Indy test a bust – weather uncooperative

uhi-sensormount.jpg

The temperature sensor mounted on the vehicle using “Mr. Bendy’s” window mount

The best laid plans of mice and men almost always is a slave to the whims of weather, and my UHI transect test in Indianapolis was no different. Night 1 was low overcast and misty, but I ran a transect anyway to work out bugs. Night 2 was cloudy and very breezy, so I didn’t bother, and last night was gusty and still overcast at 9PM, after being overcast all day, and little solar insolation occurred, so I didn’t try last night either. Getting cooperative weather is never easy in the Midwest, or anywhere for that matter. The planners of the Normandy Invasion can attest to that.

I’ve contemplated staying the weekend, hoping for a better scenario, but the forecast doesn’t look promising. Too much wind tonight, rain tomorrow, and clouds and wind lingering tomorrow night as another front passes through.

I have to leave now, so it’s off to plan B using a different city. Perhaps I’ll revisit Indy next summer. If anyone is interested in the data gathered on night 1, I’ll make it available.

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “Indy test a bust – weather uncooperative

  1. I don’t understand the problem with bad weather. Is it that the instruments won’t function well? If not, then data from turbulent, cool, wet air should be useful anyway since UHIs exist under these conditions about half the time.
    Another thought: would a transect through say 50 miles of varying landscapes (forest, field, village, suburban sprawl, coastline) be informative of the kinds of temperature variations “naturally” occurring outside of cities?

  2. Since when is gathering experience and evidence of weather related limitations a “bust?” I declare the negative results a success.
    P.S. Love the little bracket in the shape of a hockey stick.

  3. That raises the question (legitimate, I think) as to how typical such conditions are in Indi (or any other city, for that matter), and how UHI fingerprints under these circumstances. After all, temp measurements do not occur only when “there ain’t no snow and there ain’t no fog and the wind don’t blow”. Therefore, it seems to me only fair that one needs to measure UHIE under all conditions, pro-rate for frequency and and look at the mean. This, of course, would make UHIE hader to determine and may explain the conflicting results of earlkier scientific papers.
    Point?

  4. There are several inexpensive temperature loggers available that may not have the accuracy of your system, but could provide a relative temperature profile across an UHI. (This might be a way to obtain more data from a network of volunteers.)
    One is the IButton:
    http://www.maxim-ic.com/products/ibutton/ibuttons/
    They are low cost, self-powered, and the data can be downloaded to the computer.

Comments are closed.