Magnetic cloud field intensities and solar wind velocities

González, W. D.; González, Alicia; Lago, A. Dal; Tsurutani, B. T.; Arballo, J. K.; Lakhina, G. S.; Buti, B.; Ho, C. M.; Wu, S. T.

doi:10.1029/98gl00703

Cited by 88 publications

(95 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our V−B correlation is generally in agreement with the linear correlations found by other studies (e.g., Gonzalez et al 1998;Dal Lago et al 2001;Richardson & Cane 2010). Differences could be attributed to different sample sizes, different ways in which peak-values were determined, and the fact that we did not consider separately different ICMEs substructures (e.g., shock, sheath, MC).…”

Section: Cross-correlations For Icmessupporting

confidence: 80%

Comparison of geoeffectiveness of coronal mass ejections and corotating interaction regions

Verbanac

Živković

Vršnak

et al. 2013

A&A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context. A detailed comparison of the geomagnetic responses to interplanetary coronal mass ejection (ICMEs) and corotating interaction regions (CIRs) during solar cycle 23 was performed using geomagnetic indices Dst, Ap, and AE. Aims. We aim to find out if there are relative differences in the response of various magnetospheric current systems to the impact of ICMEs and CIRs. In addition, we are exploring the possibility of forecasting geomagnetic activity using the coronagraphic observations of the ICME take-off. Methods. The peak values of the plasma characteristics of ICMEs and CIRs (velocity V, magnetic field B, and BV related to the electric field), and geomagnetic indices were investigated by applying the linear and power-law cross correlation analysis. The influence of the time-resolution on the results was performed for two time resolutions obtained by one-hour (three-hour for Ap) and six-hour data averaging. Results. For ICMEs the power-law fits are found to be important only for the relationships between BV and geomagnetic indices. For Ap and Dst, there is no difference between the one-hour (three-hour for Ap) and six-hour option. For AE, the one-hour data distribution shows more clearly the non-linear dependence on BV. Our data set shows that below BV ∼ 5 mV m −1 ICMEs have practically no geomagnetic effect at low and mid latitudes, but at high latitudes at least some geomagnetic activity will be triggered. For all HSS/CIRs dependencies, a power law is found to better describe the data than the linear fit. The data distributions show that BV has to reach ∼4 mV m −1 in order to drive at least some geomagnetic activity at all latitudes. We observed that there are fast CMEs that have almost no geomagnetic effect at low and mid latitudes. On the other hand, at high latitudes, fast CMEs always trigger some geomagnetic activity. This might be have implications for space weather forecasting. Conclusions. Magnetospheric response to both solar drivers (ICMEs and CIRs) is different at various latitudes, thus results in different development of various current systems within the Earth's magnetosphere and ionosphere. Furthermore, we show that ICMEs and CIRs cause different geomagnetic activity. In the case of ICMEs equatorial current system responses in a linear manner, while the response of the polar-current system is likely to be non-linear. For HSS/CIRs, apparently all current systems respond in a non-linear way, especially the polar current system.

show abstract

Section: Cross-correlations For Icmessupporting

confidence: 80%

Comparison of geoeffectiveness of coronal mass ejections and corotating interaction regions

Verbanac

Živković

Vršnak

et al. 2013

A&A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Sheath storms are shown by asterisks and magnetic cloud storms by crosses. The rectangles show the cases that did not fulfill the Gonzalez et al (1998) intense Kp criterion for an intense storm, i.e., the requirement that Kp has to be ≥ 6 at least for three 3-h periods. Images reproduced by permission from [left] Huttunen and Koskinen (2004), copyright by the authors; [right] Koskinen and Huttunen (2006), copyright by Springer it is followed by a fast stream that compresses the southward field in in the ICME's rear part (Fenrich and Luhmann 1998;Kilpua et al 2012;Benacquista et al 2017).…”

