Southward Component Of Interplanetary Magnetic Field Research Articles

Interplanetary Causes and Impacts of the 2024 May Superstorm on the Geosphere: An Overview

The recent superstorm of 2024 May 10–11 is the second largest geomagnetic storm in the space age and the only one that has simultaneous interplanetary data (there were no interplanetary data for the 1989 March storm). The May superstorm was characterized by a sudden impulse (SI+) amplitude of +88 nT, followed by a three-step storm main-phase development, which had a total duration of ∼9 hr. The cause of the first storm main phase with a peak SYM-H intensity of −183 nT was a fast-forward interplanetary shock (magnetosonic Mach number M ms ∼ 7.2) and an interplanetary sheath with a southward interplanetary magnetic field component B s of ∼40 nT. The cause of the second storm's main phase with an SYM-H intensity of −354 nT was a deepening of the sheath B s to ∼43 nT. A magnetosonic wave (M ms ∼ 0.6) compressed the sheath to a high magnetic field strength of ∼71 nT. Intensified B s of ∼48 nT were the cause of the third and most intense storm main phase, with an SYM-H intensity of −518 nT. Three magnetic cloud events with B s fields of ∼25–40 nT occurred in the storm recovery phase, lengthening the recovery to ∼2.8 days. At geosynchronous orbit, ∼76 keV to ∼1.5 MeV electrons exhibited ∼1–3 orders of magnitude flux decreases following the shock/sheath impingement onto the magnetosphere. The cosmic-ray decreases at Dome C, Antarctica (effective vertical cutoff rigidity <0.01 GV) and Oulu, Finland (rigidity ∼0.8 GV) were ∼17% and ∼11%, respectively, relative to quiet-time values. Strong ionospheric current flows resulted in extreme geomagnetically induced currents of ∼30–40 A in the subauroral region. The storm period is characterized by strong polar-region field-aligned currents, with ∼10 times intensification during the main phase and equatorward expansion down to ∼50° geomagnetic (altitude-adjusted) latitude.

The April 2023 SYM‐H = −233 nT Geomagnetic Storm: A Classical Event

AbstractThe 23–24 April 2023 double‐peak (SYM‐H intensities of −179 and −233 nT) intense geomagnetic storm was caused by interplanetary magnetic field southward component Bs associated with an interplanetary fast‐forward shock‐preceded sheath (Bs of 25 nT), followed by a magnetic cloud (MC) (Bs of 33 nT), respectively. These interplanetary structures were led by a coronal mass ejection erupted from the Sun in association with an M1.7 X‐ray flare. At the center of the MC, the plasma density exhibited an order of magnitude decrease, leading to a sub‐Alfvénic solar wind interval for ∼2.1 hr. Ionospheric Joule heating accounted for a significant part (∼81%) of the magnetospheric energy dissipation during the storm main phase. Equal amount of Joule heating in the dayside and nightside ionosphere is consistent with the observed intense and global‐scale DP2 (disturbance polar) currents during the storm main phase. The sub‐Alfvénic solar wind is associated with disappearance of substorms, a sharp decrease in Joule heating dissipation, and reduction in electromagnetic ion cyclotron wave amplitude. The shock/sheath compression of the magnetosphere led to relativistic electron flux losses in the outer radiation belt between L* = 3.5 and 5.5. Relativistic electron flux enhancements were detected in the lower L* ≤ 3.5 region during the storm main and recovery phases. Equatorial ionospheric plasma anomaly structures are found to be modulated by the prompt penetration electric fields. Around the anomaly crests, plasma density at ∼470 km altitude and altitude‐integrated ionospheric total electron content are found to increase by ∼60% and ∼80%, with ∼33% and ∼67% increases in their latitudinal extents compared to their quiet‐time values, respectively.

