Continuous Activity and Substorm Activations during a Weak Magnetic Storm (Wind Tail Passage)

Сергеев, В. А.; Vagina, L. I.; Kauristie, K.; Koskinen, H.; Huuskonen, A.; Pajunpää, A.; Pellinen, R.; Phan, T. D.; Angelopoulos, V.; Lin, R. P.; Lepping, R. P.; Reeves, G. D.; Newell, P. T.

doi:10.1007/978-94-011-4798-9_141

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These patches extended $1 hour in local time (longitudinal width) by $5°in latitude and had durations of $3 to 6 min. Similar north-south oriented auroral arc structures have been discussed by Rostoker et al [1987], Nakamura et al [1993], Henderson et al [1995, 1998], and Sergeev et al [1999. Sergeev et al [2001] have found similar auroral structures (to that shown by Tsurutani et al [2003]), which occurred during southward IMF.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 78%

“…Some short durations and moderate injections, such as at $1330, 1500, and 1800 UT in the proton flux, are similar to the narrow injections previously identified to be the inner-magnetospheric continuations of the plasma sheet BBFs [e.g., Sergeev et al, 1999]. These bursty flows had a very short timescale and were not very effective in populating the inner magnetosphere [Sergeev et al, 1998] but may be related to the auroral patches and torches.…”

Section: Ring Current Intensifications When Substorm Expansion Phasessupporting

confidence: 58%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ring current intensification and convection‐driven negative bays: Multisatellite studies

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The original view on the cause of ring current intensifications was a frequent occurrence of intense substorm expansion phases. Results from many studies have supported this view. However, whether this is the only mechanism of ring current buildup has been a controversy. Kamide [1992] asserted that ring current intensification is due to “sustained, southward IMF, not because of frequent occurrence of intense substorms.” Lui et al. [2001] have shown that the ring current can be intensified during enhanced convection without substorm occurrence. Tsurutani et al. [2003] have found that there was a lack of substorm expansion phases for long periods of time (up to 7 hours) in 5 out of 11 storm main phases (in 1997) that were induced by the smoothly varying Bz component of the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) within interplanetary magnetic clouds. In this paper, a relatively weak magnetic storm event (with minimum SYM‐H at −47 nT) that occurred on 15 July 1997 is studied using ground‐based magnetograms, polar cap potentials from Super Dual Auroral Radar Network, and Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) geosynchronous energetic particle data as well as the Polar UV imaging (for aurorae) and Wind (for the solar wind) data. It is shown that during the storm main phase, there was a lack of substorm expansion phase activity (from imaging and the ground‐based data) and a lack of energetic particle injections at the geostationary orbit. The most prominent auroral forms were north‐south aligned auroral patches and torches. Dawn and dusk aurorae were more intense than the aurorae near midnight, where auroral gaps occurred. In addition, this paper shows that there was a significant directly driven activity during the storm main phase when the IMF was continually southward. We argue that during this event the ring current intensification was more strongly associated with enhanced magnetospheric convection than with impulsive energy unloading. Three scenarios are suggested to explain the relatively low intensity of the magnetic storm induced by a magnetic cloud. They are (1) weak nightside auroral zone ionospheric ion outflows (due to lack of substorms), (2) choked penetration of the tail plasma flow (due to lack of substorms), and (3) retarded magnetospheric convection (due to reduced solar wind‐magnetosphere reconnection). The observed saturation of the polar cap potential drop is in support of this latter mechanism.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 78%

Section: Ring Current Intensifications When Substorm Expansion Phasessupporting

confidence: 58%

Ring current intensification and convection‐driven negative bays: Multisatellite studies

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Still, in terms of time for the instability to develop, that takes around tω ci ∼ 25. This would be worth investigating in three-dimensional local simulations of reconnection, for example in a similar set-up with respect to Fujimoto & Sydora (2012), possibly allowing (i) more space in the direction orthogonal to the plane and (ii) sufficiently large current sheets (a > d i as is usually observed in the magnetotail by, e.g., Sanny et al 1994;Sergeev et al 1998;Runov et al 2005), introducing fluctuations in the direction orthogonal to the reconnection plane.…”

Section: Anomalous Resistivitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1994; Sergeev et al. 1998; Runov et al. 2005), introducing fluctuations in the direction orthogonal to the reconnection plane.…”

Section: Onset Models Based On the Tearing Instability Of Thin Currenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Onset of fast magnetic reconnection and particle energization in laboratory and space plasmas

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The onset of magnetic reconnection in space, astrophysical and laboratory plasmas is reviewed discussing results from theory, numerical simulations and observations. After a brief introduction on magnetic reconnection and approach to the question of onset, we first discuss recent theoretical models and numerical simulations, followed by observations of reconnection and its effects in space and astrophysical plasmas from satellites and ground-based detectors, as well as measurements of reconnection in laboratory plasma experiments. Mechanisms allowing reconnection spanning from collisional resistivity to kinetic effects as well as partial ionization are described, providing a description valid over a wide range of plasma parameters, and therefore applicable in principle to many different astrophysical and laboratory environments. Finally, we summarize the implications of reconnection onset physics for plasma dynamics throughout the Universe and illustrate how capturing the dynamics correctly is important to understanding particle acceleration. The goal of this review is to give a view on the present status of this topic and future interesting investigations, offering a unified approach.

show abstract

A lack of substorm expansion phases during magnetic storms induced by magnetic clouds

Tsurutani

Zhou

González

2003

Disturbances in Geospace: The Storm-Substorm Relationship

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Continuous Activity and Substorm Activations during a Weak Magnetic Storm (Wind Tail Passage)

Cited by 4 publications

References 8 publications

Ring current intensification and convection‐driven negative bays: Multisatellite studies

Ring current intensification and convection‐driven negative bays: Multisatellite studies

Onset of fast magnetic reconnection and particle energization in laboratory and space plasmas

A lack of substorm expansion phases during magnetic storms induced by magnetic clouds

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About