Joule Heating rate at high-latitudes by Swarm and ground-based observations compared to MHD simulations

IF 1.8 4区 地球科学 Q3 GEOCHEMISTRY & GEOPHYSICS
Kirsti Kauristie , Octav Marghitu , Max van de Kamp , Theresa Hoppe , Ilja Honkonen , Adrian Blagau , Ionut Madalin Ivan , Mihail Codrescu , Aaron Ridley , Gábor Tóth , Yasunobu Ogawa , Lorenzo Trenchi
{"title":"Joule Heating rate at high-latitudes by Swarm and ground-based observations compared to MHD simulations","authors":"Kirsti Kauristie ,&nbsp;Octav Marghitu ,&nbsp;Max van de Kamp ,&nbsp;Theresa Hoppe ,&nbsp;Ilja Honkonen ,&nbsp;Adrian Blagau ,&nbsp;Ionut Madalin Ivan ,&nbsp;Mihail Codrescu ,&nbsp;Aaron Ridley ,&nbsp;Gábor Tóth ,&nbsp;Yasunobu Ogawa ,&nbsp;Lorenzo Trenchi","doi":"10.1016/j.jastp.2024.106254","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We compare Joule Heating rates as derived from ground-based magnetic field and all-sky camera data, from Low Earth Orbit satellite data (ESA Swarm) and from a MHD simulation (GUMICS-5) with each other in a case study of an auroral arc system. The observational estimates of Joule Heating rates provide information on regional scales and with high spatial resolution (10–100 km). Their comparison with global MHD results is conducted for a quiet time interval of a few minutes, just before a magnetic substorm. Analysis of the ground-based observations yields electric field with dominating North-South component pointing towards the arcs and having maxima values in the range 20–35 V/km. Combining these values with Pedersen conductance estimates from optical data (5–10 S) yields Joule Heating rates in the range 2.5–3.5 mW/m<span><math><msup><mrow></mrow><mrow><mn>2</mn></mrow></msup></math></span>. Swarm electric field measurements are consistent in their direction and intensity with the ground-based estimates. They also show that heating is increased particularly in the region where the conductance is low. The total amount of Joule heating in the area between the Swarm A and C satellite footprints while crossing the all-sky camera field of view is estimated to be 46 MW and the total amount energy dissipation during the 80 s overflight is around 3.6 GJ (1000 kWh). GUMICS-5 estimate of the peak Joule Heating in the magnetic local time sector of the arc system is smaller than that from the ground-based data with a factor of 2.9. Comparisons of GUMICS-5 results with Space Weather Modeling Framework (SWMF), shows that the latter gives on average larger heating rates being thus more consistent with our regional observations. However, both MHD-codes yield smaller Joule Heating rates around the time of the arcs and during the following substorm than the CTIP-e code. CTIP-e has a more detailed description of ionosphere-thermosphere interactions than the MHD-codes and its convection electric field is enhanced with a randomly varying additional component mimicking small scale structures. GUMICS-SWMF comparisons of global Joule Heating patterns in the Northern polar area reveal that the two simulations have significant differences in their spatial distribution of heating rates. Main cause for these deviations is the difference in the derivation of ionospheric Pedersen conductance. Our results emphasize the fact that future estimates of the global energetics in the magnetosphere–ionosphere–thermosphere system require better knowledge on ionospheric conductivities, both by new measurement concepts and by better understanding on the background physics controlling conductivity variations.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":15096,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364682624000828","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GEOCHEMISTRY & GEOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We compare Joule Heating rates as derived from ground-based magnetic field and all-sky camera data, from Low Earth Orbit satellite data (ESA Swarm) and from a MHD simulation (GUMICS-5) with each other in a case study of an auroral arc system. The observational estimates of Joule Heating rates provide information on regional scales and with high spatial resolution (10–100 km). Their comparison with global MHD results is conducted for a quiet time interval of a few minutes, just before a magnetic substorm. Analysis of the ground-based observations yields electric field with dominating North-South component pointing towards the arcs and having maxima values in the range 20–35 V/km. Combining these values with Pedersen conductance estimates from optical data (5–10 S) yields Joule Heating rates in the range 2.5–3.5 mW/m2. Swarm electric field measurements are consistent in their direction and intensity with the ground-based estimates. They also show that heating is increased particularly in the region where the conductance is low. The total amount of Joule heating in the area between the Swarm A and C satellite footprints while crossing the all-sky camera field of view is estimated to be 46 MW and the total amount energy dissipation during the 80 s overflight is around 3.6 GJ (1000 kWh). GUMICS-5 estimate of the peak Joule Heating in the magnetic local time sector of the arc system is smaller than that from the ground-based data with a factor of 2.9. Comparisons of GUMICS-5 results with Space Weather Modeling Framework (SWMF), shows that the latter gives on average larger heating rates being thus more consistent with our regional observations. However, both MHD-codes yield smaller Joule Heating rates around the time of the arcs and during the following substorm than the CTIP-e code. CTIP-e has a more detailed description of ionosphere-thermosphere interactions than the MHD-codes and its convection electric field is enhanced with a randomly varying additional component mimicking small scale structures. GUMICS-SWMF comparisons of global Joule Heating patterns in the Northern polar area reveal that the two simulations have significant differences in their spatial distribution of heating rates. Main cause for these deviations is the difference in the derivation of ionospheric Pedersen conductance. Our results emphasize the fact that future estimates of the global energetics in the magnetosphere–ionosphere–thermosphere system require better knowledge on ionospheric conductivities, both by new measurement concepts and by better understanding on the background physics controlling conductivity variations.

