A quantitative assessment of empirical magnetic field models at geosynchronous orbit during magnetic storms

37Citations
Citations of this article
27Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

We evaluate the performance of recent empirical magnetic field models (Tsyganenko, 1996, 2002a, 2002b; Tsyganenko and Sitnov, 2005, hereafter referred to as T96, T02 and TS05, respectively) during magnetic storm times including both pre- and post-storm intervals. The model outputs are compared with GOES observations of the magnetic field at geosynchronous orbit. In the case of a major magnetic storm, the T96 and T02 models predict anomalously strong negative B2 at geostationary orbit on the nightside due to input values exceeding the model limits, whereas a comprehensive magnetic field data survey using GOES does not support that prediction. On the basis of additional comparisons using 52 storm events, we discuss the strengths and limitations of each model. Furthermore, we quantify the performance of individual models at predicting geostationary magnetic fields as a function of local time, D st, and storm phase. Compared to the earlier models (T96 and T02), the most recent storm-time model (TS05) has the best overall performance across the entire range of local times, storm levels, and storm phases at geostationary orbit. The field residuals between TS05 and GOES are small (≤3 nT) compared to the intrinsic short time-scale magnetic variability of the geostationary environment even during non-storm conditions (∼24 nT). Finally, we demonstrate how field model errors may affect radiation belt studies when estimating electron phase space density. Copyright 2008 by the American Geophysical Union.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Huang, C. L., Spence, H. E., Singer, H. J., & Tsyganenko, N. A. (2008). A quantitative assessment of empirical magnetic field models at geosynchronous orbit during magnetic storms. Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics, 113(4). https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JA012623

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free