Energetics of Shock-triggered Supersubstorms (SML < −2500 nT)

The solar wind energy input and dissipation in the magnetospheric–ionospheric systems of 17 supersubstorms (SSSs: SML < −2500 nT) triggered by interplanetary shocks during solar cycles 23 and 24 are studied in detail. The SSS events had durations ranging from ∼42 minutes to ∼6 hr, and SML intensities ranging from −2522 nT to −4143 nT. Shock compression greatly strengthens the upstream interplanetary magnetic field southward component (B s), and thus, through magnetic reconnection at the Earth’s dayside magnetopause, greatly enhances the solar wind energy input into the magnetosphere and ionosphere during the SSS events studied. The additional solar wind magnetic reconnection energy input supplements the ∼1.5 hr precursor (growth-phase) energy input and both supply the necessary energy for the high-intensity, long-duration SSS events. Some of the solar wind energy is immediately deposited in the magnetosphere/ionosphere system, and some is stored in the magnetosphere/magnetotail system. During the SSS events, the major part of the solar wind input energy is dissipated into Joule heating (∼30%), with substantially less energy dissipation in auroral precipitation (∼3%) and ring current energy (∼2%). The remainder of the solar wind energy input is probably lost down the magnetotail. It is found that during the SSS events, the dayside Joule heating is comparable to that of the nightside Joule heating, giving a picture of the global energy dissipation in the magnetospheric/ionospheric system, not simply a nightside-sector substorm effect. Several cases are shown where an SSS is the only substorm that occurs during a magnetic storm, essentially equating the two phenomena for these cases.

A comparative study on geoeffective and non-geoeffective corotating interaction regions

A long database of corotating interaction regions (CIRs) is used to investigate their geoeffectiveness. Among 290 CIR events identified during Solar Cycle 24 (2008–2019), 88 (30%) are found to be geoeffective in causing geomagnetic storms with the symmetric ring current index [SYM-H] peak ⩽-50nT, and 202 (70%) are non-geoeffective with the minimum SYM-H >-50nT. Based on a comparative study of the geoeffective and non-geoeffective CIRs, following results are obtained. Geoeffective and non-geoeffective CIRs have comparable duration (28±15hours, 26±14hours, respectively) and radial extent (0.33±0.17AU, 0.30±0.17AU, respectively), on average. While the mean solar-wind plasma speed during the geoeffective (503±70km s−1) and non-geoeffective (491±63km s−1) CIRs exhibits no statistical difference, the geoeffective CIRs have ≈25% higher peak plasma density, ≈45% higher ram pressure, ≈42% higher temperature, ≈39% higher interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) magnitude, ≈57% stronger IMF southward component, and ≈61% stronger reconnection electric field than the non-geoeffective events, on average. The auroral electrojet index [AE] and SYM-H are found to be, respectively, ≈58% and ≈192% stronger during the geoeffective CIRs than the non-geoeffective events. The typical characteristic solar-wind and geomagnetic activity parameters given in this article can be useful for space weather modeling and prediction purposes.

Dependence of Great Geomagnetic Storm ($\Delta $SYM-H$\le -200$ nT) on Associated Solar Wind Parameters

We use $\Delta$SYM-H to capture the variation in the SYM-H index during the main phase of a geomagnetic storm. We define great geomagnetic storms as those with $\Delta$SYM-H $\le$ -200 nT. After analyzing the data that were not obscured by solar winds, we determined that 11 such storms occurred during solar cycle 23. We calculated time integrals for the southward interplanetary magnetic field component I(B$_s$), the solar wind electric field I(E$_y$), and a combination of E$_y$ and the solar wind dynamic pressure I(Q) during the main phase of a great geomagnetic storm. The strength of the correlation coefficient (CC) between $\Delta$SYM-H and each of the three integrals I(B$_s$) (CC = 0.74), I(E$_y$) (CC = 0.85), and I(Q) (CC = 0.94) suggests that Q, which encompasses both the solar wind electric field and the solar wind dynamic pressure, is the main driving factor that determines the intensity of a great geomagnetic storm. The results also suggest that the impact of B$_s$ on the great geomagnetic storm intensity is much more significant than that of the solar wind speed and the dynamic pressure during the main phase of associated great geomagnetic storm. How to estimate the intensity of an extreme geomagnetic storm based on solar wind parameters is also discussed.

