SIDNfY R fRANfrac12GROUP ~ RT IFIE D CONSULT N G METEOROLOGIST

1500 CECIL COOK PLACE bull POST OFFICE BOX 580

SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

TELEPHONl 0GS 0 4-4477 bull HOME 805-965-7540

FINAL REPORT

REMOTE S~NSING OF ATMOSPHERIC INVERSIG~S PROJECT No J-164-2 CONTRACT Noa 022

Submitted To The California Air Resources Board

By

SIDNEY R bull FRANK

31 January 1973

REP QC 8804 AB F7

FINAL REPORT

REMOTE SENSING OF ATMOSPHERIC INVERSIONS PPOJECT No 3-164-2 CONl1RACI1 No 02

ABSTRAcrr

The program was conducted in two parts 1 1 rlhe Cc li brati on of the

atmospheric ducting of television signals over the ocean in terms

of temperature inversion base heights and 2 rrhe cal~ brati on of

anomalous propagation as exhibited by radar surface return over

land during periods of temperature inversion base heights l1he

former 1 was conducted measuring the signal strength of San

Diego television station Channel 10 at a receiver at the Sidney

R Frank bullbullbull Group office at the Santa Earbara Airport and the

latter 2 was conducted by analyzing 35 years 0f almost continshy

uous time-lapse filming of the radarscope of the Natianal weather

Servicebull s WSR57 weather radar at Sacramento Both phases of the

program were successful in that highly useful atmospheric inforshy

mation for air pollution control was obtainerl by means other than

the normal meteorological sensors In addi ti on under almost

all circumstances th~ data were more valuable and more economlcally

derived than those obtained by the standard methods used today

The conclusion was that these remote sensing techniques be expanded

to other Basins in California and ultimately throughout the

nation

~IDNfY ft fflANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

1 0 lleview

As this Final Heport includes a Fourth Quarter Progress Heport

(an extension of time without additional funds) more data

were acquired and analyzed than originally nticipa ted Hence

while not all schedn1ed areas were examinerl for television

signal ducting as originally planned the use and results

from the unplanned (unscheduled) radar data and the addishy

tional Southern California ducting da ta provided further

documentation of the applicability of atmospher 0 ducting As

will be seen the conclusions reached open an entirely newmiddot

means of providing the Air Pollution Control Officer with real

time atmospheric data wtthout adding significantly to his

operational budget

11 Phase One - Atmospheric ducting of television signals over Southern California Eay between s~n Diego and Santa Barbara

The initial investigation of the program was designed to reshy

examine and quantify the relationship between the strength of

the 19325 MH signal from Channel 10 television station in

San Diego as received at the Santa Parbra Airport Goleta

and the measured inversion base heights as determined by

radiosonde stations located along coastal Southern California

To accomplish this task the SIGNAL STRENGTH values at radioshy

sonde times were extracted from the continuous monitoring

system installed at the offices of the Sidney R Frankl~ Group

- 2 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORTbull GOLETA CALIF 93017

FINAL REPORT

REMOTE SENSING OF ATMOSPHERIC INVERSIONS PPOJECT No 3-164-2 CONl1RACI1 No 02

ABSTRAcrr

The program was conducted in two parts 1 1 rlhe Cc li brati on of the

atmospheric ducting of television signals over the ocean in terms

of temperature inversion base heights and 2 rrhe cal~ brati on of

anomalous propagation as exhibited by radar surface return over

land during periods of temperature inversion base heights l1he

former 1 was conducted measuring the signal strength of San

Diego television station Channel 10 at a receiver at the Sidney

R Frank bullbullbull Group office at the Santa Earbara Airport and the

latter 2 was conducted by analyzing 35 years 0f almost continshy

uous time-lapse filming of the radarscope of the Natianal weather

Servicebull s WSR57 weather radar at Sacramento Both phases of the

program were successful in that highly useful atmospheric inforshy

mation for air pollution control was obtainerl by means other than

the normal meteorological sensors In addi ti on under almost

all circumstances th~ data were more valuable and more economlcally

derived than those obtained by the standard methods used today

The conclusion was that these remote sensing techniques be expanded

to other Basins in California and ultimately throughout the

nation

~IDNfY ft fflANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

1 0 lleview

As this Final Heport includes a Fourth Quarter Progress Heport

(an extension of time without additional funds) more data

were acquired and analyzed than originally nticipa ted Hence

while not all schedn1ed areas were examinerl for television

signal ducting as originally planned the use and results

from the unplanned (unscheduled) radar data and the addishy

tional Southern California ducting da ta provided further

documentation of the applicability of atmospher 0 ducting As

will be seen the conclusions reached open an entirely newmiddot

means of providing the Air Pollution Control Officer with real

time atmospheric data wtthout adding significantly to his

operational budget

11 Phase One - Atmospheric ducting of television signals over Southern California Eay between s~n Diego and Santa Barbara

The initial investigation of the program was designed to reshy

examine and quantify the relationship between the strength of

the 19325 MH signal from Channel 10 television station in

San Diego as received at the Santa Parbra Airport Goleta

and the measured inversion base heights as determined by

radiosonde stations located along coastal Southern California

To accomplish this task the SIGNAL STRENGTH values at radioshy

sonde times were extracted from the continuous monitoring

system installed at the offices of the Sidney R Frankl~ Group

- 2 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORTbull GOLETA CALIF 93017

1 0 lleview

As this Final Heport includes a Fourth Quarter Progress Heport

(an extension of time without additional funds) more data

were acquired and analyzed than originally nticipa ted Hence

while not all schedn1ed areas were examinerl for television

signal ducting as originally planned the use and results

from the unplanned (unscheduled) radar data and the addishy

tional Southern California ducting da ta provided further

documentation of the applicability of atmospher 0 ducting As

will be seen the conclusions reached open an entirely newmiddot

means of providing the Air Pollution Control Officer with real

time atmospheric data wtthout adding significantly to his

operational budget

11 Phase One - Atmospheric ducting of television signals over Southern California Eay between s~n Diego and Santa Barbara

The initial investigation of the program was designed to reshy

examine and quantify the relationship between the strength of

the 19325 MH signal from Channel 10 television station in

San Diego as received at the Santa Parbra Airport Goleta

and the measured inversion base heights as determined by

radiosonde stations located along coastal Southern California

To accomplish this task the SIGNAL STRENGTH values at radioshy

sonde times were extracted from the continuous monitoring

system installed at the offices of the Sidney R Frankl~ Group

- 2 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORTbull GOLETA CALIF 93017

The system consists of a 20 DB gain antenna specifically

designed for the Channel 10 frequency band a television

receiver and a matched Leeds amp Northrup Speedomax H 8nalop

recorueru Calibrations were made periodiLlly with a Sencore

FS 134 Field Strength Meter The desirability of having a

continuous monitoring system instead of spot samples at specishy

fic times was further substantiated when it became necessary

to synchronize the irregular timing of the tAX (Los Angeles

International Airport) NTD (Pt Mugu) and NSl (San Nicholas

Island) radiosondes for measured INVERSION BASE luUGHTS with

SIGNAL STRENGTH data It can be seen from the radiosonde

location map Figure 1 that the two stations closest to the

beam path are NTD and LAX wtth LAX being the closest to midshy

point between SBA (Santa Parbara Airport Goleta) and the

Channel 10 transmitter Hence the first testing of the

technique was scheduled to involve correlations of signal

strength with the LAX inversion base he~ght Actual correlashy

tion calculations 1rere deferred until an adequate sample size

11las obtained By the end of 1971 it was evident that highly

useful data had been obta1ned during th11 period of August 25

through November 30 1971 Consequently Progress Beport 2

and the subsequent reports documented the results obtained

throughout 1972 in a manner similar to that of the original

periods analysis These will be presented in Section 20

as the Fourth Quarterly Progress Report

- 3 -

pound10NfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

12 Phase 11wo - Atmospheric ductlnp of radar sipnals emanaLin11- from the NWS WSR57 radar located at Sacramento CnUforn1n

To determine the optimum period for tPstinp the Remote Serrntng

Technique 1n the Sacramento Valley a stu~y was initiated of

film made of the Sacramento NWS WSR57 -3darmiddot scope during the

period July 1964 to aY 1968 The reason f)I using this parshy

ticular period was that the film consisted of a continuous

series of individual frames exposed at a rate of nominally one

every 15 minutes The hypothesis leading to the study was tmt

~nomalous fropagation (AP) recognizable on the cope ap an

anomalous ground return area would occur under atmospheric

conditions identical to those causing ducting and hence

would involve the same parameters as those defining inversions

The results of the study from June 1966 to May 1968 exceeded

expectations in that not only did a distinct degclimatology by

months emerge but a diurnal climatology as well rhe corresshy

pondence of the monthly AP climatology to the ducting at

Oakland (as defined by the difference in refractive index

between the surface and 1 Km above the surface Figure 2) was

particularly striking since it implied flmilarity of air masses

encompassing the Eay Region and Sacramento Another parameter

the magni tude of the reflected signal measured off Sutter

Buttes Pr was tested to see if it exhibited any monthly or

seasonal variation A similar pattern to that of the AP freshy

quency was found and by making the distinction between Pr

values at times of AP and those times without evidence o AP

- 4 -

SI DNfY R FRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

the curves assume an identical phase relationship Considershy

inp that only one measurement per oay was made ( between 0000

and OJOO) ~ it provided addi tional quali titl ve support to the

basic hypothesis

A frame by frame en nation of the radar 2c0pe film for evishy

dence of Anomalous Propagation using a counting procedure of q

calling any portion of an hour wt th AP an AP hour produced

a finite seasonal and diurnal variation A reduction to a

percentage of total hours in each month and plot~ed on axes

24 hour by serial month (from June 1965 through May 1968)

produced the patterns as shown on Pigures 3 and 4 Of note

are the late summer high percentage values and the consistent

few (or no) early afternoon occurrences of AP The relatively

high values of April 1968 is in direct contrast wtth that of

April 1967 emphasizing the fact that the AP middotoeing a function

of the ducting characteristics of the atmosphere is subject

to the natural variability of those characteristics

A composite was made of the analyzed 35 years January 1965

through May 1968 Figure 5 shows this composite by months and

hours As expected the August maximum remained as the domishy

nant feature and the Summer-Fall pattern extended to the AM

hours reflecting the April 1968 high values

Referring back to Figure 2 (a) the composite by months shows

three curvess the average percentage hoursmonth of AP the

OAK 6 year average of refractive index gradient between surface

- 5 -

SIONfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

12 Phase 11wo - Atmospheric ductlnp of radar sipnals emanaLin11- from the NWS WSR57 radar located at Sacramento CnUforn1n

To determine the optimum period for tPstinp the Remote Serrntng

Technique 1n the Sacramento Valley a stu~y was initiated of

film made of the Sacramento NWS WSR57 -3darmiddot scope during the

period July 1964 to aY 1968 The reason f)I using this parshy

ticular period was that the film consisted of a continuous

series of individual frames exposed at a rate of nominally one

every 15 minutes The hypothesis leading to the study was tmt

~nomalous fropagation (AP) recognizable on the cope ap an

anomalous ground return area would occur under atmospheric

conditions identical to those causing ducting and hence

would involve the same parameters as those defining inversions

The results of the study from June 1966 to May 1968 exceeded

expectations in that not only did a distinct degclimatology by

months emerge but a diurnal climatology as well rhe corresshy

pondence of the monthly AP climatology to the ducting at

Oakland (as defined by the difference in refractive index

between the surface and 1 Km above the surface Figure 2) was

particularly striking since it implied flmilarity of air masses

encompassing the Eay Region and Sacramento Another parameter

the magni tude of the reflected signal measured off Sutter

Buttes Pr was tested to see if it exhibited any monthly or

seasonal variation A similar pattern to that of the AP freshy

quency was found and by making the distinction between Pr

values at times of AP and those times without evidence o AP

- 4 -

SI DNfY R FRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

the curves assume an identical phase relationship Considershy

inp that only one measurement per oay was made ( between 0000

and OJOO) ~ it provided addi tional quali titl ve support to the

basic hypothesis

A frame by frame en nation of the radar 2c0pe film for evishy

dence of Anomalous Propagation using a counting procedure of q

calling any portion of an hour wt th AP an AP hour produced

a finite seasonal and diurnal variation A reduction to a

percentage of total hours in each month and plot~ed on axes

24 hour by serial month (from June 1965 through May 1968)

produced the patterns as shown on Pigures 3 and 4 Of note

are the late summer high percentage values and the consistent

few (or no) early afternoon occurrences of AP The relatively

high values of April 1968 is in direct contrast wtth that of

April 1967 emphasizing the fact that the AP middotoeing a function

of the ducting characteristics of the atmosphere is subject

to the natural variability of those characteristics

A composite was made of the analyzed 35 years January 1965

through May 1968 Figure 5 shows this composite by months and

hours As expected the August maximum remained as the domishy

nant feature and the Summer-Fall pattern extended to the AM

hours reflecting the April 1968 high values

Referring back to Figure 2 (a) the composite by months shows

three curvess the average percentage hoursmonth of AP the

OAK 6 year average of refractive index gradient between surface

- 5 -

SIONfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

the curves assume an identical phase relationship Considershy

inp that only one measurement per oay was made ( between 0000

and OJOO) ~ it provided addi tional quali titl ve support to the

basic hypothesis

A frame by frame en nation of the radar 2c0pe film for evishy

dence of Anomalous Propagation using a counting procedure of q

calling any portion of an hour wt th AP an AP hour produced

a finite seasonal and diurnal variation A reduction to a

percentage of total hours in each month and plot~ed on axes

24 hour by serial month (from June 1965 through May 1968)

produced the patterns as shown on Pigures 3 and 4 Of note

are the late summer high percentage values and the consistent

few (or no) early afternoon occurrences of AP The relatively

high values of April 1968 is in direct contrast wtth that of

April 1967 emphasizing the fact that the AP middotoeing a function

of the ducting characteristics of the atmosphere is subject

to the natural variability of those characteristics

A composite was made of the analyzed 35 years January 1965

through May 1968 Figure 5 shows this composite by months and

hours As expected the August maximum remained as the domishy

nant feature and the Summer-Fall pattern extended to the AM

hours reflecting the April 1968 high values

Referring back to Figure 2 (a) the composite by months shows

three curvess the average percentage hoursmonth of AP the

OAK 6 year average of refractive index gradient between surface

- 5 -

SIONfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

I

signal strength data and additional correlations of inversion

base heights with signal strength That made possi blc analyses

of a complete years data plus an additlonal J month rlata

comor= sing the Fall Quarter of 1972

A review of the total Sacramento AP data coupled with air

quality in terms of monthly oxidant values produced an in-phase

annual trend Those values plus a speci~l test in cooperation

with the Sacramento weather radar team will l~e expanded upon

in Section 22

21 Phase One - Atmospheric ducting of television signals SAN to SBA

1Ihe main thrust in acquiring additional signal strength da ta

was to complete a full years test of the basic hypothesis

The Supplement to Progress Report 2 completed the seasonal

analysis of the diurnal variation of sigrn=ll strength JOO uV

through May 1972 as can be seen in Figures 6 7 8 and 9

middotrhe number JOO mlcrovol ts was chosen As a limiting factor

in the correlation calculations since any higher value of

signal strength indicated an average inversion base of less

than 1000 feet ( see correlation chart Fmiddot1gure 10) o

rrhe addi tional data was used to produce Figure 11 the Summer

of 1972 which again showed the highest frequency of low

inversions at midday - al though the high frequency began earlier

in the day than during other seasons rhe J months rolling

mean of the yearly composite Figure 12 covering the period

- 7 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

25 August 1971 to Jl August 1972 differs from the three season

composite Figure 9 by the increased frequency of low invershy

sions earlier in the day as would be exp~cted by the Summer

192 addition

Time permitted calculations of the Fall 1972 diurnal frequency

as shown in Ftgure 13 The major difference between that anc1

the Fall 1971 dJ stri bution was the high frequency of low

inversions in the evening Here again we see evidence of

the variability from year to year of a meteoro_)gical parameter

basic to ambient air pollution concentrations ca1culations

Another means of showing the yearly and monthly variability of

meteorological rarameters is by plotting correlation coeffishy

cients of signal strength vs inversion 1ase heights It was

shown in earlier reports that the correlations were highest

during summer and early fall With the subsi11ence inversion

extending over the entire southern California Eay the fairly

uniform distribution of the ducting pa1middotameters along the beam

path during that period would account for the higher correlashy

tion coefficients while the discontinuities of these parameters

along the beam paths during winter and aarly spring would be

ample cause for lower correlation coefficients Accordingly

the monthly values were plotted with the correlation coeffishy

cients derived in terms of the log signal strength vs log

inversion base heights for LAX Figure 14 Pt Mugu NTD

Figure 15 for the average of the two (when the RAOBs were

- 8 -

SIDNfY R fRANt GROUP1500 CECIL COOK Plbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

taken simultaneously) Figure 16 and finally a comparative

of the J month rolling mean Figure 17

Examining the four charts in order we seE that Figures 1L1-

15 and 16 show the monthly curves in phase ~with the one

exception that LAX roq a June maximum instead of May) but

differing in amplitude On the other hand the LAX calculashy

tions were made with a larger number of samples N thereby

providing a somewhat higher confidence level rhe relatively

high values of correlation coefficient in Januar r 1972 for

both LAX and NTD can be ascribed to the fact that no storms

passed through the area during that month and hence the domishy

nant meteorological situation was that of extended periods of

high pressure cells and their corresponding subsidence invershy

sions rrhe comparison of J month rolling means Figure 17

is interesting in that the minimum indicated rt LAX in Novemshy

ber 1971 is di splaced to February 1972 for the average

LAX+ NTD and to March 1972 for NTD Essentially the

displacement is due to the relatively small sample size and

the fact that the RAOBs at both LAX and NTD represent singular

points in time and place whereas the si 6nal received at the

Santa Earbara Airport represents a mean of the entire beam

path The fact that the highest correlations exist during

the smog season actually provides a measure of confidence in

the concept that RAOBs during the smog season can be considered

representative of a greater area than the singular point in

(

- 9 -

SIDNtY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

space (though not of course for a greater period than the

singular point in time)

