In an early report on the matter [Hoag] measured at the Flagstaff 1.5-m telescope of the US Naval Observatory, housed in a dome with a diameter of 20 m, the correlation between seeing and the temperature difference between the inside and outside air, finding a mean dependency of 0.28 arcsec/K.
[Murdin] measured the increase of image size caused by dissipating large powers inside the dome volume. The heat was generated by electrical fan-heaters. In the Isaac Newton Telescope dome (located at that time at Heastmonceux, GB) which has a diameter of 18 m, the increase of seeing FWHM was found to follow approximately a linear relationship with slope 0.052 arcsec/kW. At the Yapp 90-cm telescope dome (diameter 9 m) the slope was 0.11 arcsec/kW. In both cases the warm air was blown inside the dome but not directly in the telescope beam. When the air blown by an electric fan heater rated 3 kW was directed into the telescope beam the degradation climbed to a few arcseconds per kW. Although these results could not justify generally all the dome seeing effect since the average heat dissipation of telescopes and instruments seldom exceeds a few kilowatts and of course warm air is never blown into the optical beam, they prompted telescope designers and operators to require the active cooling of the electro-mechanical and electronic systems of most following telescope. In other tests, the experimenters also dissipated 90 kW just outside and upwind of the dome slit, but could not detect a sensible degradation. Nevertheless it is also customary to require that the heat dissipation from all telescope circuits is done away and downwind from the dome.
[Woolf 79] formulated a theory of dome seeing based on the assumption that turbulent "bubbles" of warm air fill the dome volume. However this assumption was in contrast with a correct description of free convection in a large volume (see for instance [Townsend]) whereby the regions away from the surfaces may experience large velocity means and fluctuations but negligible temperature fluctuations, which are confined to the wall regions. Later, however, the same author relativized in [Woolf 82] the significance of his early interpretation and formulated the hypothesis that most dome seeing was in fact mirror seeing generated in the immediate vicinity of the mirror surface.
[Gillingham 82] measured at the Anglo-Australian Telescope a correlation of 0.28 arcsec/C between seeing and the temperature difference between the inside and outside air. Some of his later observations on the effects of blowers on dome seeing have been cited in section above.
[Forbes 82] performed some measurements of temperature fluctuations inside the enclosure of the Multi-Mirror Telescope (see section and fig. above). He noted a loose relationship between local microthermal activity inside the dome and image blur.
[Woolf 88] did some order-of-magnitude estimates of possible dome seeing effects. He analyzed experimental measurements from the AAT, the CFHT (cf. section ) and the University of Hawaii 88-inch telescope, which indicated the likelihood that seeing was caused mostly by a mirror-air temperature difference.
So far the most comprehensive analysis of seeing in a conventional dome was carried at the CFHT (cf. section ). [Racine 92] analyzed image frames from the HRCam instrument (for high resolution imaging) for correlations with temperature differences. He found that the main contribution to local seeing was due to occurrences of positive surface-air temperature differences at the optical surface of the primary mirror, while a much lower dependency was found with the temperature difference between the dome inside and outside air.