On some features characterizing the plasmasphere–magnetosphere–ionosphere system during the geomagnetic storm of 27 May 2017
Abstract This paper presents how the magnetosphere–plasmasphere–ionosphere system was affected as a whole during the geomagnetic storm peaking on 27 May 2017. The interplanetary conditions, the magnetospheric response in terms of the magnetopause motion, and the ionospheric current flow pattern were...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
SpringerOpen
2019-07-01
|
Series: | Earth, Planets and Space |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40623-019-1056-0 |
id |
doaj-dc6ccf1913dd4f12ac65ab74366f316e |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-dc6ccf1913dd4f12ac65ab74366f316e2020-11-25T03:13:09ZengSpringerOpenEarth, Planets and Space1880-59812019-07-0171112110.1186/s40623-019-1056-0On some features characterizing the plasmasphere–magnetosphere–ionosphere system during the geomagnetic storm of 27 May 2017Michael Pezzopane0Afredo Del Corpo1Mirko Piersanti2Claudio Cesaroni3Alessio Pignalberi4Simone Di Matteo5Luca Spogli6Massimo Vellante7Balazs Heilig8Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e VulcanologiaDepartment of Physical and Chemical Sciences, University of L’AquilaNational Institute of Nuclear Physics, University of “Tor Vergata”Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e VulcanologiaIstituto Nazionale di Geofisica e VulcanologiaDepartment of Physical and Chemical Sciences, University of L’AquilaIstituto Nazionale di Geofisica e VulcanologiaDepartment of Physical and Chemical Sciences, University of L’AquilaMining and Geological Survey of HungaryAbstract This paper presents how the magnetosphere–plasmasphere–ionosphere system was affected as a whole during the geomagnetic storm peaking on 27 May 2017. The interplanetary conditions, the magnetospheric response in terms of the magnetopause motion, and the ionospheric current flow pattern were investigated using data, respectively, from the WIND spacecraft, from GOES15, GOES13, THEMIS E, THEMIS D and THEMIS A satellites and from the INTERMAGNET magnetometer array. The main objective of the work is to investigate the plasmaspheric dynamics under disturbed conditions and its possible relation to the ionospheric one; to reach this goal, the equatorial plasma mass densities derived from geomagnetic field line resonance observations at the European quasi-Meridional Magnetometer Array (EMMA) and total electron content values obtained through three GPS receivers close to EMMA were jointly considered. Despite the complexity of physical mechanisms behind them, we found a similarity between the ionospheric and plasmaspheric characteristic recovery times. Specifically, the ionospheric characteristic time turned out to be ~ 1.5 days, ~ 2 days and ~ 3.1 days, respectively, at L ~ 3, L ~ 4 and L ~ 5, while the plasmaspheric one, for similar L values, ranged from ~ 1 day to more than 4 days.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40623-019-1056-0Geomagnetic stormMagnetopause motionMagnetopause crossingPlasmasphere dynamicsGeomagnetic field line resonancesIonospheric currents |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Michael Pezzopane Afredo Del Corpo Mirko Piersanti Claudio Cesaroni Alessio Pignalberi Simone Di Matteo Luca Spogli Massimo Vellante Balazs Heilig |
spellingShingle |
Michael Pezzopane Afredo Del Corpo Mirko Piersanti Claudio Cesaroni Alessio Pignalberi Simone Di Matteo Luca Spogli Massimo Vellante Balazs Heilig On some features characterizing the plasmasphere–magnetosphere–ionosphere system during the geomagnetic storm of 27 May 2017 Earth, Planets and Space Geomagnetic storm Magnetopause motion Magnetopause crossing Plasmasphere dynamics Geomagnetic field line resonances Ionospheric currents |
author_facet |