Semi-annual, annual and Universal Time variations in the magnetosphere and in geomagnetic activity: 1. Geomagnetic data

We study the semi-annual variation in geomagnetic activity, as detected in the geomagnetic indices am, aaH, AL, Dst and the four aσ indices derived for 6-hour MLT sectors (around noon, dawn, dusk and midnight). For each we compare the amplitude of the semi-annual variation, as a fraction of the overall mean, to that of the corresponding variation in power input to the magnetosphere, Pα, estimated from interplanetary observations. We demonstrate that the semi-annual variation is amplified in the geomagnetic data compared to that in Pα, by a factor that is different for each index. The largest amplification is for the Dst index (factor ~ 10) and the smallest is for the aσ index for the noon MLT sector (aσ-noon, factor ≈ 1.1). By sorting the data by the prevailing polarity of the Y-component (dawn-dusk) of the Interplanetary Magnetic Field (IMF) in the Geocentric Solar Equatorial (GSEQ) reference frame, we demonstrate that the Russell-McPherron (R-M) effect, in which a small southward IMF component in GSEQ is converted into geoeffective field by Earth’s dipole tilt, is a key factor for the semi-annual variations in both Pα and geomagnetic indices. However, the variability in the southward component in the IMF in the GSEQ frame causes more variability in power input to the magnetosphere Pα than does the R-M effect, by a factor of more than two. We show that for increasingly large geomagnetic disturbances, Pα delivered by events of large southward field in GSEQ (known to often be associated with coronal mass ejections) becomes the dominant driver and the R-M effect declines in importance and often acts to reduce geoeffectiveness for the most southward IMF in GSEQ: the semi-annual variation in large storms therefore suggests either preconditioning of the magnetosphere by average conditions or an additional effect at the equinoxes. We confirm that the very large R-M effect in the Dst index is because of a large effect at small and moderate activity levels and not in large storms. We discuss the implications of the observed “equinoctial” time-of-year (F) – Universal Time (UT) pattern of geomagnetic response, the waveform and phase of the semi-annual variations, the differences between the responses at the June and December solstices and the ratio of the amplitudes of the March and September equinox peaks. We also confirm that the UT variation in geomagnetic activity is a genuine global response. Later papers will analyse the origins and implications of the effects described.

Torsional Alfvén Wave Embedded ICME Magnetic Cloud and Corresponding Geomagnetic Storm

Abstract Energy transfer during the interaction of large-scale solar wind structure and the Earth’s magnetosphere is a chronic issue in space-weather studies. To understand this, researchers widely studied the geomagnetic storm and substorm phenomena. The present understanding suggests that the long duration of the southward interplanetary magnetic field component is the most important parameter for the geomagnetic storm. Such a long duration strong southward magnetic field is often associated with ICMEs, torsional Alfvén fluctuations superposed corotating interacting regions (CIRs), and fast solar wind streams. Torsional Alfvén fluctuations embedded CIRs have been known of for a long time; however, magnetic clouds embedded with such fluctuations are rarely observed. The presence of Alfvén waves in the ICME/MC and the influence of these waves on the storm evolution remains an interesting topic of study. The present work confirms the torsional Alfvén waves in a magnetic cloud associated with a CME launched on 2011 February 15, which impacted the Earth’s magnetosphere on 2011 February 18. Furthermore, observations indicate that these waves inject energy into the magnetosphere during the storm and contribute to the long recovery time of geomagnetic storms. Our study suggests that the presence of torsional Alfvén waves significantly controls the storm dynamics.

ULF Wave Activity in the Magnetosphere: Resolving Solar Wind Interdependencies to Identify Driving Mechanisms

AbstractUltralow frequency (ULF) waves in the magnetosphere are involved in the energization and transport of radiation belt particles and are strongly driven by the external solar wind. However, the interdependency of solar wind parameters and the variety of solar wind‐magnetosphere coupling processes make it difficult to distinguish the effect of individual processes and to predict magnetospheric wave power using solar wind properties. We examine 15 years of dayside ground‐based measurements at a single representative frequency (2.5 mHz) and a single magnetic latitude (corresponding to L ∼ 6.6RE). We determine the relative contribution to ULF wave power from instantaneous nonderived solar wind parameters, accounting for their interdependencies. The most influential parameters for ground‐based ULF wave power are solar wind speed vsw, southward interplanetary magnetic field component Bz&lt;0, and summed power in number density perturbations δNp. Together, the subordinate parameters Bz and δNp still account for significant amounts of power. We suggest that these three parameters correspond to driving by the Kelvin‐Helmholtz instability, formation, and/or propagation of flux transfer events and density perturbations from solar wind structures sweeping past the Earth. We anticipate that this new parameter reduction will aid comparisons of ULF generation mechanisms between magnetospheric sectors and will enable more sophisticated empirical models predicting magnetospheric ULF power using external solar wind driving parameters.

