scholarly journals Gas-surface interactions modelling infuence on satellite aerodynamics and thermosphere mass density

Author(s):  
Günther March ◽  
Jose van den IJssel ◽  
Christian Siemes ◽  
Pieter Visser ◽  
Eelco Doornbos ◽  
...  

The satellite acceleration data from the CHAMP, GRACE, GOCE , and Swarm missions provide detailed information on the thermosphere density over the last two decades. Recent work on reducing errors in the modelling of the spacecraft geometry has already greatly reduced scale differences between the thermosphere data sets from these missions. However, residual inconsistencies between the data sets and between data and models are still present. To a large extent, these differences originate in the modelling of the gas-surface interactions ( GSI ), which is part of the satellite aerodynamic modelling used in the acceleration to density data processing. Physics-based GSI models require in- situ atmospheric composition and temperature data that are not measured by any of the above-mentioned satellites and, as a consequence, rely on thermosphere models for these inputs. To reduce the dependence on existing thermosphere models, we choose in this work a GSI model with a constant energy accommodation coefficient per mission, which we optimize exploiting particular attitude manoeuvres and wind analyses to increase the self-consistency of the multi-mission thermosphere mass density data sets. We compare our results with those based on variable energy accommodation obtained by different studies and semi-empirical models to show the principal differences. The presented comparisons provide the novel opportunity to quantify the discrepancies between current GSI models. Among the presented data, density variations with variable accommodation are within +- 10 % and peaks can reach up to 15 % at the poles. The largest differences occur during low solar activity periods. In addition, we utilize a series of attitude manoeuvres performed in May 2014 by the Swarm A and C satellites, which are flying in close proximity, to evaluate the residual inconsistency of the density observations as a function of the energy accommodation coefficient. Our analysis demonstrates that an energy accommodation coefficient of 0.85 maximizes the consistency of the Swarm density observations during the attitude manoeuvres. Using such coefficient, for Swarm-A and Swarm-C the new density would be lower in magnitude with a 4-5 % difference. In recent studies, similar energy accommodation coefficients were retrieved for the CHAMP and GOCE missions through investigating thermospheric winds. These new values for the energy accommodation coefficient provide a higher consistency among different missions and models. A comparison of neutral densities between current thermosphere models and observations indicates that semi-empirical models such as NRLMSISE -00 and DTM -2013 significantly overestimate the density, and that an overall higher consistency between the observations from the different missions can be achieved with the presented assumptions. The new densities from this work provide consistencies of 4.13 \ % and 3.65 \ % between minimum and maximum mean ratios among the selected missions with NRLMSISE -00 and DTM -2013, respectively. A comparison with the WACCM -X general circulation model is also performed. Similarly to the other models, WACCM -X seems to provide higher estimates of mass density especially under high and moderate solar activities. This work has the objective to guide density data users over the multiple data sets and highlight the remaining uncertainties associated with different GSI models.

Energy ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 143 ◽  
pp. 219-240 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wojciech P. Adamczyk ◽  
Kari Myöhänen ◽  
Ernst-Ulrich Hartge ◽  
Jouni Ritvanen ◽  
Adam Klimanek ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 096973302110032
Author(s):  
Sastrawan Sastrawan ◽  
Jennifer Weller-Newton ◽  
Gabrielle Brand ◽  
Gulzar Malik

Background: In the ever-changing and complex healthcare environment, nurses encounter challenging situations that may involve a clash between their personal and professional values resulting in a profound impact on their practice. Nevertheless, there is a dearth of literature on how nurses develop their personal–professional values. Aim: The aim of this study was to understand how nurses develop their foundational values as the base for their value system. Research design: A constructivist grounded theory methodology was employed to collect multiple data sets, including face-to-face focus group and individual interviews, along with anecdote and reflective stories. Participants and research context: Fifty-four nurses working across various nursing settings in Indonesia were recruited to participate. Ethical considerations: Ethics approval was obtained from the Monash University Human Ethics Committee, project approval number 1553. Findings: Foundational values acquisition was achieved through family upbringing, professional nurse education and organisational/institutional values reinforcement. These values are framed through three reference points: religious lens, humanity perspective and professionalism. This framing results in a unique combination of personal–professional values that comprise nurses’ values system. Values are transferred to other nurses either in a formal or informal way as part of one’s professional responsibility and customary social interaction via telling and sharing in person or through social media. Discussion: Values and ethics are inherently interweaved during nursing practice. Ethical and moral values are part of professional training, but other values are often buried in a hidden curriculum, and attained and activated through interactions during nurses’ training. Conclusion: Developing a value system is a complex undertaking that involves basic social processes of attaining, enacting and socialising values. These processes encompass several intertwined entities such as the sources of values, the pool of foundational values, value perspectives and framings, initial value structures, and methods of value transference.


2014 ◽  
Vol 45 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 1325-1354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emilia Paula Diaconescu ◽  
Philippe Gachon ◽  
John Scinocca ◽  
René Laprise

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document