From Progress Report 2 a sample of the enalog trace recorded

on August 26 1971 from 1400 - 1600 PDT ~ows an irregular

trace The interpretation of that trace was that the inversion

surface itself was irregular and that the undulations were

reflected in the trace as the inversion surface moved across

the beam path Another possibility is that th~ inversion

surface was stationary and the undulations were ~ue to wave

action along the surface In either case the hiLh corrf~lnshy

tions that were obtained conceivably would Lnvc been even

higher had it been possible to run continual measurements of

the inversion surface at the half-way point

( 2 11 Conclusions

It has been illustrated by measurements throughout a full

years period that the strength of a television signal measshy

ured at a trans-horizon point constitutes a relative measure

of the height of the temperatur8 inversion base Although it

is known that the ducting is a function of both temperature

inversions and moisture discontinuities the fact that correshy

lations exist wibullh temperature inversions alone is probably

due to the way in which the RA0Bs are interpreted In actual

RAOB practice the point at which the temperature inversion

begins is normally considered by the technicians as the same

point at which the moisture discontinuity ls placed eiren

(

- 10 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

though they are not measured simultaneously Hence our

attempts at correlating signal strength and large changes in

the verti cal di stri but ion of refractive hd ex ( D N ---- 4 5)

provided no better correlation coeffic) nts ~han that with

temperature inversil alone It would be o-- great interest

to test the signal strength versus the refractive index ~

change say with instrumented aircraft) as it would have

greater meaning in terms of mixing depth Previous investishy

gations (Edinger et al) have shown the penetr tion of

moisture through the temperature inversion and hence the

possibility of penetration by pollutants by the same mechanism

However since all mathematical models assume the mixing depth

is equivalent to the height of the base of the temperature

inversion alone we suggest that since the signal strength

equivalent of mixing depth is protably more r~presentative

of actual mixing depth than that measured from the RAOBs

the signal strength equivalent be tested as the mixing depth

in-put for concentration calculations

22 Phase Two - Analysis of radarscope film~ from the NWS WSR57 weather radar at Sacramento

With the highly eYcouraging results of the analysis of 35

years of radar films it was decided to test the results by

operating the radar at the same specific times as the aircraft

soundings (APOBs) currently being flown twice daily at Sacrashy

mento Mr Roger Pappas chief weather radar operator agreed

(

- 11 -

SI DNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

to make the tests during ~June and Au~ust 1972 1rhe tests

o0consisted of operating the radar at elevation filming Lhe

radarscope and measuring the reflected power from Sutter

Buttes and Mt Tamalpais at 0400 and 1400 the APOB tirnes

Following the same analytical technique of middotthe J 5 year analshy

ysis the percentage of the hou~s of the month that AP was

noted for each specific hour was tabulated ari the results

plotted on Figure 19 (from Figure 2 Progress Heport J) It

can be seen that the results of the test fall cl)sely within

the i so-percentage line climatology of AP as derived from

the June 1966 - May 1968 radarscope films The deviation of

the 1972 0400 point from the actual value of the August J

line is due of course to the difference in meteorological

conditions but the fact that the values were remarkably close

during the height of the smog season lends strong support to

the use of this technique as a valuable tool for the Air Pollushy

tion Control Officer

The attempt at quantification of inversion heights versus AP

by timing the radar tests with the APOB~ was unsuccessful due

to crudeness of the APOB data It was hoped that actual

inversion base ht~ights would be defined by the APOBs Instead

as the APOBs read the outside air temperature at every 500

foot interval it was impossible to know the height of the

inversion base with any exactitude What is really needed is

a RAOB in association with the radar - even with the inherent

- 12 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

errors of the RAOB it would provide useable data for correshy

lation calculations If aircraft is to be used it should be

instrumented to provide continuous measurements of temperature

and mc~sture andor refractive index As ~es~ribed in 211

the vertical distribution of refractive index would provide the

optimum data for correlation with ducting effects on signal

strength Since AP is also a f~nction of vertical distribution

of refractive index an interesting and valua le study could

be made using aircraft so instrumented during r~riods of AP

221 Conclusion

At the very least the occurrence of AP on any radarscope is

an indication of a low level inversion This type of informashy

tion provides the Air Pollution Control Officer continuous

information as to the existence of inversion over hundreds of

square miles surrounding his area of interes~ Considerin~

that most large cities have radars at their airports it is

feasible to consider incorporating AP information as an input

to APCD offices In that way the existence of inversions

would be instantly known to the Control Officer Even in a

qualitative sense such information becomes a real time

economical area~ coverage of one of the 1asic parameters in

air pollution concentration calculations - the mixing depth

When maajuanti tative the i nforma tion would be invaluable

30 Summary

Over the contract period it has been shown that the duc+ing

- 13 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

taken simultaneously) Figure 16 and finally a comparative

of the J month rolling mean Figure 17

Examining the four charts in order we seE that Figures 1L1-

15 and 16 show the monthly curves in phase ~with the one

exception that LAX roq a June maximum instead of May) but

differing in amplitude On the other hand the LAX calculashy

tions were made with a larger number of samples N thereby

providing a somewhat higher confidence level rhe relatively

high values of correlation coefficient in Januar r 1972 for

both LAX and NTD can be ascribed to the fact that no storms

passed through the area during that month and hence the domishy

nant meteorological situation was that of extended periods of

high pressure cells and their corresponding subsidence invershy

sions rrhe comparison of J month rolling means Figure 17

is interesting in that the minimum indicated rt LAX in Novemshy

ber 1971 is di splaced to February 1972 for the average

LAX+ NTD and to March 1972 for NTD Essentially the

displacement is due to the relatively small sample size and

the fact that the RAOBs at both LAX and NTD represent singular

points in time and place whereas the si 6nal received at the

Santa Earbara Airport represents a mean of the entire beam

path The fact that the highest correlations exist during

the smog season actually provides a measure of confidence in

the concept that RAOBs during the smog season can be considered

representative of a greater area than the singular point in

(

- 9 -

SIDNtY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

space (though not of course for a greater period than the

singular point in time)

From Progress Report 2 a sample of the enalog trace recorded

on August 26 1971 from 1400 - 1600 PDT ~ows an irregular

trace The interpretation of that trace was that the inversion

surface itself was irregular and that the undulations were

reflected in the trace as the inversion surface moved across

the beam path Another possibility is that th~ inversion

surface was stationary and the undulations were ~ue to wave

action along the surface In either case the hiLh corrf~lnshy

tions that were obtained conceivably would Lnvc been even

higher had it been possible to run continual measurements of

the inversion surface at the half-way point

( 2 11 Conclusions

It has been illustrated by measurements throughout a full

years period that the strength of a television signal measshy

ured at a trans-horizon point constitutes a relative measure

of the height of the temperatur8 inversion base Although it

is known that the ducting is a function of both temperature

inversions and moisture discontinuities the fact that correshy

lations exist wibullh temperature inversions alone is probably

due to the way in which the RA0Bs are interpreted In actual

RAOB practice the point at which the temperature inversion

begins is normally considered by the technicians as the same

point at which the moisture discontinuity ls placed eiren

(

- 10 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

though they are not measured simultaneously Hence our

attempts at correlating signal strength and large changes in

the verti cal di stri but ion of refractive hd ex ( D N ---- 4 5)

provided no better correlation coeffic) nts ~han that with

temperature inversil alone It would be o-- great interest

to test the signal strength versus the refractive index ~

change say with instrumented aircraft) as it would have

greater meaning in terms of mixing depth Previous investishy

gations (Edinger et al) have shown the penetr tion of

moisture through the temperature inversion and hence the

possibility of penetration by pollutants by the same mechanism

However since all mathematical models assume the mixing depth

is equivalent to the height of the base of the temperature

inversion alone we suggest that since the signal strength

equivalent of mixing depth is protably more r~presentative

of actual mixing depth than that measured from the RAOBs

the signal strength equivalent be tested as the mixing depth

in-put for concentration calculations

22 Phase Two - Analysis of radarscope film~ from the NWS WSR57 weather radar at Sacramento

With the highly eYcouraging results of the analysis of 35

years of radar films it was decided to test the results by

operating the radar at the same specific times as the aircraft

soundings (APOBs) currently being flown twice daily at Sacrashy

mento Mr Roger Pappas chief weather radar operator agreed

(

- 11 -

SI DNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

to make the tests during ~June and Au~ust 1972 1rhe tests

o0consisted of operating the radar at elevation filming Lhe

radarscope and measuring the reflected power from Sutter

Buttes and Mt Tamalpais at 0400 and 1400 the APOB tirnes

Following the same analytical technique of middotthe J 5 year analshy

ysis the percentage of the hou~s of the month that AP was

noted for each specific hour was tabulated ari the results

plotted on Figure 19 (from Figure 2 Progress Heport J) It

can be seen that the results of the test fall cl)sely within

the i so-percentage line climatology of AP as derived from

the June 1966 - May 1968 radarscope films The deviation of

the 1972 0400 point from the actual value of the August J

line is due of course to the difference in meteorological

conditions but the fact that the values were remarkably close

during the height of the smog season lends strong support to

the use of this technique as a valuable tool for the Air Pollushy

tion Control Officer

The attempt at quantification of inversion heights versus AP

by timing the radar tests with the APOB~ was unsuccessful due

to crudeness of the APOB data It was hoped that actual

inversion base ht~ights would be defined by the APOBs Instead

as the APOBs read the outside air temperature at every 500

foot interval it was impossible to know the height of the

inversion base with any exactitude What is really needed is

a RAOB in association with the radar - even with the inherent

- 12 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

errors of the RAOB it would provide useable data for correshy

lation calculations If aircraft is to be used it should be

instrumented to provide continuous measurements of temperature

and mc~sture andor refractive index As ~es~ribed in 211

the vertical distribution of refractive index would provide the

optimum data for correlation with ducting effects on signal

strength Since AP is also a f~nction of vertical distribution

of refractive index an interesting and valua le study could

be made using aircraft so instrumented during r~riods of AP

221 Conclusion

At the very least the occurrence of AP on any radarscope is

an indication of a low level inversion This type of informashy

tion provides the Air Pollution Control Officer continuous

information as to the existence of inversion over hundreds of

square miles surrounding his area of interes~ Considerin~

that most large cities have radars at their airports it is

feasible to consider incorporating AP information as an input

to APCD offices In that way the existence of inversions

would be instantly known to the Control Officer Even in a

qualitative sense such information becomes a real time

economical area~ coverage of one of the 1asic parameters in

air pollution concentration calculations - the mixing depth

When maajuanti tative the i nforma tion would be invaluable

30 Summary

Over the contract period it has been shown that the duc+ing

- 13 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

space (though not of course for a greater period than the

singular point in time)

From Progress Report 2 a sample of the enalog trace recorded

on August 26 1971 from 1400 - 1600 PDT ~ows an irregular

trace The interpretation of that trace was that the inversion

surface itself was irregular and that the undulations were

reflected in the trace as the inversion surface moved across

the beam path Another possibility is that th~ inversion

surface was stationary and the undulations were ~ue to wave

action along the surface In either case the hiLh corrf~lnshy

tions that were obtained conceivably would Lnvc been even

higher had it been possible to run continual measurements of

the inversion surface at the half-way point

( 2 11 Conclusions

It has been illustrated by measurements throughout a full

years period that the strength of a television signal measshy

ured at a trans-horizon point constitutes a relative measure

of the height of the temperatur8 inversion base Although it

is known that the ducting is a function of both temperature

inversions and moisture discontinuities the fact that correshy

lations exist wibullh temperature inversions alone is probably

due to the way in which the RA0Bs are interpreted In actual

RAOB practice the point at which the temperature inversion

begins is normally considered by the technicians as the same

point at which the moisture discontinuity ls placed eiren

(

- 10 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

though they are not measured simultaneously Hence our

attempts at correlating signal strength and large changes in

the verti cal di stri but ion of refractive hd ex ( D N ---- 4 5)

provided no better correlation coeffic) nts ~han that with

temperature inversil alone It would be o-- great interest

to test the signal strength versus the refractive index ~

change say with instrumented aircraft) as it would have

greater meaning in terms of mixing depth Previous investishy

gations (Edinger et al) have shown the penetr tion of

moisture through the temperature inversion and hence the

possibility of penetration by pollutants by the same mechanism

However since all mathematical models assume the mixing depth

is equivalent to the height of the base of the temperature

inversion alone we suggest that since the signal strength

equivalent of mixing depth is protably more r~presentative

of actual mixing depth than that measured from the RAOBs

the signal strength equivalent be tested as the mixing depth

in-put for concentration calculations

22 Phase Two - Analysis of radarscope film~ from the NWS WSR57 weather radar at Sacramento

With the highly eYcouraging results of the analysis of 35

years of radar films it was decided to test the results by

operating the radar at the same specific times as the aircraft

soundings (APOBs) currently being flown twice daily at Sacrashy

mento Mr Roger Pappas chief weather radar operator agreed

(

- 11 -

SI DNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

to make the tests during ~June and Au~ust 1972 1rhe tests

o0consisted of operating the radar at elevation filming Lhe

radarscope and measuring the reflected power from Sutter

Buttes and Mt Tamalpais at 0400 and 1400 the APOB tirnes

Following the same analytical technique of middotthe J 5 year analshy

ysis the percentage of the hou~s of the month that AP was

noted for each specific hour was tabulated ari the results

plotted on Figure 19 (from Figure 2 Progress Heport J) It

can be seen that the results of the test fall cl)sely within

the i so-percentage line climatology of AP as derived from

the June 1966 - May 1968 radarscope films The deviation of

the 1972 0400 point from the actual value of the August J

line is due of course to the difference in meteorological

conditions but the fact that the values were remarkably close

during the height of the smog season lends strong support to

the use of this technique as a valuable tool for the Air Pollushy

tion Control Officer

The attempt at quantification of inversion heights versus AP

by timing the radar tests with the APOB~ was unsuccessful due

to crudeness of the APOB data It was hoped that actual

inversion base ht~ights would be defined by the APOBs Instead

as the APOBs read the outside air temperature at every 500

foot interval it was impossible to know the height of the

inversion base with any exactitude What is really needed is

a RAOB in association with the radar - even with the inherent

- 12 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

errors of the RAOB it would provide useable data for correshy

lation calculations If aircraft is to be used it should be

instrumented to provide continuous measurements of temperature

and mc~sture andor refractive index As ~es~ribed in 211

the vertical distribution of refractive index would provide the

optimum data for correlation with ducting effects on signal

strength Since AP is also a f~nction of vertical distribution

of refractive index an interesting and valua le study could

be made using aircraft so instrumented during r~riods of AP

221 Conclusion

At the very least the occurrence of AP on any radarscope is

an indication of a low level inversion This type of informashy

tion provides the Air Pollution Control Officer continuous

information as to the existence of inversion over hundreds of

square miles surrounding his area of interes~ Considerin~

that most large cities have radars at their airports it is

feasible to consider incorporating AP information as an input

to APCD offices In that way the existence of inversions

would be instantly known to the Control Officer Even in a

qualitative sense such information becomes a real time

economical area~ coverage of one of the 1asic parameters in

air pollution concentration calculations - the mixing depth

When maajuanti tative the i nforma tion would be invaluable

30 Summary

Over the contract period it has been shown that the duc+ing

- 13 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

though they are not measured simultaneously Hence our

attempts at correlating signal strength and large changes in

the verti cal di stri but ion of refractive hd ex ( D N ---- 4 5)