PREDICTION OF GEOMAGNETIC STORM STRENGTH FROM INNER HELIOSPHERIC IN SITU OBSERVATIONS

ABSTRACT Prediction of the effects of coronal mass ejections (CMEs) on Earth strongly depends on knowledge of the interplanetary magnetic field southward component, B z . Predicting the strength and duration of B z inside a CME with sufficient accuracy is currently impossible, forming the so-called B z problem. Here, we provide a proof-of-concept of a new method for predicting the CME arrival time, speed, B z , and resulting disturbance storm time (Dst) index on Earth based only on magnetic field data, measured in situ in the inner heliosphere (&lt;1 au). On 2012 June 12–16, three approximately Earthward-directed and interacting CMEs were observed by the Solar Terrestrial Relations Observatory imagers and Venus Express (VEX) in situ at 0.72 au, 6° away from the Sun–Earth line. The CME kinematics are calculated using the drag-based and WSA–Enlil models, constrained by the arrival time at VEX, resulting in the CME arrival time and speed on Earth. The CME magnetic field strength is scaled with a power law from VEX to Wind. Our investigation shows promising results for the Dst forecast (predicted: −96 and −114 nT (from 2 Dst models); observed: −71 nT), for the arrival speed (predicted: 531 ± 23 km s−1; observed: 488 ± 30 km s−1), and for the timing (6 ± 1 hr after the actual arrival time). The prediction lead time is 21 hr. The method may be applied to vector magnetic field data from a spacecraft at an artificial Lagrange point between the Sun and Earth or to data taken by any spacecraft temporarily crossing the Sun–Earth line.

The first super geomagnetic storm of solar cycle 24: “The St. Patrick’s day event (17 March 2015)”

The first super geomagnetic storm (Dst < −200 nT) of solar cycle 24 occurred on “St. Patrick’s day” (17 March 2015). Notably, it was a two-step storm. The source of the storm can be traced back to the solar event on 15 March 2015. At ~2:10 UT on that day, SOHO/LASCO C3 recorded a partial halo coronal mass ejection (CME), which was associated with a C9.1/1F flare (S22W25) and a series of type II/IV radio bursts. The initial propagation speed of this CME is estimated to be ~668 km/s. An interplanetary (IP) shock, likely driven by a magnetic cloud (MC), arrived at the Wind spacecraft at 03:59 UT on 17 March and caused a sudden storm commencement. The storm intensified during the Earth’s crossing of the ICME/shock sheath and then recovered slightly after the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) turned northward. The IMF started turning southward again due to a large MC field itself, which caused the second storm intensification, reaching a minimum value (Dst = −223 nT). It is found that the first step is caused by a southward IMF component in the sheath (between the upstream shock and the front of the MC), whereas the second step is associated with the passage of the MC. The CME that erupted on 15 March is the sole solar source of the MC. We also discuss the CME/storm event with detailed data from observations (Wind and SOHO) and our algorithm for predicting the intensity of a geomagnetic storm (Dstmin) from known IP parameter values. We found that choosing the correct Dstmin estimating formula for predicting the intensity of MC-associated geomagnetic storms is crucial for space weather predictions.

Ionospheric effects of solar flares and their associated particle ejections in March 2012

Flares of March 4–9, 2012 were accompanied by an intensification of solar electromagnetic and corpuscular radiations and five coronal mass ejections. Bursts of X-rays and increased solar cosmic ray fluxes caused an increase in ionospheric absorption manifesting itself in data from vertical sounding stations as enhancements of the lowest frequency of reflections up to 4–6MHz at the daytime and as the disappearance of reflections in the ionograms of high latitude stations. Interplanetary coronal mass ejections (ICME) generated March 7–8 moderate and March 8–11 intense magnetic storms accompanied by ionospheric disturbances. At the peaks of both magnetic storms there were abrupt afternoon–evening decreases in the ionospheric F2-layer critical frequency (foF2). During the March 7–8 storm, the foF2 decrease concurred with the reversal of the interplanetary magnetic field azimuthal component (IMF By) which initiated restructuring of magnetospheric convection; during the March 8–11 storm, with the abrupt weakening of the interplanetary magnetic field southward component (IMF Bz) which triggered a substorm.

