Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Environmental Impact on Mine Hunting in the Yellow Sea using the CASS/GRAB Model Lt Carlos J. Cintron.

Published byAnis Phelps Modified over 8 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Environmental Impact on Mine Hunting in the Yellow Sea using the CASS/GRAB Model Lt Carlos J. Cintron."— Presentation transcript:

1 Environmental Impact on Mine Hunting in the Yellow Sea using the CASS/GRAB Model Lt Carlos J. Cintron

2 Purpose of this study is to determine the necessity of a near real time ocean modeling capability such as MODAS for Mine Hunting applications in shallow water regions. Purpose

3 AN/SQQ-32 Mine Hunting Sonar System The CASS/GRAB Acoustic model input file used in this study was designed to simulate the Acoustic Performance of the AN/SQQ-32. The AN/SQQ-32 is the key mine hunting component of the U.S. Navy’s Mine Hunting and Countermeasure ships.

4 Detection Sonar and Classification Sonar Assembly

5 Yellow Sea Bottom Sediment Chart Four Bottom Sediment types were chosen for this Study 1. Mud 2. Sand 3. Gravel 4. Rock

6 Yellow Sea Bottom Topography 50 m Water depth in most of the region is less than 50 m. 20 m Within 50 km of the Korean coastline the average water depth is 20 m.

7 Seasonal Temperature Profile Structures (a) Winter and Fall Temperature Profile Structure. – Isothermal (b) Spring and Summer Temperature Profile Structure. – Multi-layer Mixed layer Thermocline Deep Layer

8 Oceanographic Data Sets Master Oceanographic Observational Data Set (MOODS) Generalized Digital Environmental Model (GDEM) Modular Ocean Data Assimilation System (MODAS)

9 Master Oceanographic Observational Data Set (MOODS) Historical world wide observational oceanographic profile data base dating back to 1920. Consist of: – Temperature only profiles – Both Temperature and Salinity Profiles – Sound Speed profiles – Surface Temperatures Biggest limitation is its irregular distribution over time and space.

10 Generalized Digital Environmental Model (GDEM) Gridded Climatological Data derived from MOODS. 30’ Global GDEM has a 30’ resolution 20’10’ U.S. Navy’s Operationally important areas contain resolutions of 20’ and 10’. 36 12 Contains 3, 6, and 12 month data sets.

11 Modular Ocean Data Assimilation System (MODAS) Climatological MODAS (Static) – Gridded Climatological Data derived from MOODS Near real time Synthetic MODAS (Dynamic) – Inputs Satellite SST and SSH into Climatology via model algorithms to produce synthetic Temperature and Salinity fields which are in turn used to produce 3-Dimensional Sound Speed Fields. MIODAS becomes degraded in shallow water regions because SSH is not entered into the model. Altimetry is not entered into the MODAS model in waters less the 150 m due to satellite orbit errors and other model corrections which amplify the error levels near land.

12 Comprehensive Acoustic Simulation System/Guassian Ray Bundle (CASS/GRAB) 600 Hz100 kHz CASS/GRAB is an active and passive range dependent propagation, reverberation, and signal excess acoustic model that has been accepted as a Navy Standard for the frequency bands of 600 Hz to 100 kHz.

13 CASS/GRAB Model Description The CASS model is the range dependent improvement of the Generic Sonar Model (GSM). CASS performs signal excess calculations. The Grab model is a subset of the CASS model and its main function is to compute eigenrays and propagation loss as inputs in the CASS signal excess calculations.

14 Comprehensive Acoustic Simulation System/Guassian Ray Bundle (CASS/GRAB) In the GRAB model, the travel time, source angle, target angle, and phase of the ray bundles are equal to those values for the classic ray path. The main difference between the GRAB model and a classic ray path is that the amplitude of the Gaussian ray bundles is global, affecting all depths to some degree whereas classic ray path amplitudes are local. GRAB calculates amplitude globally by distributing the amplitudes according to the Gaussian equation

15 Generic Sound Speed Profile Mixed layer – Surface duct may be generated with a negative shift in SST Main Thermocline Deep Sound Channel Axis Deep Isothermal Layer

16 Monthly and Annual Mean Sound Speed comparison for Sand bottom for all 12 months Sound Speed profiles transition from Isotherm in the winter to Multi-layer in the Summer

