1996
DOI: 10.1016/0273-1177(95)00958-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Analysis of non-planar structures with multipoint measurements

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

1997
1997
2001
2001

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this context, collaboration with simultaneous ground-based observations is already playing a key role in relating magnetospheric responses with signatures observed by remote-sensing, ground-based instruments (Paschmann and Daly, 1998, chapters and references therein). The Cluster magnetometer team also published several aspects of four-point analysis techniques specifically related to magnetic field data since 1990 (for a comprehensive list of publications on this topic, see Balogh and Dunlop, 2000, but also Dunlop et al, 1996Dunlop et al, , 1997Woodward, 1998, 2000). First reviews of applications of these techniques using Cluster magnetic field data are presented in Dunlop et al (2001b), and Glassmeier et al (2001).…”
Section: Introduction: Scientific Objectives Of the Cluster Magnetic mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this context, collaboration with simultaneous ground-based observations is already playing a key role in relating magnetospheric responses with signatures observed by remote-sensing, ground-based instruments (Paschmann and Daly, 1998, chapters and references therein). The Cluster magnetometer team also published several aspects of four-point analysis techniques specifically related to magnetic field data since 1990 (for a comprehensive list of publications on this topic, see Balogh and Dunlop, 2000, but also Dunlop et al, 1996Dunlop et al, , 1997Woodward, 1998, 2000). First reviews of applications of these techniques using Cluster magnetic field data are presented in Dunlop et al (2001b), and Glassmeier et al (2001).…”
Section: Introduction: Scientific Objectives Of the Cluster Magnetic mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Because of cloud expansion following the release, this boundary should be strongly curved between the two spacecraft and this appears to be con®rmed by boundary normals obtained from each data set. The sense of the curvature implied by the normals, which were obtained using a standard run, is described in Dunlop et al (1996) and is consistent with an expanding cloud where the eective tilt between the normal directions is $30±40°. Clearly, this event would be unsuitable for the discrete analysis in the manner discussed in Sect.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 52%
“…Additionally, the quality of any estimates of the macroscopic quantities depends upon the detailed microstructure in the sampled discontinuity, such as the presence of natural noise, wave or other properties, which can confuse simple model assumptions for the boundary unless either the structure is sampled fortuitously or judicious spectral ®ltering is possible. The latter will depend upon the degree to which the properties are in some sense con¯icting in their eect (see Dunlop et al, 1995;Dunlop et al, 1996, for more discussion of this point in the context of multi-spacecraft measurements).…”
Section: The Discontinuity Analysermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Because of cloud expansion following the release, this boundary should be strongly curved between the two spacecraft and this appears to be con®rmed by boundary normals obtained from each data set. The sense of the curvature implied by the normals, which were obtained using a standard run, is described in Dunlop et al (1996) and is consistent with an expanding cloud where the e ective tilt between the normal directions is $30±40°. Clearly, this event would be unsuitable for the discrete analysis in the manner discussed in Sect.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 53%
“…Additionally, the quality of any estimates of the macroscopic quantities depends upon the detailed microstructure in the sampled discontinuity, such as the presence of natural noise, wave or other properties, which can confuse simple model assumptions for the boundary unless either the structure is sampled fortuitously or judicious spectral ®ltering is possible. The latter will depend upon the degree to which the properties are in some sense con¯icting in their e ect (see Dunlop et al, 1995;Dunlop et al, 1996, for more discussion of this point in the context of multi-spacecraft measurements).…”
Section: The Discontinuity Analysermentioning
confidence: 99%