Alfvén waves as a possible source of long‐duration, large‐amplitude, and geoeffective southward IMF

AbstractThe southward component (Bs) of the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) is a strong driver of geomagnetic activity. Well‐defined solar wind structures such as magnetic clouds and corotating interaction regions are the main sources of long‐duration, large‐amplitude IMF Bs. Here we analyze IMF Bsevents (t&gt; 1 h, Bz&lt;−5nT) unrelated with any well‐defined solar wind structure at 1 AU using ACE spacecraft observations from 1998 to 2004. We find that about one third of these Bs events show Alfvénic wave features; therefore, those Alfvén waves in the solar wind are also an important source of long‐duration, large‐amplitude IMF southward component. We find that more than half of the Alfvén wave (AW)‐related Bs events occur in slow solar wind (Vsw &lt; 400 km/s). One third of the AW‐type Bsevents triggered geomagnetic storms, and half triggered substorms.

The source, statistical properties, and geoeffectiveness of long‐duration southward interplanetary magnetic field intervals

AbstractGeomagnetic activity is strongly controlled by solar wind and interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) conditions, especially the southward component of IMF (IMF Bs). We analyze the statistical properties of IMF Bs at 1 AU using in situ observations for more than a solar cycle (1995–2010). IMF Bs events are defined as continuous IMF Bs intervals with varying thresholds of Bs magnitude and duration and categorized by different solar wind structures, such as magnetic cloud (MC), interplanetary small‐scale magnetic flux rope, interplanetary coronal mass ejection without MC signature (ejecta), stream interacting region, and Shock, as well as events unrelated with well‐defined solar wind structures. The statistical properties of IMF Bs events and their geoeffectiveness are investigated in detail based on satellite and ground measurements. We find that the integrated duration and number of Bs events follow the sunspot number when Bz &lt; −5 nT. We also find that in extreme Bs events (t&gt; 6 h, Bz &lt; −10 nT), a majority (53%) are related to MC and 10% are related with ejecta, but nearly a quarter are not associated with any well‐defined solar wind structure. We find different geomagnetic responses for Bs events with comparable duration and magnitude depending on what type of solar wind structures they are associated with. We also find that great Bs events (t&gt; 3 h, Bz &lt; −10 nT) do not always trigger magnetic storms.

Why have geomagnetic storms been so weak during the recent solar minimum and the rising phase of cycle 24?

The minimum following solar cycle 23 was the deepest and longest since the dawn of the space age. In this paper we examine geomagnetic activity using Dst and AE indices, interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) and plasma conditions, and the properties and occurrence rate of interplanetary coronal mass ejections (ICMEs) during two periods around the last two solar minima and rising phases (Period 1: 1995–1999 and Period 2: 2006–2012). The data is obtained from the 1-h OMNI database. Geomagnetic activity was considerably weaker during Period 2 than during Period 1, in particular in terms of Dst. We show that the responses of AE and Dst depend on whether it is solar wind speed or the southward IMF component (BS) that controls the variations in solar wind driving electric field (EY). We conclude that weak Dst activity during Period 2 was primarily a consequence of weak BS and presumably further weakened due to low solar wind densities. In contrast, solar wind speed did not show significant differences between our two study periods and the high-speed solar wind during Period 2 maintained AE activity despite of weak BS. The weakness of BS during Period 2 was attributed in particular to the lack of strong and long-duration ICMEs. We show that for our study periods there was a clear annual north–south IMF asymmetry, which affected in particular the intense Dst activity. This implies that the annual amount of intense Dst activity may rather be determined by the coincidence of what magnetic structure the strong ICMEs encountering the Earth have than by the solar cycle size.

Three frontside full halo coronal mass ejections with a nontypical geomagnetic response

Forecasting potential geoeffectiveness of solar disturbances (in particular, of frontside full halo coronal mass ejections) is important for various practical purposes, e.g., for satellite operations, radio communications, global positioning system applications, power grid, and pipeline maintenance. We analyze three frontside full halo coronal mass ejections (CMEs) that occurred in the year 2000 (close to the activity maximum of solar cycle 23), together with associated solar and heliospheric phenomena as well as their impact on the Earth's magnetosphere. Even though all three were fast full halos (with plane of the sky speeds higher than 1100 km/s), the geomagnetic response was very different for each case. After analyzing the source regions of these halo CMEs, it was found that the halo associated with the strongest geomagnetic disturbance was the one that initiated farther away from disk center (source region at W66); while the other two CMEs originated closer to the central meridian but had weaker geomagnetic responses. Therefore, these three events do not fit into the general statistical trends that relate the location of the solar source and the corresponding geoeffectivity. We investigate possible causes of such a behavior. Nonradial direction of eruption, passage of the Earth through a leg of an interplanetary flux rope, and strong compression at the eastern flank of a propagating interplanetary CME during its interaction with the ambient solar wind are found to be important factors that have a direct influence on the resulting north‐south interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) component and thus on the CME geoeffectiveness. We also find indications that interaction of two CMEs could help in producing a long‐lasting southward IMF component. Finally, we are able to explain successfully the geomagnetic response using plasma and magnetic field in situ measurements at the L1 point. We discuss the implications of our results for operational space weather forecasting and stress the difficulties of making accurate predictions with the current knowledge and tools at hand.

