A scheme for finding the front boundary of an interplanetary magnetic cloud
We develop a scheme for finding a "refined" front boundary-time (<I>t<sub>B</sub></I>*) of an interplanetary magnetic cloud (MC) based on criteria that depend on the possible existence of any one or more of four specific solar wind features. The features that the...
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Copernicus Publications
2009-03-01
|
Series: | Annales Geophysicae |
Online Access: | https://www.ann-geophys.net/27/1295/2009/angeo-27-1295-2009.pdf |
id |
doaj-77334af63adc4363accc34f12326fbfe |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-77334af63adc4363accc34f12326fbfe2020-11-25T00:38:39ZengCopernicus PublicationsAnnales Geophysicae0992-76891432-05762009-03-01271295131110.5194/angeo-27-1295-2009A scheme for finding the front boundary of an interplanetary magnetic cloudR. P. Lepping0T. W. Narock1C.-C. Wu2Space Weather Laboratory, NASA-Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD 20771, USAGoddard Earth Science and Technology Center, University of Maryland Baltimore County, 1000 Hilltop Circle, Baltimore, MD 21250, USAUniversity of Alabama in Huntsville, AL 35899, USAWe develop a scheme for finding a "refined" front boundary-time (<I>t<sub>B</sub></I>*) of an interplanetary magnetic cloud (MC) based on criteria that depend on the possible existence of any one or more of four specific solar wind features. The features that the program looks for, within ±2 h (i.e., the initial uncertainty interval) of a preliminarily estimated front boundary time, are: (1) a sufficiently large directional discontinuity in the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF), (2) a significant proton plasma beta (β<sub><I>P</I></sub>) drop, (3) a significant proton temperature drop, and (4) a marked increase in the IMF's intensity. Also we examine to see if the "MC-side" of the boundary has a MC-like value of β<sub><I>P</I></sub>. The scheme was tested using 5, 10, 15, and 20 min averages of the relevant physical quantities from WIND data, in order to find the optimum average to use. The 5 min average, initially based on analysis of <I>N</I>=26 carefully chosen MCs, turned out to be marginally the best average to use for our purposes. Other criteria, besides the four described above, such as the existence of a magnetic hole, plasma speed change, and/or field fluctuation level change, were examined and dismissed as not reliable enough, or usually associated with physical quantities that change too slowly around the boundary to be useful. The preliminarily estimated front boundary time, <I>t<sub>B</sub></I>, and its initial ±2-h uncertainty interval are determined by either an automatic MC identification scheme or by visual inspection. The boundary-scheme was developed specifically for aiding in forecasting the strength and timing of a geomagnetic storm due to the passage of a MC in real-time, but can be used in post ground-data collection for imposing consistency when choosing front boundaries of MCs. This scheme has been extensively tested, first using 81 bona fide MCs, collected over about 8.6 years of WIND data (at 1 AU), and also by using 122 MC-like structures as defined by Lepping et al. (2005) over about the same period. Final statistical testing of the 81 MCs to see how close the refined boundary-time <I>t<sub>B</sub></I>* lies with respect to a preliminary time <I>t<sub>B</sub></I>(VI) was carried out, i.e., to find Δ<I>t</I><sub>1</sub>=(<I>t<sub>B</sub></I>*–<I>t<sub>B</sub></I>(VI)), for the full set of MCs, where <I>t<sub>B</sub></I>(VI) is usually a very accurate time previously determined from visual inspection, This testing showed that 59 Δ<I>t</I><sub>1</sub>s (i.e., 73%) lie within ±30 min, 71 Δ<I>t</I><sub>1</sub>s (i.e., 88%) lie within ±45 min, and only 5 cases lie outside a |Δ<I>t</I><sub>1</sub>| of 1.0 h, which is only 6% of the full 81, and these 6% would be considered unsatisfactory. Since MC parameter fitting is usually done on the basis of 30 or 60 min averages, these results seem quite satisfactory. The program for this front boundary estimation scheme is located at the Website: <a href="http://wind.nasa.gov/mc/boundary.php" target="_blank">http://wind.nasa.gov/mc/boundary.php</a>.https://www.ann-geophys.net/27/1295/2009/angeo-27-1295-2009.pdf |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
R. P. Lepping T. W. Narock C.-C. Wu |
spellingShingle |
R. P. Lepping T. W. Narock C.-C. Wu A scheme for finding the front boundary of an interplanetary magnetic cloud Annales Geophysicae |
author_facet |
R. P. Lepping T. W. Narock C.-C. Wu |
author_sort |
R. P. Lepping |
title |
A scheme for finding the front boundary of an interplanetary magnetic cloud |
title_short |
A scheme for finding the front boundary of an interplanetary magnetic cloud |
title_full |
A scheme for finding the front boundary of an interplanetary magnetic cloud |
title_fullStr |
A scheme for finding the front boundary of an interplanetary magnetic cloud |
title_full_unstemmed |
A scheme for finding the front boundary of an interplanetary magnetic cloud |
title_sort |
scheme for finding the front boundary of an interplanetary magnetic cloud |
publisher |
Copernicus Publications |
series |
Annales Geophysicae |
issn |
0992-7689 1432-0576 |
publishDate |
2009-03-01 |
description |
We develop a scheme for finding a "refined" front
boundary-time (<I>t<sub>B</sub></I>*) of an interplanetary magnetic cloud (MC) based on
criteria that depend on the possible existence of any one or more of four
specific solar wind features. The features that the program looks for,
within ±2 h (i.e., the initial uncertainty interval) of a
preliminarily estimated front boundary time, are: (1) a sufficiently large
directional discontinuity in the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF), (2) a
significant proton plasma beta (β<sub><I>P</I></sub>) drop, (3) a significant
proton temperature drop, and (4) a marked increase in the IMF's intensity.