provided no better correlation coeffic) nts ~han that with

temperature inversil alone It would be o-- great interest

to test the signal strength versus the refractive index ~

change say with instrumented aircraft) as it would have

greater meaning in terms of mixing depth Previous investishy

gations (Edinger et al) have shown the penetr tion of

moisture through the temperature inversion and hence the

possibility of penetration by pollutants by the same mechanism

However since all mathematical models assume the mixing depth

is equivalent to the height of the base of the temperature

inversion alone we suggest that since the signal strength

equivalent of mixing depth is protably more r~presentative

of actual mixing depth than that measured from the RAOBs

the signal strength equivalent be tested as the mixing depth

in-put for concentration calculations

22 Phase Two - Analysis of radarscope film~ from the NWS WSR57 weather radar at Sacramento

With the highly eYcouraging results of the analysis of 35

years of radar films it was decided to test the results by

operating the radar at the same specific times as the aircraft

soundings (APOBs) currently being flown twice daily at Sacrashy

mento Mr Roger Pappas chief weather radar operator agreed

(

- 11 -

SI DNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

to make the tests during ~June and Au~ust 1972 1rhe tests

o0consisted of operating the radar at elevation filming Lhe

radarscope and measuring the reflected power from Sutter

Buttes and Mt Tamalpais at 0400 and 1400 the APOB tirnes

Following the same analytical technique of middotthe J 5 year analshy

ysis the percentage of the hou~s of the month that AP was

noted for each specific hour was tabulated ari the results

plotted on Figure 19 (from Figure 2 Progress Heport J) It

can be seen that the results of the test fall cl)sely within

the i so-percentage line climatology of AP as derived from

the June 1966 - May 1968 radarscope films The deviation of

the 1972 0400 point from the actual value of the August J

line is due of course to the difference in meteorological

conditions but the fact that the values were remarkably close

during the height of the smog season lends strong support to

the use of this technique as a valuable tool for the Air Pollushy

tion Control Officer

The attempt at quantification of inversion heights versus AP

by timing the radar tests with the APOB~ was unsuccessful due

to crudeness of the APOB data It was hoped that actual

inversion base ht~ights would be defined by the APOBs Instead

as the APOBs read the outside air temperature at every 500

foot interval it was impossible to know the height of the

inversion base with any exactitude What is really needed is

a RAOB in association with the radar - even with the inherent

- 12 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

errors of the RAOB it would provide useable data for correshy

lation calculations If aircraft is to be used it should be

instrumented to provide continuous measurements of temperature

and mc~sture andor refractive index As ~es~ribed in 211

the vertical distribution of refractive index would provide the

optimum data for correlation with ducting effects on signal

strength Since AP is also a f~nction of vertical distribution

of refractive index an interesting and valua le study could

be made using aircraft so instrumented during r~riods of AP

221 Conclusion

At the very least the occurrence of AP on any radarscope is

an indication of a low level inversion This type of informashy

tion provides the Air Pollution Control Officer continuous

information as to the existence of inversion over hundreds of

square miles surrounding his area of interes~ Considerin~

that most large cities have radars at their airports it is

feasible to consider incorporating AP information as an input

to APCD offices In that way the existence of inversions

would be instantly known to the Control Officer Even in a

qualitative sense such information becomes a real time

economical area~ coverage of one of the 1asic parameters in

air pollution concentration calculations - the mixing depth

When maajuanti tative the i nforma tion would be invaluable

30 Summary

Over the contract period it has been shown that the duc+ing

- 13 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

to make the tests during ~June and Au~ust 1972 1rhe tests

o0consisted of operating the radar at elevation filming Lhe

radarscope and measuring the reflected power from Sutter

Buttes and Mt Tamalpais at 0400 and 1400 the APOB tirnes

Following the same analytical technique of middotthe J 5 year analshy

ysis the percentage of the hou~s of the month that AP was

noted for each specific hour was tabulated ari the results

plotted on Figure 19 (from Figure 2 Progress Heport J) It

can be seen that the results of the test fall cl)sely within

the i so-percentage line climatology of AP as derived from

the June 1966 - May 1968 radarscope films The deviation of

the 1972 0400 point from the actual value of the August J

line is due of course to the difference in meteorological

conditions but the fact that the values were remarkably close

during the height of the smog season lends strong support to

the use of this technique as a valuable tool for the Air Pollushy

tion Control Officer

The attempt at quantification of inversion heights versus AP

by timing the radar tests with the APOB~ was unsuccessful due

to crudeness of the APOB data It was hoped that actual

inversion base ht~ights would be defined by the APOBs Instead

as the APOBs read the outside air temperature at every 500

foot interval it was impossible to know the height of the

inversion base with any exactitude What is really needed is

a RAOB in association with the radar - even with the inherent

- 12 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

errors of the RAOB it would provide useable data for correshy

lation calculations If aircraft is to be used it should be

instrumented to provide continuous measurements of temperature

and mc~sture andor refractive index As ~es~ribed in 211

the vertical distribution of refractive index would provide the

optimum data for correlation with ducting effects on signal

strength Since AP is also a f~nction of vertical distribution

of refractive index an interesting and valua le study could

be made using aircraft so instrumented during r~riods of AP

221 Conclusion

At the very least the occurrence of AP on any radarscope is

an indication of a low level inversion This type of informashy

tion provides the Air Pollution Control Officer continuous

information as to the existence of inversion over hundreds of

square miles surrounding his area of interes~ Considerin~

that most large cities have radars at their airports it is

feasible to consider incorporating AP information as an input

to APCD offices In that way the existence of inversions

would be instantly known to the Control Officer Even in a

qualitative sense such information becomes a real time

economical area~ coverage of one of the 1asic parameters in

air pollution concentration calculations - the mixing depth

When maajuanti tative the i nforma tion would be invaluable

30 Summary

Over the contract period it has been shown that the duc+ing

- 13 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

errors of the RAOB it would provide useable data for correshy

lation calculations If aircraft is to be used it should be

instrumented to provide continuous measurements of temperature

and mc~sture andor refractive index As ~es~ribed in 211

the vertical distribution of refractive index would provide the

optimum data for correlation with ducting effects on signal

strength Since AP is also a f~nction of vertical distribution

of refractive index an interesting and valua le study could

be made using aircraft so instrumented during r~riods of AP

221 Conclusion

At the very least the occurrence of AP on any radarscope is

an indication of a low level inversion This type of informashy

tion provides the Air Pollution Control Officer continuous

information as to the existence of inversion over hundreds of

square miles surrounding his area of interes~ Considerin~

that most large cities have radars at their airports it is

feasible to consider incorporating AP information as an input

to APCD offices In that way the existence of inversions

would be instantly known to the Control Officer Even in a

qualitative sense such information becomes a real time

economical area~ coverage of one of the 1asic parameters in

air pollution concentration calculations - the mixing depth

When maajuanti tative the i nforma tion would be invaluable

30 Summary

Over the contract period it has been shown that the duc+ing

- 13 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

of electromagnetic signals by large vertical changes 1n the

refractive index ( 6 N middot~ 4 5) can be used in the calculations

of mixing depth Using both active (radar) and passive (receiver

only) electronic instrumentation we have -~Pcn able to establish

statistical relationships between thickness of the surface

based ducting layer and the mixing depth In the passive case

the strength of a trans-horizon television signal it was

possible to obtain relatively high correlatior values between

the signal strength and height of the base oft e temperature

inversion As explained above the signal strengh is probably

a better indicator of true mixing depth than the case of the

temperature inversion since it reflects sharp vertical changes

of both temperature and moisture Hence the correlation

coefficients would actually be higher if the refractive indiees

could be obtained along the beam pa th

In the active case radarscope indications of Anon1llous

Propagation the same basic premise holds - namely that

sharp vertical changes in refractive index will be indicated

by greater reflected signal from greater -istances than at

times of normal lapse rate of refractive index While it

1111as possible to qualitatively identify the smog season by the

percentage of the months exhibiting AP it was suggested that

a progra~ be initiated wherein quantitative evaluations could

be made of true mixing depth and used as inputs in mathe mati c_il

models of transport and diffusion

- 14 -

SIONfY ft fflANfrac12 GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

In our analyses of ducting throughout the year it was found

that the strngest values occurred during the same periods

that maximum oxidant values were fourd both in the South

Coast Pnc n and Sacramento As mixing depth is a prime paramshy

eter in all concentration calculations this was no surprise

but it was interest Jg to see the extent tc ~lhi ch a single

meteorological parameter apparently influences the ambient air

quality values Figure 20 shows a plot of pei-cent of total

possible hours of AP versus monthly averages of daily maximum

hours of oxidant at the 13th and J air quality sGation in

Sacramento The two curves are in phase giving a correlation

coefficient of 079 It does seem that the quantification of

mixing depth plus the transport and diffusion data would proshy

vide the Air Pollution Control Officer with practically all

he would need for his atmospheric monitoring

In a similar manner except that we used the maximum hourly

oxidant values from the entire south Coast ampsin instead of a

single station a plot was made of the maximum signal strength

versus the maximum oxidant value Figure 21 shows the two

curves generally in phase giving a slightly lower correlation

coefficient of 070 Here again we note ~he importance of the

single meteorological parameter in the total air quality conshy

centration calculations Since middotwe had quantitative values of

mixing depth from our signal strength calibrations we were able

to run correlations between the signal strength and Besin

oxidant maximum (as well as calculated afternoon maximum

- 15 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 bROUP1500 CECIL COOK PL bull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

mixing depth from the 0600 RAOB) and noted the annual trend by

plotting monthly valueso Figure 22 shows the maximum correlashy

tion coefficients during the smog season with the signal

strength values as indicated proving +o be more highly

correlated than the cilculated maximum inver3ion base height

In conclusion then it has been shown that highly useful

meteorological information can be derived fro1n electromagnetic

ducting effects of the atmosphere The application of this

information to air pollution control has been ammiddot)ly demonstrashy

ted throughout the contract period It is there fore re comshy

mended in fact urged that the techniques descrl bed undergo

the refinements in calibration as suggested but pending

that that the basic techniques be implemented in other Basins

in California

- 16 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 bROUP1500 CECIL COOK PL bull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

~

~1

-)) ~-J

I I

0

middot--middot-- ---- middot--middot---middot ---middot-middot--

(l

- ____________ _ - -- - -

I

GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

Figure 1

i i___

I - AP of total monthly hoursmiddot I ---- OAK - ~ N (lKm - sfc)

I i --- (Pr) wDuct - (Pr) woDuct 70

I I Summation 1 Jan 1965 - 31 Y~y 1968

I _ A (

1middot I gtabull 66 I i t

40t I L I I

lbull iI f 11 I I bull ~

z I I IJI I (J I 30

i j I I i i i

50 i i I ~

bull I

20I j--- V ~ Y

I V --t __ I

bull I l I middotO

I i i 10 i-~ I I I)= I ~ 1 (t) l i40 () 1

J A M J J A i 0F M

s bf N D 00 02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 II

(a) t middot18- (b)

- -

~~

i I 2 1

~~ I j02 I

103 2 Ol+

05 206 07

21 1 2 2 _2 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 l

I )) )jJ

f

n I d ( l _

ru~ I f

( 0 081~ 09 l ~~ j ~

10 l

l

11

I bull12 Imiddotbullmiddotbullbull13 14 I 1 15 ~ ~ 16

18 19 20

17

2~ n~r -~~21 ) L~2middot22 23 jl

j J F M A M J J A s 0 N D J F M A V J i-

~ Ci)

J

1965 1966

DUCTING OCCURRENCE - Percent of Total Monthl~- Hours

-19-

1

L_

1 11 1 - 2 3 ) 2 1

00 1 01

l I l ~ I f I 4 I I

02 03 t ti t I -_ -04

t li~U middot~~1Jj V

(~_2

Io09

I

10-

11 12 13 ~ _ 1 14 15 16 17 18 19 ---__ ~o 21 )~ I ) l 22 ltj23 _ j~ 32~ 1 1 l i- 2 l 3

~ D J F M A MM M J J A s 0 N rs J )

J A s 0 N I) I J F A (1) 19681966 1967 I ~

DUCTING OCCURRENCE - Percent of Total Monthly Hours

-20-

1 ~ 2 1 00

J01 [

02 03 1 Ol

t05 i I

06 j

07 08 i 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

i 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

~-

l VI

I

r

1

~ I

I1 1 _Jmiddot 3middot cli

-

J F M A M J J A s 0 Nmiddot D

DUCTING OCCURRENCE Percent of Total Monthly Hours

Average of Perlcd Jan 1965 - May 1968

p-

Figure 5

-_

14

1 Dec 71 - 29 Feb 72Winter - Freq (Y~x Sig strength) )OOJlV) -- 3 mo rolling mean of ( bull )

I J l--1

18

-23-242220

12

10

8

6

4

gt-rj 1--

~ t-i (t)

2 -J

I--

J ~--~J I

I I I

08 16141210PST

n

-24-

Spring 1 March 72 - 31 tay 72

- Freq (lfax Sig Strength ) JOO )lV)-- 3 mo rolling mean ( bull )

12

10

rl--

Tj-s ~

)

i--

I 1

I t8 I I I I l I t

6 I I -1 l l l

4

2

r---1

PST I 08 I10 12 14 I15 I

_j___

=-

composite Fall Winter spring 25 Aug 71 - )1 MaY 72

- Freq (fax Sig strength))OO microV) -- 3 mo rolling mean middott )

12

10

8

V 5 I I

V v

I

I I

4

J

f -j j~

sect ri (1) 2 C) 24 - 2s-

2220181614121008PST

RELATIONSHIP OF SIGNAL STRENGlH Ar SANrA lAHBABA TO AVERAGE INVERSION PASE HEIGIPl (NlD + LAX)

Average Inversion Ease Height (WlD + LAX) Feet MSL x = August 25 - September 30 1971 reg ~--- Octoher 19-71

amp November 1971 -26-

Figure 10

2j I-

~ 11 ()

12

10

8

6

4

2

I

I

Summer 1 Jun 72

_Freq (Max __ 3 mo rolling mean

- 31 Aug 72

Sig strengthgt 300 microv) ( )

shy~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-27-

L

70 Annual 25 Aug 71 - Jl Aug 72 12 Freq (Max Sig Strengthgt 300 microv)

3 mo rolling mean ( )

10

8

6

4

2

~ ~ ~ CD

I-- N

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-28-

-1 -

~

Fall 1 Sept 72 - JO Nov 72 CJ l CJJ frac12

I j bull bull 12 Freq (Maxo Sig Strengthco ll) lrj

~1-I- - gt JOO microV)

-- 3 IDOo rolling L3an ( Jf

fJlf 1 )

