scholarly journals Geospace storm effects on August 5-6, 2019

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 45-69
Author(s):  
Y. Luo ◽  
◽  
Q. Guo ◽  
Y. Zheng ◽  
K.P. Garmash ◽  
...  

Geospace storms are the synergistically interacting magnetic storms, ionospheric storms, atmospheric storms, and the storms in an electric field of magnetospheric, ionospheric, and atmospheric origins. Geospace storms are very diverse, and no two of them behave exactly the same. Therefore, studying the effects of each new storm becomes an urgent task for us. Such research will reveal both the general laws and individual characteristics of storm processes. The purpose of this paper is to present general information about the geospace storm, the results of the analysis of features of magnetic and ionospheric storms. To analyze the magnetic environment, we used the measurement results of magnetic field fluctuations in the range from 1 s to 1000 s, performed at the Magnetometric Observatory of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, and variations of three components of the geomagnetic field, performed at the Low-frequency observatory of the IRA NASU. We analyzed the ionospheric environment using multi-frequency multi-path measurements performed at Harbin Engineering University (China) and also the data of ionosonde. The main results of the work are as follows. An increase in the main parameters of the solar wind on August 5, 2019, led to a geospace storm, which was mainly observed on August 5 and 6, 2019. The main phase of the magnetic storm took place on August 5, 2019, from 06:00 a.m. to 08:30 a.m. The recovery phase lasted at no less than 4 days. The magnetic storm shows significant variations of all components of the geomagnetic field, and there is an increase by order of magnitude of the oscillations’ level of the geomagnetic field in the range from 400 s to 950 s. During the ionospheric storm, significant disturbances occurred in the F region of the ionosphere. The E-region of the ionosphere remained weakly perturbed. The ionospheric storm has severely affected the Doppler spectra of radio waves in the 5 – 10 MHz frequency range. The Doppler spectra are significantly broadened, and the Doppler frequency shift and its quasi-periodic change with a period of 20–40 minutes and a duration of 120–240 minutes have taken place. The quasi-periodic variations of the Doppler frequency shift are due to quasi-periodic variations in the electron concentration, and the amplitude of their relative perturbations varied from 3% to 16%. On one of these paths, the amplitude of the Doppler frequency shift reached 0.7 Hz. And in this case, the amplitude of the relative perturbations of the electron concentration could reach 80 - 90%. In addition, the ionospheric storm little affected the signal amplitude on most radio paths.

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 326-343
Author(s):  
L. F. Chernogor ◽  
◽  
K. P. Garmash ◽  
Y. H. Zhdanko ◽  
S. G. Leus ◽  
...  

Purpose: Solar eclipses pertain to high-energy sources of disturbance in the subsystems of the Sun–interplanetary-medium–magnetosphere–ionosphere–atmosphere–Earth and the Earth–atmosphere–ionosphere–magnetosphere systems. During the solar eclipse, the coupling between the subsystems in these systems activates, and the parameters of the dynamic processes become disturbed. Investigation of these processes contributes to understanding of the structure and dynamics of the subsystems. The ionospheric response to the solar eclipse depends on the season, local time, magnitude of the solar eclipse, phase of the solar cycle, the observation site, the state of space weather, etc. Therefore, the study of the effects, which each new solar eclipse has on the ionosphere remains an urgent geophysics and radio physics problem. The purpose of this paper is to describe the radio wave characteristics and ionospheric parameters, which accompanied the partial solar eclipse of 10 June 2021 over the City of Kharkiv. Design/methodology/approach: To make observations, the means of the HF Doppler measurements at vertical and oblique incidence available at the V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University Radiophysical Observatory were employed. The data obtained at the “Lviv” Magnetic Observatory were used for making intercomparison. Findings: The radiophysical observations have been made of the dynamic processes acting in the ionosphere during the solar eclipse of 10 June 2021 and on the reference days. The temporal variations in the Doppler frequency shift observed at vertical and oblique radio paths have been found to be, as a whole, similar. Generally speaking, the Doppler spectra over these radio propagation paths were different. Over the oblique radio paths, the number of rays was greater. The solar eclipse was accompanied by wave activity enhancement in the atmosphere and ionosphere. At least three wave trains were observed. The values of the periods (about 5–12 min) and the relative amplitudes of perturbations in the electron density (δN≈0.3–0.6 %) give evidence that the wave disturbances were caused by atmospheric gravity waves. The amplitude of the 6–8-min period geomagnetic variations has been estimated to be 0.5–1 nT. Approximately the same value has been recorded in the X component of the geomagnetic field at the nearest Magnetic Observatory. The aperiodic effect of the solar eclipse has appeared to be too small (less than 0.01 Hz) to be observed confidently. The smallness of the effect was predetermined by an insignificant magnitude of the partial eclipse over the City of Kharkiv (no more than 0.11). Conclusions: The features of the solar eclipse of 10 June 2021 include an insignificant magnitude of the aperiodic effect and an enhancement in wave activity in the atmosphere and ionosphere. Key words: solar eclipse; ionosphere; Doppler spectrum; Doppler frequency shift; electron density; geomagnetic field; atmospheric gravity wave


2021 ◽  
pp. 2000576
Author(s):  
Fuyong Yue ◽  
A. Aadhi ◽  
Riccardo Piccoli ◽  
Vincenzo Aglieri ◽  
Roberto Macaluso ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Jinye Li ◽  
Yuan Yao ◽  
Guozhang Wu ◽  
Jiaqing Hou ◽  
Wenqi Yu ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 3605 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pengcheng Hu ◽  
Yue Wang ◽  
Haijin Fu ◽  
Jinghao Zhu ◽  
Jiubin Tan

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document