3d curvature determination for the bastille interplanetary ...€¦ · originally scheduled as a...
TRANSCRIPT
3D curvature determination for the BastilleInterplanetary Shock:
Multi-Satellite Triangulation
T. Terasawa1, S. Kawada1, F. M. Ipavich2, C. W. Smith3, R. P. Lepping4, J. King4, A. J. Lazarus5, and K. I. Paularena5
1 U of Tokyo, 2 U of Maryland, 3 Bartol Res. Inst., U of Delaware, 4 GSFC/NASA, 5 MIT
Originally scheduled as a poster (abstract, page 20),then moved to the oral session 20 March, AM by LOC.
The shock normal direction…...important basic information describing the shock properties
Determination of the shock normal:conceptually simple, but not straightforward in reality
→ e.g., Russell et al.(2000) JGR 105, 25143-
For example,it is believed that the acceleration process ofelectrons emitting type II radio bursts dependscritically on the shock angle.
Determination of the shock normal direction
Trace image
flare/CME shock arrival
The Bastille day flare in 2000 …. IPS arrived on the next day(average speed … 1AU/28hours ~ 1500 km/s)
Lessons from the study of the Bastille IP shock … ACE, SOHO,WIND,GEOTAIL and IMP-8 were all in the upstream solar wind!
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
-150
300 250 200 150 100 50 0 -50
ACE
SOHO WIND
GEOTAIL
IMP-8
EarthY
gse
(Re)
-50
0
50
300 250 200 150 100 50 0 -50
ACE SOHO
G
8
W
Zgse
(Re)
Xgse (Re)
solar wind
satelliteconstellation
on 15 July 2000
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
-150
300 250 200 150 100 50 0 -50
ACE
SOHO WIND
GEOTAIL
IMP-8
EarthY
gse
(Re)
-50
0
50
300 250 200 150 100 50 0 -50
ACE SOHO
G
8
W
Zgse
(Re)
Xgse (Re)
solar wind
We are going to show the results of
satelliteconstellation
on 15 July 2000
1. The conventional methods based on the single satelliteobservation (minimum variance, etc.)2. 4-satellite method for the plane surface model3. 5-satellite method for the spherical surface model4. 5-satellite method for the plane surface model withconstant dVshock/dt (time derivative of the shock speed)
60
50
40
30
20
10
060
50
40
30
20
10
060
50
40
30
20
10
0
14:00 14:3013:3013:00 15:00 15:30 16:00
ACE
WIND
GEOTAIL
Btot
[nT]
the Bastielle interplanetary shock on 15 July 20003 of 5 satellites gave the magnetic field data
● magnetic minimum variance/Geotail: nG = (-0.82, +0.42,+0.39) phi~153o , theta~23o
● WIND best fit (Lepping et al., 2001, Solar Phys. 204, 287): nw = (-0.93, +0.26,+0.26) phi~164o , theta~15o
local determination of the shock normal direction
nw and nG agree(they make an angle ~ 13o
which is within a typical error range.)
The conventional methods give consistent answers:
W
G
phi (longitudinal angle)
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
-150
300 250 200 150 100 50 0 -50
ACE
SOHO WIND
GEOTAIL
IMP-8
Earth
Ygs
e (R
e)
-50
0
50
300 250 200 150 100 50 0 -50
ACE SOHO
G
8
W
Zgse
(Re)
Xgse (Re)
satelliteconstellation
on 15 July 2000and
shock arrival times
SOHO and IMP8gave the plasma data.(IMP8 magnetometer was not working during this event, unfortunately.)
4 satellites determine shock parameters if the shock has a plane surface.