17 AN/SQQ-32 Concept Variable depth high frequency sonar system – Sonar can be place at various positions in the water column to optimize the detection of either a moored or bottom mines. In complimenting the AN/SQQ-32 mine hunting sonar system concept in this Study – Two source depths were chosen. 25 ft 25 ft (Above the Mixed Layer if present) 125 ft 125 ft (Within or below the Mixed Layer if present)

18 GDEM Seasonal Variability for Signal Excess GDEM /January/ Sand/ SD = 25 ftGDEM /June/ Sand/ SD = 25 ft

19 GDEM Seasonal Variability for Signal Excess GDEM /January/ Sand/ SD = 125 ftGDEM /June/ Sand/ SD = 125 ft

20 Acoustic Transmission Under Severe Weather Events Track of Tropical Depression Kai-Tak over the Yellow Sea for 10-11 July 2000

21 Satellite Images of Tropical Depression Kai-Tak July 8, 2000 Tropical Cyclone over the East China Sea July 9, 2000 Tropical Cyclone over the Northern East China Sea July 10, 2000 Tropical Depression over the Yellow Sea July 11, 2000 Tropical Depression over the Northern Yellow Sea

22 Sound Speed and Maximum Detection Range Differences for a Mud Bottom region and a Source Depth of 25 ft

23 Sound Speed and Maximum Detection Range Differences for a Mud Bottom region and a Source Depth of 125 ft

24 Sound Speed and Maximum Detection Range Differences for a Sand Bottom region and a Source Depth of 25 ft

25 Sound Speed and Maximum Detection Range Differences for a Sand Bottom region and a Source Depth of 125 ft

26 Significant Acoustic Differences in detection ranges as Defined by the Mine Warfare Community A Significant Acoustic Difference in detection range as Defined by the Mine Warfare Community : Position of Detection ranges of Mine relative to Source A significant Acoustic Difference exists if: If Both Detection Ranges are less than 600 yards  Detection Ranges > 100 Yards If either of THE DETECTION Ranges are greater than or equal to 600 yards  Detection Ranges > 200 Yards A Significant Acoustic Differences in detection ranges as Defined by the Mine Warfare Community: Position of Detection ranges of Mine relative to Source A significant Acoustic Difference exists if: If Both Detection Ranges are less than 600 yards  Detection Ranges > 100 Yds If either of The Detection Ranges are greater than or equal to 600 yards  Detection Ranges > 200 Yds

27 Target Depth Source Depth = 25 ft MudSand July 10 – July 7July 15 – July 10July 10 – July 7July 15 – July 10 26 ft Lat 36.5N Lon 124.0E 490 yds Figure 62 and 63 Lat 36.5N Lon 124.0E 490 yds Figure 62 and 63 None Bottom None Target Depth Source Depth = 25 ft MudSand July 10 – July 7July 15 – July 10July 10 – July 7July 15 – July 10 26 ft Lat 36.5N Lon 124.0E 490 yds Lat 36.5N Lon 124.0E 490 yds None Bottom None Maximum Significant Acoustic Difference in detection ranges for MODAS before and after the Tropical Depression (SD =25ft)

28 Maximum Significant Acoustic Difference in detection ranges for MODAS before and after the Tropical Depression (SD=125ft) Target Depth Source Depth = 125 ft MudSand July 10 – July 7July 15 – July 10July 10 – July 7July 15 – July 10 26 ft None Bottom Lat 36.5N Lon 124.0E 790 yds Figure 64 and 65 Lat 36.5N Lon 124.0E 810 yds Figure 66 and 67 None Target Depth Source Depth = 125 ft MudSand July 10 – July 7July 15 – July 10July 10 – July 7July 15 – July 10 26 ft None Bottom Lat 36.5N Lon 124.0E 790 yds Lat 36.5N Lon 124.0E 810 yds None

29 Temperature and Sound Speed Comparisons 0.4 o CSlight Decrease in SST of 0.4 o C was observed between July 7 and 10 -Possibly due to no SST input into the MODAS model from MCSSTS due to heavy cloud cover during the Tropical Depression. 1.9 o CA decrease in SST of 1.9 o C was observed between July 10 and 15. -SST from MCSSTS may have been available for input for July 15, but effects of the Tropical depression on SST may have weaken by then. The absence of SSH from Satellite Altimeters may have not allowed MODAS to capture the storms effect to the mixed layer

30 Ray Traces of Profiles with Significant Acoustic Differences DR = 770 yds July 10, 2000/ Mud/ DR = 770 yds Moored Mine Source Depth = 25 ft  DR = 490yds July 7, 2000/ Mud /  DR = 490yds  DR =490yds July 15, 2000/ Mud /  DR =490yds

