In science, we are currently studying about waves. By waves, I mean all types of waves, including light, sound, and water waves. This last class we were talking specifically about buoys. Buoys are big floating devices that record various things such as temperature, height, atmospheric pressure, and wind speed of the local area. We were given a link, http://www.ndbc.noaa.gov/, to find out about specific buoys in specific areas.
Predictions/Hypothesis
I think that wave height is going to depend on two factors:
1) Distance from a landmass- I think that buoys that record areas that are close to shores/land areas will show less wave height. I think this because the farther you get from shores, the deeper the bodies of water will be. For example, a buoy near the coast of Africa will show small(er) waves. One that is a few miles of the coast of Africa will be significantly bigger.
2) Relative Location compared to ice masses- I think that waves might be bigger near large pieces of ice. I am thinking specifically the Arctic, because there has recently been a lot of melting of the ice caps, making the water level significantly higher. This may also work with the antarctic, but maybe not as much since the Antarctic has land under the ice, while the Arctic is 100% ice.
Results
The 4 main buoys/stations I used-
Predictions/Hypothesis
I think that wave height is going to depend on two factors:
1) Distance from a landmass- I think that buoys that record areas that are close to shores/land areas will show less wave height. I think this because the farther you get from shores, the deeper the bodies of water will be. For example, a buoy near the coast of Africa will show small(er) waves. One that is a few miles of the coast of Africa will be significantly bigger.
2) Relative Location compared to ice masses- I think that waves might be bigger near large pieces of ice. I am thinking specifically the Arctic, because there has recently been a lot of melting of the ice caps, making the water level significantly higher. This may also work with the antarctic, but maybe not as much since the Antarctic has land under the ice, while the Arctic is 100% ice.
Results
The 4 main buoys/stations I used-
1) Station 46006 (pacific ocean, off the coast of California)
Location: 40.754N 137.464W
Winds: S (190°) at 19.4 kt gusting to 23.3 kt
Winds: S (190°) at 19.4 kt gusting to 23.3 kt
Significant Wave Height: 6.9 ft
Atmospheric Pressure: 29.81 in and falling
Water Temperature: 54.1 F
Atmospheric Pressure: 29.81 in and falling
Water Temperature: 54.1 F
2) Station 46213 ( near the coast of California)
Location: 40.294N 124.74W
Significant Wave Height: 2.6 ft
Water Temperature: 50.0 F
3) Station 46041 (near the coast of Washington state)
Location: 47.353N 124.731W
Winds: SSE (150°) at 5.8 kt gusting to 7.8 kt
Significant Wave Height: 1.6 ft
Atmospheric Pressure: 29.99 in and falling
Air Temperature: 50.4 F
Water Temperature: 51.4 F
4) Station 46005 (pacific ocean, off the coast of Washington state)
Location: 46.100N 131.001W
Winds: at 13.6 kt gusting to 15.5 kt
Significant Wave Height: 3.6 ft
Atmospheric Pressure: 29.81 in and falling
Air Temperature: 51.6 F
Water Temperature: 51.4 F
Result for hypothesis/factor 1 (ocean/landmass)- This was the hypothesis that water height will be lower when closer to shore and higher when far away from coasts. I found out that my hypothesis was correct. If you look at Station 46006, which is farther away from shore, it had higher waves than Station 46213, which was closer to shore. This was also the same with Station 46041, which had smaller waves because it was near the shore, while Station 46005 was way off the coast and has larger waves. Even though this hypothesis is mostly correct, it is not always. For example, Station 41004 (near the coast of South Carolina) has a wave height of 8.5 feet. Station 41002 (way off the coast of South Carolina) has 5.6 feet, which is smaller than the one near the shore. Even though this example show the opposite of my hypothesis, I checked many other buoys/stations and they showed my hypothesis is correct most of the time.
Result for hypothesis/factor 2 (ice masses)- This hypothesis was that wave height would be higher near ice masses. This hypothesis was inconclusive (I did not have enough information). There was only one buoy close enough to the arctic/antarctic to test. I was not able to get any information from it because it was near the coast of Iceland (the nation), conflicting with my test.
I love that you included your hypotheses and backed them up with scientific reasoning. This was critical to your research. Well done Tyler!
ReplyDeleteI think this is a standout amongst the most critical data for me. What"s more, i"m happy perusing your article. Be that as it may, ought to comment on some broad things
ReplyDeletedata scientist course in hyderabad
ReplyDeleteI was basically inspecting through the web filtering for certain data and ran over your blog. I am flabbergasted by the data that you have on this blog. It shows how well you welcome this subject. Bookmarked this page, will return for extra. data science course in jaipur
I would like to thank you for the efforts you have made in writing this article. I am hoping the same best work from you in the future as well.
ReplyDeleteData Science Training in Hyderabad
I am impressed by the information that you have on this blog. It shows how well you understand this subject.
ReplyDeletedata scientist course
I have read your article, it is very informative and helpful for me.I admire the valuable information you offer in your articles. Thanks for posting it..
ReplyDeletebest data science training in hyderabad
Very awesome blog. Great stuff. Informative content. Very useful to many people. Keep up this good work.
ReplyDeleteData Science Training Institutes in Hyderabad
A good blog always comes-up with new and exciting information and while reading I feel that this blog really has all those qualities that qualify a blog to be one.
ReplyDeletebusiness analytics training in hyderabad