I 10

I

I I middotJ

( I 1 II

I I I8 I I I

I

I f I I

I

I I

f I I6

I

I

4

2 rj i- I ~ I _r-i i I ---

CD i l- J ~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-29-

~r ~ _

_L

1 tton coefficients

V-rsiOU cese nel-o t~lv TrenO ofOU bull corre ~ o-ht

) mo ro11inF~~olt si~ne-1 v-s- 105 in u -r 10 mtcrov - ------ r~----- ~ middot-bull

bull r

e~n)

co-i--re1 middot coefbull

u1-

-1middot0

bull

_o8 -

N

o

zo

_o6

-0 1

I I

I I

I I

1-rj ~

i Ct)

~ ~

10 -0 2

0

s 0

u

1)

1971

JI

1972

F

~

-30-

f

t i1

J

l J

fgt

5

)--

~onthlY Trend of correlation coefficients

correl coef

-1 0

_Q8 I

N

_Q630

_Q420

-0210

~ ~

CG 0~

(i)

~ J

10g micro~olt signal ~s 10g in~ersion 00se neight t3 reo-rollin5 me~n)----- rmiddot------ T3 - N

NTD

4-I - - I I

I I

-

~ Jigt bullbullbullbullbullbull

I

---

I

L~

I s

AJ

JM

t A1-1

I D JI N _3-0s 1971 1972

l

)--

~ 0oefftc1ents

pnO of correl0-t~on v bull tonthlY lr-bull 00se neightoP 1nvers1on () ~o ro11tng me~n)

1 ~91 7S bull ___~ ______ rsbull c ~1o 1t sJtibull ------ r

10g mi ~ 0 _ Lly amp 111D -- 11

car-re1 middot coef

-lbullO

-

IJ middotr _)

abull bull bull bull bull bull ~ It

_

_~ I

I I

I I_Q8

I ~I I

I IN

_Q6 30

-04-20

t10 -o2 s ~ Jt J fl ~ l A ~ F fl

0 t D J 11

i ~

t -32-

t-gt 0 O s 1971 1972

In our analyses of ducting throughout the year it was found

that the strngest values occurred during the same periods

that maximum oxidant values were fourd both in the South

Coast Pnc n and Sacramento As mixing depth is a prime paramshy

eter in all concentration calculations this was no surprise

but it was interest Jg to see the extent tc ~lhi ch a single

meteorological parameter apparently influences the ambient air

quality values Figure 20 shows a plot of pei-cent of total

possible hours of AP versus monthly averages of daily maximum

hours of oxidant at the 13th and J air quality sGation in

Sacramento The two curves are in phase giving a correlation

coefficient of 079 It does seem that the quantification of

mixing depth plus the transport and diffusion data would proshy

vide the Air Pollution Control Officer with practically all

he would need for his atmospheric monitoring

In a similar manner except that we used the maximum hourly

oxidant values from the entire south Coast ampsin instead of a

single station a plot was made of the maximum signal strength

versus the maximum oxidant value Figure 21 shows the two

curves generally in phase giving a slightly lower correlation

coefficient of 070 Here again we note ~he importance of the

single meteorological parameter in the total air quality conshy

centration calculations Since middotwe had quantitative values of

mixing depth from our signal strength calibrations we were able

to run correlations between the signal strength and Besin

oxidant maximum (as well as calculated afternoon maximum

- 15 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 bROUP1500 CECIL COOK PL bull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

mixing depth from the 0600 RAOB) and noted the annual trend by

plotting monthly valueso Figure 22 shows the maximum correlashy

tion coefficients during the smog season with the signal

strength values as indicated proving +o be more highly

correlated than the cilculated maximum inver3ion base height

In conclusion then it has been shown that highly useful

meteorological information can be derived fro1n electromagnetic

ducting effects of the atmosphere The application of this

information to air pollution control has been ammiddot)ly demonstrashy

ted throughout the contract period It is there fore re comshy

mended in fact urged that the techniques descrl bed undergo

the refinements in calibration as suggested but pending

that that the basic techniques be implemented in other Basins

in California

- 16 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 bROUP1500 CECIL COOK PL bull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

~

~1

-)) ~-J

I I

0

middot--middot-- ---- middot--middot---middot ---middot-middot--

(l

- ____________ _ - -- - -

I

GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

Figure 1

i i___

I - AP of total monthly hoursmiddot I ---- OAK - ~ N (lKm - sfc)

I i --- (Pr) wDuct - (Pr) woDuct 70

I I Summation 1 Jan 1965 - 31 Y~y 1968

I _ A (

1middot I gtabull 66 I i t

40t I L I I

lbull iI f 11 I I bull ~

z I I IJI I (J I 30

i j I I i i i

50 i i I ~

bull I

20I j--- V ~ Y

I V --t __ I

bull I l I middotO

I i i 10 i-~ I I I)= I ~ 1 (t) l i40 () 1

J A M J J A i 0F M

s bf N D 00 02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 II

(a) t middot18- (b)

- -

~~

i I 2 1

~~ I j02 I

103 2 Ol+

05 206 07

21 1 2 2 _2 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 l

I )) )jJ

f

n I d ( l _

ru~ I f

( 0 081~ 09 l ~~ j ~

10 l

l

11

I bull12 Imiddotbullmiddotbullbull13 14 I 1 15 ~ ~ 16

18 19 20

17

2~ n~r -~~21 ) L~2middot22 23 jl

j J F M A M J J A s 0 N D J F M A V J i-

~ Ci)

J

1965 1966

DUCTING OCCURRENCE - Percent of Total Monthl~- Hours

-19-

1

L_

1 11 1 - 2 3 ) 2 1

00 1 01

l I l ~ I f I 4 I I

02 03 t ti t I -_ -04

t li~U middot~~1Jj V

(~_2

Io09

I

10-

11 12 13 ~ _ 1 14 15 16 17 18 19 ---__ ~o 21 )~ I ) l 22 ltj23 _ j~ 32~ 1 1 l i- 2 l 3

~ D J F M A MM M J J A s 0 N rs J )

J A s 0 N I) I J F A (1) 19681966 1967 I ~

DUCTING OCCURRENCE - Percent of Total Monthly Hours

-20-

1 ~ 2 1 00

J01 [

02 03 1 Ol

t05 i I

06 j

07 08 i 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

i 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

~-

l VI

I

r

1

~ I

I1 1 _Jmiddot 3middot cli

-

J F M A M J J A s 0 Nmiddot D

DUCTING OCCURRENCE Percent of Total Monthly Hours

Average of Perlcd Jan 1965 - May 1968

p-

Figure 5

-_

14

1 Dec 71 - 29 Feb 72Winter - Freq (Y~x Sig strength) )OOJlV) -- 3 mo rolling mean of ( bull )

I J l--1

18

-23-242220

12

10

8

6

4

gt-rj 1--

~ t-i (t)

2 -J

I--

J ~--~J I

I I I

08 16141210PST

n

-24-

Spring 1 March 72 - 31 tay 72

- Freq (lfax Sig Strength ) JOO )lV)-- 3 mo rolling mean ( bull )

12

10

rl--

Tj-s ~

)

i--

I 1

I t8 I I I I l I t

6 I I -1 l l l

4

2

r---1

PST I 08 I10 12 14 I15 I

_j___

=-

composite Fall Winter spring 25 Aug 71 - )1 MaY 72

- Freq (fax Sig strength))OO microV) -- 3 mo rolling mean middott )

12

10

8

V 5 I I

V v

I

I I

4

J

f -j j~

sect ri (1) 2 C) 24 - 2s-

2220181614121008PST

RELATIONSHIP OF SIGNAL STRENGlH Ar SANrA lAHBABA TO AVERAGE INVERSION PASE HEIGIPl (NlD + LAX)

Average Inversion Ease Height (WlD + LAX) Feet MSL x = August 25 - September 30 1971 reg ~--- Octoher 19-71

amp November 1971 -26-

Figure 10

2j I-

~ 11 ()

12

10

8

6

4

2

I

I

Summer 1 Jun 72

_Freq (Max __ 3 mo rolling mean

- 31 Aug 72

Sig strengthgt 300 microv) ( )

shy~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-27-

L

70 Annual 25 Aug 71 - Jl Aug 72 12 Freq (Max Sig Strengthgt 300 microv)

3 mo rolling mean ( )

10

8

6

4

2

~ ~ ~ CD

I-- N

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-28-

-1 -

~

Fall 1 Sept 72 - JO Nov 72 CJ l CJJ frac12

I j bull bull 12 Freq (Maxo Sig Strengthco ll) lrj

~1-I- - gt JOO microV)

-- 3 IDOo rolling L3an ( Jf

fJlf 1 )

I 10

I

I I middotJ

( I 1 II

I I I8 I I I

I

I f I I

I

I I

f I I6

I

I

4

2 rj i- I ~ I _r-i i I ---

CD i l- J ~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-29-

~r ~ _

_L

1 tton coefficients

V-rsiOU cese nel-o t~lv TrenO ofOU bull corre ~ o-ht

) mo ro11inF~~olt si~ne-1 v-s- 105 in u -r 10 mtcrov - ------ r~----- ~ middot-bull

bull r

e~n)

co-i--re1 middot coefbull

u1-

-1middot0

bull

_o8 -

N

o

zo

_o6

-0 1

I I

I I

I I

1-rj ~

i Ct)

~ ~

10 -0 2

0

s 0

u

1)

1971

JI

1972

F

~

-30-

f

t i1

J

l J

fgt

5

)--

~onthlY Trend of correlation coefficients

correl coef

-1 0

_Q8 I

N

_Q630

_Q420

-0210

~ ~

CG 0~

(i)

~ J

10g micro~olt signal ~s 10g in~ersion 00se neight t3 reo-rollin5 me~n)----- rmiddot------ T3 - N

NTD

4-I - - I I

I I

-

~ Jigt bullbullbullbullbullbull

I

---

I

L~

I s

AJ

JM

t A1-1

I D JI N _3-0s 1971 1972

l

)--

~ 0oefftc1ents

pnO of correl0-t~on v bull tonthlY lr-bull 00se neightoP 1nvers1on () ~o ro11tng me~n)

1 ~91 7S bull ___~ ______ rsbull c ~1o 1t sJtibull ------ r

10g mi ~ 0 _ Lly amp 111D -- 11

car-re1 middot coef

-lbullO

-

IJ middotr _)

abull bull bull bull bull bull ~ It

_

_~ I

I I

I I_Q8

I ~I I

I IN

_Q6 30

-04-20

t10 -o2 s ~ Jt J fl ~ l A ~ F fl

0 t D J 11

i ~

t -32-

t-gt 0 O s 1971 1972

mixing depth from the 0600 RAOB) and noted the annual trend by

plotting monthly valueso Figure 22 shows the maximum correlashy

tion coefficients during the smog season with the signal

strength values as indicated proving +o be more highly

correlated than the cilculated maximum inver3ion base height

In conclusion then it has been shown that highly useful

meteorological information can be derived fro1n electromagnetic

ducting effects of the atmosphere The application of this

information to air pollution control has been ammiddot)ly demonstrashy

ted throughout the contract period It is there fore re comshy

mended in fact urged that the techniques descrl bed undergo

the refinements in calibration as suggested but pending

that that the basic techniques be implemented in other Basins

in California

- 16 -

SIDNfY R fRANfrac12 bROUP1500 CECIL COOK PL bull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

~

~1

-)) ~-J

I I

0

middot--middot-- ---- middot--middot---middot ---middot-middot--

(l

- ____________ _ - -- - -

I

GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

Figure 1

i i___

I - AP of total monthly hoursmiddot I ---- OAK - ~ N (lKm - sfc)

I i --- (Pr) wDuct - (Pr) woDuct 70

I I Summation 1 Jan 1965 - 31 Y~y 1968

I _ A (

1middot I gtabull 66 I i t

40t I L I I

lbull iI f 11 I I bull ~

z I I IJI I (J I 30

i j I I i i i

50 i i I ~

bull I

20I j--- V ~ Y

I V --t __ I

bull I l I middotO

I i i 10 i-~ I I I)= I ~ 1 (t) l i40 () 1

J A M J J A i 0F M

s bf N D 00 02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 II

(a) t middot18- (b)

- -

~~

i I 2 1

~~ I j02 I

103 2 Ol+

05 206 07

21 1 2 2 _2 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 l

I )) )jJ

f

n I d ( l _

ru~ I f

( 0 081~ 09 l ~~ j ~

10 l

l

11

I bull12 Imiddotbullmiddotbullbull13 14 I 1 15 ~ ~ 16

18 19 20

17

2~ n~r -~~21 ) L~2middot22 23 jl

j J F M A M J J A s 0 N D J F M A V J i-

~ Ci)

J

1965 1966

DUCTING OCCURRENCE - Percent of Total Monthl~- Hours

-19-

1

L_

1 11 1 - 2 3 ) 2 1

00 1 01

l I l ~ I f I 4 I I

02 03 t ti t I -_ -04

t li~U middot~~1Jj V

(~_2

Io09

I

10-

11 12 13 ~ _ 1 14 15 16 17 18 19 ---__ ~o 21 )~ I ) l 22 ltj23 _ j~ 32~ 1 1 l i- 2 l 3

~ D J F M A MM M J J A s 0 N rs J )

J A s 0 N I) I J F A (1) 19681966 1967 I ~

DUCTING OCCURRENCE - Percent of Total Monthly Hours

-20-

1 ~ 2 1 00

J01 [

02 03 1 Ol

t05 i I

06 j

07 08 i 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

i 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

~-

l VI

I

r

1

~ I

I1 1 _Jmiddot 3middot cli

-

J F M A M J J A s 0 Nmiddot D

DUCTING OCCURRENCE Percent of Total Monthly Hours

Average of Perlcd Jan 1965 - May 1968

p-

Figure 5

-_

14

1 Dec 71 - 29 Feb 72Winter - Freq (Y~x Sig strength) )OOJlV) -- 3 mo rolling mean of ( bull )

I J l--1

18

-23-242220

12

10

8

6

4

gt-rj 1--

~ t-i (t)

2 -J

I--

J ~--~J I

I I I

08 16141210PST

n

-24-

Spring 1 March 72 - 31 tay 72

- Freq (lfax Sig Strength ) JOO )lV)-- 3 mo rolling mean ( bull )

12

10

rl--

Tj-s ~

)

i--

I 1

I t8 I I I I l I t

6 I I -1 l l l

4

2

r---1

PST I 08 I10 12 14 I15 I

_j___

=-

composite Fall Winter spring 25 Aug 71 - )1 MaY 72

- Freq (fax Sig strength))OO microV) -- 3 mo rolling mean middott )

12

10

8

V 5 I I

V v

I

I I

4

J

f -j j~

sect ri (1) 2 C) 24 - 2s-

2220181614121008PST

RELATIONSHIP OF SIGNAL STRENGlH Ar SANrA lAHBABA TO AVERAGE INVERSION PASE HEIGIPl (NlD + LAX)

Average Inversion Ease Height (WlD + LAX) Feet MSL x = August 25 - September 30 1971 reg ~--- Octoher 19-71

amp November 1971 -26-

Figure 10

2j I-

~ 11 ()

12

10

8

6

4

2

I

I

Summer 1 Jun 72

_Freq (Max __ 3 mo rolling mean

- 31 Aug 72

Sig strengthgt 300 microv) ( )

shy~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-27-

L

70 Annual 25 Aug 71 - Jl Aug 72 12 Freq (Max Sig Strengthgt 300 microv)

3 mo rolling mean ( )

10

8

6

4

2

~ ~ ~ CD

I-- N

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-28-

-1 -

~

Fall 1 Sept 72 - JO Nov 72 CJ l CJJ frac12

I j bull bull 12 Freq (Maxo Sig Strengthco ll) lrj

~1-I- - gt JOO microV)

-- 3 IDOo rolling L3an ( Jf

fJlf 1 )

I 10

I

I I middotJ

( I 1 II

I I I8 I I I

I

I f I I

I

I I

f I I6

I

I

4

2 rj i- I ~ I _r-i i I ---

CD i l- J ~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-29-

~r ~ _

_L

1 tton coefficients

V-rsiOU cese nel-o t~lv TrenO ofOU bull corre ~ o-ht

) mo ro11inF~~olt si~ne-1 v-s- 105 in u -r 10 mtcrov - ------ r~----- ~ middot-bull

bull r

e~n)

co-i--re1 middot coefbull

u1-

-1middot0

bull

_o8 -

N

o

zo

_o6

-0 1

I I

I I

I I

1-rj ~

i Ct)

