 1989, measurements were taken from the LowellObservatory 31-inch telescope dome facility on Anderson Mesa, 16 km southeast of Flagstaff.Further sampling occurred 26-28 September 1989 from the United States Naval Observatory's(USNO) 61-inch telescope dome, approximately 8 km west of Flagstaff. The parameters measuredconsisted of transverse coherence lengths, isoplanatic angles, and various meteorologicalsurface and upper-air variables measured from a high resolution, instrumented balloon(rawinsonde) system. This report compiles, analyses and summarizes the acquired data. Asummary of the synoptic scale activities occurring simultaneously over the data acquisitionsites is also presented.

20 distribution /availability of abstract

DuNCLASSlFlED/UNLIMrED SAME AS RPT OTIC USERS

21 ABSTRACT SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

Unclassified22a, NAME OF RESPONSIBLE INDIVIDUALGail Tirrell Vaucher

22b TELEPHONE (Incluae Area Code)

(408^-646-3207lIc. OFFICE SYMBOL

PK

DDFORM 1473, 84 mar J3 APR edition may oe used until exhausted

All other editions are obsoleteSECURITY CLASSIFICATION QF THIS PAGE

« U.S. Govtmmtnt Printing Qffto*! !•••—

t

Unclassified

OPTICAL TURBULENCE AND RAWINSONDE MEASUREMENTS

FOR 17-28 SEPTEMBER 1989

AT

ANDERSON MESA/UNITED STATES NAVAL OBSERVATORY,

FLAGSTAFF, ARIZONA

by

G.Tirrell Vaucher, C.A. Vaucher, and D.L. Walters

Atmospheric Optics GroupDepartment of PhysicsNaval Postgraduate SchoolMonterey, California 93943-5000

li

FORWARD

The acquisition of data was performed by the NavalPostgraduate School Atmospheric Optics Group for the NavalResearch Lab, Dr. Kenneth Johnston, project monitor.

111

ABSTRACT

The Naval Postgraduate School Atmospheric Optics Groupacquired atmospheric optical turbulence and navaidradiosonde (rawinsonde) data in the Flagstaff, Arizonaregion as part of a site survey for a large-scale, ground-based, synthetic aperture system (100-300 m baseline stellarinterferometer). From 17 to 25 September 1989, measurementswere taken from the Lowell Observatory 31-inch telescopedome facility on Anderson Mesa, 16 km southeast ofFlagstaff. Further sampling occurred 26-28 September 1989from the United States Naval Observatory's (USNO) 61-inchtelescope dome, approximately 8 km west of Flagstaff. Theparameters measured consisted of transverse coherencelengths, isoplanatic angles, and various meteorologicalsurface and upper-air variables measured from a highresolution, instrumented balloon (rawinsonde) system. Thisreport compiles, analyses and summarizes the acquired data.A summary of the synoptic scale activities occurringsimultaneously over the data acquisition sites is alsopresented.

IV

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION 1

II . EXPERIMENT OVERVIEW 3

A. SITE TOPOGRAPHY 3

B. DATA ACQUISITION 3

III

.

INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENTS 6

A. OPTICAL DATA 6

1. Transverse Coherence Length Sensor ......... 6

2. Isoplanatic Angle Sensor, Isoplanometer 6

B

.

METEOROLOGICAL DATA 7

1. Upper-Air System and Measurement Procedures. 7

a. Navaid-Radiosonde Ground Processor 7

b. Balloon Measurements 8

2

.

Surface Data Sampling 9

3. Synoptic Weather Information 10

IV. DATA ANALYSIS 12

A. OPTICAL DATA ANALYSIS 12

1. Transverse Coherence Length Data 122

.

Isoplanatic Angle Data 15

B. RAWINSONDE DATA ANALYSIS 18C. GENERAL SYNOPTIC WEATHER REVIEW 21

1. Anderson Mesa, Arizona 212. USNO, Arizona 23

V. DATA SUMMARY 2 4

VI . RECOMMENDATIONS 28

APPENDIX A. OPTICAL VARIABLES DEFINED 29

A. Transverse Coherence Length 29B. Isoplanatic Angle 30

APPENDIX B. DAILY SYNOPTIC WEATHER SUMMARY -ANDERSONMESA, AZ 31

APPENDIX C. DAILY SYNOPTIC WEATHER SUMMARY-USNO, AZ 34

APPENDIX D. RAW OPTICAL DATA (1989 SEPTEMBER 17-28) ... 36

APPENDIX E. TRANSVERSE COHERENCE LENGTH STATISTICS .... 46

APPENDIX F. ISOPLANATIC ANGLE STATISTICS 55

APPENDIX G. RAWINSONDE THERMODYNAMIC PROFILES(Entire Sounding) 65

APPENDIX H. RAWINSONDE THERMODYNAMIC PROFILES(First 3 km Only) 80

LIST OF REFERENCES 9 3

INITIAL DISTRIBUTION LIST 94

VI

List of Tables

Table 1. MARK II MICROSONDE SENSOR ACCURACIES 8

Table 2. TRANSVERSE COHERENCE LENGTH STATISTICS 12

Table 3 . ISOPLANATIC ANGLE STATISTICS 17

Table 4. THERMODYNAMIC INFORMATION-ANDERSON MESA/USNO.. 22

Table 5. SUMMARY OF OPTICAL/METEOROLOGICAL DATA -

ANDERSON MESA (1989 Sept 17-25)/ USNO (1989Sept 26-28) 25

Table 6. BALLOON LAUNCH SCHEDULE - ANDERSON MESA/USNO . 66

Table 7. LAUNCH SPECIFICATIONS - ANDERSON MESA/USNO ... 67

VI 1

List of Figures

Fig 1. Topographical Views of the Anderson Mesa, AzRegion 4

Fig 2. Topographical Views of the USNO-Flagstaf f , AzRegion 5

Fig 3. Average Transverse Coherence Lengths(89 Sept 20-28) 13

Fig 4. Normalized Transverse Coherency Length FrequencyDistribution 14

Fig 5. Cumulative Normalized r D Frequency Distribution 16Fig 6. Average Isoplanatic Angle (89 Sept 17-28) 17Fig 7. Normalized Isoplanatic Angle Frequency

Distribution 19Fig 8. Cumulative Normalized o Frequency Distribution 20Fig 9. Rawinsonde Freezing Levels and Pressure Surface

Heights 27Fig 10. Anderson Mesa, Az Optical Data: 1989 Sept 17 .. 37Fig 11. Anderson Mesa, Az Optical Data: 1989 Sept 20 .. 38Fig 12. Anderson Mesa, Az Optical Data: 1989 Sept 21 .. 39Fig 13. Anderson Mesa, Az Optical Data: 1989 Sept 22 .. 40Fig 14. Anderson Mesa, Az Optical Data: 1989 Sept 23 .. 41Fig 15. Anderson Mesa, Az Optical Data: 1989 Sept 25 .. 42Fig 16. USNO, Az Optical Data: 1989 Sept 26 43Fig 17. USNO, Az Optical Data: 1989 Sept 27 44Fig 18. USNO, Az Optical Data: 1989 Sept 28 45Fig 19. Anderson Mesa, Az r Statistics: 1989 Sept 20 . 47Fig 20. Anderson Mesa, Az r Statistics: 1989 Sept 21 . 48Fig 21. Anderson Mesa, Az r Statistics: 1989 Sept 22 . 49Fig 22. Anderson Mesa, Az r Statistics: 1989 Sept 23 . 50Fig 23. Anderson Mesa, Az r Statistics: 1989 Sept 25 . 51Fig 24. USNO, Az r D Statistics: 1989 Sept 26 52Fig 25. USNO, Az r D Statistics: 1989 Sept 27 53Fig 26. USNO, Az ro Statistics: 1989 Sept 28 54Fig 27. Anderson Mesa, Az Go Statistics: 1989 Sept 17 . 56Fig 28. Anderson Mesa, Az Go Statistics: 1989 Sept 20 . 57Fig 29. Anderson Mesa, Az Go Statistics: 1989 Sept 21 . 58Fig 30. Anderson Mesa, Az Go Statistics: 1989 Sept 22 . 59Fig 31. Anderson Mesa, Az Go Statistics: 1989 Sept 23 . 60Fig 32. Anderson Mesa, Az Go Statistics: 1989 Sept 25 . 61Fig 33. USNO, Az Go Statistics: 1989 Sept 26 62Fig 34. USNO, Az Go Statistics: 1989 Sept 27 63Fig 35. USNO, Az Go Statistics: 1989 Sept 28 64Fig 36. Entire Rawinsonde Profile: 89 Sept 19, 2100 MST 68Fig 37. Entire Rawinsonde Profile: 89 Sept 20, 2033 MST 69Fig 38. Entire Rawinsonde Profile: 89 Sept 21, 0355 MST 70Fig 39. Entire Rawinsonde Profile: 89 Sept 21, 1957 MST 71

VI 1 1

Fig 40. Entire Rawinsonde Profile: 89 Sept 22, 0348 MST 72Fig 41. Entire Rawinsonde Profile: 89 Sept 22, 2004 MST 73Fig 42. Entire Rawinsonde Profile: 89 Sept 23, 0340 MST 74Fig 43. Entire Rawinsonde Profile: 89 Sept 25, 0341 MST 75Fig 44. Entire Rawinsonde Profile: 89 Sept 25, 2220 MST 76Fig 45. Entire Rawinsonde Profile: 89 Sept 26, 2029 MST 77Fig 46. Entire Rawinsonde Profile: 89 Sept 27, 0246 MST 78Fig 47. Entire Rawinsonde Profile: 89 Sept 27, 2006 MST 79Fig 48. Rawinsonde Profile First 3-km: 89 Sept 19,

2100 MST 81Fig 49. Rawinsonde Profile First 3-km: 89 Sept 20,

2033 MST 82Fig 50. Rawinsonde Profile First 3-km: 89 Sept 21,

0355 MST 8 3

Fig 51. Rawinsonde Profile First 3-km: 89 Sept 21,1957 MST 8 4

Fig 52. Rawinsonde Profile First 3-km: 89 Sept 22,0348 MST 85








IX

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to express our sincere appreciation to theLowell Observatory, particularly Drs . Nat White and BobMillis (Director), for their assistance in the dataacquisition and use of their 31" telescope dome facility onAnderson Mesa. Also, a thank you to the Flagstaff NavalObservatory Director, Dr. Harold Abies, for the supportpersonnel that assisted during the 26-28 Septembermeasurement sessions. And finally, a special thanks toNancy Alexander from Technical and Business Systems, for heroutstanding skills and dedication in the areas of fieldmeasurements and business management.

