Ionospheric TEC response to severe geomagnetic storm and annular solar eclipse through GNSS based TEC observations and assessment of IRI-2016 model and global ionosphere maps over Sri Lankan equatorial and low latitude region

Jenan, Rajavarathan; Dammalage, Thilantha Lakmal; Panda, Sampad Kumar

doi:10.1007/s10509-022-04051-8

Cited by 12 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To study the correlation and difference between the observation and model TECs, the Pearson correlation coefficients between the GPS‐derived TEC versus the WHUG and IRIG are calculated, as well as the RMS of the difference between the GPS‐derived TEC versus the WHUG and IRIG (Jenan et al., 2022; Panda et al., 2015; Rao et al., 2023). Figure 11 presents the correlation coefficient between the GPS‐derived TEC versus the WHUG and IRIG TEC during the selected periods of the 2015 and 2018 storms.…”

Section: Results and Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous studies reported a pre-storm enhancement in TEC near the EIA region over the Asian-Australian sector from 12:00 to 24:00 UT on DOY 75 in 2015. A salient increase during the daytime and a decrease at nighttime were observed on DOY 76, and there was an intense negative storm in the EIA on DOY 77 (Kuai et al, 2016; To study the correlation and difference between the observation and model TECs, the Pearson correlation coefficients between the GPS-derived TEC versus the WHUG and IRIG are calculated, as well as the RMS of the difference between the GPS-derived TEC versus the WHUG and IRIG (Jenan et al, 2022;Panda et al, 2015;Rao et al, 2023). Figure 11 presents the correlation coefficient between the GPS-derived TEC versus the WHUG and IRIG TEC during the selected periods of the 2015 and 2018 storms.…”

Section: Comparison With the Gps Tec Over China Under Storm Conditionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Comparison of a GNSS‐GIM and the IRI‐2020 Model Over China Under Different Ionospheric Conditions

He,

Li,

Zhang

et al. 2023

Space Weather

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ionosphere is a crucial factor affecting Global Navigation Satellite System positioning. The Global Ionosphere Map (GIM) or the International Reference Ionosphere (IRI) model can be used for regional ionospheric correction. Since southern China is located near the electron density equatorial anomaly, this study evaluates the performance of the Wuhan University GIM (WHU‐GIM) and the IRI‐2020 from 2008 to 2020 over the China region. The comparison indicates that the Total Electron Content (TEC) from IRI‐2020 is lower than that from WHU‐GIM overall, the discrepancy is more obvious in high solar conditions and low‐latitude regions. The differential Slant TEC (dSTEC) during a phase‐arc with about 0.1 TECU accuracy derived from Global Positioning System (GPS) observations is used for model validation, the results show that the accuracies of WHU‐GIM and IRI‐2020 are 3.14 and 4.57 TECU, respectively. The dSTEC error is larger at low latitudes and decreases with increasing latitude. GPS‐derived TEC is taken for reference to evaluate the model reliability. Results show that both models can reproduce the diurnal TEC variations, but IRI‐2020 is more influenced by geomagnetic activities. The TEC correction percentage for IRI‐2020 is about 60%–80% under different ionospheric conditions, while for WHU‐GIM is 80%–90%. The Single‐Frequency Precise Point Positioning is performed with the ionosphere delay corrected by the two models, respectively. The positioning errors show that using IRI‐2020 has a lower accuracy, and the TEC discrepancy of the IRI‐2020 can cause a large bias in the up direction, especially at low‐latitude regions.

show abstract

Section: Results and Analysesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Comparison With the Gps Tec Over China Under Storm Conditionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of a GNSS‐GIM and the IRI‐2020 Model Over China Under Different Ionospheric Conditions

He,

Li,

Zhang

et al. 2023

Space Weather

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, during September 9-10, weak TEC depletion rates were observed at middle and low latitudes. Other several studies [21] , [22] , [23] , [24] , [25] , [26] , [27] , [28] also examined ionospheric disturbances during this storm event over different regions. To date, open questions in understanding the main features of ionospheric disturbances still remain unsolved; so, monitoring the TEC variations over different sectors during CME events is important for assessing potential space weather impacts.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

TEC disturbances caused by CME-triggered geomagnetic storm of September 6–9, 2017

Uga,

Gautam,

Seba

2024

Heliyon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The ionosphere layer can be disrupted by earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, and other natural disasters, and these anomalies have been observed using the GNSS TEC. During these events, acoustic waves propagate upward to the ionosphere layer and are monitored using the TEC (Cahyadi, 2014;Cahyadi et al, 2018Cahyadi et al, , 2022Cahyadi & Heki, 2013a, 2013bHeki & Cahyadi, 2012;Jin et al, 2015;Jin & Su, 2019;Liu et al, 2011;Sharma et al, 2017), tsunamis (Kakinami et al, 2012;Liu et al, 2006;Muslim et al, 2020;Rolland et al, 2010), geomagnetic storms (Jenan et al, 2022;Jin et al, 2017;Sori et al, 2021), and volcanic eruption (Cahyadi et al, 2020(Cahyadi et al, , 2021Nakashima et al, 2014Nakashima et al, , 2016Shults et al, 2016). This is due to the fact that these natural disasters are propagating acoustic waves upward to the ionosphere layer, which was monitored using the TEC (Cahyadi & Heki, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D Traveling Ionospheric Disturbances During the 2022 Hunga Tonga–Hunga Ha’apai Eruption Using GNSS TEC

Cahyadi,

Muslim,

Muafiry

et al. 2024

JGR Space Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The dual frequency Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) observations could determine the total electron content (TEC) in the ionosphere. In this study, GNSS TEC was applied to detect traveling ionospheric disturbances (TIDs) after the eruption of Hunga Tonga–Hunga Ha’apai (HTHH) on 15 January 2022. The eruption caused two types of tsunamis, first is tsunami generated by atmospheric wave (meteo‐tsunami) and second is caused by eruption induces water displacement or tsunami classic. At the same time with former tsunami, the atmospheric wave (shock and lamb waves) also caused TIDs at a speed of approximately ∼0.3 km/s. We found moderate correlation between this TIDs amplitude and the tsunami wave height model from tide gauge stations in New Zealand (0.64) and Australia (0.65). Further we attempted to reveal 3D structure of the TIDs in New Zealand, South Australia, and Philippines using 3D tomography. The tomography was set up > 1,170 blocks, as large as 1.0° (east–west) × 1.0° (north–south) × 100 km (vertical), up to 600 km altitude over selected regions. Tomogram shows beautiful concentric directivity of the first TIDs generated by atmospheric wave (AW).

show abstract

Ionospheric TEC response to severe geomagnetic storm and annular solar eclipse through GNSS based TEC observations and assessment of IRI-2016 model and global ionosphere maps over Sri Lankan equatorial and low latitude region

Cited by 12 publications

References 56 publications

A Comparison of a GNSS‐GIM and the IRI‐2020 Model Over China Under Different Ionospheric Conditions

A Comparison of a GNSS‐GIM and the IRI‐2020 Model Over China Under Different Ionospheric Conditions

TEC disturbances caused by CME-triggered geomagnetic storm of September 6–9, 2017

3D Traveling Ionospheric Disturbances During the 2022 Hunga Tonga–Hunga Ha’apai Eruption Using GNSS TEC

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About