YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • AMS
    • Monthly Weather Review
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • AMS
    • Monthly Weather Review
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Autocorrelation of Wind Observations

    Source: Monthly Weather Review:;1985:;volume( 113 ):;issue: 005::page 849
    Author:
    Wylie, Donald P.
    ,
    Hinton, Barry B.
    ,
    Howland, Michael R.
    ,
    Lord, Raymond J.
    DOI: 10.1175/1520-0493(1985)113<0849:AOWO>2.0.CO;2
    Publisher: American Meteorological Society
    Abstract: Autocorrelation and variance statistics were calculated for seven types of wind data in the western hemispheric tropics. Most of these data came from the Global Weather Experiment (GWE) in January 1979. They were: 1) cloud motion measurements from four different sources, 2) rawinsonde wind reports, 3) synoptic land station reports, 4) marine ship reports, 5) aircraft pilot reports, 6) automatic aircraft reports for the GWE, and 7) Seasat scatterometer winds from September 1978. Winds were analyzed within a target area from 30°N to 30°S latitude and 0° to 180°W longitude. The Seasat scatterometer data had the highest autocorrelations and lowest standard deviations over short distances (<500 km). Cloud motions and rawinsondes had lower autocorrelations than Seasat, while synoptic land stations, ship reports, and aircraft pilot reports had the poorest autocorrelations. These correlations imply that synoptic land stations, ship reports, and aircraft reports were either more sensitive to small?scale fluctuations than other sensors, or had higher intrinsic noise levels. Structure function plots of autocovariances against separation distance between observations indicated that Seasat was most sensitive to wind field structure by having low autovariance at short distances (100 km) that also grew with distance. The other structure function plots for low?level wind observations indicated a lack of structure sensitivity to scalar wind speeds because of very small growth rates of the autocovariances with distance. However, all observations were sensitive to structure in the wind direction patterns.
    • Download: (692.7Kb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Price: 5000 Rial
    • Statistics

      Autocorrelation of Wind Observations

    URI
    http://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4201333
    Collections
    • Monthly Weather Review

    Show full item record

    contributor authorWylie, Donald P.
    contributor authorHinton, Barry B.
    contributor authorHowland, Michael R.
    contributor authorLord, Raymond J.
    date accessioned2017-06-09T16:05:19Z
    date available2017-06-09T16:05:19Z
    date copyright1985/05/01
    date issued1985
    identifier issn0027-0644
    identifier otherams-60641.pdf
    identifier urihttp://onlinelibrary.yabesh.ir/handle/yetl/4201333
    description abstractAutocorrelation and variance statistics were calculated for seven types of wind data in the western hemispheric tropics. Most of these data came from the Global Weather Experiment (GWE) in January 1979. They were: 1) cloud motion measurements from four different sources, 2) rawinsonde wind reports, 3) synoptic land station reports, 4) marine ship reports, 5) aircraft pilot reports, 6) automatic aircraft reports for the GWE, and 7) Seasat scatterometer winds from September 1978. Winds were analyzed within a target area from 30°N to 30°S latitude and 0° to 180°W longitude. The Seasat scatterometer data had the highest autocorrelations and lowest standard deviations over short distances (<500 km). Cloud motions and rawinsondes had lower autocorrelations than Seasat, while synoptic land stations, ship reports, and aircraft pilot reports had the poorest autocorrelations. These correlations imply that synoptic land stations, ship reports, and aircraft reports were either more sensitive to small?scale fluctuations than other sensors, or had higher intrinsic noise levels. Structure function plots of autocovariances against separation distance between observations indicated that Seasat was most sensitive to wind field structure by having low autovariance at short distances (100 km) that also grew with distance. The other structure function plots for low?level wind observations indicated a lack of structure sensitivity to scalar wind speeds because of very small growth rates of the autocovariances with distance. However, all observations were sensitive to structure in the wind direction patterns.
    publisherAmerican Meteorological Society
    titleAutocorrelation of Wind Observations
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume113
    journal issue5
    journal titleMonthly Weather Review
    identifier doi10.1175/1520-0493(1985)113<0849:AOWO>2.0.CO;2
    journal fristpage849
    journal lastpage857
    treeMonthly Weather Review:;1985:;volume( 113 ):;issue: 005
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian