Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-65tv2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-31T00:30:43.980Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Vertical refraction angle derived from the variance of the angle-of-arrival fluctuations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 August 2015

F. K. Brunner
F. K. Brunner*
Affiliation:
University of New South Wales, Kensington, 2033, Australia

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

A theory is developed for evaluating the vertical refraction angle from the variance of the angle-of-arrival fluctuations, assuming a horizontally homogeneous turbulent atmospheric surface layer. The vertical refraction angle is mainly a function of the vertical temperature gradient, and the variance of the angle-of-arrival is related to the temperature structure parameter CT 2. However, surface layer similarity theory states that both the mean vertical temperature gradient and CT 2 are functions of the same scaling temperature T* and a thermal stability parameter. This therefore provides an indirect method of determining the vertical refraction angle from a measurement of the variance of the angle-of-arrival and an estimate of the thermal stability parameter. Advantages of this method over other techniques of evaluating vertical refraction are discussed.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Symposium - International Astronomical Union , Volume 89: Refractional Influences in Astrometry Andgeodesy , 1979 , pp. 227 - 238
Copyright
Copyright © Reidel 1979 

References

Barrel, H. and Sears, J.E.: 1939, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London A-238, pp. 1–64.Google Scholar
Bouricius, G.M.B. and Clifford, S.F.: 1970, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 60, pp. 1484–1489.Google Scholar
Brunner, F.K.: 1978, in Richardus, P. (ed.) Proc. Int. Symp. EDM and Influence Atmos. Refraction , Wageningen, Publ. Netherlands Geodetic Commission, pp. 245–255.Google Scholar
Brunner, F.K. and Fraser, C.S.: 1977, Unisurv G27 (Univ. NSW, Sydney), pp. 3–26.Google Scholar
Busch, N.E.: 1973, in Haugen, D.A. (ed.), Workshop on Micrometeorology , Am. Met. Soc., Boston, pp. 1–65.Google Scholar
Businger, J.A.: 1973, in Haugen, D.A. (ed.), Workshop on Micrometeorology , Am. Met. Soc., Boston, pp. 67–100.Google Scholar
Coulman, C.E.: 1966, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 56, pp. 1232–1238.Google Scholar
de Wolf, D.A.: 1974, Proc. IEEE 62, pp. 1523–1529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyer, A.J.: 1976, Boundary-Layer Meteorol. 7, pp. 363–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glissmann, T.: 1976, Zur Bestimmung des Refraktionswinkels über die Dispersion des Lichtes mittels positionsempfindlicher Photodioden , Wiss. Arb. Geod. Photogramm. Kartogr. Hannover, T. U., Band 62, Hannover.Google Scholar
Kukkamäki, T.J.: 1950, Geofisica pura et applicata 18, pp. 120–127.Google Scholar
Lawrence, R.A. and Strohbehn, J.W.: 1970, Proc. IEEE 58, pp. 1523–1545.Google Scholar
Lee, R.W.: 1969, Radio Science 4, pp. 1211–1223.Google Scholar
Lumley, J.L. and Panofsky, H.A.: 1964, The Structure of Atmospheric Turbulence , Interscience-Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
Okamoto, M. and Webb, E.K.: 1970, Quart. J. Roy. Meteorol. Soc. 96, pp. 591–600.Google Scholar
Panofsky, H.A.: 1968, J. Geophys. Res. 73, pp. 6047–6049.Google Scholar
Prilepin, M.T.: 1974, Elimination of angular refraction by means of multiple wavelength methods, Proc. Int. Symp. Terrestrial EDM and Atmos. Effects on Angular Measurements , Stockholm, 1974, Vol. 5.Google Scholar
Priestley, C.H.B.: 1959, Turbulent Transfer in the Lower Atmosphere , Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
Tatarskii, V.I.: 1971, The Effects of the Turbulent Atmosphere on Wave Propagation , (Translated from the Russian), NTIS, Springfield, Va.Google Scholar
Tengström, E.: 1978, in Richardus, P. (ed.), Proc. Int. Symp. EDM and Influence Atmos. Refraction , Wageningen, Publ. Netherlands Geodetic Commission, pp. 101–124.Google Scholar
Wesely, M.L.: 1976, J. Appl. Meteorol. 15, pp. 1177–1188.Google Scholar
Wesely, M.L. and Alcaraz, E.C.: 1973, J. Geophys. Res. 78, pp. 6224–6232.Google Scholar
Wesely, M.L. and Derzko, Z.I.: 1975, Applied Optics 14, pp. 847–853.Google Scholar
Williams, D.C.: 1978, in Richardus, P. (ed.), Proc. Int. Symp. EDM and Influence Atmos. Refraction , Wageningen, Publ. Netherlands Geodetic Commission, pp. 163–170.Google Scholar
Webb, E.K.: 1964, Applied Optics 3, pp. 1329–1335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, E.K.: 1965, Meteorol. Monographs 6(28), pp. 27–58.Google Scholar
Wyngaard, J.C.: 1973, in Haugen, D.A. (ed.), Workshop on Micrometeorology , Am. Met. Soc., Boston, pp. 101–149.Google Scholar
Wyngaard, J.C. and Clifford, S.J.: 1978, Momentum, Heat and Moisture Fluxes from Structure Parameters, J. Atmos. Sci. 35, (in press).Google Scholar
Wyngaard, J.C., Izumi, Y. and Collins, S.A. Jr.: 1971, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 61, pp. 1646–1650.Google Scholar