Also we examine to see if the "MC-side" of the boundary has a MC-like
value of β<sub><I>P</I></sub>. The scheme was tested using 5, 10, 15, and 20 min
averages of the relevant physical quantities from WIND data, in order
to find the optimum average to use. The 5 min average, initially based on
analysis of <I>N</I>=26 carefully chosen MCs, turned out to be marginally the best
average to use for our purposes. Other criteria, besides the four described
above, such as the existence of a magnetic hole, plasma speed change, and/or
field fluctuation level change, were examined and dismissed as not reliable
enough, or usually associated with physical quantities that change too
slowly around the boundary to be useful. The preliminarily estimated front
boundary time, <I>t<sub>B</sub></I>, and its initial ±2-h uncertainty interval
are determined by either an automatic MC identification scheme or by visual
inspection. The boundary-scheme was developed specifically for aiding in
forecasting the strength and timing of a geomagnetic storm due to the
passage of a MC in real-time, but can be used in post ground-data collection
for imposing consistency when choosing front boundaries of MCs. This scheme
has been extensively tested, first using 81 bona fide MCs, collected over about 8.6
years of WIND data (at 1 AU), and also by using 122 MC-like structures as
defined by Lepping et al. (2005) over about the same period. Final
statistical testing of the 81 MCs to see how close the refined boundary-time
<I>t<sub>B</sub></I>* lies with respect to a preliminary time <I>t<sub>B</sub></I>(VI) was carried
out, i.e., to find Δ<I>t</I><sub>1</sub>=(<I>t<sub>B</sub></I>*–<I>t<sub>B</sub></I>(VI)), for the full
set of MCs, where <I>t<sub>B</sub></I>(VI) is usually a very accurate time previously
determined from visual inspection, This testing showed that 59 Δ<I>t</I><sub>1</sub>s
(i.e., 73%) lie within ±30 min, 71 Δ<I>t</I><sub>1</sub>s (i.e., 88%) lie within ±45 min, and only 5 cases
lie outside a |Δ<I>t</I><sub>1</sub>| of 1.0 h, which is only 6% of the
full 81, and these 6% would be considered unsatisfactory.
Since MC parameter fitting is usually done on the basis of 30 or 60 min
averages, these results seem quite satisfactory. The program for this front
boundary estimation scheme is located at the Website:
<a href="http://wind.nasa.gov/mc/boundary.php" target="_blank">http://wind.nasa.gov/mc/boundary.php</a>. |
url |
https://www.ann-geophys.net/27/1295/2009/angeo-27-1295-2009.pdf |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT rplepping aschemeforfindingthefrontboundaryofaninterplanetarymagneticcloud AT twnarock aschemeforfindingthefrontboundaryofaninterplanetarymagneticcloud AT ccwu aschemeforfindingthefrontboundaryofaninterplanetarymagneticcloud AT rplepping schemeforfindingthefrontboundaryofaninterplanetarymagneticcloud AT twnarock schemeforfindingthefrontboundaryofaninterplanetarymagneticcloud AT ccwu schemeforfindingthefrontboundaryofaninterplanetarymagneticcloud |
_version_ |
1725296473930727424 |