I. INTRODUCTION

The atmospheric optical turbulence and navaid radiosonde(rawinsonde) data acquired by the Naval Postgraduate School(NPS) Atmospheric Optics Group in the Flagstaff, Arizonaregion are part of a site survey for a Naval ResearchLaboratory (NRL) large-scale, ground-based, syntheticaperture system (100-300 m baseline stellar interferometer).Between 17 and 25 September 1989, measurements were takenfrom the Lowell Observatory's 31-inch telescope dome onAnderson Mesa, 16 km southeast of Flagstaff. Furthersampling occurred 26-28 September 1989 from the UnitedStates Naval Observatory's (USNO) 61-inch telescope dome, 8

km west of Flagstaff. The data acquired during the NavalObservatory measurement session were taken in the hopes ofderiving an algorithm linking the USNO stellar full-widthhalf-maximum and NPS transverse coherence lengthmeasurements. Because the Naval Observatory is locatedwithin 30 km of Anderson Mesa, the optical andmeteorological analyses for USNO are also included in thisreport

.

The purpose of this report is to document the September1989 measurements and provide a summary of the findings.Supplementing the report text are eight appendices. Thefirst, Appendix A, provides a brief description of the twooptical turbulence parameters measured (transverse coherencelength, r and isoplanatic angle, O ). Appendices B and Care summaries of the general synoptic weather conditionscoincident with the data acquisition over and around thesites, Anderson Mesa and USNO, respectively.

Appendix D displays all the processed optical datasampled between 17-28 September 1989. Each figure shows theindividual points per night.

Appendix E presents the transverse coherence length un-normalized percent frequency distribution (bin interval 10mm) and empirical seeing quality histogram for eachobserving night. The bin intervals selected for the latterqualitative interpretation are a product of approximately 50site surveys spanning 18-40 degrees of latitude and 65-156degrees of longitude. Specific empirical seeing qualityintervals are listed in Appendix E.

Appendix F displays the isoplanatic angle un-normalizedpercent frequency distribution (bin interval 1 urad) andempirical seeing quality plots for each sampling session.Also included is a list of the specific empirically-derivedseeing quality bin intervals.

Rawinsonde launches were made - usually twice a night -

at the two northern Arizona sites. These soundings assistin identifying atmospheric layers responsible for producingthe integrated optical turbulence viewed by the telescope-mounted sensors. Appendix G catalogs balloon launchschedules and specifications for both locations. AppendicesG (Entire Sounding) and H (First 3 km Only) present thethermodynamic information in the form of verticalatmospheric profiles. The total number of plots per balloonlaunch is four:

1. Temperature/Dewpoint - entire sounding,2. Relative Humidity - entire sounding,3. Temperature/Dewpoint - first 3 km above site, and4. Relative Humidity - first 3 km above site.

In both Appendices, the complete series of Anderson Mesaprofiles precede the USNO plots. Although collected, nonavaid-wind results appear in this report. The protractedeffort required to recondition the poor signal-to-noiseratio data exceeds practical time limits for this project.

II. EXPERIMENT OVERVIEW

A. SITE TOPOGRAPHY

The initial site, Anderson Mesa, is an 125 m highplateau situated in the ponderosa pine and lake mesa-country16 km southeast of Flagstaff and 18 km west of the highdesert floor. The 31-inch telescope dome used for opticaldata gathering (rawinsonde launches were made just outsidethe dome) is 2.2 km above sea level and located on thesouthwest edge of the mesa. Figure 1 displays a 3-dimensional topographical view of Anderson Mesa, showing thelocation of the 31-inch site, as well as major features ofinterest

.

The second site, USNO, from which the 26-28 Septemberseries of observations were made, is 8 km west of Flagstaff.The site is on a small, rounded hill, 80 m above theforested plain. The building structure is 2.3 km above sealevel. Optical measurements were taken along side of the61-inch telescope mounted on the third story of theobservatory. The rawinsonde launches were made from localground level. Figure 2 presents a 3-dimensional view of theterrain around the USNO site, along with major features ofinterest

.

B. DATA ACQUISITION

All data acquisition sessions commenced at local sunsetand terminated with the onset of local sunrise twilight.Total data collection time was approximately 10-11 hours pernight. Intermittent cloud-cover often disrupted the abilityto sample data, providing both gaps in the optical record onindividual nights as well as over some entire nights. Dueto logistical hurtles, the cessation of the last USNOsession was at local midnight.

Anderson MesaLake Anderson Mesa

Lowell Sites

Walnut Canyon

Walnut Creek

Lowell Sites

Mesa

Mesa

Fig 1. Topographical Views of the Anderson Mesa, Az Region

A1 Mtn

Lowell Obs

Flagstaff

Woody Mtn

USNO

A1 Mtn

Woody Mtn

Fig 2. Topographical Views of the USNO-Flagstaf f , Az Region

III. INSTRUMENTATION AND MEASUREMENTS

A. OPTICAL DATA

The optical turbulence parameters gathered throughoutthe experiment include the transverse coherence length andthe isoplanatic angle. Appendix A provides a briefdescription of these parameters.

An isoplanometer and transverse coherence length sensor,designed and built by Dr. D.L. Walters, measured the opticaldata. Stevens (1985) and Walters, Favier, and Hines (1979)describe specific details for each instrument, respectively.

All optical data is referenced in Universal TimeCoordinated (UTC). The conversion from local MountainStandard Time (MST) to UTC is:

Time(UTC) = Time(MST) + 7 hours.

1. Transverse Coherence Length Sensor

The transverse coherence length sensor was mountedon the tailplate of a portable 14-inch (356 mm) Celestrontelescope. A researcher interacted with software designedfor real-time data collection. This additional interfaceserved to suppress instrumental artifacts. The averagesampling rate was between 1-2 minutes per sample. An HP 300series computer stored the processed data on its hard disc.All data files were later transferred serially to an IBM-class personal computer for statistical evaluation.

2. Isoplanatic Angle Sensor, Isoplanometer

An isoplanometer mounted onto the tailplate of aportable, apodized, 8-inch (203 mm) Celestron telescopemeasured the isoplanatic angles. An HP 217 computer ran theisoplanometer software. Automated sampling at a rate of 1per second complimented a real-time, graphics display ofTime(UTC) verses Raw Isoplanatic Angle(urad). Samples wereconverted into 10-second averages before being stored.Providing the polar alignment was good and the chosenstar's zenith angle did not exceed 40 degrees, theisoplanatic angle system operated independent of humaninteraction for 1-2 hours. Post-experiment processing forthis report consisted of transferring the data files

serially to an IBM-class personal computer, calculating thezenith angle correction, and submitting the data to a basicstatistical analysis.

B. METEOROLOGICAL DATA

1. Upper-Air System and Measurement Procedures

Rawinsonde launches at both sites helped to identifylayers in the earth's atmosphere which produced theintegrated optical turbulence viewed simultaneously by ourtelescope mounted sensors. Although the rawinsonde systemmeasured both the atmospheric thermodynamic and horizontalwind variables at discrete elevations in each sounding, thisreport presents only the thermodynamic results. Problemswith the Loran-C signal acquisition and processing have madefurther filtering and conditioning mandatory before any windinformation can be properly extracted.

a. Navaid-Radiosonde Ground Processor

The navaid-radiosonde (rawinsonde) upper-airsystem package is a portable, light-weight, solid-state,automatic instrument capable of real-time collection andfinal processing of various meteorological variables. Thevariables include: pressure, temperature, relativehumidity, dewpoint, wind speed, and wind direction. Thetotal system, constructed by VIZ and named "ZEEMET", has twomajor components: a W-9000 P90 BUS (receiving station) and adata gathering, real-time processing, Dell-300, 16-MHz,80386 microcomputer (ground processor).

The instrumented balloon package - also made byVIZ and termed Mark II Microsonde - is activated and poweredby two 9-volt lithium batteries. The Mark II microsondeprovided three channels allowing measurement of pressure,temperature, and humidity. The three thermodynamic sensorsmounted on each sonde include: a fast-response rodthermister coated with a white, water-repellent material tomeasure temperature; a fast-response carbon-gel elementmounted on a glass-plate to measure humidity; and, a high-accuracy aneroid barometer-capacitor to measure thepressure. Table 1 lists the Mark II RMS sensor accuracyspecifications, as provided by VIZ (Bell, 1989).

TABLE 1. MARK II MICROSONDE SENSOR ACCURACIES

SENSOR TYPE ACCURACY RANGE OF VALIDITY(RMS)

Pressure < 2 mb 1080-5 mb(capacitor/resistor

)

(temperaturecompensated from+40C to -70C)

Temperature < 0.4C +50C to -90C(rod thermistor)

Humidity < 4% RH +5% to 100% RH(carbon coated glass) (temperature

compensated from+40C to -60C)

VIZ pre-cal ibrates all Microsonde sensors at thefactory. The rawinsonde ground processor uses thesecalibration values for all real-time data reduction.Navigational timing signals, transmitted by the Loran-C WestCoast (USA) chain, provide the calculation base forobtaining the horizontal winds. The microsonde receives theLoran times and superimposes these signals on top of thedigital thermodynamic data signal. All sensor informationis then transmitted to the ground system as a 400-406 MHzsignal for nearly real-time processing and reduction.During a launch, the researcher has the option to revieweither the processed thermodynamic or wind profiles as afunction of time or height. A set of binary files on themicrocomputer's hard disc store all sounding data. A binaryto ASCII conversion utility permits post-launch review andanalysis of selected files.