31 Signal Excess Contours of Profiles with Significant Acoustic Differences Moored Mine Source Depth = 25 ft DR = 770 yds July 10, 2000/ Mud/ DR = 770 yds  DR = 490yds July 7, 2000/ Mud /  DR = 490yds  DR = 490 July 15, 2000/Mud/  DR = 490 yds

32 Ray Traces of Profiles with Significant Acoustic Differences Bottom Mine Source Depth = 125 ft DR = 0 yds July 10, 2000/ Mud/ DR = 0 yds  DR = -775 yds July 7, 2000/Mud/  DR = -775 yds  DR = -810 yds July 15, 2000/Mud/  DR = -810 yds

33 Signal Excess Contours of Profiles with Significant Acoustic Differences Bottom Mine Source Depth = 125 ft DR = 0 yds July 10, 2000/ Mud/ DR = 0 yds  DR = -775 yds July 7, 2000/Mud/  DR = -775 yds  DR = -810 yds July 15, 2000/Mud/  DR = -810 yds

34 Maximum Significant Acoustic Differences in detection ranges for MODAS versus MOODS Target Depth = 26 ft Source Depth = 25 ft MonthMudSand 1999200019992000 February Lt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds May Lt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 795 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 780 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 795 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 810 yds August Lt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 545 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 535 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 820 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 815 yds November Lt 36.5N Ln 123.0E 840 yds Lt 36.5N Ln 123.0E 840 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 765 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 765 yds Target Depth 26 ft Source Depth = 25 ft Month MudSand 1999200019992000 February Lt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds May Lt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 795 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 780 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 795 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 810 yds August Lt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 545 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 535 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 820 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 815 yds November Lt 36.5N Ln 123.0E 840 yds Lt 36.5N Ln 123.0E 840 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 765 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 765 yds

35 Maximum Significant Acoustic Differences in detection ranges for MODAS versus MOODS Target Depth = 26 ft Source Depth = 25 ft MonthMudSand 1999200019992000 February Lt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds May Lt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 795 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 780 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 795 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 810 yds August Lt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 545 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 535 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 820 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 815 yds November Lt 36.5N Ln 123.0E 840 yds Lt 36.5N Ln 123.0E 840 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 765 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 765 yds Target Depth = Bottom Source Depth = 25 ft Month MudSand 1999200019992000 February Lt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 900 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 890 yds None May None August None November None

36 Maximum Significant Acoustic Differences in detection ranges for MODAS versus MOODS Target Depth = 26 ft Source Depth = 25 ft MonthMudSand 1999200019992000 FebruaryLt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds MayLt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 795 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 780 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 795 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 810 yds AugustLt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 545 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 535 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 820 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 815 yds NovemberLt 36.5N Ln 123.0E 840 yds Lt 36.5N Ln 123.0E 840 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 765 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 765 yds Target Depth 26 ft Source Depth = 50/ 75/ 125 ft Month MudSand 1999 200019992000 February Lt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 495 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 510 yds None May Lt 36.3N Ln 125.0E 620 yds Lt 36.3N Ln 125.0E 620 yds NA August None Lt35.9N Ln124.6E 545 yds Lt35.9N Ln124.6E 545 yds November Lt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 445 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 445 yds Lt36.0N Ln124.8E 495 yds Lt 36.0NLn124.8E 495 yds

37 Target Depth = 26 ft Source Depth = 25 ft MonthMudSand 1999200019992000 FebruaryLt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds MayLt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 795 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 780 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 795 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 810 yds AugustLt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 545 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 535 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 820 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 815 yds NovemberLt 36.5N Ln 123.0E 840 yds Lt 36.5N Ln 123.0E 840 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 765 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 765 yds Target Depth Bottom Source Depth = 50/ 75/ 125 ft MonthMudSand 1999200019992000 February Lt 36.4N Ln 124.4E 1000 yds Lt 36.4N Ln 124.4E 1000 yds None May Lt 36.3N Ln 125.0E 225 yds Lt 36.3N Ln 125.0E 315 yds NA August None Lt35.9NLn 125.8E 265 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 225 yds November None Lt35.9NLn 124.6E 205 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.6E 205 yds Maximum Significant Acoustic Differences in detection ranges for MODAS versus MOODS

