Abstract
Abstract. Observations of astronomical sources provide information that can significantly enhance the utility of auroral data for scientific studies. This report presents results obtained by using Jupiter for field cross calibration of four multispectral auroral meridian scanning photometers during the 2011–2015 Northern Hemisphere winters. Seasonal average optical field-of-view and local orientation estimates are obtained with uncertainties of 0.01 and 0.1°, respectively. Estimates of absolute sensitivity are repeatable to roughly 5 % from one month to the next, while the relative response between different wavelength channels is stable to better than 1 %. Astronomical field calibrations and darkroom calibration differences are on the order of 10 %. Atmospheric variability is the primary source of uncertainty; this may be reduced with complementary data from co-located instruments.
Highlights
Interactions between the solar wind and the terrestrial magnetic field produce a complex and dynamic geospace environment
We show that using Jupiter for field calibration of meridian scanning photometer (MSP) provides detailed knowledge about fG(θ, φ), estimates of C that are comparable to darkroom calibration, and useful information about relative spectral response fS(λ) at different wavelengths
Working with Rayleighs requires some additional knowledge in the form of the effective bandwidth λ. As this is true for darkroom low-brightness sources (LBSs) calibration, we focus here on relating Iin Rayleighs per nanometer to Sin watts per meter squared per nanometer
Summary
Interactions between the solar wind and the terrestrial magnetic field produce a complex and dynamic geospace environment. Comprehensive calibration requires specialized equipment and skilled personnel that are typically available only at centrally located research facilities With sufficient resources it is possible, at least in principle, to determine all device parameters that are required to convert raw instrument data numbers to physically useful quantities. Practical limitations can result in random or systematic uncertainties which may impede quantitative scientific analysis This is relevant for large networks of nominally identical instruments, where ongoing calibration of each device may be extremely challenging. Even assuming ideal calibration at a central facility, many auroral instruments must be operated at remote field sites Transfer between these locations requires a sequence of packing, shipping, and reassembly that is time-consuming, costly, and may unintentionally alter instrument response.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Geoscientific Instrumentation, Methods and Data Systems
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
