18.11.2014 Views

AIDJEX Bulletin #40 - Polar Science Center - University of Washington

AIDJEX Bulletin #40 - Polar Science Center - University of Washington

AIDJEX Bulletin #40 - Polar Science Center - University of Washington

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

.<br />

J<br />

BUOY PERFON4ANCE<br />

A brief summary <strong>of</strong> M/O buoy performance is listed in Table 1. In conformance<br />

with <strong>AIDJEX</strong> notation we have listed time in days from the beginning<br />

<strong>of</strong> calendar 1975; e.g., day 366 is 1 January 1976. Good environmental data<br />

were collected from M/O 1 for 145 days and from M/O 4 for 332 days as shown.<br />

M/O 1, M/O 2, and M/O 4 each produced good position data for more than 300<br />

days and are believed to have exhausted their power supplies. The premature<br />

environmental data failures are believed to be due to integrated circuit failures.<br />

M/O 3 was mishandled during installation and produced only very sparse<br />

data for the next four months.<br />

Figures 1 through 4 (adapted from Thqrndike and Cheung, 1977) show<br />

drift tracks for the buoys. M/O 1 left the air on day 452, but began transmitting<br />

again about two months later. Environmental data after that time are<br />

garbled, which is unfortunate since the buoy drift in the vicinity <strong>of</strong> the<br />

Barrow Canyon is <strong>of</strong>ten anomalously swift, and it would have been particularly<br />

useful to have surface current measurements there.<br />

A sample <strong>of</strong> the barometric pressure record is shown in Figure 5. Experience<br />

with these sensors (Hamilton Standard ''Vibrasense") has shown them to<br />

be very stable with time. The coarse resolution, about 1.4 millibar, is due<br />

to an erroneous simplifying assumption in the electrical design. It should<br />

have been 0.1 millibar. The data have been enhanced by smoothing and used in<br />

pressure analyses. It has not been possible to decode any coherent air temperature<br />

data, and a shortcoming in design is suspected.<br />

All current directions are referenced to the buoy hull, and the azimuth<br />

<strong>of</strong> the buoy hull is measured with a magnetic compass (Digicourse Mode1 215).<br />

Figures 6 and 7 show the magnetic azimuth data obtained from the M/O buoys.<br />

Early work on the use <strong>of</strong> magnetic compasses for data buoys in the Arctic Ocean<br />

suggested that weak horizontal components <strong>of</strong> the magnetic field and magnetic<br />

disturbances would be expected to cause errors <strong>of</strong> 5"-1.0" [Haugen and Dozier,<br />

19751. The raw data shown in the figures require a correction, unique to each<br />

compass and dependent on the compass direction and the local horizontal field<br />

strength, to get the actual magnetic azimuth used to define true current directions.<br />

Calibration curves taken in Seattle and checked in Barrow, where field<br />

38

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!