lonospheric/Thermospheric Space Weather Issues

R. W. Schunk and J. J. Sojka

Center for Atmospheric and Space SciencesUtah State University

Logan, Utah 84322-4405

CEDAR Tutorial

June 29,1995

Outline

Applications

Weather Features

Causes of Weather

Status of Weather Modeling

Requirements for Forecasting

Applications

Weather disturbances in the ionosphere-thennosphere system affect thefollowing:

Over-The-Horizon (OTH) Radars

Communications

GPS Surveying

Navigation Systems (GPS and VLF)

Satellite Drag

Spacecraft Charging (inTrough)

Surveillance

0 OpticalEmissions/

o Radar Altimetry

Induced EMF at Ground

o Pipelines

0 Power Grids

o Long Telecommunications Cables

Weather Features

Sun-Aligned Arcs

Auroral Arcs

Plasma Patches

Boundary Blobs

Flux Transfer Events

Traveling Convection Vortices

SAID Events

SAR-arcs

Anomalous T^ in E-region

Sporadic E

Spread F

Equatorial Bubbles

Descending Layers

Magnetic Storms

Substorms

Gravity and Tidal Waves

Scintillations

200

100LU

Q 600Z)1—

H 500

0442:33 TO 0457:16 UT

%

0529:36 TO 0544:19 UT

0553:08 TO

0607:51 UT

11 NOVEMBER 1981

I

I

-7 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

GEOMAGNETIC NORTH DISTANCE FROM CHATANIKA — x 10^ km

j{ino ztd (lU3)

i: + to Yn'm. ,(a) 1438:22 TO 1448:18 UT Os 1449:47 TO 1500:23 UT

A'm' (s I-, : " ,1 ^ <11 "alp3 X 10 el/cm

-100 0 100 -200 -100

GEOMAGNETIC NORTH DISTANCE FROM CHATANIKA

7sn/)oc((\ (iJFP)

MARCH 1982

• y't\o(ar

• OA-^oiYi^Exjidence 4^/* yolJ(?/c( ]oy)}ic^f/ol^ ',yj

F-

I2--

D"

MASSPLOT OF foF2 MEASUREMENTS (At=5 min) QAANAAQ, GREENLAND

• • •

• • ••

8*

•iT • • \ - ••• ••

REGULAR WORLD DAYS \7. 18. 19 JANUARY 1989

o S.

*•1

/9Jariaaft^ 19S

•. • •

: •. ••

• m

,• Jl*

'j • •• •" • • •••_• _• •

• • T• •

• <9

a

s

3

i

I

5-- •. • • •• ••

•.. v •/' V- \• • •

• •

\ • :•••• •• •••

• •

• ••

* ' A'•

. •• . y• *• •

• •

• • ••• —•

v-\v* "

• •

• *•

•• • • •

^ ^ ^ ^ lo \(f. IC, IS ^0 <55,I' I I I I' . .

10 iV \'Z 1^ I'A \'5 iV ' '\V ' I's' • I'si'q ' 'Jq' ' 'J.' ' ' 'JV " I •• ' I ' " 1' ••1" M• " 1' " 1• " 1" •1" • I ' >• I• • • I . »• I•• • I . . . I•• »I• •• I>• »I• >• I . • • I . •O19 20 21 22 23 0 5 3 4 5 6 7 d 6 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 L

20 21 22 2

-4

: r VE'Z 5<d'dliie

tJorfhtrn sphereWinter

LATITUDE/LOCAL TIME NEUTRAL WINDS AND ION DRIFTS

NORTH POLE ^DE-2 FPI/WATSORBIT 7212 IDM/RPA

IMF (nT)

• —1 OOJC' •

By: O.OBz: +24.0

18

\ \ y\/

6

^X40 ION DRIFTS

500 M/SEC

O HRS12

18

\ \ ^^v60 / /

6

NEUTRAL WINDS

DATE 82328 UT 7:48 o HRS1

iJorfhoJardl IMF

MHceH PaH-e^naC CljFs)

LJ 160O

?P

MID-LATITUDE

UPLEG

DOWNLEG

10"' 10"®10"® 10"'PEAK ELECTRON

CURRENT Ie(V+)

O 300

< 220

EQUATORIAL

DOWNLEG

UPLEG

10 " 10 ' 10 ' 10

BASEUNE CURRENT (A)

S^us^ciCMic-g-

O 140

< 100

7

AURORAL

UPLEG -

_ DOWNUEG

-H.-1.7*1o'em"

\

N,«2x}0* em~^_

Iq BASEUNECURRENT (A)

oo 6

z 5o

oi 4a:

CD H

9 z 3-I u

oz 2oo

2III52

-7.27

-28.2

28 JAN. 81

211608

19.9

-19.41

-13.06

212024 UT

20.92 MLT

-28.93 DIP LAT

2.52 LONG

AE-E

370 km

211000 211200 211400 211600 211800 212000 212200 212400 UT

Causes of Weather

Structured Precipitation

Structured Electric Fields

Structured Downward Heat Fluxes

Time Varying Electric Fields

Time Varying Precipitation

Plasma Instabilities

Upward Propagating Gravity and Tidal Waves

•:SS3J»«SlS;#S•'Iv.