The ZEEMET ground system is capable of loggingand processing up to two hours of data, allowing themicrosonde to reach altitudes of up to 25 km. Should theballoon burst prior to this time, data collecting willcontinue uninterrupted.

b. Balloon Measurements

A total of 12 Navaid (Loran-based ) balloonlaunches were successfully completed at both Anderson Mesa(19-25 September 1989) and USNO (26-28 September 1989). The

datasets generated by the ascending instrumented packagescreated vertical atmospheric profiles of thermodynamic andwind variables at selected height levels above each site.Table 6 (Appendix G) includes a complete listing of all theindividual dates and times of balloon launches.

Table 7 (Appendix G), which summarizes theatmospheric balloon soundings, includes the launch time,duration, maximum vertical height obtained, and verticalresolution (sample rate) of every balloon flight. Here, thevertical resolution is an average estimated fromdifferencing each height level, summing the differences,then dividing by their total number. All heights referencedin any of the tables are with respect to mean sea level(MSL) . The following site elevations will allow theconversion to local ground level (relative height):

ANDERSON MESA(31" telescope dome): 7210 feet or 2198 meters,USNO(61" telescope dome): 7560 feet or 2304 meters.

To facilitate quick inspection, Appendices G and H plot allsounding profiles with respect to local ground level.

As can be seen from Table 7 (Appendix G), theaverage height resolution varied between 2-5 meters(typically 4m), with soundings reaching a maximum altitudeof 14-21 km above their launch points, into the Arizonastratosphere in most cases. (Sounding ANM92504 is anexception. The ascent rate was purposefully kept slow,allowing a much higher vertical resolution in that profile.)

It should be emphasized that all rawinsondeinformation and plots are referenced in Mountain StandardTime (MST). This allows review between the soundinginformation and known diurnal atmospheric effects. There isa seven hour additive correction to go from MST to UTC(Arizona retains MST throughout the year).

2. Surface Data Sampling

Prior to a launch, surface data probes measured thetemperature, humidity, and pressure to calibrate therawinsonde ground processor's thermodynamic arrays. Theseintermittently monitored the multiple weather changes andpotentially hazardous (extreme cold) environments duringdata collection.

The surface data probes include a Vaisala DigitalBarometer Model PA 11 and a WeatherMeasure WEATHERtronicsHumidity/Temperature Indicator Model 5165-A. The digitalbarometer has three independent aneroid capsules, each witha vacuum sealed capacitive element. A microprocessorcontrols the three transducer units (pressure-frequencyconverters). Continuous measurements of the capsuletemperature compensates for temperature drift of the aneroidcapsules and electronics.

The Model 5165-A Humidity/Temperature Indicator usestwo 9-volt, nickel cadmium batteries for power. Thehumidity sensor is a thin film capacitor with a one secondresponse time. The published measuring range is 0-100 %Relative Humidity. The temperature sensor has a twoelement, composite thermistor with an accuracy of +/- 0.15Celsius. The measuring range is -5 to 45 degrees Celsius.(WeatherMeasure, 1987)

3. Synoptic Weather Information

GOES-WEST Satellite Images (Visible) as well assurface, 500 mb, and 200 mb National Weather Service chartsprovided on-site evaluation of synoptic weather conditions.These also detected trends and potential sources of opticalturbulence

.

National Weather Service charts summarized thesynoptic scale activity over and around the Arizona sitesbetween 17-28 September 1989. The six standard pressurelevels referenced included:

EquivalentPressure Height Above

(mb) Sea Level (km)

Surface 0.1850 1.4700 3.0500 5.5300 9.2200 12.0

It should be noted that the equivalent heights indicatedabove represent averaged values. Actual height will vary,for any given pressure level, as Low and High pressuresystems traverse the site.

10

Appendices B (Anderson Mesa) and C (USNO) furnish a moredetailed review and summary of the National Weather Servicesynoptic charts for each session.

11

IV. DATA ANALYSIS

A. OPTICAL DATA ANALYSIS

1. Transverse Coherence Length Data

Transverse coherence length data acquired at bothAnderson Mesa (20-25 September) and USNO (26-28 September)display dynamic atmospheric conditions. Table 2 synoptizesthe individual transverse coherence length measurements intonightly averages, standard deviations, and standarddeviations of the means. Assuming similar opticalconditions at both sites, Figure 3 presents all the averagevalues from Table 2, along with their one standard deviationenvelopes (dashed lines). The increase of average robetween 20-25 September indicates a transition from anoptically turbulent atmosphere to a more optically stableenvironment. Though the last three sessions (USNO) haveaverage ro values less than the peak of 196 mm (25September-Anderson Mesa), their magnitudes indicate that theatmospheric conditions were still less turbulent (greatermagnitude) than the initial four sessions. The normalizedpercent frequency distribution plots (Figure 4) confirm the20 to 28 September trends just described. The bin intervalselected was 10 mm. This is the sane bin-size used as inthe un-normalized percent frequency distributions - AppendixE.

TABLE 2. TRANSVERSE COHERENCE LENGTH STATISTICS

Number Average Standard StandardDate of Data r Deviation Deviation(UTC) Points (mm) (mm) of Mean (mm)

20 Sept 150 41.8 7.0 0.621 Sept 366 68.9 19.1 1.022 Sept 373 76.4 30.2 1.623 Sept 452 91.2 24.4 1.125 Sept 328 196.4 75.9 4.2

26 Sept 276 157.0 63.4 3.827 Sept 542 99.9 27.2 1.228 Sept 286 140.0 40.5 2.4

12

AVERAGE TRANSVERSE COHERENCE LENGTHS1989 September 20-28

S

9O

2

I

Fig 3. Average Transverse Coherence Lengths (89 Sept 20-28)Solid line is data average; Dashed line is standarddeviation of the data.

13

NORMALIZED FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONAnderson Mesa, Az - 1989 September 20-25

Iit

I

1.33

o

-5 -

An./, N Stpt 20/I « » i ii

/ fit i

— 8«pt 21

'; \ i x n 8«0t 22/

•I Hi ill Sept 23'• 5 i i » /i

': I II 1 MSept 26

"J i » i ii1 j i» i i i- N

/in[l

/ \ n ii i i inl • ii ii ii i/i

K1 * 1 i » 1 I U 1 A

i \ i i ii • i • /i

• 1' III ii I n l I

ns i ii i / i i i

I ? » J \ i u i/i f

I]f

i \ / N \ \ ' i i \ i

t i \ 1 \ \\ 1/ *4

" Li\ i \-Xr. 1

, /*'*If i \ 1 ^ -N V ' "\ - < \JJ . V I -. !^. —-*. ,-•-.

i .

'-1 • >..*.

/oo 200 300rfl (mm.)

400 500

USNO, Flagstaff. Az - 1989 September 26-28

I

T

I9

£ -

o

1 '•. I

S«pt 26

''"*-

i-\''

—-3«pt 27-

1 • 1 / 1 '

8*pt 26

- / ! i / \

' -

;'/ \

-

_' if 1

' A / ' \i

-

-

/ / i \ i

- / / 1 A:/ / i -V

/ i 1 :.\-

' / ^ *\

/./- 1 . . X— ". A 'V i

'^. TsXV

700 200 300rO (mm)

400 600

Fig A. Normalized Transverse Coherence Length FrequencyDistribution for: (a)Anderson Mesa, Az (89 Sept20-25); (b) Naval Observatory, Az (89 Sept 26-28)

14

An inspection of the un-normalized frequencydistribution (Appendix E) shows that fifty percent of the

20 September sampling session is around 50 mm. Thecorresponding empirical seeing quality histogram for thissession (Appendix E) rates 90% of the samples taken as Poor.All subsequent nights display un-normalized peak frequencieswhich contain less than 28% of the sampling set. The lackof a dominant peak frequency implies a broad range ofoptical conditions in each sampling night.

The USNO normalized frequency distribution (Figure4) displays a drop in the peak frequency from approximately130 mm (26 September) to about 80 mm before increasing to100-110 mm. Qualitatively, the Good to Excellent conditionsof 26 September decay into Mediocre/Good on 27 September.The 28 September session, however, displays predominantlyGood conditions (84% Frequency: See Appendix E).

Figure 5 presents a normalized frequencydistribution based on the accumulation of all the AndersonMesa and USNO transverse coherence length samples. Asbefore, the bin-size is 10 mm. Despite the various dynamicatmospheric conditions, the experiment's mode isapproximately 100 mm. A minor (second order) peak ispresent at 200 mm.

2. Isoplanatic Angle Data

Isoplanatic angle measurements are especiallysensitive to turbulence aloft, particularly at thetropopause level (12-20 km). From 20 to 28 September 1989,the percent frequency modes are typically less than 25% ofthe dataset (Appendix F) . Since the lack of a dominantfrequency is also a characteristic of the r datasets (seeabove), this implies that broad turbulent contributionsoccurred throughout the entire atmosphere.

Table 3 condenses the individual isoplanatic anglemeasurements into nightly averages, standard deviations, andstandard deviations of the means. Assuming similar opticalconditions at both sites, Figure 6 displays all the averagevalues from Table 3, along with their one standard deviationenvelopes (dashed lines). The increasing trend between 17and 22 September is consistent with the gradually increasingtransverse coherence length trend over the same time period.This implies that turbulence in the upper atmospheredominates the data. Between 17 and 23 September, themajority of the average isoplanatic angle values sampled

15

CUMULATIVE NORMALIZED FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION1989 September 20-28

3

TX

9

*3

100 200 300 400rO (10 mm. bin interval)

500

Fig 5. Cumulative Normalized r Frequency Distributionfor the Anderson Mesa/USNO 1989 Sept 20-28 session

16

TABLE 3. ISOPLANATIC ANGLE STATISTICS

Number Average Standard StandardDate of Data 8o Deviation Deviation(UTC) Points (urad) (urad

)

of Mean (urad)

17 Sept 22 5.97 1.31 0.2820 Sept 1637 6.84 2.80 0.0721 Sept 3175 9.28 2.14 0.0422 Sept 3017 11.17 1.91 0.0423 Sept 3058 7.17 1.60 0.0325 Sept 1339 15.72 3.12 0.08

26 Sept 728 15.56 3.64 0.1427 Sept 2213 12.06 2.72 0.0628 Sept 1166 11.25 2.34 0.07

5

Io

ec

|2

AVERAGE ISOPLANATIC ANGLES1989 September 17-28

20

15 -

10 -

6 -

/•-"—

\

/ \

/ \

/ \

- / // /

/ /

.

