Engineering topics

Gordeev, E.

Publications and source records attributed to Gordeev, E..

2 records

NASA NTRS2017

The Substorm Cycle as Reproduced by Global MHD Models

Recently, Gordeev et al. (2015) suggested a method to test global MHD models against statistical empirical data. They showed that four community-available global MHD models supported by the Community Coordinated Modeling Center (CCMC) produce a reasonable agreement with reality for those key parameters (the magnetospheric size, magnetic field, and pressure) that are directly related to the large-scale equilibria in the outer magnetosphere. Based on the same set of simulation runs, here we investigate how the models reproduce the global loading-unloading cycle. We found that in terms of global magnetic flux transport, three examined CCMC models display systematically different response to idealized2 h north then 2 h south interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) Bz variation. The LFM model shows a depressed return convection and high loading rate during the growth phase as well as enhanced return convection and high unloading rate during the expansion phase, with the amount of loaded unloaded magnetotail flux and the growth phase duration being the closest to their observed empirical values during isolated substorms. Two other models exhibit drastically different behavior. In the BATS-R-US model the plasma sheet convection shows a smooth transition to the steady convection regime after the IMF southward turning. In the Open GGCM a weak plasma sheet convection has comparable intensities during both the growth phase and the following slow unloading phase. We also demonstrate potential technical problem in the publicly available simulations which is related to post processing interpolation and could affect the accuracy of magnetic field tracing and of other related procedures.

Gordeev, E.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Do We Know the Actual Magnetopause Position for Typical Solar Wind Conditions?

We compare predicted magnetopause positions at the subsolar point and four reference points in the terminator plane obtained from several empirical and numerical MHD (magnetohydrodynamics) models. Empirical models using various sets of magnetopause crossings and making different assumptions about the magnetopause shape predict significantly different magnetopause positions (with a scatter greater than 1 Earth radius (R (sub E)) even at the subsolar point. Axisymmetric magnetopause models cannot reproduce the cusp indentations or the changes related to the dipole tilt effect, and most of them predict the magnetopause closer to the Earth than non axisymmetric models for typical solar wind conditions and zero tilt angle. Predictions of two global non axisymmetric models do not match each other, and the models need additional verification. MHD models often predict the magnetopause closer to the Earth than the non axisymmetric empirical models, but the predictions of MHD simulations may need corrections for the ring current effect and decreases of the solar wind pressure that occur in the foreshock. Comparing MHD models in which the ring current magnetic field is taken into account with the empirical Lin et al. model, we find that the differences in the reference point positions predicted by these models are relatively small for B (sub z) equals 0 (note: B (sub z) is when the Earth's magnetic field points north versus Sun's magnetic field pointing south). Therefore, we assume that these predictions indicate the actual magnetopause position, but future investigations are still needed.

Samsonov, A. A.↗