-i-

tFF.

',!:• f..'-t-.»c-»iT^•(:/•-fjo't'W

^:>V-Vt..^^-^V°"

f£:ii

CvVf

l-/SPil--n

|v5V̂-'T:

St'

Ii«

I' r

[f

,

4->-.-»7}y;

?f"

^rv':

rf,t

>i,'-i-- -53r

V../R.-r*-:

--

'̂•f'V£#;•/-',;:'V•••::.•5:-...••

•1HI39IDEnb"

3

v.-V;"J

•»'••-•,•••:•.•;:•<•>:f.'\•.,,.•^•.••:,;•-

;•''ii'ry'f.-y-^.-i—''>.?,-»;

;V-^-»••*''V'OC'/*"•''.'*'

-<.-.-•^,-;-,^?-Ar^^.'A.-.:•""..---

p:-^S^'EP:

>>^.v

bVCESnbEblEHBE']

DE-B ION DRIFT VELOCITIES

MLT V ILAT NORTHERN HEMISPHERE

DAY 82 21 UT 6:61 ORBIT 2534

1

1 KM/SEC

Figure 18. An implied convection pattern consistent with observed optical emissions andplasma convection velocities measured by DE 2. The flow lines describing cells III, IV, andV are at the same potential and may be connected 'fingers* or separate convection cells.From Carlson et al. [1988],

Btie fi%l4 S-i-riAcj-uirc

ION DRIFT METER, DE-2UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT DALLAS

OCTOBER 17, 19811634-1646 UT

I KM/SEC

ef «/ (life)

15

Magnetospheric Parameters

Paxameters

• Convection

• Precipitation

• Birkeland Currents

• Heat Flows

Dependence

• IMF By, B,)

• Kp

Issues

Statistical Patterns

Instantaneous Patterns

Spatial Structure

Temporal Variations

Transition Time-Scales

17

Statistical Patterns

Southward IMF

0 2-Cell Convection

0 Precipitation

Northward IMF

0 ^ Convection

0 3-Cell Convection

0 Distorted 2-Cell Convection

0 Turbulent

0 Sun-AlignedArcs

0 0-Aurora

0 Unifonn Precipitation (in polar cap)

0 Precipitation in Classical Oval

1i

0.2-0.4

0.4 - 0.6

0.6 - 0.8

H 0.8

24-AUG^ I4:i4.-0I SQMttlOlfOR Upid OVALAFCLKPtO.lOl

12MLT

80

60

klorfk^^MBy > 0

06 18

7o/ev«ir«.et cl Cl?5'f9 By >0

c

§CO

TJ

6

</)

D

Q

ai

cDCO

03

$of-

QQ

<

i i

Dawn Va« \av/ Dusk

North

South

FTfTURE 5

By <0 .. >

06 18

By <0

B„ >0

itf> -

NORTHWARD

IMF

-6'' 18" -

Bu<0

FigTire 10. Distorted two-cell convection patterns for a strongly nortlward and for>0(left dial) and <0(right dial) in the northern hem^sphere. From Heppner and

Mavnaxd [1987].

\

<§)

SUNALIGNEO ARCSDAWN-OUSK DRIFT (PREDOMINANT)

/•« - a fo m/r

Figure 11. Schematic illustration ofsun-aligned arcs in the polar cap for a northward IMF.From Buchau et al. fl983].

Vj.

'J-V-

Status of Northward IMF Convectioa

Rich and Hairston (1994)

Comprehensive Study Using DMSP F8 and F9 Satellites

The development of more than 2 convection cellsfor northward IMF is either uncommon or nonexistent.A distorted 2-ceU pattern occurs, not a 4-cellpattern.

Weimer (1995)

Comprehensive StudyUsing DE 2 SatelliteData

For northward IMF, evidently there are 4 convection cells,rather than a distortion of the 2-ceIl pattem.

I-CQ

Hc

w

XCQ

Hc

>a

Nen

Tev^foroil VcirJdfi'oyi

30

20

10

O

-10

20

...• •—•—1 ' «—•—1 ' ' '—< I i ' i

• — — —^

•» 1 •—^^—fLl ' 1 1 ' —* r ' '

: - • • '

Ik.

—.—.—-—1—' • • -

\

1

JVl A A '• ' ' 1

' - ' • 1 -T-: -fl 1

-ifO

20

-20

20

-20

08

Universal Time

Figure 21. Variation of the interplanetary magnetic field (B,, Bg, Br) versus universaltime for a representative 14-liour period. From Roble et al. (1987).