通过 Swarm 和地面观测与 MHD 模拟比较的高纬度焦耳热率
在极光弧系统的案例研究中,我们比较了从地基磁场和全天空照相机数据、低地球轨道卫星数据(欧空局 Swarm)和 MHD 模拟(GUMICS-5)得出的焦耳加热率。焦耳加热率的观测估计值提供了区域尺度和高空间分辨率(10-100 公里)的信息。它们与全球 MHD 结果的比较是在磁亚暴前几分钟的安静时间间隔内进行的。对地基观测结果的分析表明,电场的主要南北分量指向电弧,最大值在 20-35 V/km 之间。将这些值与根据光学数据(5-10 S)估算的 Pedersen 传导率相结合,可得出焦耳热率在 2.5-3.5 mW/m2 之间。蜂群电场测量的方向和强度与地面估计值一致。它们还表明,特别是在电导率较低的区域,热量会增加。在穿越全天空照相机视场时,Swarm A 和 C 卫星足迹之间区域的焦耳热总量估计为 46 兆瓦,80 秒飞越期间的能量耗散总量约为 3.6 千兆焦耳(1000 千瓦时)。GUMICS-5估计的弧系磁局部时间段的焦耳热峰值比地面数据小2.9倍。GUMICS-5与空间天气模拟框架(SWMF)的比较结果表明,后者得出的平均加热率更大,因此更符合我们的区域观测结果。不过,与 CTIP-e 代码相比,这两种 MHD 代码在弧光发生前后和随后的亚暴期间产生的焦耳热率都较小。与 MHD 代码相比,CTIP-e 对电离层-热层相互作用的描述更加详细,而且其对流电场通过模拟小尺度结构的随机变化附加分量得到了增强。GUMICS-SWMF 对北极地区全球焦耳热模式的比较显示,两种模拟在加热率的空间分布上存在显著差异。造成这些偏差的主要原因是电离层佩德森电导的推导不同。我们的结果表明,未来对磁层-电离层-热大气层系统的全球能量估计需要更好地了解电离层的电导率,既要有新的测量概念,也要更好地了解控制电导率变化的背景物理学。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics
Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 地学-地球化学与地球物理
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
5.30%
发文量
95
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics (JASTP) is an international journal concerned with the inter-disciplinary science of the Earth''s atmospheric and space environment, especially the highly varied and highly variable physical phenomena that occur in this natural laboratory and the processes that couple them. The journal covers the physical processes operating in the troposphere, stratosphere, mesosphere, thermosphere, ionosphere, magnetosphere, the Sun, interplanetary medium, and heliosphere. Phenomena occurring in other "spheres", solar influences on climate, and supporting laboratory measurements are also considered. The journal deals especially with the coupling between the different regions. Solar flares, coronal mass ejections, and other energetic events on the Sun create interesting and important perturbations in the near-Earth space environment. The physics of such "space weather" is central to the Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics and the journal welcomes papers that lead in the direction of a predictive understanding of the coupled system. Regarding the upper atmosphere, the subjects of aeronomy, geomagnetism and geoelectricity, auroral phenomena, radio wave propagation, and plasma instabilities, are examples within the broad field of solar-terrestrial physics which emphasise the energy exchange between the solar wind, the magnetospheric and ionospheric plasmas, and the neutral gas. In the lower atmosphere, topics covered range from mesoscale to global scale dynamics, to atmospheric electricity, lightning and its effects, and to anthropogenic changes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信