^^** s ^ N \ v / /

/ / \ V /— /s /

\

- /

-

I I Ii i i i i i

I t t

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 26 26 27 23 29Day (UTC)

Fig 6. Average Isoplanatic Angle (89 Sept 17-28) - Solidline is data average; Dashed line is standarddeviation of the data.

17

range 6-12 urad (Poor to Mediocre conditions). The impliedabundance of turbulence aloft is consistent with theattributes of cold fronts traversing a site (Appendix B).The least turbulent conditions sampled during thisexperiment occur 25-26 September. The dominant quality ofseeing is Good, 12-20 urad (Appendix F). Averageisoplanatic angles for these two sessions is 15.7 and 15.6,respectively.

The decreasing average isoplanatic angles of 26through 28 September (Figure 6) indicates a transition tomore turbulent conditions. Though the average isoplanaticangle decreased by 22% between 26 and 27 September, thenormalized frequency distribution (Figure 7) for thesenights displays equivalent peak frequencies. On 27September, the Good conditions (52%) are equivalent to theMediocre/Poor quality of seeing (49%) statistically(Appendix F). The last night of measurements (28 September)extends the evolution to more turbulent conditions aloftwith 38% of the dataset between 12-20 urad (Good) and 62%between 4-12 urad (Poor/Mediocre).

Figure 8 presents a normalized frequencydistribution based on the accumulation of all the AndersonMesa and USNO isoplanatic angle samples. The bin-size is 1

urad. The broad range of isoplanatic angles (centered at 9

urad) highlights the extensive atmospheric variations aloftduring the experiment period.

Note: The 17 September data had a 22 sample count beforecloud cover terminated the session. The limitedmeasurements deceptively increase the percent frequencystatistics and therefore, these statistics should beignored

.

B. RAWINSONDE DATA ANALYSIS

Upper-air balloon measurements made at Anderson Mesa andUSNO sampled both the thermodynamic (pressure, temperature,humidity) and horizontal wind information (wind directionand speed). Since the reprocessed Loran-C balloon windinformation was unavailable for inclusion at the time ofpublication, this report includes only the thermodynamicvariables

.

18

NORMALIZED FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONAnderson Mesa, AZ - 1989 September 17-25

3

X

Ik

£ -

o

I k^' i\ ; »

1 <rv \/ \ f \ 3«pt 17

ll H^ i \ i

1 AI»\ i" \ /i d#pt 20

*:

/P» i\ \ / \ 8«pt 21

//// \\ i •.. XI 8spt 22

S -—Sept 231 1 1 / / / I '

»" \ / \

\ 8«pt 26

i -7 1 '« A ' \

r M ; / 1'*'' / '*

* \

i'1 • / !' '* / *

' 1 / 1 : / WW / \ \ AM' 1:7 Ml ' \ » ^\' ' // \ '* / ": \ \

1 ll III /I ' \ 1 \ \1 ll f / i \ * u \ \

' t :l/ /' W \ \ \' f ;f /' /» \ \ \

' J / /' /*\ \ '< ». \

.-V 1-1 .• -> I *0» *-_J •

10 20Jaopla.na.tic Ingle (urad)

30

USNO, Flagstaff, Az - 1989 September 26-28

2

t

P

Ik

"2

•3

o

jS -

1 ^-Swt 26

If:

1

\ \- 3#pt 27

. l[ \\ \ - 8«pt 28f J j •A t

- i

h

i;

/;

•M A A

y v \

-: \ \

\ \

-

/ /

/ /

':\ \\ V

/H 1

\

\

/ i /i^-^

10 20JsopUtnatic Angle (urad)

30

Fig 7. Normalized Isoplanatic Angle Frequency Distributionfor: (a) Anderson Mesa, Az (89 Sept 17-25);(b) Naval Observatory, Az (89 Sept 26-28).

19

I

X

5

Ii.

K

3

CUMULATIVE NORMALIZED FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION1989 September 17-28

10 20 30laojUanaiic Angle (1 urad bin interval)

Fig 8. Cumulative Normalized O Frequency Distributionfor the Anderson Mesa/USNO 1989 Sept 17-28 session

20

Thermodynamic soundings, presented in the form ofvertical atmospheric profiles (Appendices G and H), andsummarized in Table 4, serve as a guide to detect theprobable locations of optically turbulent layers. Ofparticular importance is the height of the atmosphericboundary layer (ABL) and the number of temperature inversionlevels in each sounding, and the variation with time in theheight of the atmospheric freezing level.

Low-level wind jet maxima and relatively large windshears often occur near the top of the atmospheric boundarylayer, as well as other (higher) levels which display asimilar temperature inversion. Since wind shear andmechanical mixing are correlated, all temperature inversionlayers within a given sounding are suspect as regions ofpossible optical turbulence. Hence, the more inversionlevels an atmospheric profile possesses, the greater thepotential for there to be turbulence which limits theeffective optical "seeing". This is especially true whenthe sounding inversions are strong (dT > 5 Celsius) andcoincide with a correspondingly large drop in the relativehumidity (dH > 40%), as is often the case at the top of theABL.

Table 4 presents information to help evaluate the seeingquality of a night, as based upon the above assumptions.From it, we surmise that the night of 26-27 September(soundings USN92620 and USN92703) had possibly good seeingat USNO while the night of 20-21 September (soundingsANM92020 and ANM92104) had potentially mediocre seeing atAnderson Mesa.

A rigorous rawinsonde analysis is possible only with theinclusion of detailed wind information, particularly thelevels of high wind shear. Without such data, only a crudeassessment of the potential seeing quality based onstrengths, locations, and the number of temperatureinversion levels can be made.

C. GENERAL SYNOPTIC WEATHER REVIEW

1. Anderson Mesa, Arizona

The synoptic weather data acquired during the 17-25September 1989 Anderson Mesa measurement session fit intotwo categories: frontal and non-frontal conditions. Forthis application, frontal weather is defined by either thepresence of an upper level trough or the passage of a

21

TABLE 4. THERMODYNAMIC INFORMATION - ANDERSON MESA/USNO

Sounding SiteName Code

(AM/USNO)

Number of Height MSL Height MSLTemperature of Atmospheric FreezingInversion Boundary Layer+# Level+Layers* (m) (m)

ANM91921 AM 6 3364 3636

ANM92020 AM 6 3614 5064ANM92104 AM 7 3038 5092

ANM92120 AM 4 2945 4993ANM92204 AM 6 3042 5114

ANM92220 AM 5 2816,4843 4621ANM92304 AM 5 3048,4778 4512

ANM92504 AM 6 5082 4662

USN92522 USNO 7 5045 4493

USN92620 USNO 3 5588 4595USN92703 USNO 3 3587,4687 4558

USN92720 USNO 4 3784 (?) 5220

* A temperature inversion layer, in this case, is defined asany layer displaying either increasing or constant ambienttemperature with increasing height.

If When multiple levels are selected, the higher layer is theresidual atmospheric boundary layer (ABL) developed duringthe daylight hours, while the lower level is the newlydeveloping nighttime ABL.

+ Height MSL = height above mean sea level (meters).

22

surface cold/warm front. Both categories of unsettledweather will affect the atmospheric optical qualityadversely . Characteristically, non-frontal weather hasvery stable upper level atmospheric conditions, withgenerally stagnant air and a high pressure center or ridgeoverhead. While the cold fronts traversed Anderson Mesa,average transverse coherence lengths for this site rangedfrom 42 to 112 mm (17-22 September). Non-frontal conditionsgenerated an average transverse coherence length of 196 mm(25 September). Weather conditions for 23 Septemberprovided elements of both frontal and non-frontalcharacteristics. For more detailed information, seeAppendix B.

2. USNO, Arizona

Transverse coherence lengths measured at the USNO(26-28 September 1989) were principally Good (100-200 mm).The synoptic weather pattern during the 26-28 September 1989sampling session included a High pressure system between 700and 200 mb. The surface conditions were variable/unsettled.Surface winds averaged 5-10 knots (kt) from the southernquadrants. During the entire measurement session, windsaloft were from the western quadrants at 50 kt and less.Appendix C provides additional synoptic weather information.

23

V. DATA SUMMARY

Table 5 consolidates key optical/meteorologicalparameters acquired between 17 and 28 September 1989. Whileseveral elements within it appear earlier, the "Empirical %>= 'Good' " columns (Parts A and B) are seen for the firsttime. Here, the Optical Empirical Seeing Quality scaledefined in Appendicies E and F quantifies the percentage ofthe individual datum points within an observing session thatfall in the Good or better classifications. Another columnin the meteorological parameters section (Part C), the"Frontal/Non-Frontal/Transistional", aids in interpretingthe potential optical quality over the night. Here,transitional implies a changeover period from either frontalor non-frontal weather conditions, while frontal and non-frontal are as defined in Section IV.

The following discussion assimilates the variousimportant elements presented previously but separately inthe data analysis section, and codified below (with the helpof Table 5) into one succinct summary.

Optical conditions gradually improved during the initialfour nights of data acquisition. The meteorological forcingmay be inferred from the rawinsonde time sections in Figure9. Here, a significant change from a cold to warm air massappears as a sharp increase in freezing level heights (over1400 m) from the 20 September minimum. Likewise, the 750and 700 mb pressure surfaces also confirm this trend bydisplaying a gradual, but definite, increase in theirheights (Figure 9).

A transition from frontal to non-frontal conditionsoccurs on 23 September 1989. Despite the overallimprovement in optical conditions, residual turbulence aloftappears as a temporary decrease in isoplanatic angles (23September )

.