as-

Status of Weather Modeling

Climatology

Sun-Aligned Polar Cap Arcs

Traveling Convection Vortices

Plasma Patches

Tides and Gravity Waves

SAID Events

Storms and Substorms

%6

GLOBAL IONOSPHERE MODEL

• 3-dimensional, time-dependent

• 100-1000 km altitude range

• Densities & velocities for electrons and

N0+, 02+, N2+, 0+, N+, He+

• Ion and electron temperatures

Inputs Needed

• Magnetospheric electric field

Auroral oval

• Neutral atmosphere

Neutral wind

• Magnetospheric Heat Flow

108 RUNS OF USUIONOSPHERIC MODEL

Season - Equinox

- June Solstice

- December Solstice

Solar Activity - High Fio.7 = 210

- Mid Fio.7 = 130

-Low Fio.7 = 70

Geomagnetic Activity

- High Kp = 6.0- Mid Kp = 3.5- Low Kp = 1.0

Heppner-Maynard Convection (Bz < 0)- By >0-By<0

Northem and Southem Hemispheres

SojKcL Sohuyt/C QlJJV-)

Model Inputs

Heppner-Maynard Convection

Hardy Auroral Oval

MSIS Atmosphere

Hedin Winds

Displaced Poles

Diumally Reproducible Results

"Climatology"

NPDE04 UT0500 NPDE04 UT1700

-•y'Bm

\

3.5 130 84357 3.5 130 84357

3.75 4.00 4.25 4.50 4.75 5.00 5.25 5.50 5.75 6.00

20-Jaii-9l pl2ascslas.f npdeOJxae npdeO^ase

0+ 300 km

NPDE13 UT1700 NPDE22 UT1700

1.0 130 84357 6.0 130 84357

3.75 4.00 4.25 4.50 4.75 5.00 5.25 5.50 5.75 6.00

2S-Jan-9t 22:S2:57 pl2asalas./ npdelSutic npde'̂ Z.aic

" /

0+ 300 km

NPDE04 UT1700 NPDE05 UT1700

3.5 130 84357 3.5 130 84173

4.00 4.25 4.50 4.75 5.00 5.25 5.50 5.75 6.00

23-Jon-9l 2I;2J:-)2 pl^scslas.f npdeOJ.aK np<i^V^•a3c

-i\r'

Toyiosf>hirt'c

TYPE 1 SUNALIGNED ARCSDAWN-DUSK DRIFT (PREDOMINANT)

/oo- 2 SO m/x

CGLT

lOOOk

(§)07 UT

TYPE 2 PATCHES

ANTI-SUNWARD DRIFT

- / Km/s

'BuchcLOi, ^ oJi

SIPFIELD

OF VIEW

33

if-

P/aswiq Pftclj

1200 MLT

1800- 0600

0000

^ojK<k ef 01^3)

A DE

^ ♦ ♦'■••A

-" V -*. «r

i t (• l\ I'' ^ i' J "•I ' i V.»•A \. \. VA.

• Sou'fkiA/fti'o^ XAiFi> - II

//CMj l4l9|-F9K»9f -f/oii/5oo M/r

• "pg" /leMx sir9¥i^ ^/»|/ /l7Stt+or «it /

• eufir/

1

5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 6.0

Logio Nn,F2

NCAR-TGCM Simulation

Equinox Transition Study

• September 18-19,1984

Parameterized Convection and R:ecipitationModels for Entire Period

• NOAA & DMSP Particle Data

• AMIE Technique for Convection

• Semi-diumal Tides

Several Quiet Days Followed by Storm

Crowley et al. (1989)

rn

Hp(

GW

)A

E(n

T)

POT

EN

TIA

LD

IFF

ER

EN

CE

(kV

)JO

UL

EH

EATI

NG

(GVV

)

>

UL

Vo^y3 00

13 UT •='

18

\^JiY\ds <\Y\di l^nftrccttA.y'^s ^

12 12

If

300 M/S

%

C00 M/C

a UT

000 M/S

ISUT

500 H/G

LN

P/P

O

Forecasting: What's Needed?

Requirements range from hours to 30 or 90 days forecast ofthe ITM system.

The latter arise from the need to define optimal usablecommunication links.

Typically, 12 hours to a day is a good forecast for severeweather related problems, i.e., satellite drag, spacecraftdamage, etc.

How can we do this?

An example on 14 April 1994, from Murray Dryer,SEL, NOAA, shows forecasters had no evidence of aCME ejection. However, soft x-ray images fromYOHKOH (Japanese satellite) were FAXed to SEL.They showed a very extended short-lived filament.Forecast was made ~ 2-3 days to reach Earth and 7 daysto reach Ulysses.

Forecasting: Science Issues

When a CME arrives at the Earth, how do you convert this knowledge ioitoconvection and precipitation patterns? How long will the storm last?

For non-storm conditions, how do you forecast and Dst variations?That is, how do you forecast convection and precipitation pattemvariations?

Models of convection and precipitation do not exist for severe stoms. Across-tail potential of 216 kV was observed, but this corresponds to a iT =14.

The 'average' convection pattem for northwardIMF has not been clearlyidentified

The spatial stracture seen m the ionosphere-thermosphere system needs tobe incorporated into the forecast models. Multi-grids or nested models arerequired.

More work needs to be done on establishing how the convection andprecipitation patterns vary with time.

0 AMIE approach is the state-of-the-art, but needs validation.

^0 PCO is important.

Need to predict substorm onset.

Real-time monitoring is important to update forecast models.

Need a specification of upward propagating gravity and tidal waves.