Comparison of polar cap potential drops estimated from solar wind and ground magnetometer data: CDAW 6
Comparison of polar cap potential drops estimated from solar wind and ground magnetometer data: CDAW 6
复制标题
根据太阳风和地面磁力计数据估计的极帽电位下降的比较：CDAW 6
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1985
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. King
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
P. Reiff;R. Spiro;R. Wolf;Y. Kamide;J. King
本文比较了两种间接确定高纬电离层最大静电势差的方法。一种方法使用具有经验确定系数的理论公式从太阳风参数估计跨极帽电势差，而另一种方法基于全球磁力计网络的地面磁图反演。在第一个区间(1979年3月22日)，由太阳风参数预测的势降与从地面磁图推断的势降是令人鼓舞的一致，而在第二个区间(1979年3月31日-4月1日)，理论预测的势降比由磁图反演技术计算的势降大得多。这种不一致的部分原因可能是磁图反演技术所依赖的电离层电导率模型中的不确定性。对于3月22日的区间，电导率模型与现场的粒子通量数据吻合得很好；对于第二个区间，没有进行类似的比较。此外，3月31日的时间间隔以太阳风的小范围变化为特征，这可能会影响更多跨极帽电位降的预测值的有效性。这两个时段内亚暴的性质也可能有很大的不同。
This paper compares two indirect methods of determining the maximum electrostatic potential difference across the high-latitude ionosphere. One method estimates the cross-polar-cap potential difference from solar wind parameters using a theoretical formula with empirically determined coefficients, while the other method is based on the inversion of ground magnetograms from a global network of magnetometers. These techniques are each applied to the two intervals chosen for study during the Coordinated Data Analysis Workshop (CDAW) 6. During the first interval (March 22, 1979) the potential drop predictd from solar wind parameters is in encouraging agreement with that inferred from the ground magnetograms, while for the second interval (March 31--April 1, 1979) the theoretically predicted potential drop was substantially larger than that calculated from the magnetogram inversion technique. The disagreement is likely due, in part, to uncertainties in the ionospheric conductivity model upon which the magnetogram inversion technique depends. For the March 22 interval, the conductivity model agrees reasonably well with in situ particle flux data; a similar comparison has not been made for the second interval. In addition, the March 31 interval was characterized by small-scale variations in the solar wind, which may affect the validity of the predicted value of themore » cross-polar-cap potential drop. The difference in the nature of the substorms within the two intervals may also be significant.« less