~ ~

10 -0 2

0

s 0

u

1)

1971

JI

1972

F

~

-30-

f

t i1

J

l J

fgt

5

)--

~onthlY Trend of correlation coefficients

correl coef

-1 0

_Q8 I

N

_Q630

_Q420

-0210

~ ~

CG 0~

(i)

~ J

10g micro~olt signal ~s 10g in~ersion 00se neight t3 reo-rollin5 me~n)----- rmiddot------ T3 - N

NTD

4-I - - I I

I I

-

~ Jigt bullbullbullbullbullbull

I

---

I

L~

I s

AJ

JM

t A1-1

I D JI N _3-0s 1971 1972

l

)--

~ 0oefftc1ents

pnO of correl0-t~on v bull tonthlY lr-bull 00se neightoP 1nvers1on () ~o ro11tng me~n)

1 ~91 7S bull ___~ ______ rsbull c ~1o 1t sJtibull ------ r

10g mi ~ 0 _ Lly amp 111D -- 11

car-re1 middot coef

-lbullO

-

IJ middotr _)

abull bull bull bull bull bull ~ It

_

_~ I

I I

I I_Q8

I ~I I

I IN

_Q6 30

-04-20

t10 -o2 s ~ Jt J fl ~ l A ~ F fl

0 t D J 11

i ~

t -32-

t-gt 0 O s 1971 1972

~

~1

-)) ~-J

I I

0

middot--middot-- ---- middot--middot---middot ---middot-middot--

(l

- ____________ _ - -- - -

I

GROUP1500 CECIL COOK PLbull SANTA BARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 93017

Figure 1

i i___

I - AP of total monthly hoursmiddot I ---- OAK - ~ N (lKm - sfc)

I i --- (Pr) wDuct - (Pr) woDuct 70

I I Summation 1 Jan 1965 - 31 Y~y 1968

I _ A (

1middot I gtabull 66 I i t

40t I L I I

lbull iI f 11 I I bull ~

z I I IJI I (J I 30

i j I I i i i

50 i i I ~

bull I

20I j--- V ~ Y

I V --t __ I

bull I l I middotO

I i i 10 i-~ I I I)= I ~ 1 (t) l i40 () 1

J A M J J A i 0F M

s bf N D 00 02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 II

(a) t middot18- (b)

- -

~~

i I 2 1

~~ I j02 I

103 2 Ol+

05 206 07

21 1 2 2 _2 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 l

I )) )jJ

f

n I d ( l _

ru~ I f

( 0 081~ 09 l ~~ j ~

10 l

l

11

I bull12 Imiddotbullmiddotbullbull13 14 I 1 15 ~ ~ 16

18 19 20

17

2~ n~r -~~21 ) L~2middot22 23 jl

j J F M A M J J A s 0 N D J F M A V J i-

~ Ci)

J

1965 1966

DUCTING OCCURRENCE - Percent of Total Monthl~- Hours

-19-

1

L_

1 11 1 - 2 3 ) 2 1

00 1 01

l I l ~ I f I 4 I I

02 03 t ti t I -_ -04

t li~U middot~~1Jj V

(~_2

Io09

I

10-

11 12 13 ~ _ 1 14 15 16 17 18 19 ---__ ~o 21 )~ I ) l 22 ltj23 _ j~ 32~ 1 1 l i- 2 l 3

~ D J F M A MM M J J A s 0 N rs J )

J A s 0 N I) I J F A (1) 19681966 1967 I ~

DUCTING OCCURRENCE - Percent of Total Monthly Hours

-20-

1 ~ 2 1 00

J01 [

02 03 1 Ol

t05 i I

06 j

07 08 i 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

i 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

~-

l VI

I

r

1

~ I

I1 1 _Jmiddot 3middot cli

-

J F M A M J J A s 0 Nmiddot D

DUCTING OCCURRENCE Percent of Total Monthly Hours

Average of Perlcd Jan 1965 - May 1968

p-

Figure 5

-_

14

1 Dec 71 - 29 Feb 72Winter - Freq (Y~x Sig strength) )OOJlV) -- 3 mo rolling mean of ( bull )

I J l--1

18

-23-242220

12

10

8

6

4

gt-rj 1--

~ t-i (t)

2 -J

I--

J ~--~J I

I I I

08 16141210PST

n

-24-

Spring 1 March 72 - 31 tay 72

- Freq (lfax Sig Strength ) JOO )lV)-- 3 mo rolling mean ( bull )

12

10

rl--

Tj-s ~

)

i--

I 1

I t8 I I I I l I t

6 I I -1 l l l

4

2

r---1

PST I 08 I10 12 14 I15 I

_j___

=-

composite Fall Winter spring 25 Aug 71 - )1 MaY 72

- Freq (fax Sig strength))OO microV) -- 3 mo rolling mean middott )

12

10

8

V 5 I I

V v

I

I I

4

J

f -j j~

sect ri (1) 2 C) 24 - 2s-

2220181614121008PST

RELATIONSHIP OF SIGNAL STRENGlH Ar SANrA lAHBABA TO AVERAGE INVERSION PASE HEIGIPl (NlD + LAX)

Average Inversion Ease Height (WlD + LAX) Feet MSL x = August 25 - September 30 1971 reg ~--- Octoher 19-71

amp November 1971 -26-

Figure 10

2j I-

~ 11 ()

12

10

8

6

4

2

I

I

Summer 1 Jun 72

_Freq (Max __ 3 mo rolling mean

- 31 Aug 72

Sig strengthgt 300 microv) ( )

shy~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-27-

L

70 Annual 25 Aug 71 - Jl Aug 72 12 Freq (Max Sig Strengthgt 300 microv)

3 mo rolling mean ( )

10

8

6

4

2

~ ~ ~ CD

I-- N

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-28-

-1 -

~

Fall 1 Sept 72 - JO Nov 72 CJ l CJJ frac12

I j bull bull 12 Freq (Maxo Sig Strengthco ll) lrj

~1-I- - gt JOO microV)

-- 3 IDOo rolling L3an ( Jf

fJlf 1 )

I 10

I

I I middotJ

( I 1 II

I I I8 I I I

I

I f I I

I

I I

f I I6

I

I

4

2 rj i- I ~ I _r-i i I ---

CD i l- J ~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-29-

~r ~ _

_L

1 tton coefficients

V-rsiOU cese nel-o t~lv TrenO ofOU bull corre ~ o-ht

) mo ro11inF~~olt si~ne-1 v-s- 105 in u -r 10 mtcrov - ------ r~----- ~ middot-bull

bull r

e~n)

co-i--re1 middot coefbull

u1-

-1middot0

bull

_o8 -

N

o

zo

_o6

-0 1

I I

I I

I I

1-rj ~

i Ct)

~ ~

10 -0 2

0

s 0

u

1)

1971

JI

1972

F

~

-30-

f

t i1

J

l J

fgt

5

)--

~onthlY Trend of correlation coefficients

correl coef

-1 0

_Q8 I

N

_Q630

_Q420

-0210

~ ~

CG 0~

(i)

~ J

10g micro~olt signal ~s 10g in~ersion 00se neight t3 reo-rollin5 me~n)----- rmiddot------ T3 - N

NTD

4-I - - I I

I I

-

~ Jigt bullbullbullbullbullbull

I

---

I

L~

I s

AJ

JM

t A1-1

I D JI N _3-0s 1971 1972

l

)--

~ 0oefftc1ents

pnO of correl0-t~on v bull tonthlY lr-bull 00se neightoP 1nvers1on () ~o ro11tng me~n)

1 ~91 7S bull ___~ ______ rsbull c ~1o 1t sJtibull ------ r

10g mi ~ 0 _ Lly amp 111D -- 11

car-re1 middot coef

-lbullO

-

IJ middotr _)

abull bull bull bull bull bull ~ It

_

_~ I

I I

I I_Q8

I ~I I

I IN

_Q6 30

-04-20

t10 -o2 s ~ Jt J fl ~ l A ~ F fl

0 t D J 11

i ~

t -32-

t-gt 0 O s 1971 1972

i i___

I - AP of total monthly hoursmiddot I ---- OAK - ~ N (lKm - sfc)

I i --- (Pr) wDuct - (Pr) woDuct 70

I I Summation 1 Jan 1965 - 31 Y~y 1968

I _ A (

1middot I gtabull 66 I i t

40t I L I I

lbull iI f 11 I I bull ~

z I I IJI I (J I 30

i j I I i i i

50 i i I ~

bull I

20I j--- V ~ Y

I V --t __ I

bull I l I middotO

I i i 10 i-~ I I I)= I ~ 1 (t) l i40 () 1

J A M J J A i 0F M

s bf N D 00 02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 II

(a) t middot18- (b)

- -

~~

i I 2 1

~~ I j02 I

103 2 Ol+

05 206 07

21 1 2 2 _2 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 l

I )) )jJ

f

n I d ( l _

ru~ I f

( 0 081~ 09 l ~~ j ~

10 l

l

11

I bull12 Imiddotbullmiddotbullbull13 14 I 1 15 ~ ~ 16

18 19 20

17

2~ n~r -~~21 ) L~2middot22 23 jl

j J F M A M J J A s 0 N D J F M A V J i-

~ Ci)

J

1965 1966

DUCTING OCCURRENCE - Percent of Total Monthl~- Hours

-19-

1

L_

1 11 1 - 2 3 ) 2 1

00 1 01

l I l ~ I f I 4 I I

02 03 t ti t I -_ -04

t li~U middot~~1Jj V

(~_2

Io09

I

10-

11 12 13 ~ _ 1 14 15 16 17 18 19 ---__ ~o 21 )~ I ) l 22 ltj23 _ j~ 32~ 1 1 l i- 2 l 3

~ D J F M A MM M J J A s 0 N rs J )

J A s 0 N I) I J F A (1) 19681966 1967 I ~

DUCTING OCCURRENCE - Percent of Total Monthly Hours

-20-

1 ~ 2 1 00

J01 [

02 03 1 Ol

t05 i I

06 j

07 08 i 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

i 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

~-

l VI

I

r

1

~ I

I1 1 _Jmiddot 3middot cli

-

J F M A M J J A s 0 Nmiddot D

DUCTING OCCURRENCE Percent of Total Monthly Hours

Average of Perlcd Jan 1965 - May 1968

p-

Figure 5

-_

14

1 Dec 71 - 29 Feb 72Winter - Freq (Y~x Sig strength) )OOJlV) -- 3 mo rolling mean of ( bull )

I J l--1

18

-23-242220

12

10

8

6

4

gt-rj 1--

~ t-i (t)

2 -J

I--

J ~--~J I

I I I

08 16141210PST

n

-24-

Spring 1 March 72 - 31 tay 72

- Freq (lfax Sig Strength ) JOO )lV)-- 3 mo rolling mean ( bull )

12

10

rl--

Tj-s ~

)

i--

I 1

I t8 I I I I l I t

6 I I -1 l l l

4

2

r---1

PST I 08 I10 12 14 I15 I

_j___

=-

composite Fall Winter spring 25 Aug 71 - )1 MaY 72

- Freq (fax Sig strength))OO microV) -- 3 mo rolling mean middott )

12

10

8

V 5 I I

V v

I

I I

4

J

f -j j~

sect ri (1) 2 C) 24 - 2s-

2220181614121008PST

RELATIONSHIP OF SIGNAL STRENGlH Ar SANrA lAHBABA TO AVERAGE INVERSION PASE HEIGIPl (NlD + LAX)

Average Inversion Ease Height (WlD + LAX) Feet MSL x = August 25 - September 30 1971 reg ~--- Octoher 19-71

amp November 1971 -26-

Figure 10

2j I-

~ 11 ()

12

10

8

6

4

2

I

I

Summer 1 Jun 72

_Freq (Max __ 3 mo rolling mean

- 31 Aug 72

Sig strengthgt 300 microv) ( )

shy~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-27-

L

70 Annual 25 Aug 71 - Jl Aug 72 12 Freq (Max Sig Strengthgt 300 microv)

3 mo rolling mean ( )

10

8

6

4

2

~ ~ ~ CD

I-- N

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-28-

-1 -

~

Fall 1 Sept 72 - JO Nov 72 CJ l CJJ frac12

I j bull bull 12 Freq (Maxo Sig Strengthco ll) lrj

~1-I- - gt JOO microV)

-- 3 IDOo rolling L3an ( Jf

fJlf 1 )

I 10

I

I I middotJ

( I 1 II

I I I8 I I I

I

I f I I

I

I I

f I I6

I

I

4

2 rj i- I ~ I _r-i i I ---

CD i l- J ~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-29-

~r ~ _

_L

1 tton coefficients

V-rsiOU cese nel-o t~lv TrenO ofOU bull corre ~ o-ht

) mo ro11inF~~olt si~ne-1 v-s- 105 in u -r 10 mtcrov - ------ r~----- ~ middot-bull

bull r

e~n)

co-i--re1 middot coefbull

u1-

-1middot0

bull

_o8 -

N

o

zo

_o6

-0 1

I I

I I

I I

1-rj ~

i Ct)

~ ~

10 -0 2

0

s 0

u

1)

1971

JI

1972

F

~

-30-

f

t i1

J

l J

fgt

5

)--

~onthlY Trend of correlation coefficients

correl coef

-1 0

_Q8 I

N

_Q630

_Q420

-0210

~ ~

CG 0~

(i)

~ J

10g micro~olt signal ~s 10g in~ersion 00se neight t3 reo-rollin5 me~n)----- rmiddot------ T3 - N

NTD

4-I - - I I

I I

-

~ Jigt bullbullbullbullbullbull

I

---

I

L~

I s

AJ

JM

t A1-1

I D JI N _3-0s 1971 1972

l

)--

~ 0oefftc1ents

pnO of correl0-t~on v bull tonthlY lr-bull 00se neightoP 1nvers1on () ~o ro11tng me~n)

1 ~91 7S bull ___~ ______ rsbull c ~1o 1t sJtibull ------ r

10g mi ~ 0 _ Lly amp 111D -- 11

car-re1 middot coef

-lbullO

-

IJ middotr _)

abull bull bull bull bull bull ~ It

_

_~ I

I I

I I_Q8

I ~I I

I IN

_Q6 30

-04-20

t10 -o2 s ~ Jt J fl ~ l A ~ F fl

0 t D J 11

i ~

t -32-

t-gt 0 O s 1971 1972

- -

~~

i I 2 1

~~ I j02 I

103 2 Ol+

05 206 07

21 1 2 2 _2 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 l

I )) )jJ

f

n I d ( l _

ru~ I f

( 0 081~ 09 l ~~ j ~

10 l

l

11

I bull12 Imiddotbullmiddotbullbull13 14 I 1 15 ~ ~ 16

18 19 20

17

2~ n~r -~~21 ) L~2middot22 23 jl

j J F M A M J J A s 0 N D J F M A V J i-

~ Ci)

J

1965 1966

DUCTING OCCURRENCE - Percent of Total Monthl~- Hours

-19-

1

L_

1 11 1 - 2 3 ) 2 1

00 1 01

l I l ~ I f I 4 I I

02 03 t ti t I -_ -04

t li~U middot~~1Jj V

(~_2

Io09

I

10-

11 12 13 ~ _ 1 14 15 16 17 18 19 ---__ ~o 21 )~ I ) l 22 ltj23 _ j~ 32~ 1 1 l i- 2 l 3

~ D J F M A MM M J J A s 0 N rs J )

J A s 0 N I) I J F A (1) 19681966 1967 I ~

DUCTING OCCURRENCE - Percent of Total Monthly Hours

-20-

1 ~ 2 1 00

J01 [

02 03 1 Ol

t05 i I

06 j

07 08 i 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

i 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

~-

l VI

I

r

1

~ I

I1 1 _Jmiddot 3middot cli

-

J F M A M J J A s 0 Nmiddot D

DUCTING OCCURRENCE Percent of Total Monthly Hours

Average of Perlcd Jan 1965 - May 1968

p-

Figure 5

-_

14

1 Dec 71 - 29 Feb 72Winter - Freq (Y~x Sig strength) )OOJlV) -- 3 mo rolling mean of ( bull )

I J l--1

18

-23-242220

12

10

8

6

4

gt-rj 1--

~ t-i (t)

