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
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