Three frontside full halo coronal mass ejections with a nontypical geomagnetic response

被引:21
|
作者
Rodriguez, L. [1 ]
Zhukov, A. N. [1 ,2 ]
Cid, C. [3 ]
Cerrato, Y. [3 ]
Saiz, E. [3 ]
Cremades, H. [4 ]
Dasso, S. [5 ,6 ]
Menvielle, M. [7 ]
Aran, A. [8 ]
Mandrini, C. [5 ]
Poedts, S. [9 ]
Schmieder, B. [10 ]
机构
[1] Royal Observ Belgium, SIDC, Solar Terr Ctr Excellence, B-1180 Brussels, Belgium
[2] Moscow MV Lomonosov State Univ, Skobeltsyn Inst Nucl Phys, Moscow, Russia
[3] Univ Alcala de Henares, Dept Phys, E-28871 Alcala De Henares, Spain
[4] Univ Tecnol Nacl, Fac Reg Mendoza, RA-5502 Mendoza, Argentina
[5] Univ Buenos Aires, CONICET, Inst Astron & Fis Espacio, RA-1428 Buenos Aires, DF, Argentina
[6] Univ Buenos Aires, Fac Ciencias Exactas & Nat, Dept Fis, RA-1428 Buenos Aires, DF, Argentina
[7] Ctr Etud Environm Terrestre & Planetaires, F-78140 Velizy Villacoublay, France
[8] Univ Barcelona, Dept Astron & Meteorol, E-08028 Barcelona, Spain
[9] Catholic Univ Louvain, Ctr Plasma Astrophys, B-3001 Louvain, Belgium
[10] Observ Paris, F-92195 Meudon, France
关键词
SOLAR-WIND; RING CURRENT; INTERPLANETARY FIELD; LASCO OBSERVATIONS; MAGNETIC-FIELDS; APRIL; 2000; ORIGIN; STORM; CMES; ASSOCIATION;
D O I
10.1029/2008SW000453
中图分类号
P1 [天文学];
学科分类号
0704 ;
摘要
Forecasting potential geoeffectiveness of solar disturbances ( in particular, of frontside full halo coronal mass ejections) is important for various practical purposes, e. g., for satellite operations, radio communications, global positioning system applications, power grid, and pipeline maintenance. We analyze three frontside full halo coronal mass ejections (CMEs) that occurred in the year 2000 ( close to the activity maximum of solar cycle 23), together with associated solar and heliospheric phenomena as well as their impact on the Earth's magnetosphere. Even though all three were fast full halos ( with plane of the sky speeds higher than 1100 km/s), the geomagnetic response was very different for each case. After analyzing the source regions of these halo CMEs, it was found that the halo associated with the strongest geomagnetic disturbance was the one that initiated farther away from disk center ( source region at W66); while the other two CMEs originated closer to the central meridian but had weaker geomagnetic responses. Therefore, these three events do not fit into the general statistical trends that relate the location of the solar source and the corresponding geoeffectivity. We investigate possible causes of such a behavior. Nonradial direction of eruption, passage of the Earth through a leg of an interplanetary flux rope, and strong compression at the eastern flank of a propagating interplanetary CME during its interaction with the ambient solar wind are found to be important factors that have a direct influence on the resulting north-south interplanetary magnetic field ( IMF) component and thus on the CME geoeffectiveness. We also find indications that interaction of two CMEs could help in producing a long-lasting southward IMF component. Finally, we are able to explain successfully the geomagnetic response using plasma and magnetic field in situ measurements at the L1 point. We discuss the implications of our results for operational space weather forecasting and stress the difficulties of making accurate predictions with the current knowledge and tools at hand.
引用
收藏
页数:19
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Prediction of Geomagnetic Storms Associated with Interplanetary Coronal Mass Ejections
    Rodkin, D. G.
    Slemzin, V. A.
    ASTRONOMY REPORTS, 2024, 68 (02) : 192 - 199
  • [42] Solar source regions of coronal mass ejections and their geomagnetic effects
    Plunkett, SP
    Thompson, BJ
    St Cyr, OC
    Howard, RA
    JOURNAL OF ATMOSPHERIC AND SOLAR-TERRESTRIAL PHYSICS, 2001, 63 (05) : 389 - 402
  • [43] Relation between solar flares and halo coronal mass ejections
    V. Koteswara Rao
    K. Rama Gopal
    R. Ramakrishna Reddy
    K. Amareswari
    K. Sankarasubramanian
    Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy, 2019, 40
  • [44] Is the Asymmetric Cone Model for Halo Coronal Mass Ejections Correct?
    Michalek, G.
    SOLAR PHYSICS, 2010, 261 (01) : 107 - 114
  • [45] Is the Asymmetric Cone Model for Halo Coronal Mass Ejections Correct?
    G. Michalek
    Solar Physics, 2010, 261 : 107 - 114
  • [46] Comparison of Cone Model Parameters for Halo Coronal Mass Ejections
    Na, Hyeonock
    Moon, Y. -J.
    Jang, Soojeong
    Lee, Kyoung-Sun
    Kim, Hae-Yeon
    SOLAR PHYSICS, 2013, 288 (01) : 313 - 329
  • [47] Arrival time of halo coronal mass ejections in the vicinity of the Earth
    Michalek, G
    Gopalswamy, N
    Lara, A
    Manoharan, PK
    ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS, 2004, 423 (02): : 729 - 736
  • [48] Prospective of coronal mass ejections, solar flares and geomagnetic storms
    Singh, A. K.
    Tonk, A.
    Singh, R.
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICS, 2014, 88 (11) : 1127 - 1133
  • [50] Prospective of coronal mass ejections, solar flares and geomagnetic storms
    A. K. Singh
    A. Tonk
    R. Singh
    Indian Journal of Physics, 2014, 88 : 1127 - 1133