On the variation betweenDstand IMFBzduring ‘intense’ and ‘very intense’ geomagnetic storms

Intense magnetic storms are dominantly caused by the interplanetary manifestations of fast coronal mass ejections (CMEs); and are in two forms: the sheath region and the CME ejecta itself; both involving an intense and long duration southward interplanetary magnetic field component Bz. A study of the storm events which were divided into two parts of ‘intense’ −250 nT ≤ peak Dst 10 nT and long duration (>3 hour) would always cause a depression in the Dst magnitude, signifying an intense storm. The study reveals that ‘very intense’ storms are more likely to experience shock in the interplanetary magnetic field region faster than ‘intense’ storms with a plasma flow speed >400 km/s. This is because Dst plots shows that activity of storm sudden commencement (SSC) is not noticeable until about 7 hours to storm day under ‘intense’ storms, whereas, it is as much as 12 hours to storm day for ‘very intense’ activities.

On the geomagnetic and ionospheric responses to an intense storm associated with weak IMF Bz and high solar wind dynamic pressure

A study of the geomagnetic storm of July 13–14, 1982, and its ionospheric response is presented using the low-latitude magnetic index, Dst, and interpreted using solar wind interplanetary data: proton number density, solar wind flow speed, interplanetary magnetic field southward component B Z , and solar wind dynamic pressure. The F2 region structure response to the geomagnetic storm was studied using foF2 data obtained during the storm from a network of various ionosonde stations. Our results appear to show simultaneous abrupt depletion of foF2 that occurred at all latitudes in both the East Asian and African/European longitudinal zone during the period: 18:00–19:00 UT on July 13 and is as result of an abrupt increase in the dynamic pressure between 16:00 and 17:00 UT. The dynamic pressure increased from 3.21 to 28.07 nPa within an hour. The aforementioned abrupt depletion of foF2 simultaneously resulted in an intense negative storm with peak depletion of foF2 at about 19:00 at all the stations in the East Asian longitudinal zone. In the African/European longitudinal zone, this simultaneous abrupt depletion of foF2 resulted in intense negative storm that occurred simultaneously at the low latitude stations with peak depletion at about 20:00 UT on July 13, while the resulting negative storm at the mid latitude stations recorded peak depletion of foF2 simultaneously at about 2:00 UT on July 14. The present results indicate that most of the stations in the three longitudinal zones showed some level of simultaneity in the depletion of foF2 between 18:00 UT on July 13 and 2:00 UT on July 14. The depletion of foF2 during the main phase of the storm was especially strongly dependent on the solar wind dynamic pressure.

An intense geomagnetic storm associated with slow solar wind

Results of earlier studies on intense geomagnetic storms appear to suggest the interplanetary manifestation of fast (v = 500km/s) coronal mass ejections (CMEs) as the dominant interplanetary phenomenon causing intense magnetic storms. However, the intense storm of April 1-2, 1973 appears to be due to a slow solar wind. Presently a study has been made of the April 1-2, 1973 geomagnetic storm in order to identify the probable roles played by the various solar and interplanetary factors in the generation of major geomagnetic storms. The storm is summarized using the low-latitude magnetic index, Dst and is interpreted using available interplanetary data: proton number density, solar wind flow speed, plasma temperature, interplanetary magnetic field southward component Bz, plasma beta and dawn-dusk electric field. Our results show the magnetic storm is a double step event: a moderate-to- weak storm which occurred during the period 20:00 UT March 31- 13:00 UT April 1 and is due to the weakly compressed magnetic fields in the sheath, and the April 1-2 intense storm which is due a magnetic cloud. Furthermore, the present results show that the peak solar wind velocity occurred on April 2, a day Dst after attained its peak value of -211 nT and confirms the results of Sawyer and Haurwitz (1976) that geomagnetic activity is highest on the day preceding peak velocity in the high-speed stream. Keywords: solar wind, Interplanetary Magnetic Field (IMF), coronal mass ejections (CME), low-latitude magnetic index (Dst), geomagnetic storm, Plasma beta Nigerian Journal of Physics Vol. 17, 2005: 27-34