38 Oceanographic Difference between MODAS and MOODS Targ et Dept h = 26 ft Source Depth = 25 ft MonthMudSand 1999200019992000 FebruaryLt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds MayLt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 795 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 780 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 795 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 810 yds AugustLt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 545 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 535 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 820 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 815 yds Novemb er Lt 36.5N Ln 123.0E 840 yds Lt 36.5N Ln 123.0E 840 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 765 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 765 yds MODAS versus MOODS February for Mud Bottom Type 1. Oceanographic Difference between MODAS and MOODS Differences are due to a deficiency in the MODAS climatology, which gives the MODAS profiles a near bottom positive gradient. (See Text) 2. How did this affect the Acoustic Model This near bottom positive gradient produced up bending near the bottom. When the Source was at hull depth both moored and bottom mines detection ranges were over predicted. When the Source was at 125 ft moored mines detection ranges were over predicted and bottom mines detection ranges were under predicted. 3. Prevalence of Problems if any in the Yellow Sea or North East China Sea This problem was present in approximately 15 % of the MODAS profiles in the Yellow Sea.

39 Near Bottom Positive Gradient Error Mud bottom/ February/ 35.0 N 123.5 E/ Source Depth = 125 ft MODASMOODS

40 Mud bottom/ February/ 35.0 N 123.5 E/ Source Depth = 125 ft MODASMOODS Near Bottom Positive Gradient Error

41 Target Depth = 26 ft Source Depth = 25 ft MonthMudSand 1999200019992000 FebruaryLt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds MayLt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 795 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 780 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 795 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 810 yds AugustLt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 545 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 535 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 820 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 815 yds NovemberLt 36.5N Ln 123.0E 840 yds Lt 36.5N Ln 123.0E 840 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 765 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 765 yds Oceanographic Difference between MODAS and MOODS MODAS versus MOODS November/ Mud Bottom 1. Oceanographic Difference between MODAS and MOODS Differences were due to the presence of a surface duct when the source depth was at 25 ft. When there was a surface duct in both profiles, it was much stronger in the MOODS profile for most cases. In most cases, MODAS produced surface ducts that were weaker than would be expected. MODAS weakens the gradients in the thermocline. 2. How did this affect the Acoustic Model The surface ducts produce greater detection ranges for a moored mine. The weaker surface ducts produced by MODAS sometimes under predicted the detection range of a moored mine. No significant acoustic differences were observed for a bottom mine due to the presence or absence of a surface duct. When the source depth was within the thermocline the weaker thermocline gradients produced by MODAS caused less down bending of sound propagation. This produced weaker caustics due to less focusing of sound propagation, which in turn caused an under prediction of moored mines. (See Text) 3. Prevalence of Problems if any in the Yellow Sea or North East China Sea The weaker surface ducts found in the MODAS profiles cannot be determined to be a problem without performing a study of the MODAS climatology. Weaker MODAS thermocline gradients were observed in approximately over 75 % of the MODAS profiles used in this study.

42 Weakening of Surface Duct Mud bottom/ November/ 36.5 N 123.0 E/ Source Depth = 25 ft MODASMOODS

43 Weakening of Thermocline Mud bottom/ November/ 35.0 N 123.0 E/ Source Depth = 125 ft MODASMOODS

44 Maximum Acoustic Difference in detection ranges for MODAS Versus MODAS plus Gaussian error in Sound speed Target Depth = 26 ft Source Depth = 25 ft MonthMudSand 1999200019992000 FebruaryLt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds MayLt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 795 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 780 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 795 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 810 yds AugustLt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 545 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 535 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 820 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 815 yds NovemberLt 36.5N Ln 123.0E 840 yds Lt 36.5N Ln 123.0E 840 yds Target Depth = 26 ft Source Depth = 25 ft MonthMudSand 1999200019992000 FebruaryLt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds MayLt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 795 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 780 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 795 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 810 yds AugustLt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 545 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 535 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 820 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 815 yds NovemberLt 36.5N Ln 123.0E 840 yds Lt 36.5N Ln 123.0E 840 yds Target Depth Source Depth = 25 ft MudSand Error (m/s) 151015 26 ft Lt35.4N Ln 124.4E 735 yds Lt 35.4N Ln 124.4E 735 yds Lt 35.4N Ln 124.4E 735 yds Lt 36.3N Ln 125.0E 845 yds Lt 36.3N Ln 125.0E 845 yds Lt 36.3N Ln 125.0E 845 yds Bottom None Lt 35.4N Ln 124.4E 1000 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 990 yds None Lt 35.9N Ln 124.6E 665 yds Target Depth Source Depth = 125 ft MudSand Error (m/s) 151015 26 ft Lt 35. 0N Ln 123.5E 390 yds Lt 36.4N Ln 124.4E 885 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 885 yds None Lt 35.9N Ln 125.9E 390 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.6E 565 yds Bottom Lt 36.4N Ln 124.4E 1000 yds Lt 35.1N Ln 124.3E 875 yds Lt 35.4N Ln 124.4E 1000 yds Lt 36.4N Ln 124.6E 115 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.9E 320 yds Lt 36.4N Ln 124.6E 210 yds February

