Dependence of plasmaspheric morphology on the electric field description during the recovery phase of the 17 April 2002 magnetic storm

被引:70
|
作者
Liemohn, MW
Ridley, AJ
Gallagher, DL
Ober, DM
Kozyra, JU
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Dept Atmospher Ocean & Space Sci, Ctr Space Environm Modeling, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[2] NASA, Natl Space Sci & Technol Ctr, Marshall Space Flight Ctr, Huntsville, AL 35899 USA
[3] Mission Res Corp, Nashua, NH 03062 USA
关键词
plasmapause location; magnetosphere-ionosphere coupling; magnetic storms;
D O I
10.1029/2003JA010304
中图分类号
P1 [天文学];
学科分类号
0704 ;
摘要
A comparison of how well three different electric field models can predict the storm time plasmapause shape is conducted. The magnetic storm of 17 April 2002 is selected for this event, and plasmapause locations are extracted from images from the EUV instrument on the Imager for Magnetopause-to-Aurora Geomagnetic Effects (IMAGE) satellite throughout the main phase and recovery phase of the event. The three electric field descriptions are as follows: the modified McIlwain E5D analytical formula, the Weimer statistical compilation from low-Earth orbit satellite data, and a self-consistent Poisson equation solution for the subauroral potential pattern. It is found that all of the models have certain strengths and weaknesses in predicting the plasmapause location during this storm. The modified McIlwain model did well on the nightside but not on the dayside because the electric fields near noon are too small (analogous to too large of a conductance in the subauroral dayside ionosphere). The Weimer model did well overall, but the resulting plasmapause is usually smaller than the observed one because the electric fields are a bit too strong in the inner magnetosphere (perhaps because of an ionosphere-magnetosphere mapping problem). The self-consistent model is also quite good in general, but the plasmapause in the postmidnight sector was always inward of the observed one. This is because of too low a conductance at the location of the field-aligned currents that close the partial ring current. It is concluded that the latter two models provide a sufficient description of the storm time development of the plasmaspheric morphology during this storm, with the self-consistent model being the best choice. Another conclusion is that plasmapause locations extracted from EUV images should be compared with peak density gradients from model results rather than with any one isocontour of the cold plasma density itself.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Evolution of equatorial ionospheric bubbles during a large auroral electrojet index increase in the recovery phase of a magnetic storm
    Keskinen, MJ
    Ossakow, SL
    Fejer, BG
    Emmert, J
    JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-SPACE PHYSICS, 2006, 111 (A2)
  • [42] Response of the inner and outer magnetosphere to solar wind density fluctuations during the recovery phase of a moderate magnetic storm
    Zolotukhina, N.
    Pilipenko, V.
    Engebretson, M. J.
    Rodger, A. S.
    JOURNAL OF ATMOSPHERIC AND SOLAR-TERRESTRIAL PHYSICS, 2007, 69 (14) : 1707 - 1722
  • [43] Multi-spacecraft observations of ULF waves during the recovery phase of magnetic storm on October 30, 2003
    WANG YongFu1
    2 Center for Atmospheric Research
    Science in China(Series E:Technological Sciences), 2008, (10) : 1772 - 1785
  • [44] Variations in the geomagnetic field and auroras during the main phase of a large magnetic storm of November 20, 2003
    Baishev, D. G.
    Borisov, G. V.
    Velichko, V. A.
    Samsonov, S. N.
    Yumoto, K.
    GEOMAGNETISM AND AERONOMY, 2008, 48 (02) : 201 - 208
  • [45] Variations in the geomagnetic field and auroras during the main phase of a large magnetic storm of November 20, 2003
    D. G. Baishev
    G. V. Borisov
    V. A. Velichko
    S. N. Samsonov
    K. Yumoto
    Geomagnetism and Aeronomy, 2008, 48 : 201 - 208
  • [46] Long-period geomagnetic pulsations in the quasi-conjugate arctic and antarctic regions during the magnetic storm of April 16–17, 1999
    O. V. Kozyreva
    N. G. Kleimenova
    A. E. Levitin
    J. Watermann
    Geomagnetism and Aeronomy, 2006, 46 : 622 - 634
  • [47] Ion cyclotron waves during a great magnetic storm observed by Freja double-probe electric field instrument
    Braysy, T
    Mursula, K
    Marklund, G
    JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-SPACE PHYSICS, 1998, 103 (A3) : 4145 - 4155
  • [48] Prediction of maximal daily average values of relativistic electron fluxes in geostationary orbit during the magnetic storm recovery phase
    Degtyarev, V. I.
    Chudnenko, S. E.
    Kharchenko, I. P.
    Tsegmed, B.
    Xue, B.
    GEOMAGNETISM AND AERONOMY, 2009, 49 (08) : 1208 - 1217
  • [49] Prediction of maximal daily average values of relativistic electron fluxes in geostationary orbit during the magnetic storm recovery phase
    V. I. Degtyarev
    S. E. Chudnenko
    I. P. Kharchenko
    B. Tsegmed
    B. Xue
    Geomagnetism and Aeronomy, 2009, 49 : 1208 - 1217
  • [50] Westward electric field penetration to the dayside equatorial ionosphere during the main phase of the geomagnetic storm on 22 July 2009
    Sreeja, V.
    Pant, Tarun Kumar
    Jose, Lijo
    Ravindran, Sudha
    JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-SPACE PHYSICS, 2011, 116