IPS
velocity ~ Vs (constant)
direction ~ n
S1
S2
S3
S4
plane surface model
Russell et al., 1983; Horbury, Invited talk on the first day
shock normal direction (phi, theta)
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
175170165160155150145
GTL MVM WIND
with planer shock assumption A-S-G-W A-S-8-W A-S-G-8 S-G-8-W A-G-8-W
theta_n
phi_n
4-satellite method for plane shocks
Best fit normals by conventional methods
plane surface model--- results
longitudinal angle
latitudinalangle
The result with the largestdeparture from theconventional methods doesnot depend on the IMP8timing uncertainly.
spherical surface modelformulation (1)
Rc(t) = Rc0 + Vs・t
(Xc,Yc,Zc)
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
center
5-satellite method for spherical shocks
5-satellite method for spherical shocks
spherical surface modelformulation (1)
Rc(t) = Rc0 + Vs・t
(Xc,Yc,Zc)
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
center
Rc0 + Vs t1 = [ (X1-Xc)2 + (Y1-Yc)2 + (Z1-Zc)2]1/2
Rc0 + Vs t2 = [ (X2-Xc)2 + (Y2-Yc)2 + (Z2-Zc)2]1/2
Rc0 + Vs t3 = [ (X3-Xc)2 + (Y3-Yc)2 + (Z3-Zc)2]1/2
Rc0 + Vs t4 = [ (X4-Xc)2 + (Y4-Yc)2 + (Z4-Zc)2]1/2
Rc0 + Vs t5 = [ (X5-Xc)2 + (Y5-Yc)2 + (Z5-Zc)2]1/2
five unknowns (Rc0, Vs, Xc, Yc, Zc) and five equations
→ solvable (We need iterations to treat nonlinearity of Vs)
Let us take the S1 position as the origin of the new coordinate.Then we have,
Rc0 = [ Xc2 + Yc2 + Zc2]1/2 (1)Rc0 + Vs (t2 - t1) = [ (X2-Xc)2 + (Y2-Yc)2 + (Z2-Zc)2]1/2 (2)Rc0 + Vs (t3 - t1) = [ (X3-Xc)2 + (Y3-Yc)2 + (Z3-Zc)2]1/2 (3)Rc0 + Vs (t4 - t1) = [ (X4-Xc)2 + (Y4-Yc)2 + (Z4-Zc)2]1/2 (4)Rc0 + Vs (t5 - t1) = [ (X5-Xc)2 + (Y5-Yc)2 + (Z5-Zc)2]1/2 (5)
From (2)~(5), we have a set of nonlinear equations, X2Xc+Y2Yc+Z2Zc+Vs (t2 - t1) Rc0 = [ X2
2+Y22+Z2
2 - Vs2 (t2 - t1)2 ]/2 (2’) X3Xc+Y3Yc+Z3Zc+Vs (t3 - t1) Rc0 = [ X3
2+Y32+Z3
2 - Vs2 (t3 - t1)2 ]/2 (3’) X4Xc+Y4Yc+Z4Zc+Vs (t4 - t1) Rc0 = [ X4
2+Y42+Z4
2 - Vs2 (t4 - t1)2 ]/2 (4’) X5Xc+Y5Yc+Z5Zc+Vs (t5 - t1) Rc0 = [ X5
2+Y52+Z5
2 - Vs2 (t5 - t1)2 ]/2 (5’)
Note that if we fix Vs (2’)~(5’) are linear with respect to (Xc,Yc,Zc,Rc0).Our procedure is, therefore, (a) Solve (2’)~(5’) for a trial value of Vs, and obtain (Xc,Yc,Zc,Rc0). (b) Search Vs so that [Xc2 + Yc2 + Zc2]1/2 - Rc0 =0 is satisfied.
spherical surface modelformulation (2)
shock normal direction (phi, theta)
Best fit normals by conventional methods
longitudinal angle
latitudinalangle
plane surface model + spherical surface model70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
175170165160155150145
GTL MVM WIND
with planer shock assumption A-S-G-W A-S-8-W A-S-G-8 S-G-8-W A-G-8-W
theta_n
phi_n
4-satellite method for plane shocks
5-satellite method(shock normal at the GEOTAIL position)
spherical surface modelshock normal direction
We have set the IMP8 timing correction at -20 secso as to make the shock normal direction consistent with thoseby the conventionalmethods.