Parameters influencing the growth and decay of the regular part of the AE index

The statistical behavior of the AE index, which describes the intensity of auroral electrojets, has been studied using hourly data. It has been shown that the AE index depends on the solar wind parameters as well as on its own value in the preceding hour. This makes it possible to describe the AE index behavior by the first-order inhomogeneous differential equation. The index growth rate is proportional mainly to the southward component of the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF). The timescale of the breakup of the currents responsible for the index is approximately 2 h. A similarity in the time variations in the AE and Dst indices has been referred to. The empirical formulas, which make it possible to restore the missing values of the IMF southward component from the available AE or Dst indices, have been proposed.

Transition region of TEC enhancement phenomena during geomagnetically disturbed periods at mid-latitudes

Abstract. Large-scale TEC perturbations/enhancements observed during the day sectors of major storm periods, 12-13 February 2000, 23 September 1999, 29 October 2003, and 21 November 2003, were studied using a high resolution GPS network over Japan. TEC enhancements described in the present study have large magnitudes (≥25×1016 electrons/m2) compared to the quiet-time values and long periods (≥120 min). The sequential manner of development and the propagation of these perturbations show that they are initiated at the northern region and propagate towards the southern region of Japan, with velocities &gt;350 m/s. On 12 February 2000, remarkably high values of TEC and background content are observed at the southern region, compared to the north, because of the poleward expansion of the equatorial anomaly crest, which is characterized by strong latitudinal gradients near 35° N (26° N geomagnetically). When the TEC enhancements, initiating at the north, propagate through the region 39-34° N (30-25° N geomagnetically), they undergo transitions characterized by a severe decrease in amplitude of TEC enhancements. This may be due to their interaction with the higher background content of the expanded anomaly crest. However, at the low-latitude region, below 34° N, an increase in TEC is manifested as an enhanced ionization pattern (EIP). This could be due to the prompt penetration of the eastward electric field, which is evident from high values of the southward Interplanetary Magnetic Field component (IMF Bz) and AE index. The TEC perturbations observed on the other storm days also exhibit similar transitions, characterized by a decreasing magnitude of the perturbation component, at the region around 39-34° N. In addition to this, on the other storm days, at the low-latitude region, below 34° N, an increase in TEC (EIP feature) also indicates the repeatability of the above scenario. It is found that, the latitude and time at which the decrease in magnitude of the perturbation component/amplitude of the TEC enhancement are matching with the latitude and time of the appearance of the high background content. In the present study, on 12 February 2000, the F-layer height increases at Wakkanai and Kokubunji, by exhibiting a typical dispersion feature of LSTID, or passage of an equatorward surge, which is matching with the time of occurrence of the propagating TEC perturbation component. Similarly, on 29 October 2003, the increase in F-layer heights by more than 150km at Wakkanai and 90 km at Kokubunji around 18:00 JST, indicates the role of the equatorward neutral wind. On that day, TEC perturbation observed at the northern region, after 18:30 JST, which propagates towards south, could be caused mainly by the equatorward neutral wind, leading to an F-layer height increase. These observations imply the role of the equatorward neutral wind, which increases the F-layer height, by lifting the ionization to the regions of lower loss during daytime, when production is still taking place, which, in turn, increases the TEC values. Large-scale traveling ionospheric disturbances (LSTIDs) are considered as ionospheric manifestations of the passage of Atmospheric Gravity Waves (AGWs) that are generated at the high latitude by energy input from the magnetosphere to the low-latitude ionosphere. This study shows that large-scale TEC perturbations observed here are produced at the northern region due to the combined effects of the equatorward neutral wind, the subsequent F-layer height increase, and LSTIDs. When these perturbation components propagate through the region, 39-34° N, they undergo transitions characterised by a decrease in magnitude. Also, at the low-latitude region, below 34° N, an increase in the TEC exhibits EIP feature, due to the prompt penetration of the eastward electric field.