2020
DOI: 10.26464/epp2020023
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A detailed investigation of low latitude tweek atmospherics observed by the WHU ELF/VLF receiver: 2. Occurrence features and associated ionospheric parameters

Abstract: As a companion paper to Zhou RX et al. (2020), this study describes application of the automatic detection and analysis module to identify all the tweek atmospherics detectible in the WHU ELF/VLF receiver data collected at Suizhou station during the period of 3 February through 29 February 2016. Detailed analysis of the identified low‐latitude tweek events reveals that the occurrence rate varies considerably — from 800 to 6000 tweeks per day, and exhibits a strong diurnal and local time dependence, the peak oc… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

4
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While our study has adopted the model described by Equations (1)–(6) to estimate the tweek propagation distances and then obtain estimates of source lightning locations, it is important to compare our model results with direct observations of lightning activity, e.g., data from the WWLLN. Our companion paper (Yi J et al, 2020) has performed such an analysis for the period of this study, February 2016. It concludes that our ELF/VLF receiver at the Suizhou station captures a majority of tweek events with propagation distances < 4000 km, but does not detect as many lightning events at greater distances from Suizhou (i.e., > 4000 km) as are found in WWLLN data.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…While our study has adopted the model described by Equations (1)–(6) to estimate the tweek propagation distances and then obtain estimates of source lightning locations, it is important to compare our model results with direct observations of lightning activity, e.g., data from the WWLLN. Our companion paper (Yi J et al, 2020) has performed such an analysis for the period of this study, February 2016. It concludes that our ELF/VLF receiver at the Suizhou station captures a majority of tweek events with propagation distances < 4000 km, but does not detect as many lightning events at greater distances from Suizhou (i.e., > 4000 km) as are found in WWLLN data.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We also note that the present study utilizes only nighttime (i.e., 22–02 LT) data for analysis. The major reason is that the number of daytime tweeks is much lower than that of nighttime tweeks, as shown inFigure 1 of the companion paper (Yi J et al, 2020). Such a day‐night asymmetry of the occurrence pattern of tweeks can be well explained by the fact that the diurnal variation of the lower ionosphere is predominantly controlled by the abundance of sunlight.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The detection system has a high dynamic range of ∼110 dB, and thus the signal with a wide range of intensity variation can be sampled as completely as possible. With a dynamic range sensitivity of ∼110 dB and time accuracy of ∼100 ns, the WHU ELF/VLF receiving system enables the reception of artificial and natural VLF signals with resolutions that suffice most ionospheric and magnetospheric studies (Chen et al., 2017; Gu, Chen, et al., 2022; Gu, Li, et al., 2021; Gu, Luo, et al., 2021; Gu, Peng, et al., 2022; Wang et al., 2020; Yi et al., 2019, 2020; Zhou et al., 2020).…”
Section: Instrumentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Universal Time Coordinated (UTC), longitude and latitude, and high precision 1‐Pulse‐Per‐Second (1 PPS) timing signals required by the receiving system are all obtained by the standard GPS module. Due to the high dynamic range and time accuracy of the equipment, the WHU ELF/VLF receiving system can guarantee the reception of artificial VLF transmitter signals and natural VLF signals in high resolution (Chen et al., 2017; Gu, Luo, et al., 2021; Gu, Peng, et al., 2021; Wang et al., 2020; Yi et al., 2019, 2020; Zhou et al., 2020).…”
Section: Instrument and Databasementioning
confidence: 99%