180
165
150
135
120
105
90-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60
WIND
Geotail MVM
���������������
lon
gitu
dina
l ang
le
of th
e sh
ock
norm
al v
ecto
rr
90
75
60
45
30
15
0-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60
uncertainty in IMP-8 timing (sec)
Geotail MVM
WIND��������������
l
atitu
dina
l ang
le o
fth
e sh
ock
norm
al v
ecto
rr
correction for IMP-8 timing (sec)
phi
theta ±22sec
Shock normal directiondepends on the choiceof the timing correctionsfor the IMP-8 data.
spherical surface model --- Rc and Vs
-1000
-500
0
500
1000
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60
uncertainty in IMP-8 timing (sec)
V
s (km
/s)
shoc
k ve
loci
tyw
ithin
the
eclip
tic p
lane convex
concave
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60
Rs
(AU
)ra
dius
of t
he c
urve
d
shoc
k su
rfac
e
Vs<0
Vs>0
Vs (projected tothe ecliptic plane)
Rc AU
Curvature radiusof the shock surface
correction for IMP-8 timing (sec)
shock speed
If the shock surface is spherical …. 5 satellites needed
spherical surface modelformulation (1)
Rc(t) = Rc0 + Vs・t
(Xc,Yc,Zc)
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
center
However, we should also take into account of the casewhere the center is outside of 1AU and Vs<0,namely the shock has a concave shape shrinking in time.
Initially we expect that the center is inside of 1AU and Vs>0,namely the shock has a convex shape expanding in time.
spherical surfacemodel --- result
spherical surface model
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
-150
300 250 200 150 100 50 0 -50
ACE
SOHO WIND
GEOTAIL
IMP-8
EarthYg
se (R
e)
-50
0
50
300 250 200 150 100 50 0 -50
ACE SOHO
G
8
W
Zgse
(Re)
Xgse (Re)
~1100 km/s(shock speed projected to the ecliptic plane)
solar wind
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
-150
300 250 200 150 100 50 0 -50
ACE
SOHO WIND
GEOTAIL Earth
Ygse
(Re)
Split plane shock model
splitting time correctionfor shock arrival times
at SOHO and GEOTAIL
An artificial model: split plane surface model
Choose the best splitting time:… agree with results from the conventional methods (WIND best fit,
Geotail MVM)
split plane surface model --- solution
200
180
160
140-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30
longitudinal angle ofthe shock normal vector
��
908070605040302010
0-10-20-30-40-50-60
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30time shifted (sec)
concave convex
split plane shock model Geotail MVM WIND best fit
latitudinal angle ofthe shock normal vector
�
Splitting time correction (sec)
delay advance
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
-150
300 250 200 150 100 50 0 -50
ACE
SOHO WIND
GEOTAIL Earth
Ygse
(Re)
Split plane shock model
4-satellite methodSplit plane surface model
split plane surface model vs. spherical surface model
5-satellite methodspherical surface model
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
-150
300 250 200 150 100 50 0 -50
ACE
SOHO WIND
GEOTAIL
IMP-8
Earth
Ygs
e (R
e)
These two results seem to be not inconsistent.
A : Leading edgeB : Core 1C : Core 2 A
B
C
10:54 11:54
18 Jan 2000 CME SOHO/LASCO
Ahead of such a concaved-shape CME, the shock may also have a concave shape locally.
It may not be so crazy to think of a concaved-shape IPS:
Question to solar radio astronomers:Are there any peculiar type-II bursts relating toconcaved shocks?
5 satellites determine shock parameters if the shock hasa plane surface.
IPS
velocity ~ Vs = Vs0 + a・ t (a: constant)
direction ~ n
plane surface model with constant dVs/dt
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
Physically unacceptable result:IPS was accelerated from
660 km/s (at ACE) to1330 km/s (at WIND)
Summary and comments・We have formulated a 5-satellite method in which the shockcurvature is derived from shock arrival times at these satellites.・The method is applied to obtain the curvature radius of the Bastilleinterplanetary shock in 2000.・This Bastille IPS seems to have had a concave shape locally when itarrived at the near-earth environment.
Application of the 5-satellite method: STEREO + 3 other spacecraft
possible Japan’s contribution to STEREO (in addition to the Solar-B collaboration)
around Earth … GEOTAIL(1992-?), SELENE (2005-)around Mars … NOZOMI (orbit insertion in Jan 2004)