Izvestiya, Physics of the Solid Earth

, Volume 54, Issue 5, pp 721–740 | Cite as

Geomagnetic and Ionospheric Responses to the Interplanetary Shock Wave of March 17, 2015

  • V. A. Pilipenko
  • M. Bravo
  • N. V. Romanova
  • O. V. Kozyreva
  • S. N. Samsonov
  • Ya. A. Sakharov


The propagation of perturbation caused by the interplanetary shock wave of March 17, 2015 from the solar wind through the magnetosheath, magnetosphere, and ionosphere down to the Earth’s surface is analyzed. The onboard satellite measurements, global magnetometer network data, and records by the receivers of the global positioning system (GPS) providing the information about the total electron content (TEC) of the ionosphere are used for the analysis. By the example of this event, various aspects of the influence of the interplanetary shock wave on the near-Earth environment and ground-based engineering systems are considered. It is shown which effects of this influence are well described by the existing theoretical models and which ones need additional research. The formation of the fine structure of the magnetic impulse of the storm sudden commencement (SC)—the preliminary impulse (PI) and main impulse (MI)—is considered. The MI and compression of the magnetospheric magnetic field is observed by the GOES and RBSP satellites and on the geomagnetically conjugate stations; however, the PI was only noted on the Earth. The PI was detected in the afternoon sector practically simultaneously (within 1 min) with the shock wave impact on the magnetopause. The wave’s response to the SC includes the strongly decaying resonant oscillations of the magnetic shells and the magnetoacoustic cavity mode. This study supports the possibility of detecting the ionospheric response to the SC by the GPS method. The TEC response to the MI was detected in the auroral latitudes although not on every radio path. The TEC modulation can be associated with the precipitation of superthermal electrons into the lower ionosphere which is undetectable by riometers. The burst in the intensity of the geomagnetically induced currents caused by an interplanetary shock wave turns out to be higher than the currents during the storm’s commencement, although the SC’s amplitude is noticeably lower than the amplitude of the magnetic bay related to the substorm.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Afraimovich, E.L., Astafyeva, E.I., Demyanov, V.V., et al., A review of GPS/GLONASS studies of the ionospheric response to natural and anthropogenic processes and phenomena, J. Space Weather Space Clim., 2013, vol. 3, no. A27. doi 10.1051/swsc/2013049Google Scholar
  2. Alperovich, L.S. and Fedorov, E.N., Hydromagnetic Waves in the Magnetosphere and the Ionosphere, Astrophysics and Space Science Library Series, vol. 353, Dordrecht: Springer, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amata, E., Pilipenko, V.A., Pokhotelov, O.A., Troitskaya, V.A., and Shchepetnov, R.V., Psc5 pulsations on geostationary orbit, Geomagn. Aeron., 1986, vol. 26, pp. 283–287.Google Scholar
  4. Araki, T., Global structure of geomagnetic sudden commencements, Planet. Space Sci., 1977, vol. 25, pp. 373–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Araki, T., A Physical Model of the Geomagnetic Sudden Commencement, Engebretson, M.J., Takahashi, K., and Scholer, M., Eds., Solar Wind Sources of Magnetospheric Ultra-Low-Frequency Waves Ser., Washington, DC: AGU, 1994.Google Scholar
  6. Belakhovsky, V., Pilipenko, V., Murr, D., Fedorov, E., and Kozlovsky, A., Modulation of the ionosphere by Pc5 waves observed simultaneously by GPS/TEC and EISCAT, Earth Planets Space, 2016, vol. 68, no. 102. doi 10.1186/s40623-016-0480-7Google Scholar
  7. Beland, J. and Small, K., Space weather effects on power transmission systems: the cases of Hydro-Quebec and Transpower New Zealand Ltd, in Effects of Space Weather on Technology Infrastructure, Eaglis, I.A., Ed., Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2004.Google Scholar