45 Target Depth = 26 ft Source Depth = 25 ft MonthMudSand 1999200019992000 FebruaryLt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds MayLt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 795 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 780 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 795 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 810 yds AugustLt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 545 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 535 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 820 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 815 yds NovemberLt 36.5N Ln 123.0E 840 yds Maximum Acoustic Difference in detection ranges for MODAS Versus MODAS plus Gaussian error in Sound speed Target Depth = 26 ft Source Depth = 25 ft MonthMudSand 1999200019992000 FebruaryLt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.5E 760 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 125.8E 840 yds MayLt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 795 yds Lt 35.0N Ln 123.0E 780 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 795 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 126.0E 810 yds AugustLt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 545 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.4E 535 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 820 yds Lt 35.9N Ln 124.8E 815 yds NovemberLt 36.5N Ln 123.0E 840 yds August Target Depth Source Depth = 25 ft MudSand Error (m/s) 151015 26 ft Lt 35.4N Ln 124.4E 550 yds Lt 35.4N Ln 124.4E 560 yds Lt 35.4N Ln 124.4E 600 yds Lt 36.4N Ln 125.9E 810 yds Lt 36.4N Ln 125.9E 785 yds None Bottom None Lt 35.9N Ln 124.6E 590 yds None Target Depth Source Depth = 125 ft MudSand Error (m/s) 151015 26 ft None Lt 36.4N Ln 124.4E 530 yds Lt 36.4N Ln 124.6E 440 yds Lt 36.4N Ln 124.4E 380 yds Bottom None Lt 36.4N Ln 124.4E 595 yds None Lt 36.4N Ln 124.6E 340 yds Lt 36.4N Ln 124.6E 375 yds Lt 36.4N Ln 124.6E 755 yds

46 Histograms of the Acoustic Difference Distribution throughout the Water Column for Source Depth = 125 ft, Mud bottom February 15, 2000 August 15, 2000

47 Effect of Sound Speed Error at Source Depth No Error+1 m/s Error-1 m/s Error

48 Conclusion Capability of CASS/GRAB model … Strong seasonal variability in acoustic transmission (detection range, signal excess) …. Effect of the tropical cyclone on acoustic transmission … Error propagation from sound speed profile to signal excess Capability of MODAS Weakness of MODAS Future Work

Download ppt "Environmental Impact on Mine Hunting in the Yellow Sea using the CASS/GRAB Model Lt Carlos J. Cintron."

Similar presentations

ISSUES IN PREDICTING SOLITARY WAVES IN STRAITS OF MESSINA AND LUZON A. Warn-Varnas, P. Smolarkiewicz, J. Hawkins, S. Piacsek, S. Chin-Bing, D. King and.

ISSUES IN PREDICTING SOLITARY WAVES IN STRAITS OF MESSINA AND LUZON A. Warn-Varnas, P. Smolarkiewicz, J. Hawkins, S. Piacsek, S. Chin-Bing, D. King and.
An analysis of transport and water masses in the Straits of Florida and the Bahamas Moulin Aurélie Moulin Department of Marine and Environmental Systems.

An analysis of transport and water masses in the Straits of Florida and the Bahamas Moulin Aurélie Moulin Department of Marine and Environmental Systems.
Experiments with Monthly Satellite Ocean Color Fields in a NCEP Operational Ocean Forecast System PI: Eric Bayler, NESDIS/STAR Co-I: David Behringer, NWS/NCEP/EMC/GCWMB.

Experiments with Monthly Satellite Ocean Color Fields in a NCEP Operational Ocean Forecast System PI: Eric Bayler, NESDIS/STAR Co-I: David Behringer, NWS/NCEP/EMC/GCWMB.
Why the Earth has seasons  Earth revolves in elliptical path around sun every 365 days.  Earth rotates counterclockwise or eastward every 24 hours.