The most favorable optical conditions occur between 25and 26 September. Mean values for both isoplanatic anglesand transverse coherence lengths are "Good". The percent ofoptical data registering greater than or equal to these Goodconditions is more than 82%. The large number oftemperature inversions displayed in the 25-26 Septemberrawinsonde profiles, implying possibly poor opticalconditions, can be explained. The main cause of optical

24

TABLE 5. SUMMARY OF OPTICAL/METEOROLOGICAL DATA - ANDERSONMESA (1989 Sept 17-25)/ USNO (1989 Sept 26-28)

A. Transverse Coherence Length: B. Isoplanatic Angle:

Sept Mean EmDir ica 1: Mean EmDir ical ••

Date Value Dominant % > = Value Dominant % > =

( UTC ) ( mm

)

Conditions "Good" (urad

)

Conditions "Good"

17 5.97 Poor(100%)20 41.8 Poor(90%) 6.84 Poor(65%) 2

21 68.3 Mediocre( 81%) 6 9.28 Mediocre(57%) 1222 76.4 Mediocre(70%) 16 | 11.17 Mediocre(63%) 3323 91.2 Mediocre(65%) 32 7.17 Poor (66%)25 196.4 Good(52%) 96 15.72 Good(78%) 89

26 157.0 Good(66%) 86 15.56 Good (69%) 8327 99.9 Mediocre(54%) 46 12.06 Good(52%) 5228 139.7 Good(84%) 90 11.25 Mediocre( 54%) 38

C. Atmospheric Structure/Synoptic Weather Conditions

Frontal/ Height MSL Number ofSept Non-frontal/ of Freezing TemperatureDate Transitional Level*# Inversion(UTC) (F/NF/T) (m) Layersf

17 F20 F 3636 6

21 F 5064,5092 6,722 F 4993,5114 4,6 .

23 T 4621,4512 5,525 NF 4662 6

26 NF 4493 7

27 T 4595,4558 3,328 F 5220 4

* Height MSL = height above mean sea level (meters).

# Multiple heights represent more than one sounding.

+ Temperature inversion, in this case, is defined as anylayer displaying either increasing or constant ambienttemperature with increasing height.

25

turbulence is density variations. These variations are afunction of both the temperature gradient and wind shear(Richardson Number). During 25-26 September, the authorssuspect that the wind sheer was not sufficient to induceturbulence in these layers.

With theatmospheric o

effect was i

lengths (27September )

.

Figure 9 rafrontal acticoherence 1

potentially t

the transversor equal toqual ity

.

return of frontaptical conditionsnitially recordedSeptember), thenA sudden height i

winsonde freezingvity. During thengths maintainurbulent optical ce coherence lengththe Good classif

1 activity (27-28 September),begin to deteriorate. Thein the transverse coherencethe isoplanatic angles (28

ncrease (over 650 m) in thelevels marks the onset of

e last session, transverselarge values despite the

onditions. Ninety percen t ofs collected are greater thanicat ion of empirical seeing

26

Anderson Meaa/USNO - 1989 September 19-27

Rawinsonde Freezing Levels

5500

5000 -

4500 -

4000 -

350018 20 22 24 26

Time (UTC-Decimal Days)28 30

Pressure Surface Heights

?

3

3400

3200

3000

2800

2800

2400

-A-7GC mb L*V« (m)750 mb l«v« (m)

/"***-** .-tr

18 20 22 24 26Time (UTC-Decimal Days)

28 30

Fig 9. Rawir.sonde Freezing Levels and Pressure SurfaceHeights recorded between 1989 Sept 20-28 UTC.

27

VI. RECOMMENDATIONS

The original intent of this study was to evaluate theFlagstaff, Arizona region as a potential site for a largebaseline stellar interferometer. The snapshot of opticalconditions sampled over Anderson Mesa (17-25 September) andthe United States Naval Observatory - Flagstaff (26-28September) displays a broad range of atmospheric events.Consistent with other areas, the optical turbulence overFlagstaff increases with the onset of frontal activity.Despite the constant colliding of cold and warm air massestypical for this area in September, significant Good toExcellent seeing conditions occurred. Knowing thatExcellent seeing exists under less than ideal weatherpatterns, one must ask how often these Excellent seeingconditions prevail. Sampling every night for years would bethe ideal recommendation. A more realistic recommendation,however, is to improve the statistical sampling by makingseasonal 7-10 night long snapshots of optical data whilepursuing a climatological study of the thermodynamic andshear producing events. In summary, it is the authors*opinions that the Flagstaff region warrants furtherconsideration and measurements.

28

APPENDIX A. OPTICAL VARIABLES DEFINED

Two parameters that characterize atmospheric opticalturbulence are the transverse coherence length, r , and theisoplanatic angle, 9o . The following description of theseoptical parameters is borrowed from Vaucher (1989)Correlation of Atmospheric Optical Turbulence andMeteorological Measurements :

A. Transverse Coherence Length

"The transverse coherence length, r 0/ is a measureof the lateral autocorrelation length of the electric fieldpropagating through the turbulent atmosphere. Because ofthe Fourier transform properties of an imaging system, r isalso a measure of the spatial frequency response of theatmosphere, the atmospheric modulation transfer function.Viewed as a component of a linear system, the atmosphereacts like a low pass filter suppressing the high spatialfrequencies, or details of an image."

The coherence length for a plane wave, r is

r Q = 2.1 [1.46 kA C 2 (z) dz ]

~ 3/s.

"The parameter r represents the distance transverseto the direction of propagation where, on average, thecorrelation of the electric field is e~ 3 -* A (Fried, 1966).

To interpret r consider the following:

1. For an optical aperture d smaller than the coherencelength, the electric field across the aperture is coherent.The angular resolution will be proportional to "X /d

.

2. For an optical aperture larger than the coherencelength, the correlation across the aperture is limited toregions of r . The electromagnetic intensities across theaperture will add (energy is conserved). The opticalsystem's average angular resolution will be proportional toX/r . (Walters, Favier and Hines, 1979).

29

3. Visually, for apertures smaller than r , atmosphericturbulence results in image centroid motion, a processcalled 'tilt'. In telescopes larger than r 0/ the image isbroken up into multiple speckles, each associated with a rosized region. The angle ^/r determines the overallenvelope of the complex image.

4. With respect to measuring the atmospheric opticalturbulence, large r values, such as 200-400 mm, indicate asmall amount of optical turbulence is present along theintegrated path. Conversely, small ro magnitudes, such as20-40 mm, imply a large amount of optical turbulence existsalong the integrated path."

B. Isoplanatic Angle

The isoplanatic angle, 9o, is an angular measurementof spatial coherence between two intersecting rays (Walters,1985). Given two light sources a small angle 9 apart, therandom atmospheric phase fluctuations along the two pathsare different. At the atmosphere top the two paths undergounique path distortions. At the surface, the turbulentinteraction is common to both rays. 9o is the angle betweenrays such that the accumulated phase fluctuations arecorrelated to within e -2- of a perfect correlation.

Fried (1982) develops a mathematical representationfor 9o for aperture d >> r :

= [ 2.91 k

a

s(z) z s/3 dz ]

-3/3

where k is 2rc/X i wavenumber of light; C„index structure parameter; and, z is theground .

"

is the refractivealtitude from the

"When 9o magnitudes are small (1-4 urad), theoptical turbulence along the integrated path, and especiallyaround the tropopause level, is large. Conversely, when 9ovalues are large (12-20 urad), optical turbulence is small."

30

APPENDIX B. DAILY SYNOPTIC WEATHER SUMMARY-ANDERSON MESA,AZ

Site: Anderson Mesa, Flagstaff, ArizonaTime Period: 17-25 September 1989

Equipment Used: Transverse Coherence Length SensorIsoplanatic Angle SensorRawinsondesNational Weather Service Synoptic Summaries

Data acquired during the 17-25 September 1989 Anderson Mesameasurement session can be generalized into two categories:frontal and non-frontal conditions. While the cold frontstraversed Anderson Mesa, transverse coherence lengths forthis site ranged from 50 to 150 mm (17-22 September 1989)."Non-frontal" conditions generated transverse coherencelengths between 100 and 450 mm (25 September 1989).September 23, 1989 provided elements of both frontal andnon-frontal characteristics.

31

ANDERSON MESA, ARIZONA (1989)

Observations: 17 Sept, 0030 hr - 25 Sept, 0600 hr (local time)17 Sept, 0730 hr - 25 Sept, 1300 hr (UTC)

GENERAL SYNOPTIC METEOROLOGICAL SUMMARY:

17 September 1989: An approaching front coupled with 7/10to 9/10 cloud cover severely limits the 17 September 1989sampling session. Though the polar jet is still west of thesite, the isoplanatic angles acquired average only 7 and 4

urad .

20 September 1989: The 20 September 1989 observing beginssoon after sunset (approximately 0230 UTC). Dense cloudcover terminates the session around 1000 UTC. Thetransverse coherence lengths are acquired between the partlycloudy skies.

Between 1200 UTC, 19 September and 1200 UTC, 20 September,a cold front crosses over the site generating quite a bit ofunsettled (turbulent) conditions. A 70-90 knot (kt) polarjet (300 and 200 mb levels) over the site completes the veryturbulent profile (atmospheric structure).

21 September 1989: Post-frontal weather conditions persistover the observation site. The front is about 4 degreeslatitude (440 km) east of Anderson Mesa, Arizona (0000 UTC).The north-northeasterly flow over northern Arizonacompliments the development of a surface High pressuresystem centered over Wyoming. From 850-300 mb, the site issituated between a Low centered over Wyoming/Utah and a Highover Texas/Mexico. At 200 mb (only), the site experiences asouthwesterly 70-90 kt jet. During the 0000-1200 UTC timeperiod the jet moves from directly overhead northward. By1200 UTC, the site is on the trailing edge of theaccelerated 70 kt westerly winds.

22 September 1989: Borderline Good seeing conditions(Appendices E and F) coincide with the gradual return to a

non-frontal (non-turbulent) environment. The surface High

32

over Wyoming is more organized. From 850 to 500 mb a Highpressure system dominates the non-coastal western states(including Arizona). Aloft, however, the site continues tostraddle a Low centered over the Dakotas and a High overMexico. Winds are northwesterly and generally weak at 30-50kt.

23 September 1989: A thermal Low over Baha/Mexico proper isaccompanied by scattered clouds and south/southeasterlysurface winds over much of Arizona. A cold front overnortheastern New Mexico moves southwest over New Mexicotowards Arizona. These southeasterly winds persist from thesurface to 700 mb (500 mb chart was unavailable foranalyses). Throughout the 700-200 mb layer, a High pressuresystem/ridge exists over the site. No jet stream is evidentover the immediate site.

24 September 1989: Extensive cloud cover prohibits opticalmeasurements

.