Michael Pezzopane Afredo Del Corpo Mirko Piersanti Claudio Cesaroni Alessio Pignalberi Simone Di Matteo Luca Spogli Massimo Vellante Balazs Heilig |
author_sort |
Michael Pezzopane |
title |
On some features characterizing the plasmasphere–magnetosphere–ionosphere system during the geomagnetic storm of 27 May 2017 |
title_short |
On some features characterizing the plasmasphere–magnetosphere–ionosphere system during the geomagnetic storm of 27 May 2017 |
title_full |
On some features characterizing the plasmasphere–magnetosphere–ionosphere system during the geomagnetic storm of 27 May 2017 |
title_fullStr |
On some features characterizing the plasmasphere–magnetosphere–ionosphere system during the geomagnetic storm of 27 May 2017 |
title_full_unstemmed |
On some features characterizing the plasmasphere–magnetosphere–ionosphere system during the geomagnetic storm of 27 May 2017 |
title_sort |
on some features characterizing the plasmasphere–magnetosphere–ionosphere system during the geomagnetic storm of 27 may 2017 |
publisher |
SpringerOpen |
series |
Earth, Planets and Space |
issn |
1880-5981 |
publishDate |
2019-07-01 |
description |
Abstract This paper presents how the magnetosphere–plasmasphere–ionosphere system was affected as a whole during the geomagnetic storm peaking on 27 May 2017. The interplanetary conditions, the magnetospheric response in terms of the magnetopause motion, and the ionospheric current flow pattern were investigated using data, respectively, from the WIND spacecraft, from GOES15, GOES13, THEMIS E, THEMIS D and THEMIS A satellites and from the INTERMAGNET magnetometer array. The main objective of the work is to investigate the plasmaspheric dynamics under disturbed conditions and its possible relation to the ionospheric one; to reach this goal, the equatorial plasma mass densities derived from geomagnetic field line resonance observations at the European quasi-Meridional Magnetometer Array (EMMA) and total electron content values obtained through three GPS receivers close to EMMA were jointly considered. Despite the complexity of physical mechanisms behind them, we found a similarity between the ionospheric and plasmaspheric characteristic recovery times. Specifically, the ionospheric characteristic time turned out to be ~ 1.5 days, ~ 2 days and ~ 3.1 days, respectively, at L ~ 3, L ~ 4 and L ~ 5, while the plasmaspheric one, for similar L values, ranged from ~ 1 day to more than 4 days. |
topic |
Geomagnetic storm Magnetopause motion Magnetopause crossing Plasmasphere dynamics Geomagnetic field line resonances Ionospheric currents |
url |
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40623-019-1056-0 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT michaelpezzopane onsomefeaturescharacterizingtheplasmaspheremagnetosphereionospheresystemduringthegeomagneticstormof27may2017 AT afredodelcorpo onsomefeaturescharacterizingtheplasmaspheremagnetosphereionospheresystemduringthegeomagneticstormof27may2017 AT mirkopiersanti onsomefeaturescharacterizingtheplasmaspheremagnetosphereionospheresystemduringthegeomagneticstormof27may2017 AT claudiocesaroni onsomefeaturescharacterizingtheplasmaspheremagnetosphereionospheresystemduringthegeomagneticstormof27may2017 AT alessiopignalberi onsomefeaturescharacterizingtheplasmaspheremagnetosphereionospheresystemduringthegeomagneticstormof27may2017 AT simonedimatteo onsomefeaturescharacterizingtheplasmaspheremagnetosphereionospheresystemduringthegeomagneticstormof27may2017 AT lucaspogli onsomefeaturescharacterizingtheplasmaspheremagnetosphereionospheresystemduringthegeomagneticstormof27may2017 AT massimovellante onsomefeaturescharacterizingtheplasmaspheremagnetosphereionospheresystemduringthegeomagneticstormof27may2017 AT balazsheilig onsomefeaturescharacterizingtheplasmaspheremagnetosphereionospheresystemduringthegeomagneticstormof27may2017 |
_version_ |
1724648429792002048 |