Why the Earth has seasons  Earth revolves in elliptical path around sun every 365 days.  Earth rotates counterclockwise or eastward every 24 hours.
Argo Products at the Asia-Pacific Data-Research Center Konstantin Lebedev, Sharon DeCarlo, Peter Hacker, Nikolai Maximenko, James Potemra, Yingshuo Shen.

Argo Products at the Asia-Pacific Data-Research Center Konstantin Lebedev, Sharon DeCarlo, Peter Hacker, Nikolai Maximenko, James Potemra, Yingshuo Shen.
Climate Impacts Discussion: What economic impacts does ENSO have? What can we say about ENSO and global climate change? Are there other phenomena similar.

Climate Impacts Discussion: What economic impacts does ENSO have? What can we say about ENSO and global climate change? Are there other phenomena similar.
MODULATING FACTORS OF THE CLIMATOLOGICAL VARIABILITY OF THE MEXICAN PACIFIC; MODEL AND DATA. ABSTRACT. Sea Surface Temperature and wind from the Comprehensive.

MODULATING FACTORS OF THE CLIMATOLOGICAL VARIABILITY OF THE MEXICAN PACIFIC; MODEL AND DATA. ABSTRACT. Sea Surface Temperature and wind from the Comprehensive.
=(S,,0); 4=(S,,4000).

=(S,,0); 4=(S,,4000).
Evaporative heat flux (Q e ) 51% of the heat input into the ocean is used for evaporation. Evaporation starts when the air over the ocean is unsaturated.

Evaporative heat flux (Q e ) 51% of the heat input into the ocean is used for evaporation. Evaporation starts when the air over the ocean is unsaturated.
NOAA Climate Obs 4th Annual Review Silver Spring, MD May 10-12, 2006 1 NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center 1.SSTs for 2005 2.Daily SST OI NOAA’s National.

NOAA Climate Obs 4th Annual Review Silver Spring, MD May 10-12, NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center 1.SSTs for Daily SST OI NOAA’s National.
1 Improved Sea Surface Temperature (SST) Analyses for Climate NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center Asheville, NC Thomas M. Smith Richard W. Reynolds Kenneth.

1 Improved Sea Surface Temperature (SST) Analyses for Climate NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center Asheville, NC Thomas M. Smith Richard W. Reynolds Kenneth.
Preliminary Freezing Rain/Drizzle Climatology for EAX Mike July Winter Weather/Cool Season Seminar November 3, 2006.

Preliminary Freezing Rain/Drizzle Climatology for EAX Mike July Winter Weather/Cool Season Seminar November 3, 2006.
Center for Satellite Applications and Research (STAR) Review 09 – 11 March 2010 Satellite Observations of Seasonal Sediment Plume in the Central East China.

Center for Satellite Applications and Research (STAR) Review 09 – 11 March 2010 Satellite Observations of Seasonal Sediment Plume in the Central East China.
Environmental Variability on Acoustic Prediction Using CASS/GRAB Nick A. Vares June 2002.

Environmental Variability on Acoustic Prediction Using CASS/GRAB Nick A. Vares June 2002.
Japan/East Sea Hybrid Coordinate Ocean Model (HYCOM) Patrick J. Hogan and Harley E. Hurlburt Naval Research Laboratory, Code 7323, Stennis Space Center,

Japan/East Sea Hybrid Coordinate Ocean Model (HYCOM) Patrick J. Hogan and Harley E. Hurlburt Naval Research Laboratory, Code 7323, Stennis Space Center,
Review of Passive Sonar Equation

Review of Passive Sonar Equation
U1LG3: Climates & Biomes Criteria for Success:

U1LG3: Climates & Biomes Criteria for Success:
Ensemble-variational sea ice data assimilation Anna Shlyaeva, Mark Buehner, Alain Caya, Data Assimilation and Satellite Meteorology Research Jean-Francois.

Ensemble-variational sea ice data assimilation Anna Shlyaeva, Mark Buehner, Alain Caya, Data Assimilation and Satellite Meteorology Research Jean-Francois.
Equatorial Atmosphere and Ocean Dynamics

Equatorial Atmosphere and Ocean Dynamics
Different options for the assimilation of GPS Radio Occultation data within GSI Lidia Cucurull NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMC GSI workshop, Boulder CO, 28 June 2011.

Different options for the assimilation of GPS Radio Occultation data within GSI Lidia Cucurull NOAA/NWS/NCEP/EMC GSI workshop, Boulder CO, 28 June 2011.

Similar presentations

Ads by Google