25 September 1989: Both optical sensors indicate Good toVery Good conditions (Appendices E and F) . The "trof"generating September 24th' s abundant cloud cover is overNew Mexico. Skies are initially 1/10 to 4/10 covered. Overthe site, the sky transitions from cloudy to clear. Between850-200 mb levels, a high develops over the site. Winds aregenerally from the northern quadrants at moderate windspeeds ( <50 kt )

.

33

APPENDIX C. DAILY SYNOPTIC WEATHER SUMMARY-USNO, AZ

Site: United States Naval Observatory (USNO),Flagstaff, Arizona

Time Period: 26-28 September 1989Equipment Used: Transverse Coherence Length Sensor

Isoplanatic Angle SensorRawinsondesNational Weather Service Synoptic Charts

Optical data acquired during the 26-28 (UTC) September 1989USNO measurement session were taken in hopes of deriving acorrelation between the USNO arc-second and the NPStransverse coherence length measurements. Because the NavalObservatory is located near Anderson Mesa, Arizona theoptical values/meteorological analysis serves a dualpurpose

.

In general, the transverse coherence lengths were Good (100-200 mm). Consistently high values (average valueapproximately 200 mm) were observed between 0845-1045 UTC on26 September. Somewhat low values (100-70 mm) were sampledbetween 0830-1230 UTC, 27 September.

The synoptic weather pattern during the 26-28 September 1989sampling session included a High pressure system between 700and 200 mb . The surface conditions were variable/unsettled.Surface winds were generally from the southern quadrants at5-10 knots (kt). During the entire measurement session,winds aloft were from the western quadrants at 50 kt andless .

34

UNITED STATES NAVAL OBSERVATORY, ARIZONA (1989)

Observations

:

25 Sept, 2145 hr - 2726 Sept / 0445 hr - 28

Sept, 2315 hrSept, 0615 hr

( local(UTC)

time )

GENERAL SYNOPTIC METEOROLOGICAL SUMMARY:

26 September 1989: The sampling session begins around 0445UTC and is terminated around 1045 UTC due to cloud cover.The optical values measured are generally Good to Very Good.The synoptic weather pattern over the site consists of aHigh pressure/Ridge structure from 700 to 200 mb . Belowthis layer is an unorganized Low with just enough energy tosupport local cloud development.

27 September 1989: The synoptic weather pattern over thesite still displays a High pressure/Ridge structure from 700to 200 mb . The surface to 850 mb remains unsettled.However, the site appears to be indirectly influenced by asurface High centered over northeastern New Mexico/Oklahomapanhandle (850 mb ) . Surface to 850 mb winds are southerly,southeasterly at 5-10 knots (kt).

28 September 1989: A High pressure system persists in theupper layers (700-200 mb ) . The surface to 850 mb layerappears to be on the boarder of a High centered overColorado. Surface to 850 mb winds are southeasterly(southwesterly) at 5-10 kt.

During the entire sampling session, no upper level polar jetis observed directly over the Naval Observatory site. Windsaloft are generally from the western quadrants at 50 kt andless .

35

APPENDIX D. RAW OPTICAL DATA (1989 September 17-28)

Appendix D displays all the processedTransverse Coherence Lengths and Isoplanatic Angles sampledbetween 17-28 September 1989. Each figure displays theindividual points per night.

36

.3

Io5

ANDERSON MESA. AZ - 1989 SEPTEMBER 17

Isoplanatic Angle

Time (UTC)

Fig 10. Anderson Mesa, Az Optical Data: 1989 September 17

37

ANDERSON MESA. AZ - 19B9 SEPTEMBER 20Transverse Coherence Length

I

I

Isoplanatic Angle

I

.2

i

!


38


Transverse Coherence Length

I

0»

8

200

150

100

BO

_J I I i I i I i I i I I I i I i I i I i I L

2 3 4 S 6 7 B 9 10 11 12 13

Time (UTC)

Isoplanatic Angle

i

I

20

15

10

i ii ' i

i ' iI i I i_l i I i I i—I—

i

I L

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B B 10 11 12 13

Time (UTC)


39

ANDERSON MESA, AZ - 1969 SEPTEMBER 22Transverse Coherence Length

Ok

300

8

zoo

100 - n r

Q I I L_J l_J I l__] I I I I I I I 1 I

/ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Time (UTC)

Isoplanatic Angle

20

.3

i

!

15 -

10

> i iI

i ii I i I i I i I i \—i—I—i—I—

L

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 11 12 13

Time (UTC)

Pig 13. Anderson Mesa, Az Optical Data: 1989 September 22

40

ANDERSON MESA. AZ - 1989 SEPTEMBER 23Transverse Coherence Length

Q»

250

ZOO

160

100

60

i I I I I I I I I I I i I i__l i I I I i I i I L

/ 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 11 12 13

Time (UTC)

Isoplanatic Angle

I

I

I

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9Time (UTC)

10 11 12 13


41

ANDERSON MESA. AZ - 1989 SEPTEMBER 25Transverse Coherence Length

i

I8

500

4O0 -

300 -

200 -

100 -

B 10 11

Time (UTC)12 13 14-

Isoplanatic Angle

I

.3

I

10 11

Time (UTC)


42

NAVAL OBSERVATORY. AZ - 1989 SEPTEMBER 28Transverse Coherence Length

S

5

a>

soo

400

300 -

200 -

100 -

7 BTime (UTC)

10 11

Isoplanatic Angle

5

I

4 7 8Time (UTC)

Fig 16. USNO, Az Optical Data: 1989 Sept 26

43


O

300

200

100

' I I I I I I II I I I I I I I 1 L

8 7 8 9Time (UTC)

10 11 12 13

Isoplanatic Angle

30

I

I

to

10 -

Q l_l I' I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 1 1 L.

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 S 10 11 12 13

Time (UTC)


44


S

9O

500

400 -

300 -

200 -

100 -

3 4 5Time (UTC)

Isoplanatic Angle

5

I


45

APPENDIX E. TRANSVERSE COHERENCE LENGTH STATISTICS

Appendix E presents the transverse coherencelength un-normalized percent frequency distribution for eachobserving night (bin interval is 10 mm). Empirical seeingquality histograms are also included. The bin intervalsselected for this qualitative interpretation are a productof approximately 50 site surveys spanning 18-40 degreeslatitude and 65-156 degrees longitude. The specificempirical seeing quality intervals are:

Empirical roSeeing measurementQual itv (mm)

Poor 00 - 50Mediocre 51 - 100Good 101 - 200Very Good 201 - 300Excellent 301 - 500

46

ANDERSON MESA. AZ - 1969 SEPTEMBER 20r„ Percent Frequency Distribution

I

100 200 SOO 400r Bin Interval* (10 mm)

500

Empirical Seeing Quality

9i.

100

Poor Mediocre Good Very Good Sxoattexit

Pig 19. Anderson Mesa, Az r Q Statistics: 1989 Sept 20

47


r. Percent Frequency Distribution

I

100 ZOO 300 400re Bin Interval* (JO mm)

500


r

i

Poor Mediocre Good Very Good Excellent

Fig 20. Anderson Mesa, Az r Statistics: 1989 Sept 21

48

ANDERSON MESA. AZ - 1969 SEPTEMBER 22r. Percent Frequency Distribution

3

IK

100 ZOO 300r. Bin Interval* (10 mm)

400 500


.K

i9

100


Fig 21. Anderson Mesa, Az r Q Statistics: 1989 Sept 22

49

ANDERSON MESA. AZ - 1989 SEPTEMBER 23r Percent Frequency Distribution

3

!

100 200 300ra Bin Interval* (10 mm)

400 500


I

I


Pig 22. Anderson Mesa, Az r Statistics: 1989 Sept 23

50

ANDERSON MESA. AZ - 1969 SEPTEMBER 25r Percent Frequency Distribution

I

100 200 300 400r Bin Intervals (10 mm)

500


JK

Poor Mediocre Good Vary Good Excellent

Fig 23. Anderson Mesa, Az r Statistics: 1989 Sept 25

51

NAVAL OBSERVATORY. AZ - 1969 SEPTEMBER 26r8 Percent Frequency Distribution

3

!

100 ZOO 300 400rc Bin Intervals (10 mm)

soo


>?

no


Fig 24. USNO, Az r« Statistics: 1989 Sept 26

52

NAVAL OBSERVATORY. AZ - 1969 SEPTEMBER 27r Percent Frequency Distribution

!

100 ZOO 300 400r Bin Intervals (10 mm)

500


«


Fig 25. USNO, Az r D Statistics: 1989 Sept 27

53

NAVAL OBSERVATORY. AZ - 1969 SEPTEMBER 28r Percent Frequency Distribution

r

100 200 300 400r_ Bin Interval* (10 mm)

500


r

i2


Fig 26. USNO, Az r Q Statistics: 1989 Sept 28

54

APPENDIX F. ISOPLANATIC ANGLE STATISTICS

To assist with the interpretation of theisoplanatic angle measurements, an un-normalized frequencydistribution and an empirical seeing quality plot for eachsampling session have been provided in Appendix F. The bin-size for this frequency distribution is 1 urad. Theempirical seeing quality graphs use the following binintervals

:

Empirical SoSeeing measurementQuality ( urad

)

Very Poor - 4.0Poor 4.1 - 8.0Mediocre 8.1 - 12.0Good 12.1 - 20.0Very Good 20.1 - 30.0Excellent 30.1 - 50.0

55


60 Percent Frequency Distribution

I

10 20do Bin Interval* (f urad)


t«3at

I

Very Poor Poor Mediocre Good Very Good Excellent

Fig 27. Anderson Mesa, Az Go Statistics: 1989 Sept 17

56

ANDERSON MESA, AZ - 1989 SEPTEMBER 20Go Percent Frequency Distribution

I

10 £09o Bin Interval* (1 urad)



Fig 28. Anderson Mesa, Az o Statistics: 1989 Sept 20

57

ANDERSON MESA. AZ - 1989 SEPTEMBER 21Oo Percent Frequency Distribution

3

10 20&o Bin Interval* (1 urad)


tf«»-.

a

<8

100

lory Poor Poor Mediocre Good Very Good ftrrdlrnt

Fig 29. Anderson Mesa, Az 9o Statistics: 1989 Sept 21

58

ANDERSON MESA. AZ - 1969 SEPTEMBER 22do Percent Frequency Distribution

!

