Chinese Science Bulletin

, Volume 55, Issue 2, pp 179–187 | Cite as

Comparison of a new model with previous models for the low-latitude magnetopause size and shape

  • RuiLin Lin
  • XiaoXin Zhang
  • SiQing Liu
  • YongLi Wang
  • JianCun Gong
Articles Geophysics
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

In this study, the advantages and the limitations of previous low-latitude magnetopause empirical models are discussed. In order to overcome their limitations and inherit their advantages, a new continuous function for the influence of the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) B z on the magnetopause, the Shue model function and the 613 low-latitude magnetopause crossings are used to construct a new low-latitude magnetopause model parameterized by the solar wind dynamic pressure (D p ) and IMF B z . In comparison with the previous low-latitude magnetopause models, it is found that the new model improves the prediction capability and has a large range of validity for the low-latitude magnetopause. In addition, it is also demonstrated that the new model and the previous low-latitude magnetopause models are not appropriate for predicting the high-latitude magnetopause.

Keywords

low-latitude magnetopause size and shape solar wind dynamic pressure interplanetary magnetic field Bz magnetopause model 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Yang Y H, Chao J K, Lin C H, et al. Comparison of three magnetopause prediction models under extreme solar wind conditions. J Geophys Res, 2002, 107, doi:10.1029/2001JA000079Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chapman S, Ferraro V C A. A new theory of magnetic storm. Terr Magn Atmos Electr, 1931, 36: 77–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aubry M P, Russell C T, Kivelson M G. Inward motion of the magnetopause before a substorm. J Geophys Res, 1970, 75: 7018–7031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sibeck D G, Lopez R E, Roelof E C. Solar wind control of the magnetopause shape, location, and motion. J Geophys Res, 1991, 96: 5489–5495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Roelof E C, Sibeck D G. Magnetopause shape as a bivariate function of interplanetary magnetic field B Z and solar wind dynamic pressure. J Geophys Res, 1993, 98: 21421–21450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Petrinec S M, Song P, Russell C T. Solar cycle variations in the size and shape of the magnetopause. J Geophys Res, 1991, 96: 7893–7896CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Petrinec S M, Russell C T. An empirical model of the size and shape of the near-Earth magnetotail. Geophys Res Lett, 1993, 20: 2695–2698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Petrinec S M, Russell C T. Near-Earth magnetotail shape and size as determined from the magnetopause flaring angle. J Geophys Res, 1996, 101: 137–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kuznetsov S N, Suvorova A V. Solar wind control of the magnetopause shape and location. Rad Meas, 1996, 26: 413–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shue J H, Chao J K, Fu H C, et al. A new functional form to study the solar wind control of the magnetopause size and shape. J Geophys Res, 1997, 102: 9497–9511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shue J H, Song P, Russell C T, et al. Magnetopause location under extreme solar wind conditions. J Geophys Res, 1998, 103: 17691–17700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kuznetsov S N, Suvorova A V. An empirical model of the magnetopause for broad ranges of solar wind pressure and IMF B z, Collection in Polar Cap Boundary Phenomena. In: Moen J, ed. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998. 51–61Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kawano H, Petrinec S M, Russell C T, et al. Magnetopause shape determinations from measured position and estimated flaring angle. J Geophys Res, 1999, 104: 247–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kalegaev V V, Lyutov Y G. The solar wind control of the magnetopause. Adv Space Res, 2000, 25: 1489–1492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Boardsen S A, Eastman T E, Sotirelis T, et al. An empirical model of the high-latitude magnetopause. J Geophys Res, 2000, 105: 23193–23219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chao J K, Wu D J, Lin C H, et al. Models for the size and shape of the Earth’s magnetopause and bow shock. In: Lyu L H, ed. Collection in Space Weather Study Using Multipoint Techniques. New York: Pergamon Press, 2002. 127–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shue J H, Song P, Russell C T, et al. Toward predicting the position of the magnetopause within geosynchronous orbit. J Geophys Res, 2000, 105: 2641–2656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fairfield D H. Average and unusual locations of the Earth’s magnetopause and bow shock. J Geophys Res, 1971, 76: 6700–6716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Howe H C Jr, Binsack J H. Explorer 33 and 35 plasma observations of magnetosheath flow. J Geophys Res, 1972, 77: 3334–3344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Holzer R E, Slavin J A. Magnetic flux transfer associated with expansions and contractions of the dayside magnetosphere. J Geophys Res, 1978, 83: 3831–3839CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Formisano V, Domingo V, Wenzel K P. The three-dimensional shape of the magnetopause. Planet Space Sci, 1979, 27: 1137–1149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cao J B, Leonovich A, Zhou G C, et al. A theoretic interpretation of movement of the cusp equatorward boundary. Chin J Space Sci, 2005, 25: 412–417Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shue J H, Russell C T, Song P. Shape of the low-latitude magnetopause: comparison of models. Adv. Space Res, 2000, 25: 1471–1484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Eastman T, Boardsen S A, Chen S H, et al. Configuration of high-latitude and high-altitude boundary layers. J Geophys Res, 2000, 105: 23221–23238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Scurry L, Russell C T. Proxy studies of energy transfer in the magnetosphere. J Geophys Res, 1991, 96: 9541–9548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Šafránková J, Němeček Z, Dušík Š, et al. The magnetopause shape and location: a comparison of the Interball and Geotail observations with models. Ann Geophys, 2002, 20: 301–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zhou X W, Russell C T. The location of the high-latitude polar cusp and the shape of the surrounding magnetopause. J Geophys Res, 1997, 102: 105–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Press W H, Teukolsky S A, Vetterling W T, et al. Numerical Recipes in FORTRAN 77. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992. 650–700Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Science in China Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • RuiLin Lin
    • 1
    • 2
  • XiaoXin Zhang
    • 3
  • SiQing Liu
    • 1
  • YongLi Wang
    • 4
  • JianCun Gong
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Space Science and Applied ResearchChinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina
  2. 2.Graduate University of Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina
  3. 3.National Center for Space WeatherChina Meteorological AdministrationBeijingChina
  4. 4.NASA/Goddard Space Flight CenterGreenbeltUSA

Personalised recommendations