2022
DOI: 10.5194/egusphere-2022-59
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

In-Situ Calibration of the Swarm-Echo Magnetometers

Abstract: Abstract. CASSIOPE/e-POP, now known as Swarm-Echo, was launched in 2013 to study polar plasma outflow, neutral escape, and the effects of auroral currents on radio propagation in the ionosphere. The e-POP suite contains an array of eight instruments which include two fluxgate magnetometers on a shared boom. Until now, the two magnetometers relied on a set of prefight calibrations which limited the accuracy of the magnetic field product and their utility for some applications. Here we present the results of an … Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Specifically, the e‐POP/Swarm‐Echo magnetic field data appears to be contaminated with stray field from three primary sources: quasi‐static fields generated by ferromagnetic materials onboard the spacecraft; quasi‐sinusoidal field generated by the spacecraft's reaction wheels; and time‐varying field generated by spacecraft subsystem currents. The quasi‐static fields are most easily removed by in situ calibration (e.g., Broadfoot et al., 2022) and are not discussed throughout the remainder of this manuscript. Instead, this manuscript is focused on the removal of the quasi‐sinusoidal reaction wheel signals, since they are a constantly present feature inherent to the spacecraft's operation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Specifically, the e‐POP/Swarm‐Echo magnetic field data appears to be contaminated with stray field from three primary sources: quasi‐static fields generated by ferromagnetic materials onboard the spacecraft; quasi‐sinusoidal field generated by the spacecraft's reaction wheels; and time‐varying field generated by spacecraft subsystem currents. The quasi‐static fields are most easily removed by in situ calibration (e.g., Broadfoot et al., 2022) and are not discussed throughout the remainder of this manuscript. Instead, this manuscript is focused on the removal of the quasi‐sinusoidal reaction wheel signals, since they are a constantly present feature inherent to the spacecraft's operation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…CC BY 4.0 License. sources can include the battery and solar panel systems used to provide the spacecraft's power, the reaction wheels and magnetorquers used to control the spacecraft's attitude, and even the ferromagnetic materials used in the construction of the spacecraft itself (e.g., Broadfoot et al, 2022;Stolle et al, 2021;Styp-Rekowski et al, 2022). Historically, this interference has 35 been mitigated by placing the magnetic field sensor at the end of a long boom, increasing the physical distance from the spacecraft and its associated magnetic noise sources.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Specifically, the e-POP/Swarm-Echo magnetic field data appears to be contaminated with stray field from three primary sources: quasi-static fields generated by ferromagnetic materials onboard the spacecraft; quasi-sinusoidal field generated by the spacecraft's reaction wheels; and time-varying field generated by spacecraft subsystem currents. The quasi-static fields are most easily re-moved by in-situ calibration (e.g., Broadfoot et al (2022)) and are not discussed throughout the remainder of this manuscript. Instead, this manuscript is focused on the removal of the quasi-sinusoidal reaction wheel signals, since they are a constantly-present feature inherent to the spacecraft's operation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%