Search NASASearch

Engineering topics

Denny M. Oliveira

Publications and source records attributed to Denny M. Oliveira.

Geoeffectiveness of Interplanetary Shocks Controlled By Impact Angles: Past Research, Recent Advancements, and Future Work

Interplanetary shocks are disturbances commonly observed in the solar wind. IP shock impacts can cause a myriad of space weather effects in the Earth’s magnetopause, inner magnetosphere, ionosphere, thermosphere, and ground magnetic field. The shock impact angle, measured as the angle the shock normal vector performs with the Sun-Earth line, has been shown to be a very important parameter that controls shock geoeffectivess. An extensive review provided by Oliveira and Samsonov (2018) summarized all the work known at the time with respect to shock impact angles and geomagnetic activity; however, this topic has had some progress since Oliveira and Samsonov (2018) and the main goal of this mini review is to summarize all achievements to date in the topic to the knowledge of the author. Finally, this mini review also brings a few suggestions and ideas for future research in the area of IP shock impact angle geoeffectiveness.

interplanetary shocks

Editorial: Understanding the Causes of Asymmetries in Earth’S Magnetosphere-Ionosphere System

Geomagnetic activity observed in geospace, the upper atmosphere, and on the ground results from solar-terrestrial interactions. Such interactions correspond to the coupling between the solar wind, magnetosphere, and the thermosphere-ionosphere (MIT) system (Khazanov, 2016). However, given the complexity of the whole system and its large spatial scale and long-term solar variability, effects resulting from this coupling can be asymmetric. For example, inter-hemispherical asymmetric responses can arise when a hemisphere receives more energy than the other (e.g., Knipp et al., 2021; Pakhotin et al., 2021), local time effects can take place due to the occurrence of intense dawn-dusk interplanetary electric fields (e.g.,Haaland et al., 2017), and asymmetric geomagnetic field and mapping are caused by the Earth’s dipole offset and tilt (e.g., Laundal et al., 2017). The drivers that generate asymmetric MIT coupling response are generally recognized as long term: solar activity (Zhang et al., 2022) and dipole offset and tilt (Laundal et al., 2017); middle term: seasons (Lu et al., 2010); and short term: the y and z components of the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) (Cowley, 1981; Li et al., 2011; Knipp et al., 2021). Thermospheric neutral mass density can present local time asymmetries associated with IMF By (Forster et al., 2017), and inter-hemispheric asymmetries can be generated by cross-hemispheric propagation of large-scale gravity waves (Bruinsma and Forbes, 2007). In addition, forcing from the mesosphere and lower thermosphere can generate inter-hemispheric neutral wind asymmetric patterns that can in turn asymmetrically impact neutral density in different hemispheres (Stober et al., 2021).

magnetosphere-ionophere coupling

Investigation of the Differences in Onset Times for Magnetically Conjugate Magnetometers

We have identified nearly 1,000 onsets using two pairs of hemispheric conjugate ground magnetometers where the onset is defined based on a sharp decline in the H component of the magnetic field at a ground magnetometer station. Specifically, we used the pair of stations at West Antarctica Ice Sheet Divide and Sanikiluaq, Canada; Syowa, Antarctica; and Tjörnes, Iceland. While the onset time in the southern hemisphere is identified by eye, the value of the differences in the onset time between the northern and southern hemispheres is determined using cross covariance. We observe differences in the onset time between the two hemispheres as large as several minutes, but 53% of the events show no difference in the onset time. Using statistics, we show that the largest differences in onset time are associated with the summer and winter seasons and when the IMF By value is limited between 0.5 and 2.5 nT, which is the IMF By range when the local time difference between the northern and southern hemisphere foot points is the smallest. The results indicate that ionospheric conductivity associated with solar illumination plays a role in the differences in onset time between the northern and southern hemisphere when only non-zero differences in onset time are considered. We validate these results with two other less robust methods. The median value of the differences in onset time indicates that the onsets occur ∼23 s earlier in the winter hemisphere than that in the summer hemisphere. It has been reported that the time difference between the start of the substorm in the magnetotail and the observed auroral break up (substorm auroral onset) in the ionosphere is 30 s to 2 min in the current disruption model and the near earth neutral line model, respectively. Our results may be of interest to those two models.

James M. Weygand