Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Sperm whale seismic study in Gulf of Mexico-acoustics focus General background My role: 3D tracking tagged/untagged animalsworking a few months at a time.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Sperm whale seismic study in Gulf of Mexico-acoustics focus General background My role: 3D tracking tagged/untagged animalsworking a few months at a time."— Presentation transcript:

1 Sperm whale seismic study in Gulf of Mexico-acoustics focus General background My role: 3D tracking tagged/untagged animalsworking a few months at a time Single array localization-2000 Tag/array integration-2001 Dual-array localization-2002-? Upcoming plans Aaron Thode, Marine Physical Lab, SIO, UCSD M M S Minerals Management Service Marine Fisheries Service

2 Background-SWAMP cruises Sponsors Minerals Management Service International Association of Geophysical Contractors Marine Fisheries, SE, Focus: effect of seismic exploration on sperm whales Endangered species Acoustically active Resident populations Mississippi Canyon De Soto photo: Keith Mullin, SE Fisheries Service

3 Present SWSS study centers on two types of tags Bruce Mates satellite tag (STAG) Long duration deploymentslong-term habitat shift? Over 15 animals tagged, mostly on one day WHOI digital recording tag (DTAG) Also pressure, orientation, acceleration High-resolution behavioral responses, energy studies, 3D pseudeotracks Visual, biopsy, acoustic component Nineteen animals tagged in 2002, three simultaneously under controlled seismic exposure, many more under uncontrolled exposures.

4 Gulf of Mexico an acoustically unfavorable propagation environment

5 Measured and computed detection ranges predict 3-10km, depending on source depth Three different towed array systems m depth, give ~6km range Source: MATLAB KRAKEN (should also Be repeated With Bellhop)

6 Bottom-mounted sensors have similar predicted ranges Stennis Space Center (George Ioup) has placed bottom-mounted sensors in general vicinity of SWSS. Some coordination, little overlap so far.

7 To date passive acoustic data collection program uses towed arrays with few elements->close range work Outgrowth of Jay Barlow work, SWFSC. Also arrays from Ecologic, WHOI

8 My focus has been tracking untagged animals, under various conditions Goal: statistically significant samples of low- resolution dive profiles under tagging/seismic conditions Complements high-resolution low volume tagging runs. Three branches: Single array localization-2000 Tag/array integration-2001 Dual-array localization-2002-?

9 SWSS acoustic work involves close follows at slow speeds NOAA ship Gordon Gunther kts Overnight tracking allowed biopsy, tagging in morning July 3 typical-slow tow through middle of traveling pod Silty/muddy flat bottom, depth measured with fathometer Pod composition assumed to be females and juveniles TDR was NOT attached during this particular sequence 930 m d s b t

10 t ds t db t dt Bearing 1 Bearing 2 R zwzw zaza

11 Example from one dive: Good depth resolution from 100 m depth Range uncertainty increases with animal depth Tracking ends when bottom returns vanish

12 Ray refraction may be neglected for ranges less than 1 km True range (m)

13 During first stage of dive cycle inter-click interval is closely related to two-way travel time from whale to bottom. During second stage bottom bounces vanish and timing becomes irregular. Why so many clicks related to bottom? (New Zealand counterexample)

14 Some work has been performed on merging tag/array data Simultaneous recordings on tag/array corrects pseudotrack. Acoustics does not have control of ship during most tagging operations, with interesting results. Time (sec) Array bearing (deg)

15 The inter-click interval (ICI) used to identify tagged whale out of 7-13 other animals

16 Using surface reflections only gives three different time-of-arrivals, with two arrays Ishmael display: David Mellinger

17 Two arrays can eliminate need for bottom reflection, if array depths measured Restrictions: Array depths known (difficult!) Depths > 40 m (slow towing speed) Doesnt work broadside. Assumes straight-line propagation

18 Sept. 5 proof- of-concept trial demonstrated results Array depth had to be estimated for one array. Measured descent rate of 91 meters per minute, similar to 88 meter per minute measurements from next-day tag. broadside endfire Range vs. time Depth vs. time

19 Two arrays plus tag refines localization-leverages tag info 2001-Array depths still the bug-bear!

20 Everything seems up in the air, as opposed to in the water What ship for seismic playback? There was a lot of uncontrolled seismic exposures in 2002 What ship for research? Last years ship was way too noisy What holes are there? The off axis acoustic signature of seismic vessels is not known. Modeling by IAGC free-space only, no waveguide effects included. Better arrays needed Bottom-mounted sensors? Stennis?


Download ppt "Sperm whale seismic study in Gulf of Mexico-acoustics focus General background My role: 3D tracking tagged/untagged animalsworking a few months at a time."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google