Section: Icmes/sheaths As Drivers Of Storms In the Magnetospherementioning

confidence: 99%

Coronal mass ejections and their sheath regions in interplanetary space

Kilpua

Koskinen

Pulkkinen

2017

Living Rev Sol Phys

358

360

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interplanetary coronal mass ejections (ICMEs) are large-scale heliospheric transients that originate from the Sun. When an ICME is sufficiently faster than the preceding solar wind, a shock wave develops ahead of the ICME. The turbulent region between the shock and the ICME is called the sheath region. ICMEs and their sheaths and shocks are all interesting structures from the fundamental plasma physics viewpoint. They are also key drivers of space weather disturbances in the heliosphere and planetary environments. ICME-driven shock waves can accelerate charged particles to high energies. Sheaths and ICMEs drive practically all intense geospace storms at the Earth, and they can also affect dramatically the planetary radiation environments and atmospheres. This review focuses on the current understanding of observational signatures and properties of ICMEs and the associated sheath regions based on five decades of studies. In addition, we discuss modelling of ICMEs and many fundamental outstanding questions on their origin, evolution and effects, largely due to the limitations of single spacecraft observations of these macro-scale structures. We also present current understanding of space weather consequences of these large-scale solar wind structures, including effects at the other Solar System planets and exoplanets. We specially emphasize the different origin, properties and consequences of the sheaths and ICMEs.

show abstract

“…When measured by the D st magnetic index, the May storm appears less intense than the October-November storms. According to the classification of Gonzalez et al (1994), the 29 May storm belongs to the "intense storm" category (minimum D st =-131 nT) while the Halloween storm is a more severe one and falls into the superstorm category (minimum D st =-401 nT). It is now well known (Gosling, 1993) that the central role in the chain of events leading to major geospace disturbances is attributed to CMEs through the association of their strongly southward magnetic field with the increased solar wind pressure.…”

Section: Satellite Dragmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To do so we have selected the 27-30 May 2003 space storm period during the declining phase of solar cycle 23, which was characterized by numerous solar flares and several Earth directed CMEs, resulting in an "intense geomagnetic storm" (minimum D st =-131 nT), according to the classification of Gonzalez et al (1994).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

From the Sun to the Earth: impact of the 27-28 May 2003 solar events on the magnetosphere, ionosphere and thermosphere

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. During the last week of May 2003, the solar active region AR 10365 produced a large number of flares, several of which were accompanied by Coronal Mass Ejections (CME). Specifically on 27 and 28 May three halo CMEs were observed which had a significant impact on geospace. On 29 May, upon their arrival at the L1 point, in front of the Earth's magnetosphere, two interplanetary shocks and two additional solar wind pressure pulses were recorded by the ACE spacecraft. The interplanetary magnetic field data showed the clear signature of a magnetic cloud passing ACE. In the wake of the successive increases in solar wind pressure, the magnetosphere became strongly compressed and the sub-solar magnetopause moved inside five Earth radii. At low altitudes the increased energy input to the magnetosphere was responsible for a substantial enhancement of Region-1 field-aligned currents. The ionospheric Hall currents also intensified and the entire high-latitude current system moved equatorward by about 10 • . Several substorms occurred during this period, some of them -but not allapparently triggered by the solar wind pressure pulses. The storm's most notable consequences on geospace, including space weather effects, were (1) the expansion of the auroral oval, and aurorae seen at mid latitudes, (2) the significant modification of the total electron content in the sunlight highlatitude ionosphere, (3) the perturbation of radio-wave propagation manifested by HF blackouts and increased GPS signal scintillation, and (4) the heating of the thermosphere, causing

show abstract

Magnetic cloud field intensities and solar wind velocities

Cited by 88 publications

References 12 publications

Comparison of geoeffectiveness of coronal mass ejections and corotating interaction regions

Comparison of geoeffectiveness of coronal mass ejections and corotating interaction regions

Coronal mass ejections and their sheath regions in interplanetary space

From the Sun to the Earth: impact of the 27-28 May 2003 solar events on the magnetosphere, ionosphere and thermosphere

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About