2 -J

I--

J ~--~J I

I I I

08 16141210PST

n

-24-

Spring 1 March 72 - 31 tay 72

- Freq (lfax Sig Strength ) JOO )lV)-- 3 mo rolling mean ( bull )

12

10

rl--

Tj-s ~

)

i--

I 1

I t8 I I I I l I t

6 I I -1 l l l

4

2

r---1

PST I 08 I10 12 14 I15 I

_j___

=-

composite Fall Winter spring 25 Aug 71 - )1 MaY 72

- Freq (fax Sig strength))OO microV) -- 3 mo rolling mean middott )

12

10

8

V 5 I I

V v

I

I I

4

J

f -j j~

sect ri (1) 2 C) 24 - 2s-

2220181614121008PST

RELATIONSHIP OF SIGNAL STRENGlH Ar SANrA lAHBABA TO AVERAGE INVERSION PASE HEIGIPl (NlD + LAX)

Average Inversion Ease Height (WlD + LAX) Feet MSL x = August 25 - September 30 1971 reg ~--- Octoher 19-71

amp November 1971 -26-

Figure 10

2j I-

~ 11 ()

12

10

8

6

4

2

I

I

Summer 1 Jun 72

_Freq (Max __ 3 mo rolling mean

- 31 Aug 72

Sig strengthgt 300 microv) ( )

shy~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-27-

L

70 Annual 25 Aug 71 - Jl Aug 72 12 Freq (Max Sig Strengthgt 300 microv)

3 mo rolling mean ( )

10

8

6

4

2

~ ~ ~ CD

I-- N

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-28-

-1 -

~

Fall 1 Sept 72 - JO Nov 72 CJ l CJJ frac12

I j bull bull 12 Freq (Maxo Sig Strengthco ll) lrj

~1-I- - gt JOO microV)

-- 3 IDOo rolling L3an ( Jf

fJlf 1 )

I 10

I

I I middotJ

( I 1 II

I I I8 I I I

I

I f I I

I

I I

f I I6

I

I

4

2 rj i- I ~ I _r-i i I ---

CD i l- J ~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-29-

~r ~ _

_L

1 tton coefficients

V-rsiOU cese nel-o t~lv TrenO ofOU bull corre ~ o-ht

) mo ro11inF~~olt si~ne-1 v-s- 105 in u -r 10 mtcrov - ------ r~----- ~ middot-bull

bull r

e~n)

co-i--re1 middot coefbull

u1-

-1middot0

bull

_o8 -

N

o

zo

_o6

-0 1

I I

I I

I I

1-rj ~

i Ct)

~ ~

10 -0 2

0

s 0

u

1)

1971

JI

1972

F

~

-30-

f

t i1

J

l J

fgt

5

)--

~onthlY Trend of correlation coefficients

correl coef

-1 0

_Q8 I

N

_Q630

_Q420

-0210

~ ~

CG 0~

(i)

~ J

10g micro~olt signal ~s 10g in~ersion 00se neight t3 reo-rollin5 me~n)----- rmiddot------ T3 - N

NTD

4-I - - I I

I I

-

~ Jigt bullbullbullbullbullbull

I

---

I

L~

I s

AJ

JM

t A1-1

I D JI N _3-0s 1971 1972

l

)--

~ 0oefftc1ents

pnO of correl0-t~on v bull tonthlY lr-bull 00se neightoP 1nvers1on () ~o ro11tng me~n)

1 ~91 7S bull ___~ ______ rsbull c ~1o 1t sJtibull ------ r

10g mi ~ 0 _ Lly amp 111D -- 11

car-re1 middot coef

-lbullO

-

IJ middotr _)

abull bull bull bull bull bull ~ It

_

_~ I

I I

I I_Q8

I ~I I

I IN

_Q6 30

-04-20

t10 -o2 s ~ Jt J fl ~ l A ~ F fl

0 t D J 11

i ~

t -32-

t-gt 0 O s 1971 1972

L_

1 11 1 - 2 3 ) 2 1

00 1 01

l I l ~ I f I 4 I I

02 03 t ti t I -_ -04

t li~U middot~~1Jj V

(~_2

Io09

I

10-

11 12 13 ~ _ 1 14 15 16 17 18 19 ---__ ~o 21 )~ I ) l 22 ltj23 _ j~ 32~ 1 1 l i- 2 l 3

~ D J F M A MM M J J A s 0 N rs J )

J A s 0 N I) I J F A (1) 19681966 1967 I ~

DUCTING OCCURRENCE - Percent of Total Monthly Hours

-20-

1 ~ 2 1 00

J01 [

02 03 1 Ol

t05 i I

06 j

07 08 i 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

i 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

~-

l VI

I

r

1

~ I

I1 1 _Jmiddot 3middot cli

-

J F M A M J J A s 0 Nmiddot D

DUCTING OCCURRENCE Percent of Total Monthly Hours

Average of Perlcd Jan 1965 - May 1968

p-

Figure 5

-_

14

1 Dec 71 - 29 Feb 72Winter - Freq (Y~x Sig strength) )OOJlV) -- 3 mo rolling mean of ( bull )

I J l--1

18

-23-242220

12

10

8

6

4

gt-rj 1--

~ t-i (t)

2 -J

I--

J ~--~J I

I I I

08 16141210PST

n

-24-

Spring 1 March 72 - 31 tay 72

- Freq (lfax Sig Strength ) JOO )lV)-- 3 mo rolling mean ( bull )

12

10

rl--

Tj-s ~

)

i--

I 1

I t8 I I I I l I t

6 I I -1 l l l

4

2

r---1

PST I 08 I10 12 14 I15 I

_j___

=-

composite Fall Winter spring 25 Aug 71 - )1 MaY 72

- Freq (fax Sig strength))OO microV) -- 3 mo rolling mean middott )

12

10

8

V 5 I I

V v

I

I I

4

J

f -j j~

sect ri (1) 2 C) 24 - 2s-

2220181614121008PST

RELATIONSHIP OF SIGNAL STRENGlH Ar SANrA lAHBABA TO AVERAGE INVERSION PASE HEIGIPl (NlD + LAX)

Average Inversion Ease Height (WlD + LAX) Feet MSL x = August 25 - September 30 1971 reg ~--- Octoher 19-71

amp November 1971 -26-

Figure 10

2j I-

~ 11 ()

12

10

8

6

4

2

I

I

Summer 1 Jun 72

_Freq (Max __ 3 mo rolling mean

- 31 Aug 72

Sig strengthgt 300 microv) ( )

shy~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-27-

L

70 Annual 25 Aug 71 - Jl Aug 72 12 Freq (Max Sig Strengthgt 300 microv)

3 mo rolling mean ( )

10

8

6

4

2

~ ~ ~ CD

I-- N

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-28-

-1 -

~

Fall 1 Sept 72 - JO Nov 72 CJ l CJJ frac12

I j bull bull 12 Freq (Maxo Sig Strengthco ll) lrj

~1-I- - gt JOO microV)

-- 3 IDOo rolling L3an ( Jf

fJlf 1 )

I 10

I

I I middotJ

( I 1 II

I I I8 I I I

I

I f I I

I

I I

f I I6

I

I

4

2 rj i- I ~ I _r-i i I ---

CD i l- J ~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-29-

~r ~ _

_L

1 tton coefficients

V-rsiOU cese nel-o t~lv TrenO ofOU bull corre ~ o-ht

) mo ro11inF~~olt si~ne-1 v-s- 105 in u -r 10 mtcrov - ------ r~----- ~ middot-bull

bull r

e~n)

co-i--re1 middot coefbull

u1-

-1middot0

bull

_o8 -

N

o

zo

_o6

-0 1

I I

I I

I I

1-rj ~

i Ct)

~ ~

10 -0 2

0

s 0

u

1)

1971

JI

1972

F

~

-30-

f

t i1

J

l J

fgt

5

)--

~onthlY Trend of correlation coefficients

correl coef

-1 0

_Q8 I

N

_Q630

_Q420

-0210

~ ~

CG 0~

(i)

~ J

10g micro~olt signal ~s 10g in~ersion 00se neight t3 reo-rollin5 me~n)----- rmiddot------ T3 - N

NTD

4-I - - I I

I I

-

~ Jigt bullbullbullbullbullbull

I

---

I

L~

I s

AJ

JM

t A1-1

I D JI N _3-0s 1971 1972

l

)--

~ 0oefftc1ents

pnO of correl0-t~on v bull tonthlY lr-bull 00se neightoP 1nvers1on () ~o ro11tng me~n)

1 ~91 7S bull ___~ ______ rsbull c ~1o 1t sJtibull ------ r

10g mi ~ 0 _ Lly amp 111D -- 11

car-re1 middot coef

-lbullO

-

IJ middotr _)

abull bull bull bull bull bull ~ It

_

_~ I

I I

I I_Q8

I ~I I

I IN

_Q6 30

-04-20

t10 -o2 s ~ Jt J fl ~ l A ~ F fl

0 t D J 11

i ~

t -32-

t-gt 0 O s 1971 1972

1 ~ 2 1 00

J01 [

02 03 1 Ol

t05 i I

06 j

07 08 i 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

i 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

~-

l VI

I

r

1

~ I

I1 1 _Jmiddot 3middot cli

-

J F M A M J J A s 0 Nmiddot D

DUCTING OCCURRENCE Percent of Total Monthly Hours

Average of Perlcd Jan 1965 - May 1968

p-

Figure 5

-_

14

1 Dec 71 - 29 Feb 72Winter - Freq (Y~x Sig strength) )OOJlV) -- 3 mo rolling mean of ( bull )

I J l--1

18

-23-242220

12

10

8

6

4

gt-rj 1--

~ t-i (t)

2 -J

I--

J ~--~J I

I I I

08 16141210PST

n

-24-

Spring 1 March 72 - 31 tay 72

- Freq (lfax Sig Strength ) JOO )lV)-- 3 mo rolling mean ( bull )

12

10

rl--

Tj-s ~

)

i--

I 1

I t8 I I I I l I t

6 I I -1 l l l

4

2

r---1

PST I 08 I10 12 14 I15 I

_j___

=-

composite Fall Winter spring 25 Aug 71 - )1 MaY 72

- Freq (fax Sig strength))OO microV) -- 3 mo rolling mean middott )

12

10

8

V 5 I I

V v

I

I I

4

J

f -j j~

sect ri (1) 2 C) 24 - 2s-

2220181614121008PST

RELATIONSHIP OF SIGNAL STRENGlH Ar SANrA lAHBABA TO AVERAGE INVERSION PASE HEIGIPl (NlD + LAX)

Average Inversion Ease Height (WlD + LAX) Feet MSL x = August 25 - September 30 1971 reg ~--- Octoher 19-71

amp November 1971 -26-

Figure 10

2j I-

~ 11 ()

12

10

8

6

4

2

I

I

Summer 1 Jun 72

_Freq (Max __ 3 mo rolling mean

- 31 Aug 72

Sig strengthgt 300 microv) ( )

shy~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-27-

L

70 Annual 25 Aug 71 - Jl Aug 72 12 Freq (Max Sig Strengthgt 300 microv)

3 mo rolling mean ( )

10

8

6

4

2

~ ~ ~ CD

I-- N

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-28-

-1 -

~

Fall 1 Sept 72 - JO Nov 72 CJ l CJJ frac12

I j bull bull 12 Freq (Maxo Sig Strengthco ll) lrj

~1-I- - gt JOO microV)

-- 3 IDOo rolling L3an ( Jf

fJlf 1 )

I 10

I

I I middotJ

( I 1 II

I I I8 I I I

I

I f I I

I

I I

f I I6

I

I

4

2 rj i- I ~ I _r-i i I ---

CD i l- J ~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-29-

~r ~ _

_L

1 tton coefficients

V-rsiOU cese nel-o t~lv TrenO ofOU bull corre ~ o-ht

) mo ro11inF~~olt si~ne-1 v-s- 105 in u -r 10 mtcrov - ------ r~----- ~ middot-bull

bull r

e~n)

co-i--re1 middot coefbull

u1-

-1middot0

bull

_o8 -

N

o

zo

_o6

-0 1

I I

I I

I I

1-rj ~

i Ct)

~ ~

10 -0 2

0

s 0

u

1)

1971

JI

1972

F

~

-30-

f

t i1

J

l J

fgt

5

)--

~onthlY Trend of correlation coefficients

correl coef

-1 0

_Q8 I

N

_Q630

_Q420

-0210

~ ~

CG 0~

(i)

~ J

10g micro~olt signal ~s 10g in~ersion 00se neight t3 reo-rollin5 me~n)----- rmiddot------ T3 - N

NTD

4-I - - I I

I I

-

~ Jigt bullbullbullbullbullbull

I

---

I

L~

I s

AJ

JM

t A1-1

I D JI N _3-0s 1971 1972

l

)--

~ 0oefftc1ents

pnO of correl0-t~on v bull tonthlY lr-bull 00se neightoP 1nvers1on () ~o ro11tng me~n)

1 ~91 7S bull ___~ ______ rsbull c ~1o 1t sJtibull ------ r

10g mi ~ 0 _ Lly amp 111D -- 11

car-re1 middot coef

-lbullO

-

IJ middotr _)

abull bull bull bull bull bull ~ It

_

_~ I

I I

I I_Q8

I ~I I

I IN

_Q6 30

-04-20

t10 -o2 s ~ Jt J fl ~ l A ~ F fl

0 t D J 11

i ~

t -32-

t-gt 0 O s 1971 1972

-_

14

1 Dec 71 - 29 Feb 72Winter - Freq (Y~x Sig strength) )OOJlV) -- 3 mo rolling mean of ( bull )

I J l--1

18

-23-242220

12

10

8

6

4

gt-rj 1--

~ t-i (t)

2 -J

I--

J ~--~J I

I I I

08 16141210PST

n

-24-

Spring 1 March 72 - 31 tay 72

- Freq (lfax Sig Strength ) JOO )lV)-- 3 mo rolling mean ( bull )

12

10

rl--

Tj-s ~

)

i--

I 1

I t8 I I I I l I t

6 I I -1 l l l

4

2

r---1

PST I 08 I10 12 14 I15 I

_j___

=-

composite Fall Winter spring 25 Aug 71 - )1 MaY 72

- Freq (fax Sig strength))OO microV) -- 3 mo rolling mean middott )

12

10

8

V 5 I I

V v

I

I I

4

J

f -j j~

sect ri (1) 2 C) 24 - 2s-

2220181614121008PST

RELATIONSHIP OF SIGNAL STRENGlH Ar SANrA lAHBABA TO AVERAGE INVERSION PASE HEIGIPl (NlD + LAX)

Average Inversion Ease Height (WlD + LAX) Feet MSL x = August 25 - September 30 1971 reg ~--- Octoher 19-71

amp November 1971 -26-

Figure 10

2j I-

~ 11 ()

12

10

8

6

4

2

I

I

Summer 1 Jun 72

_Freq (Max __ 3 mo rolling mean

- 31 Aug 72

Sig strengthgt 300 microv) ( )

shy~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-27-

L

70 Annual 25 Aug 71 - Jl Aug 72 12 Freq (Max Sig Strengthgt 300 microv)

3 mo rolling mean ( )

10

8

6

4

2

~ ~ ~ CD

I-- N

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-28-

-1 -

~

Fall 1 Sept 72 - JO Nov 72 CJ l CJJ frac12

I j bull bull 12 Freq (Maxo Sig Strengthco ll) lrj

~1-I- - gt JOO microV)

-- 3 IDOo rolling L3an ( Jf

fJlf 1 )

I 10

I

I I middotJ

( I 1 II

I I I8 I I I

I

I f I I

I

I I

f I I6

I

I

4

2 rj i- I ~ I _r-i i I ---

CD i l- J ~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-29-

~r ~ _

_L

1 tton coefficients

V-rsiOU cese nel-o t~lv TrenO ofOU bull corre ~ o-ht

) mo ro11inF~~olt si~ne-1 v-s- 105 in u -r 10 mtcrov - ------ r~----- ~ middot-bull

bull r

e~n)

co-i--re1 middot coefbull

u1-

-1middot0

bull

_o8 -

N

o

zo

_o6

-0 1

I I

I I

I I

1-rj ~

i Ct)