10 £09o Bin Interval* (1 wad)


100


Fig 30. Anderson Mesa, Az Go Statistics: 1989 Sept 22

59

ANDERSON MESA. AZ - 1969 SEPTEMBER 2360 Percent Frequency Distribution

I

JO £00o 5in /nwnxxit (/ urad)

Bmpirlcal Seeing Quality

31

i

Very Poor Poor Mediocre Good Very Good SroeUent

Fig 31. Anderson Mesa, Az 8o Statistics: 1989 Sept 23

60

ANDERSON MESA. AZ - 1989 SEPTEMBER 25Oo Percent Frequency Distribution

ft

10 toBo Bin Interval* (1 vsrad)


Verj Poor Poor Mediocre Oood Verj Good Excellent

Fig 32. Anderson Mesa, Az 8 Statistics: 1989 Sept 25

61

NAVAL OBSERVATORY. AZ - 1969 SEPTEMBER 2660 Percent Frequency Distribution

3

!

10 20Oo Bin Interval* (1 urad)


91

100

Verjr Poor Poor Mediocre Oood Very Good trrHlrnt

Fig 33. USNO, Az O Statistics: 1989 Sept 26

62

NAVAL OBSERVATORY. AZ - 1980 SEPTEMBER 27Go Percent Frequency Distribution

3

10 209o Bin InUrvaim (1 urad)



Fig 34. USNO, Az 9o Statistics: 1989 Sept 27

63

NAVAL OBSERVATORY. AZ - 1089 SEPTEMBER 2860 Percent Frequency Distribution

3

!

10 BO&o Bin Interval* (1 urad)


2

Very Poor Poor Mediocre Oood Very Good Excellent

Fig 35. USNO, Az ©o Statistics: 1989 Sept 28

64

APPENDIX G. RAWINSONDE THERMODYNAMIC PROFILES(Entire Sounding)

Appendix G includes two tables of balloonlaunch specifications, plus the entire rawinsondethermodynamic profiles for both Anderson Mesa (1989 Sept 19-25 MST) and USNO (1989 Sept 26-28 MST), Flagstaff, Arizona.To facilitate quick inspection, all sounding heights arewith respect to the local ground level. The following siteelevations allow the conversion to height above mean sealevel (MSL):

ANDERSON MESA(31" telescope dome): 7210 feet or 2198 meters,USNO(61" telescope dome): 7560 feet or 2304 meters.

TABLE 6. BALLOON LAUNCH SCHEDULE - ANDERSON MESA/USNO

Local LocalSounding Sounding Night Site* Launch Date Launch Time

Name Number Number (AM/USNO) (yymmdd) (MST)

ANM91921 1 1 AM 890919 21:00

ANM9 2020 2 2 AM 890920 20:33ANM92104 3 2 AM 890921 03:55

ANM92120 4 3 AM 890921 19:57ANM9 2 204 5 3 AM 890922 03:48

ANM92220 6 4 AM 890922 20:04ANM9 23 4 7 4 AM 890923 03:40

ANM92504 8 5 AM 890925 03:41

USN92522 1 1 USNO 890925 22:20

USN92620 2 2 USNO 890926 20:29USN92703 3 2 USNO 890927 02:46

USN92720 4 3 USNO 890927 20:06

* AM = Anderson Mesa-Lowell Observatory, Flagstaff, Arizona;USNO = United States Naval Observatory, Flagstaff, Arizona.

66

TABLE 7. LAUNCH SPECIFICATIONS - ANDERSON MESA/USNO

MaximumSounding Site Sounding Height

Name Code Duration MSL*(AM/USNO) (min) (m)

Average+ LocalVertical Loran-Wind

Resolution Information(m) (Yes/No)

ANM91921 AM 50.9 10874.7 3.6 Yes

ANM92020 AM 69.1 16377.4 4.3 YesANM92104 AM 96.3 20895.7 4 Yes

ANM92120 AM 81.9 20200.4 4.6 Yes ( partial

)

ANM92204 AM 119.5 17839.2 2.7 Yes

ANM92220 AM 99.2 22145.1 4.2 YesANM92304 AM 76.6 19201.4 4.6 No

ANM92504 AM 119.6 9162.4 1.2 Yes ( partial

)

USN92522 USNO 77.7 20341.5 4.8 Yes

USN92620 USNO 74.6 19424.7 4.7 NoUSN92703 USNO 101.8 23436.7 4.3 Yes

USN92720 USNO 75.3 20078.1 4.9 Yes (mostly)

* Height MSL = height above mean sea level.

+ The average height resolution between vertical samplepoints in a particular sounding.

67

Anderson Mesa, Az - 1989 September 19, 2100 MSTTemperature (T) and Dewpoint (Td)

I

B2

10000

3000 -

0000 -

4000

2000 -

—2000 ' ' ' ' ' ' ! ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ''-

-90 -70 -60 SO -10 10 30T (C) A Td (C)

Relative Humidity

f

i3

10000

aooo -

oooo

4000 -

2000 -

-2000-20 40 60

RH (%)

Fig 36. Entire Rawinsonde Profile: 1989 Sept 19, 2100 MST

68

Anderson Mean, Az - 1989 September 20, 2033 MSTTemperature (T) and Dewpoint (Td)

16000

14000: S*

-N 12000

i,«—10000

«•«

£8000

*0000

tf*• 4000

2 2000 —

-2000

— T—Id

V

J I I I L

-90 -70

VV

*\

"V

J I I I L_l I I I l__l I I I L

-60 -30 -10

T (C) * Td (C)10 so

Relative Humidity

!

8

3

16000

14000

12000

10000 -

8000 -

8000 -

4000 -

-8000 -

-2000 '''' ' i t I i ii | i i

—

i i I I I I I I i—i I I

10 20 80 40 50 80

RH (%)


69


I

3

25000

eoooo -

15000 -

10OOO -

5000 -

-1 —

T

I11111111

1—Td

: vv.'- ^*x\^o\.- ^ ^*-^

Sr^X

^—inr... ...

m

I i i 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 l i i 1 . . . i . , ,-5000-90 -70 -60 SO -10 10 SO

T (C) A Td (C)

Relative Humidity

!2

•8

3

25000

£0000 -

15000 -

10000 -


70


i

a

2

23000

80Q00

15000

10000

6000

— T- .Td

—6000 ' ' ' I ' ' I I ' ' ' ' t—i ' ' ' ' ' L

-90 -70 -50 -30 -10 10

T (C) * Td (C)30

Relative Humidity

2

25000

£0000 -

15000 -

10000 -


71


3

lOVW — T16000

/ /— Td

14000

12000

10000

aooo

6000

4000 x>2000 V.

.... v >

-P1W) i i i L l l i 1 i i i 1 i i i 1 . . . 1 i i i

-90 -70 -60 SO -10 10 30T (C) * Td (C)

Relative Humidity

%"5

10000

16000

14000 H

12000

10000

aooo {-

6000 -

4000 -

2000 -

-2000 ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '—'—'—'—'—'

—

L-

10 20 SO 40 SO 60RH (%)


72


!

i

£3000

£0000

1S00Q

10000

6000 -

— T— Td

—eooo ' ' ' ' ' > ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '—

'

' J ' L

-90 -70 -60 -30 -10 10 SOT (C) * Td (C)

Relative Humidity

ft

!

•5

2

£5000

£0000 -

16000 -

10000 -


73


1Is8

2

25000

20000 -

1S000 -

10000 -

6000 -

. — T

-

.....Td

[ f£vO-v_-

:^\̂*1

*"":<!"" V-

r-x^^^—->

"1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I

i i ii i i i i i i 1 1 1-6000

-90 -70 -60 -SO -fO 10 SOT (C) * Td (C)

Relative Humidity

25000

\

•8

3

15000 -


74


!

2

10000

3000 -

6000 -

4000

2000 -

-2000

.

— T

-

•

1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 L l_ 1 1_J_l_l -t-l t 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 i i i i i

-60 -40 -30 -20 -10

T (C) A Td (C)10 20 SO

Relative Humidity

10000

!

i3

60RH (%)


75

USNO, Az - 1989 September 25, 2220 MSTTemperature (T) and Dewpoint (Td)

I

%

B

2

23000

80000

15000

10000

6000

— T— Td

-4000 ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '

-90 -70 -60 -SO -10

T (C) * Td (C)

j I i i i_

10 80

Relative Humidity

|Is

B

3

£3000

£0000

13000

10000

6000 -

-6000 *—' j I I I I L I i I J I 1 I I l_

20 40 60RH (%)

80 100 120


76


I

25000

soooo

15000

10000

5000

— T— Td

-6000 *- ' ' ' ! ' ' ' ' ' ' L—

'

' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ''

-90 -70 -60 -SO -10 10 SOT (C) * Td (C)

Relative Humidity

IIi•3

1

25000

20000

15000

10000

5000 £

-6000 ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '''' i l l i i I t i i i I i i t i I i i i i I i i i i I i i i i

10 20 30 40 SO 80 70 80 90 100

RH (X)


77


!5

3

GOUVU

-4

<— T—.Td

eoooo

15000

10000

6000

_™r/w>

<\_J—****f. —v

~-«^.

i, J l ..1 i—

•

i_.L_J__l.._i 1 I i i 1 I I I L I l i

-80 -70 -60 -SO -10 10 SOT (C) * Td (C)

Relative Humidity

25000

eoooo -

15000 -

!

8

2


78


!

3

£5000

iWOOO -

15000 -

10000 -

6000 -

-6000

. — T- —Td

m >' *• Jt X- X X" v>- *s.

-

- *»».^ ^^-^- ^ —

^

**•• ^v"*^.- Ss ^*^- ">L-

1 1 1 1 i i 1 i i i 1 i i i 1 i i i 1 1 1 1

-90 -70 -60 -SO -10

T (C) <r Td (C)10 80

Relative Humidity

!5

o

3

23000

80000 -

15000 -

10000 -

IS BO 25RH (%)


79

APPENDIX H. RAWINSONDE THERMODYNAMIC PROFILES(First 3-KM Only)

Appendix H includes only the first threekilometers of each thermodynamic rawinsonde profilepresented in Appendix G. Sites and dates are the same as inAppendix G. As before, all heights are with respect tolocal ground level.

