In the plots below, a perfect fit between the observed and calculated
heights would fall on the strait line.
| Observed heights from all flights compared to height from: | Observed heights from selected flights compared to height from: |
| ZM96 equation 26 | ZM96 equation 26 |
| ZM96 equation 30 | ZM96 equation 30 |
| KC99 equation 34 | KC99 equation 34 |
Agreement improved when flights with overall stable conditions were used (see maps of zeta below for each flights), or with data outside of flow accelerating around topography. Flights on June 11, 23, 29, and July 1, 1996 were chosen.
The best fit was found using the KC99 formula, which was close to the
height from ZM96 equation 26, as this comparison
between them shows. Note that the height calculated from KC99 was
found with the Monin-Obukhov formula for L which contained the Von Karman
constant k, while the height from ZM96 defined L without k. A remaining
question is how to account for the cross-shore slope of the ABL, which
is in geostrophic balance across shore with the strong equatorwards flow.
Should the cross-shore slope be removed, then compared to the formulae
for the ABL depth?
| Point Conception | Point Sur | Cape Mendocino | Cape Blanco |
| June 19 | June 02 | June 07 | July 01 |
| June 23 | June 11 | June 12 | |
| June 29 | June 17 | June 26 | |
| June 21 |
Please send comments or questions to me at kate@coast.ucsd.edu