Calibration techniques for magnetometers implementing on-board de-spinning algorithms

Brown, P.; Dunlop, M. W.; Balogh, A.; Carr, C.; Gloag, John; Lucek, E.; Oddy, T.

doi:10.1016/j.asr.2007.09.028

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 8 publications

(4 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Depending on the purpose of the mission or the equipment flown many different approaches have been applied (e.g., Kepko et al, 1996;Anderson et al, 2001;Merayo et al, 2001;Kim et al, 2003;Brown et al, 2008;Leinweber et al, 2008). For Low Earth orbiting satellites (LEOs), in cases where no reference instrument is available like the Swedish micro-satellite Astrid-2, the readings of a tri-axial magnetometer was 30 calibrated by comparing it with the field computed from a model like IGRF (Merayo et al 2000).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Recalibration of the CHAMP satellite magnetic field measurements

Yin

Lühr

2011

Meas. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The 8 years of continuous CHAMP operation allow us to investigate the long-term behaviours of the vector magnetometer on board the satellite. For the processing of the FGM vector magnetometer data primarily 9 instrument parameters are needed (3 offsets, 3 scale factors, 3 misalignment angles). These are determined in pre-flight calibration and routinely in the in-flight scalar calibration. A review of the temporal evolution shows that the scale factors exhibit a clear change 5 with time. This variation of the sensitivity can well be described by a logarithmic function. The offsets and the misalignment angles show no long-term trend. The Z component offset performs medium-term variations within the range of 1nT. These have been corrected on a daily base. When processing the FGM data over the whole period with the derived parameters, the difference between the FGM and OVM readings stays below 0.5nT (corresponding to about 0.2nT standard deviation). 10For a further improvement the error model has to be extended beyond the scalar calibration. Dynamic spacecraft magnetic fields varying over an orbit are falsely interpreted by the scalar calibration and cause apparent variations of the instrument parameters. In the case of CHAMP magnetic field generated by the power system are responsible for most of the remaining errors. We have applied an extended error model that can account for the time-varying disturbance fields. When considering 15 them properly the standard deviation of scalar errors less than 0.1nT can be achieved.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Recalibration of the CHAMP satellite magnetic field measurements

Yin

Lühr

2011

Meas. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite FGM EXT mode being designed to provide contextual information and not usually suited to multi-spacecraft analysis (Brown et al, 2008), comparison between the MVA and four-spacecraft timing analysis of the data and comparison of the results of these techniques between the EXT mode data and 5 Hz CAA data would suggest that the results, in this case, are reliable, given the similarity between the vectors obtained at different times and the relatively small angle between the vectors from the two different techniques.…”

Section: Current Sheet Wavementioning

confidence: 99%

Solar wind and substorm excitation of the wavy current sheet

et al. 2009

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Following a solar wind pressure pulse on 3 August 2001, GOES 8, GOES 10, Cluster and Polar observed dipolarizations of the magnetic field, accompanied by an eastward expansion of the aurora observed by IMAGE, indicating the occurrence of two substorms. Prior to the first substorm, the motion of the plasma sheet with respect to Cluster was in the Z GSM direction. Observations following the substorms show the occurrence of current sheet waves moving predominantly in the −Y GSM direction. Following the second substorm, the current sheet waves caused multiple current sheet crossings of the Cluster spacecraft, previously studied by Zhang et al. (2002). We further this study to show that the velocity of the current sheet waves was similar to the expansion velocity of the substorm aurora and the expansion of the dipolarization regions in the magnetotail. Furthermore, we compare these results with the current sheet wave models of Golovchanskaya and Maltsev (2005) and Erkaev et al. (2008). We find that the Erkaev et al. (2008) model gives the best fit to the observations.

show abstract

“…Imperial College London and CEA/SPEC have been working on the development of highly sensitive magnetometers for space applications [8]. They have defined the specifications required for a three-axis magnetometer in three specific cases: outer planet orbiter, outer planet lander and shadowed Nanosat.…”

Section: Magnetometrymentioning

confidence: 99%