~ ~

10 -0 2

0

s 0

u

1)

1971

JI

1972

F

~

-30-

f

t i1

J

l J

fgt

5

)--

~onthlY Trend of correlation coefficients

correl coef

-1 0

_Q8 I

N

_Q630

_Q420

-0210

~ ~

CG 0~

(i)

~ J

10g micro~olt signal ~s 10g in~ersion 00se neight t3 reo-rollin5 me~n)----- rmiddot------ T3 - N

NTD

4-I - - I I

I I

-

~ Jigt bullbullbullbullbullbull

I

---

I

L~

I s

AJ

JM

t A1-1

I D JI N _3-0s 1971 1972

l

)--

~ 0oefftc1ents

pnO of correl0-t~on v bull tonthlY lr-bull 00se neightoP 1nvers1on () ~o ro11tng me~n)

1 ~91 7S bull ___~ ______ rsbull c ~1o 1t sJtibull ------ r

10g mi ~ 0 _ Lly amp 111D -- 11

car-re1 middot coef

-lbullO

-

IJ middotr _)

abull bull bull bull bull bull ~ It

_

_~ I

I I

I I_Q8

I ~I I

I IN

_Q6 30

-04-20

t10 -o2 s ~ Jt J fl ~ l A ~ F fl

0 t D J 11

i ~

t -32-

t-gt 0 O s 1971 1972

n

-24-

Spring 1 March 72 - 31 tay 72

- Freq (lfax Sig Strength ) JOO )lV)-- 3 mo rolling mean ( bull )

12

10

rl--

Tj-s ~

)

i--

I 1

I t8 I I I I l I t

6 I I -1 l l l

4

2

r---1

PST I 08 I10 12 14 I15 I

_j___

=-

composite Fall Winter spring 25 Aug 71 - )1 MaY 72

- Freq (fax Sig strength))OO microV) -- 3 mo rolling mean middott )

12

10

8

V 5 I I

V v

I

I I

4

J

f -j j~

sect ri (1) 2 C) 24 - 2s-

2220181614121008PST

RELATIONSHIP OF SIGNAL STRENGlH Ar SANrA lAHBABA TO AVERAGE INVERSION PASE HEIGIPl (NlD + LAX)

Average Inversion Ease Height (WlD + LAX) Feet MSL x = August 25 - September 30 1971 reg ~--- Octoher 19-71

amp November 1971 -26-

Figure 10

2j I-

~ 11 ()

12

10

8

6

4

2

I

I

Summer 1 Jun 72

_Freq (Max __ 3 mo rolling mean

- 31 Aug 72

Sig strengthgt 300 microv) ( )

shy~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-27-

L

70 Annual 25 Aug 71 - Jl Aug 72 12 Freq (Max Sig Strengthgt 300 microv)

3 mo rolling mean ( )

10

8

6

4

2

~ ~ ~ CD

I-- N

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-28-

-1 -

~

Fall 1 Sept 72 - JO Nov 72 CJ l CJJ frac12

I j bull bull 12 Freq (Maxo Sig Strengthco ll) lrj

~1-I- - gt JOO microV)

-- 3 IDOo rolling L3an ( Jf

fJlf 1 )

I 10

I

I I middotJ

( I 1 II

I I I8 I I I

I

I f I I

I

I I

f I I6

I

I

4

2 rj i- I ~ I _r-i i I ---

CD i l- J ~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-29-

~r ~ _

_L

1 tton coefficients

V-rsiOU cese nel-o t~lv TrenO ofOU bull corre ~ o-ht

) mo ro11inF~~olt si~ne-1 v-s- 105 in u -r 10 mtcrov - ------ r~----- ~ middot-bull

bull r

e~n)

co-i--re1 middot coefbull

u1-

-1middot0

bull

_o8 -

N

o

zo

_o6

-0 1

I I

I I

I I

1-rj ~

i Ct)

~ ~

10 -0 2

0

s 0

u

1)

1971

JI

1972

F

~

-30-

f

t i1

J

l J

fgt

5

)--

~onthlY Trend of correlation coefficients

correl coef

-1 0

_Q8 I

N

_Q630

_Q420

-0210

~ ~

CG 0~

(i)

~ J

10g micro~olt signal ~s 10g in~ersion 00se neight t3 reo-rollin5 me~n)----- rmiddot------ T3 - N

NTD

4-I - - I I

I I

-

~ Jigt bullbullbullbullbullbull

I

---

I

L~

I s

AJ

JM

t A1-1

I D JI N _3-0s 1971 1972

l

)--

~ 0oefftc1ents

pnO of correl0-t~on v bull tonthlY lr-bull 00se neightoP 1nvers1on () ~o ro11tng me~n)

1 ~91 7S bull ___~ ______ rsbull c ~1o 1t sJtibull ------ r

10g mi ~ 0 _ Lly amp 111D -- 11

car-re1 middot coef

-lbullO

-

IJ middotr _)

abull bull bull bull bull bull ~ It

_

_~ I

I I

I I_Q8

I ~I I

I IN

_Q6 30

-04-20

t10 -o2 s ~ Jt J fl ~ l A ~ F fl

0 t D J 11

i ~

t -32-

t-gt 0 O s 1971 1972

_j___

=-

composite Fall Winter spring 25 Aug 71 - )1 MaY 72

- Freq (fax Sig strength))OO microV) -- 3 mo rolling mean middott )

12

10

8

V 5 I I

V v

I

I I

4

J

f -j j~

sect ri (1) 2 C) 24 - 2s-

2220181614121008PST

RELATIONSHIP OF SIGNAL STRENGlH Ar SANrA lAHBABA TO AVERAGE INVERSION PASE HEIGIPl (NlD + LAX)

Average Inversion Ease Height (WlD + LAX) Feet MSL x = August 25 - September 30 1971 reg ~--- Octoher 19-71

amp November 1971 -26-

Figure 10

2j I-

~ 11 ()

12

10

8

6

4

2

I

I

Summer 1 Jun 72

_Freq (Max __ 3 mo rolling mean

- 31 Aug 72

Sig strengthgt 300 microv) ( )

shy~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-27-

L

70 Annual 25 Aug 71 - Jl Aug 72 12 Freq (Max Sig Strengthgt 300 microv)

3 mo rolling mean ( )

10

8

6

4

2

~ ~ ~ CD

I-- N

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-28-

-1 -

~

Fall 1 Sept 72 - JO Nov 72 CJ l CJJ frac12

I j bull bull 12 Freq (Maxo Sig Strengthco ll) lrj

~1-I- - gt JOO microV)

-- 3 IDOo rolling L3an ( Jf

fJlf 1 )

I 10

I

I I middotJ

( I 1 II

I I I8 I I I

I

I f I I

I

I I

f I I6

I

I

4

2 rj i- I ~ I _r-i i I ---

CD i l- J ~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-29-

~r ~ _

_L

1 tton coefficients

V-rsiOU cese nel-o t~lv TrenO ofOU bull corre ~ o-ht

) mo ro11inF~~olt si~ne-1 v-s- 105 in u -r 10 mtcrov - ------ r~----- ~ middot-bull

bull r

e~n)

co-i--re1 middot coefbull

u1-

-1middot0

bull

_o8 -

N

o

zo

_o6

-0 1

I I

I I

I I

1-rj ~

i Ct)

~ ~

10 -0 2

0

s 0

u

1)

1971

JI

1972

F

~

-30-

f

t i1

J

l J

fgt

5

)--

~onthlY Trend of correlation coefficients

correl coef

-1 0

_Q8 I

N

_Q630

_Q420

-0210

~ ~

CG 0~

(i)

~ J

10g micro~olt signal ~s 10g in~ersion 00se neight t3 reo-rollin5 me~n)----- rmiddot------ T3 - N

NTD

4-I - - I I

I I

-

~ Jigt bullbullbullbullbullbull

I

---

I

L~

I s

AJ

JM

t A1-1

I D JI N _3-0s 1971 1972

l

)--

~ 0oefftc1ents

pnO of correl0-t~on v bull tonthlY lr-bull 00se neightoP 1nvers1on () ~o ro11tng me~n)

1 ~91 7S bull ___~ ______ rsbull c ~1o 1t sJtibull ------ r

10g mi ~ 0 _ Lly amp 111D -- 11

car-re1 middot coef

-lbullO

-

IJ middotr _)

abull bull bull bull bull bull ~ It

_

_~ I

I I

I I_Q8

I ~I I

I IN

_Q6 30

-04-20

t10 -o2 s ~ Jt J fl ~ l A ~ F fl

0 t D J 11

i ~

t -32-

t-gt 0 O s 1971 1972

RELATIONSHIP OF SIGNAL STRENGlH Ar SANrA lAHBABA TO AVERAGE INVERSION PASE HEIGIPl (NlD + LAX)

Average Inversion Ease Height (WlD + LAX) Feet MSL x = August 25 - September 30 1971 reg ~--- Octoher 19-71

amp November 1971 -26-

Figure 10

2j I-

~ 11 ()

12

10

8

6

4

2

I

I

Summer 1 Jun 72

_Freq (Max __ 3 mo rolling mean

- 31 Aug 72

Sig strengthgt 300 microv) ( )

shy~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-27-

L

70 Annual 25 Aug 71 - Jl Aug 72 12 Freq (Max Sig Strengthgt 300 microv)

3 mo rolling mean ( )

10

8

6

4

2

~ ~ ~ CD

I-- N

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-28-

-1 -

~

Fall 1 Sept 72 - JO Nov 72 CJ l CJJ frac12

I j bull bull 12 Freq (Maxo Sig Strengthco ll) lrj

~1-I- - gt JOO microV)

-- 3 IDOo rolling L3an ( Jf

fJlf 1 )

I 10

I

I I middotJ

( I 1 II

I I I8 I I I

I

I f I I

I

I I

f I I6

I

I

4

2 rj i- I ~ I _r-i i I ---

CD i l- J ~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-29-

~r ~ _

_L

1 tton coefficients

V-rsiOU cese nel-o t~lv TrenO ofOU bull corre ~ o-ht

) mo ro11inF~~olt si~ne-1 v-s- 105 in u -r 10 mtcrov - ------ r~----- ~ middot-bull

bull r

e~n)

co-i--re1 middot coefbull

u1-

-1middot0

bull

_o8 -

N

o

zo

_o6

-0 1

I I

I I

I I

1-rj ~

i Ct)

~ ~

10 -0 2

0

s 0

u

1)

1971

JI

1972

F

~

-30-

f

t i1

J

l J

fgt

5

)--

~onthlY Trend of correlation coefficients

correl coef

-1 0

_Q8 I

N

_Q630

_Q420

-0210

~ ~

CG 0~

(i)

~ J

10g micro~olt signal ~s 10g in~ersion 00se neight t3 reo-rollin5 me~n)----- rmiddot------ T3 - N

NTD

4-I - - I I

I I

-

~ Jigt bullbullbullbullbullbull

I

---

I

L~

I s

AJ

JM

t A1-1

I D JI N _3-0s 1971 1972

l

)--

~ 0oefftc1ents

pnO of correl0-t~on v bull tonthlY lr-bull 00se neightoP 1nvers1on () ~o ro11tng me~n)

1 ~91 7S bull ___~ ______ rsbull c ~1o 1t sJtibull ------ r

10g mi ~ 0 _ Lly amp 111D -- 11

car-re1 middot coef

-lbullO

-

IJ middotr _)

abull bull bull bull bull bull ~ It

_

_~ I

I I

I I_Q8

I ~I I

I IN

_Q6 30

-04-20

t10 -o2 s ~ Jt J fl ~ l A ~ F fl

0 t D J 11

i ~

t -32-

t-gt 0 O s 1971 1972

2j I-

~ 11 ()

12

10

8

6

4

2

I

I

Summer 1 Jun 72

_Freq (Max __ 3 mo rolling mean

- 31 Aug 72

Sig strengthgt 300 microv) ( )

shy~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-27-

L

70 Annual 25 Aug 71 - Jl Aug 72 12 Freq (Max Sig Strengthgt 300 microv)

3 mo rolling mean ( )

10

8

6

4

2

~ ~ ~ CD

I-- N

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-28-

-1 -

~

Fall 1 Sept 72 - JO Nov 72 CJ l CJJ frac12

I j bull bull 12 Freq (Maxo Sig Strengthco ll) lrj

~1-I- - gt JOO microV)

-- 3 IDOo rolling L3an ( Jf

fJlf 1 )

I 10

I

I I middotJ

( I 1 II

I I I8 I I I

I

I f I I

I

I I

f I I6

I

I

4

2 rj i- I ~ I _r-i i I ---

CD i l- J ~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-29-

~r ~ _

_L

1 tton coefficients

V-rsiOU cese nel-o t~lv TrenO ofOU bull corre ~ o-ht

) mo ro11inF~~olt si~ne-1 v-s- 105 in u -r 10 mtcrov - ------ r~----- ~ middot-bull

bull r

e~n)

co-i--re1 middot coefbull

u1-

-1middot0

bull

_o8 -

N

o

zo

_o6

-0 1

I I

I I

I I

1-rj ~

i Ct)

~ ~

10 -0 2

0

s 0

u

1)

1971

JI

1972

F

~

-30-

f

t i1

J

l J

fgt

5

)--

~onthlY Trend of correlation coefficients

correl coef

-1 0

_Q8 I

N

_Q630

_Q420

-0210

~ ~

CG 0~

(i)

~ J

10g micro~olt signal ~s 10g in~ersion 00se neight t3 reo-rollin5 me~n)----- rmiddot------ T3 - N

NTD

4-I - - I I

I I

-

~ Jigt bullbullbullbullbullbull

I

---

I

L~

I s

AJ

JM

t A1-1

I D JI N _3-0s 1971 1972

l

)--

~ 0oefftc1ents

pnO of correl0-t~on v bull tonthlY lr-bull 00se neightoP 1nvers1on () ~o ro11tng me~n)

1 ~91 7S bull ___~ ______ rsbull c ~1o 1t sJtibull ------ r

10g mi ~ 0 _ Lly amp 111D -- 11

car-re1 middot coef

-lbullO

-

IJ middotr _)

abull bull bull bull bull bull ~ It

_

_~ I

I I

I I_Q8

I ~I I

I IN

_Q6 30

-04-20

t10 -o2 s ~ Jt J fl ~ l A ~ F fl

0 t D J 11

i ~

t -32-

t-gt 0 O s 1971 1972

L

70 Annual 25 Aug 71 - Jl Aug 72 12 Freq (Max Sig Strengthgt 300 microv)

3 mo rolling mean ( )

10

8

6

4

2

~ ~ ~ CD

I-- N

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-28-

-1 -

~

Fall 1 Sept 72 - JO Nov 72 CJ l CJJ frac12

I j bull bull 12 Freq (Maxo Sig Strengthco ll) lrj

~1-I- - gt JOO microV)

-- 3 IDOo rolling L3an ( Jf

fJlf 1 )

I 10

I

I I middotJ

( I 1 II

I I I8 I I I

I

I f I I

I

I I

f I I6

I

I

4

2 rj i- I ~ I _r-i i I ---

CD i l- J ~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-29-

~r ~ _

_L

1 tton coefficients

V-rsiOU cese nel-o t~lv TrenO ofOU bull corre ~ o-ht

) mo ro11inF~~olt si~ne-1 v-s- 105 in u -r 10 mtcrov - ------ r~----- ~ middot-bull

bull r

e~n)

co-i--re1 middot coefbull

u1-

-1middot0

bull

_o8 -

N

o

zo

_o6

-0 1

I I

I I

I I

1-rj ~

i Ct)

~ ~

10 -0 2

0

s 0

u

1)

1971

JI

1972

F

~

-30-

f

t i1

J

l J

fgt

5

)--

~onthlY Trend of correlation coefficients

correl coef

-1 0

_Q8 I

N

_Q630

_Q420

-0210

~ ~

CG 0~

(i)

~ J

10g micro~olt signal ~s 10g in~ersion 00se neight t3 reo-rollin5 me~n)----- rmiddot------ T3 - N