80

t


3600

3000

2500

2000

1600

1000

BOO

-600 L-L-L

-60

— T— Td

Vv.

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

-40 -30 -20 -10 10 20T (C) A Td (C)

2

3600

3000 -

2500'-

2000'-

1600'-

1000 h

500

-600 J L

-20

Relative Humidity

Ii ' ' ' ' l_J I I I I L_l I I I I l_

20 40 80RH (%)

80 100 120

Fig 48. Rawinsonde Profile First 3-km: 89 Sept 19, 2100 MST

81


3

3600

30Q0

2500

2000

1600

1000

BOO E

-600

t

—

T

._Td

' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t I I I I » I I I I I I I I I I

-SO -40 -30 -20 -10

T (C) * Td (C)10 20 30

Relative Humidity

a

3

3600


82


3600

3O00

—

N

g2500

< 2000«ft

*S

5 1600

5-«• 1000•»•

e

2 600

-600

1—T

~ * V

I— Td

L \ \XJLllJ

:'t \

• "x \

: ""> V

"1 1 1 i i 1 i 1 1 1 1 1

Ll 1 1, J 1— 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

-50 -40 -30 -20 -10

T (C) A Td (C)10 20 SO

Relative Humidity

!

a

I

3600

3000

2500

2000 h

1600 h

1000

600 b

-600 ' ' ' ' ' I—

'

'—

'

' I ' ' ' ' I i ''•

' I ' ' ' ' I ' I

10 20 SO 40 60 60RH (%)

Piq 50. Rawinsonde Profile First 3-km: 89 Sept 21, 0355 MST

83

*§

a

3

Anderson Mesa Az - 1989 September 21, 1967 MSTTemperature (T) and Dewpoint (Td)

JOViJ —

T

1

— TdSOOO

I \

>\

2500 i

\ \2000 \ \

K.. \

1600f

1

\1000 C \

5\ \

600 \ \\ \J )

_JT/V> •••!-• 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 L_L_I_1_J_1_ 1 1 1 1 1 1

-SO -40 -SO -10 -10 10 so soT (C) i Ti (C)

2

Relative Humidity

9600

SOOO

2500

2000

1600

1000 Y

600

-600

1I_i i i i L j i i I

''' i i i i I I ' ' i L J i L

10 20 SORH (%)

40 60 60


84

Anderson Mesa, Az - 1989 September 22, 0348 KSTTemperature (T) and Dewpoint (Td)

3600

5000

—

\

g2500

•*•

< 2000«fc

"5

5 1600

*•»• 1000•»»

5

3 BOO

—T"-

\.1

V—.14

'-

'1 \—

V \-

\ \V \

•

\ }

1 V_ \•

.

-\ \

'iiii t i i i_. i i i i i i i i i i 1 I.JL-I 1 1 l-L I 1 1 1 t 1 .!_ i l j. t i.i-600-60-40-30-20 -10 10 20 SO

T (C) * Td (C)

3600

SOOO (-

2500

2000

1600

1000 h

600

-600

Relative Humidity

/

J ' I I I I I I I u I I I I I I 1 I I I I I

10 20 SORH (%)

40 60 80


85

Anderson Mesa, Az - 1989 September 22, 2004 MSTTemperature (T) and DewpointfTd)

3600

aooo

I2500

2000

1600

1000

600

- —

T

_\

__Td

' ^~-..._

"1 \-

\ \~

\ \- V \- \ \. ^ \- h,s \•"

;

"I I I I IllllI

i

i

|

i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i 1 1 I 1 1 1-600-60 -40 -30 -20 -10 10 20 SO

T (C) * Td (C)

Relative Humidity

3600

30Q0

? 2500

< 2000<a>

"S

i 1600

$•* 1000*•d

3 600

-600 J I I ' ' ' I II ' ' I I I I I I I J I I I L

10 20 SORH (%)

40 60 60


86


3600

aooo

2500

*0

i

2000

1600

s

e1000

3 600

-600

—

T

1N

.

..._Td

. V. \- s-——

«

J-

*\ \| \V \~1 \V \

r *""V \. \ \-

\ \- { \-

t1 _p

;

*l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1I i i i i I i i i t i i i I l_i L 1 1

-SO -40 -SO -BO -10

T (C) * Td (C)10 SO SO

Relative Humidity

*I

3

10 BO SO 40 60 eoRH (X)

Fig 54. Rawinsonde Profile First 3-Jcm: 89 Sept 23, 0340 MST

87


9600

3O0O

I2500

1

2000

1600

18

3

1000

600

-600

— T

r >»....Td

L \i»

: ^v.* vi \ x• \ x-

\ \m « \_

\ x* x.

:

# x.

| V. X"i i i i 1 i i i i 1 i 1 i i 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1

-20 -16 -10 -6 6 10 16

T (C) * Td (C)20 26 SO

Relative Humidity

9600

aooo

—

\

12500

•*• 2000*x5 1600

5•* 1000•3

3 600

-600

20 40 60RB (T.)


88


3600

SOOO

s2500

2 2000

1 1600

s•*• 1000«»•

5

3 600

-600

- — Tz — Td—

'**»-—• '*•%!

•

\\_ >X-

(

X

•

I

• •

- \\

-\i

"

ti

"

:_l i. j_.j 1...J l_J L.J L_i i i i i i1 1 1 I—

1

LI. i ..1 i- 1—1—

-30 -20 -10 10

T (C) A Td (C)20 SO

I

e

3

3600

SOOO

2500 t

2000

1600 h

1000 "-

600 t

-600 J L

Relative Humidity

J ' I I I I L. J I I I i I I L. J L

20 40 60RH (%)

80 100 120


89

8

2

3600

SOOO

2500

2000 b

1600

1000 h

600 b

-600


""S

\

— T...„Td

' i i I i I t i i i I I I I |_J I I I L_l I I t I I I L

-30 -20 -10 10

T (C) * Td (C)20 SO

Relative Humidity

!I

3

3600

3000

2500

2000 h

1600 ~

1000 '-

500 -

SQQ f*l I I I » I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t I 1 I I I I I I I I I

10 20 30 40 60 80 70 80 90 100

RB (%)

Pig 57. Rawinsonde Profile First 3-km: 89 Sept 26, 2029 MST

90


3600

30Q0

52500

2000*"S

£ 1600

51000

*•d

3 600

-600

—T

_V

_Td. I \- V. |%

"»...-•w«.-V \

'.

1 \. / V

.».— V• T' \- *—. 1

-

-

-J \

. \ \-

i r

z

'11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1_i_t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i i i i i

-60 -40-80-20 -10

T (C) * Td (C)10 20 SO

Relative Humidity

2

3600

3000

2500

2000

1600 E

1000

600 t

-600 J l_l '''10 20

'''''i i i i I i '

30 40 SO 60RH (%)


91


3600

SOOO

—

\

2500

*•< 2000«*

%i 1600

3 1000"3

3 600

-600

\

Vc

IL

—

T

—Td

i i i i l » i i i i t t i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i

-60 -40 -SO -BO -10

T (C) * Td (C)10 20 30

Relative Humidity

3600

I%3

3

Pig 59. Rawinsonde Profile First 3-km: 89 Sept 27, 2006 MST

92

LIST OF REFERENCES

Bell, Scott, 1989: Private Communication (VIZ).

Stevens, K.B., 1985: Remote Measurement of the AtmosphericIsoplanatic Angle and Determination of Refractive TurbulenceProfiles by Direct Inversion of the Scintillation AmplitudeCovariance Function with Tikhonov Regular ization, P h . D

.

Dissertation, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA, 170pp.

Vaucher, G. Tirrell, 1989: Correlation of AtmosphericOptical Turbulence and Meteorological Measurements, M.S.,Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, CA, 145 pp.

Walters, D.L., Favier, D.L., and Hines, J.R., 1979:Vertical Path Atmospheric MTF Measurements. J. Opt. Soc.Am . , v . 69, 829.

WeatherMeasure WEATHERtronics, 1987: 1987-1988 Catalog.Geophysical Instruments and Systems. Division ofQUALIMETRICS, INC., Sacramento, CA, 323 pp.

93

INITIAL DISTRIBUTION LIST

No. Copies

Library, Code 0142Naval Postgraduate SchoolMonterey, CA 93943-5002

Gail Tirrell Vaucher, Code PHDepartment of PhysicsNaval Postgraduate SchoolMonterey, CA 93943-5000

Christopher Vaucher, Code PHUSRA Visiting ScientistDepartment of PhysicsNaval Postgraduate SchoolMonterey, CA 93943-5000

Professor Donald L. Walters, Code PH/WENaval Postgraduate SchoolMonterey, CA 93943-5000

Dr. Ken Johnston, Code 4130Naval Research LaboratoryWashington, D.C. 20375

Lowell ObservatoryAttn: Dr. Bob Millis, Dr. Nat WhiteMars Hill Rd, 1400 WestFlagstaff, AZ 86001

United States Naval ObservatoryAttn: Dr. Harold Abies, Dr. Jeff PierP.O. Box 1149Flagstaff, AZ 86002

Dr. Gart Westerhout, Scientific DirectorUnited States Naval Observatory34 Massachusetts Ave, NWWashington, D.C. 20392

94

N/ Dr. Frank KerrUniversities Space Research AssociationMail Stop 610.3Goddard Space Flight CenterGreenbelt, Maryland 20771

Ms. Nancy AlexanderTechnical and Business Systems859 Second St.Santa Rosa, CA 95404

Research Administrative Dept, Code 012Naval Postgraduate SchoolMonterey, CA 93943-5000

Library AcquisitionsNational Center for Atmospheric ResearchP.O. Box 3000Boulder, CO 80307

Department of Physics, Code PHNaval Postgraduate SchoolMonterey, CA 93943-5000

95

DUDLEY KNOX LIBRARY

3 2768 00338324 1

NPS61-90-005PR NAVAL SCHOOL · GZ3 NPS61-90-005PR NAVALPOSTGRADUATESCHOOL Monterey,California...

Documents

Transcript of NPS61-90-005PR NAVAL SCHOOL · GZ3 NPS61-90-005PR NAVALPOSTGRADUATESCHOOL Monterey,California...