NTD

4-I - - I I

I I

-

~ Jigt bullbullbullbullbullbull

I

---

I

L~

I s

AJ

JM

t A1-1

I D JI N _3-0s 1971 1972

l

)--

~ 0oefftc1ents

pnO of correl0-t~on v bull tonthlY lr-bull 00se neightoP 1nvers1on () ~o ro11tng me~n)

1 ~91 7S bull ___~ ______ rsbull c ~1o 1t sJtibull ------ r

10g mi ~ 0 _ Lly amp 111D -- 11

car-re1 middot coef

-lbullO

-

IJ middotr _)

abull bull bull bull bull bull ~ It

_

_~ I

I I

I I_Q8

I ~I I

I IN

_Q6 30

-04-20

t10 -o2 s ~ Jt J fl ~ l A ~ F fl

0 t D J 11

i ~

t -32-

t-gt 0 O s 1971 1972

-1 -

~

Fall 1 Sept 72 - JO Nov 72 CJ l CJJ frac12

I j bull bull 12 Freq (Maxo Sig Strengthco ll) lrj

~1-I- - gt JOO microV)

-- 3 IDOo rolling L3an ( Jf

fJlf 1 )

I 10

I

I I middotJ

( I 1 II

I I I8 I I I

I

I f I I

I

I I

f I I6

I

I

4

2 rj i- I ~ I _r-i i I ---

CD i l- J ~

PST 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24

-29-

~r ~ _

_L

1 tton coefficients

V-rsiOU cese nel-o t~lv TrenO ofOU bull corre ~ o-ht

) mo ro11inF~~olt si~ne-1 v-s- 105 in u -r 10 mtcrov - ------ r~----- ~ middot-bull

bull r

e~n)

co-i--re1 middot coefbull

u1-

-1middot0

bull

_o8 -

N

o

zo

_o6

-0 1

I I

I I

I I

1-rj ~

i Ct)

~ ~

10 -0 2

0

s 0

u

1)

1971

JI

1972

F

~

-30-

f

t i1

J

l J

fgt

5

)--

~onthlY Trend of correlation coefficients

correl coef

-1 0

_Q8 I

N

_Q630

_Q420

-0210

~ ~

CG 0~

(i)

~ J

10g micro~olt signal ~s 10g in~ersion 00se neight t3 reo-rollin5 me~n)----- rmiddot------ T3 - N

NTD

4-I - - I I

I I

-

~ Jigt bullbullbullbullbullbull

I

---

I

L~

I s

AJ

JM

t A1-1

I D JI N _3-0s 1971 1972

l

)--

~ 0oefftc1ents

pnO of correl0-t~on v bull tonthlY lr-bull 00se neightoP 1nvers1on () ~o ro11tng me~n)

1 ~91 7S bull ___~ ______ rsbull c ~1o 1t sJtibull ------ r

10g mi ~ 0 _ Lly amp 111D -- 11

car-re1 middot coef

-lbullO

-

IJ middotr _)

abull bull bull bull bull bull ~ It

_

_~ I

I I

I I_Q8

I ~I I

I IN

_Q6 30

-04-20

t10 -o2 s ~ Jt J fl ~ l A ~ F fl

0 t D J 11

i ~

t -32-

t-gt 0 O s 1971 1972

~r ~ _

_L

1 tton coefficients

V-rsiOU cese nel-o t~lv TrenO ofOU bull corre ~ o-ht

) mo ro11inF~~olt si~ne-1 v-s- 105 in u -r 10 mtcrov - ------ r~----- ~ middot-bull

bull r

e~n)

co-i--re1 middot coefbull

u1-

-1middot0

bull

_o8 -

N

o

zo

_o6

-0 1

I I

I I

I I

1-rj ~

i Ct)

~ ~

10 -0 2

0

s 0

u

1)

1971

JI

1972

F

~

-30-

f

t i1

J

l J

fgt

5

)--

~onthlY Trend of correlation coefficients

correl coef

-1 0

_Q8 I

N

_Q630

_Q420

-0210

~ ~

CG 0~

(i)

~ J

10g micro~olt signal ~s 10g in~ersion 00se neight t3 reo-rollin5 me~n)----- rmiddot------ T3 - N

NTD

4-I - - I I

I I

-

~ Jigt bullbullbullbullbullbull

I

---

I

L~

I s

AJ

JM

t A1-1

I D JI N _3-0s 1971 1972

l

)--

~ 0oefftc1ents

pnO of correl0-t~on v bull tonthlY lr-bull 00se neightoP 1nvers1on () ~o ro11tng me~n)

1 ~91 7S bull ___~ ______ rsbull c ~1o 1t sJtibull ------ r

10g mi ~ 0 _ Lly amp 111D -- 11

car-re1 middot coef

-lbullO

-

IJ middotr _)

abull bull bull bull bull bull ~ It

_

_~ I

I I

I I_Q8

I ~I I

I IN

_Q6 30

-04-20

t10 -o2 s ~ Jt J fl ~ l A ~ F fl

0 t D J 11

i ~

t -32-

t-gt 0 O s 1971 1972

)--

~onthlY Trend of correlation coefficients

correl coef

-1 0

_Q8 I

N

_Q630

_Q420

-0210

~ ~

CG 0~

(i)

~ J

10g micro~olt signal ~s 10g in~ersion 00se neight t3 reo-rollin5 me~n)----- rmiddot------ T3 - N

NTD

4-I - - I I

I I

-

~ Jigt bullbullbullbullbullbull

I

---

I

L~

I s

AJ

JM

t A1-1

I D JI N _3-0s 1971 1972

l

)--

~ 0oefftc1ents

pnO of correl0-t~on v bull tonthlY lr-bull 00se neightoP 1nvers1on () ~o ro11tng me~n)

1 ~91 7S bull ___~ ______ rsbull c ~1o 1t sJtibull ------ r

10g mi ~ 0 _ Lly amp 111D -- 11

car-re1 middot coef

-lbullO

-

IJ middotr _)

abull bull bull bull bull bull ~ It

_

_~ I

I I

I I_Q8

I ~I I

I IN

_Q6 30

-04-20

t10 -o2 s ~ Jt J fl ~ l A ~ F fl

0 t D J 11

i ~

t -32-

t-gt 0 O s 1971 1972

)--

~ 0oefftc1ents

pnO of correl0-t~on v bull tonthlY lr-bull 00se neightoP 1nvers1on () ~o ro11tng me~n)

1 ~91 7S bull ___~ ______ rsbull c ~1o 1t sJtibull ------ r

10g mi ~ 0 _ Lly amp 111D -- 11

car-re1 middot coef

-lbullO

-

IJ middotr _)

abull bull bull bull bull bull ~ It

_

_~ I

I I

I I_Q8

I ~I I

I IN

_Q6 30

-04-20

t10 -o2 s ~ Jt J fl ~ l A ~ F fl

0 t D J 11

i ~

t -32-

t-gt 0 O s 1971 1972

Monthly Trend of Correlation Coefficients

log microvolt signal vs log inversion case height

Correl Coef

-10

J mo rolling mean (r3) LAX amp NTD

ux NTD

middot-o 8

-06 _

--- middot - ---

~-

-04

______1

- ___ _

-02

~-~ ~ D

J

0

I s

I 0

I l Ii I I I

191 192 I F

-3-3-middot

I M

I A M

t J

t J

I A s

soo CECIL COOK Plbull SANTA bARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 9307

-34-

SIDNEY R fRANg GROUP F1 siure 18

bull bull bull bull bull bull

1 -1 2 13 t

02~~) 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12

l

13 14 middot 01 middot+ 0 middot+ 0 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

1 0 J F M A M J J A s 0 N D

DUCTING OCCURRENCE Percent of Total Monthly Hours

Average of Period June 1966 - May 1968

1

-35-

Figure 19

------_

--- -

PPM t

0 10

60

50

I I

I

I

AP vr o40

- I

I I

I I

- ---I

L

I I

I

- - i

3 Cor Coef r = 079

30

--7

- - -1

005 20

I Ir I

10 I ___

~ I ---f-lo v

~ ~ a

l)

0 J J A s 0 N DI J F M A M J J1966 1967 A s 0 N F

D I J M A K Monthly of Total Possible Monthly Hours of Anomalous Propagation 1968

Monthly Average of Daily Maximum Hour of 03 at 1Jth amp J Sacramento-36-

-- Nu Li

PJlI

bull30 60

Signal Strength v -- J OJ 50

Cor Coef r = O 70

20 40 I

I I

I

I

30 I

I I I

i I

10 20 I I I I

I I

I10 v

V ~ i-

~ ~ li ~

N J F M A M J J A s 0s 0 N D

19721971 Monthly Average of Daily Maximum Signal strength_

Monthly Average of south Coast Basin Daily Maximum Oxidant -7-

------

0

------------ --

-- --

_

~ raquo ~

~ IS-f I

fl-) s H +- tr~ U) s Q) ~ H aS +gt ~ ti)

0 bO r-1

~6 t1D n II II II Cl)

gt

amp-)

~

ltt

~

( ~lef

I co

bull-- M

I

~)

z

_ 0

t C N 0F-i

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Monthly Correlation Coefficients - LA Basin

3-Month Rolling Mean 1 Sep 71 - 31 Oct 72

03 Daily Max vs Signal Strength o3 Daily Max vs Cale Max HIB

soo CECIL COOK Plbull SANTA bARBARA AIRPORT bull GOLETA CALIF 9307

-34-

SIDNEY R fRANg GROUP F1 siure 18

bull bull bull bull bull bull

1 -1 2 13 t

02~~) 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12

l

13 14 middot 01 middot+ 0 middot+ 0 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

1 0 J F M A M J J A s 0 N D

DUCTING OCCURRENCE Percent of Total Monthly Hours

Average of Period June 1966 - May 1968

1

-35-

Figure 19

------_

--- -

PPM t

0 10

60

50

I I

I

I

AP vr o40

- I

I I

I I

- ---I

L

I I

I

- - i

3 Cor Coef r = 079

30

--7

- - -1

005 20

I Ir I

10 I ___

~ I ---f-lo v

~ ~ a

l)

0 J J A s 0 N DI J F M A M J J1966 1967 A s 0 N F

D I J M A K Monthly of Total Possible Monthly Hours of Anomalous Propagation 1968

Monthly Average of Daily Maximum Hour of 03 at 1Jth amp J Sacramento-36-

-- Nu Li

PJlI

bull30 60

Signal Strength v -- J OJ 50

Cor Coef r = O 70

20 40 I

I I

I

I

30 I

I I I

i I

10 20 I I I I

I I

I10 v

V ~ i-

~ ~ li ~

N J F M A M J J A s 0s 0 N D

19721971 Monthly Average of Daily Maximum Signal strength_

Monthly Average of south Coast Basin Daily Maximum Oxidant -7-

------

0

------------ --

-- --

_

~ raquo ~

~ IS-f I

fl-) s H +- tr~ U) s Q) ~ H aS +gt ~ ti)

0 bO r-1

~6 t1D n II II II Cl)

gt

amp-)

~

ltt

~

( ~lef

I co

bull-- M

I

~)

z

_ 0

t C N 0F-i

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Monthly Correlation Coefficients - LA Basin

3-Month Rolling Mean 1 Sep 71 - 31 Oct 72

03 Daily Max vs Signal Strength o3 Daily Max vs Cale Max HIB

bull bull bull bull bull bull

1 -1 2 13 t

02~~) 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12

l

13 14 middot 01 middot+ 0 middot+ 0 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

1 0 J F M A M J J A s 0 N D

DUCTING OCCURRENCE Percent of Total Monthly Hours

Average of Period June 1966 - May 1968

1

-35-

Figure 19

------_

--- -

PPM t

0 10

60

50

I I

I

I

AP vr o40

- I

I I

I I

- ---I

L

I I

I

- - i

3 Cor Coef r = 079

30

--7

- - -1

005 20

I Ir I

10 I ___

~ I ---f-lo v

~ ~ a

l)

0 J J A s 0 N DI J F M A M J J1966 1967 A s 0 N F

D I J M A K Monthly of Total Possible Monthly Hours of Anomalous Propagation 1968

Monthly Average of Daily Maximum Hour of 03 at 1Jth amp J Sacramento-36-

-- Nu Li

PJlI

bull30 60

Signal Strength v -- J OJ 50

Cor Coef r = O 70

20 40 I

I I

I

I

30 I

I I I

i I

10 20 I I I I

I I

I10 v

V ~ i-

~ ~ li ~

N J F M A M J J A s 0s 0 N D

19721971 Monthly Average of Daily Maximum Signal strength_

Monthly Average of south Coast Basin Daily Maximum Oxidant -7-

------

0

------------ --

-- --

_

~ raquo ~

~ IS-f I

fl-) s H +- tr~ U) s Q) ~ H aS +gt ~ ti)

0 bO r-1

~6 t1D n II II II Cl)

gt

amp-)

~

ltt

~

( ~lef

I co

bull-- M

I

~)

z

_ 0

t C N 0F-i

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Monthly Correlation Coefficients - LA Basin

3-Month Rolling Mean 1 Sep 71 - 31 Oct 72

03 Daily Max vs Signal Strength o3 Daily Max vs Cale Max HIB

------_

--- -

PPM t

0 10

60

50

I I

I

I

AP vr o40

- I

I I

I I

- ---I

L

I I

I

- - i

3 Cor Coef r = 079

30

--7

- - -1

005 20

I Ir I

10 I ___

~ I ---f-lo v

~ ~ a

l)

0 J J A s 0 N DI J F M A M J J1966 1967 A s 0 N F

D I J M A K Monthly of Total Possible Monthly Hours of Anomalous Propagation 1968

Monthly Average of Daily Maximum Hour of 03 at 1Jth amp J Sacramento-36-

-- Nu Li

PJlI

bull30 60

Signal Strength v -- J OJ 50

Cor Coef r = O 70

20 40 I

I I

I

I

30 I

I I I

i I

10 20 I I I I

I I

I10 v

V ~ i-

~ ~ li ~

N J F M A M J J A s 0s 0 N D

19721971 Monthly Average of Daily Maximum Signal strength_

Monthly Average of south Coast Basin Daily Maximum Oxidant -7-

------

0

------------ --

-- --

_

~ raquo ~

~ IS-f I

fl-) s H +- tr~ U) s Q) ~ H aS +gt ~ ti)

0 bO r-1

~6 t1D n II II II Cl)

gt

amp-)

~

ltt

~

( ~lef

I co

bull-- M

I

~)

z

_ 0

t C N 0F-i

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Monthly Correlation Coefficients - LA Basin

3-Month Rolling Mean 1 Sep 71 - 31 Oct 72

03 Daily Max vs Signal Strength o3 Daily Max vs Cale Max HIB

-- Nu Li

PJlI

bull30 60

Signal Strength v -- J OJ 50

Cor Coef r = O 70

20 40 I

I I

I

I

30 I

I I I

i I

10 20 I I I I

I I

I10 v

V ~ i-

~ ~ li ~

N J F M A M J J A s 0s 0 N D

19721971 Monthly Average of Daily Maximum Signal strength_

Monthly Average of south Coast Basin Daily Maximum Oxidant -7-

------

0

------------ --

-- --

_

~ raquo ~

~ IS-f I

fl-) s H +- tr~ U) s Q) ~ H aS +gt ~ ti)

0 bO r-1

~6 t1D n II II II Cl)

gt

amp-)

~

ltt

~

( ~lef

I co

bull-- M

I

~)

z

_ 0

t C N 0F-i

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Monthly Correlation Coefficients - LA Basin

3-Month Rolling Mean 1 Sep 71 - 31 Oct 72

03 Daily Max vs Signal Strength o3 Daily Max vs Cale Max HIB

------

0

------------ --

-- --

_

~ raquo ~

~ IS-f I

fl-) s H +- tr~ U) s Q) ~ H aS +gt ~ ti)

0 bO r-1

~6 t1D n II II II Cl)

gt

amp-)

~

ltt

~

( ~lef

I co

bull-- M

I

~)

z

_ 0

t C N 0F-i

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Monthly Correlation Coefficients - LA Basin

3-Month Rolling Mean 1 Sep 71 - 31 Oct 72

03 Daily Max vs Signal Strength o3 Daily Max vs Cale Max HIB