  8. Chi, P.J., Russell, C.T., Raeder, J., et al., Propagation of the preliminary reverse impulse of sudden commencements to low latitudes, J. Geophys. Res., 2001, vol. 106, pp. 18857–18864.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chi, P.J., Lee, D.-H., and Russell, C.T., Tamao travel time of sudden impulses and its relationship to ionospheric convection vortices, J. Geophys. Res., 2006, vol. 111, A08205. doi 10.1029/2005JA011578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Curto, J.J., Araki, T., and Alberca, L.F., Evolution of the concept of sudden storm commencements and their operative identification, Earth Planets Space, 2007, vol. 59, doi 10.1186/BF03352059Google Scholar
  11. Dessler, A.J., Francis, W.E., and Parker, E.N., Geomagnetic storm sudden commencement rise times, J. Geophys. Res., 1960, vol. 65, pp. 2715–2719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Engebretson, M.J., Murr, D.L., Hughes, W.J., et al., A multipoint determination of the propagation velocity of a sudden commencement across the polar ionosphere, J. Geophys. Res., 1999, vol. 104, pp. 22433–22451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fiori, R.A.D., Boteler, D.H., and Gillies, D.M., Assessment of GIC risk due to geomagnetic sudden commencements and identification of the current systems responsible, Space Weather, 2014, vol. 12, pp. 76–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fujita, S., Tanaka, T., Kikuchi, T., Fujimoto, K., Hosokawa, K., and Itonaga, M., A numerical simulation of the geomagnetic sudden commencement: 1. Generation of the field-aligned current associated with the preliminary impulse, J. Geophys. Res., 2003a, vol. 108, p. 1416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fujita, S., Tanaka, T., Kikuchi, T., Fujimoto, K., and Itonaga, M., A numerical simulation of the geomagnetic sudden commencement: 2. Plasma processes in the main impulse, J. Geophys. Res., 2003b, vol. 108, p. 1417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gjerloev, J.W., The SuperMAG data processing technique, J. Geophys. Res., 2012, vol. 117, A09213. doi 10.1029/2012JA017683CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gold, T., Discussion of shock waves in rarefied gases, in Gas Dynamics of Cosmic Clouds: A Symposium Held at Cambridge, England, July 6–11, 1953, Van de Hulst, H.C., Ed., Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1955, pp. 103–105.Google Scholar
  18. Guglielmi, A.V. and Troitskaya, V.A., Geomagnitnye pul’satsii i diagnostika magnitosfery (Geomagnetic Pulsations and Diagnostics of the Magnetosphere), Moscow: Nauka, 1973.Google Scholar
  19. Jayachandran, P.T., Watson, C., Rae, I.J., et al., High-latitude GPS TEC changes associated with a sudden magnetospheric compression, Geophys. Rev. Lett., 2011, vol. 38, L23104. GL050041. doi 10.1029/2011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jin, Y., Zhou, X., Moen, J.I., and Hairston, M., The auroral ionosphere TEC response to an interplanetary shock, Geophys. Rev. Lett., 2016, vol. 43, pp. 1810–1818.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kanekal, S.G., Baker, D.N., Fennell, J.F., et al., Prompt acceleration of magnetospheric electrons to ultra-relativistic energies by the 17 March 2015 interplanetary shock, J. Geophys. Res., 2016, vol. 121, pp. 7622–7635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kappenman, J.G., Storm sudden commencement events and the associated geomagnetically induced current risks to ground-based systems at low-latitude and mid-latitude locations, Space Weather, 2003, vol. 1, p. 1016. doi 10.1029/2003SW000009Google Scholar
  23. Kappenman, J.G., Great geomagnetic storms and extreme impulsive geomagnetic field disturbance events—an analysis of observational evidence including the great storm of May 1921, Adv. Space Res., 2006, vol. 38, pp. 188–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kikuchi, T., Transmission line model for the near-instantaneous transmission of the ionospheric electric field and currents to the equator, J. Geophys. Res., 2014, vol. 119, pp. 1131–1156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kikuchi, T. and Araki, T., Transient response of uniform ionosphere and preliminary reverse impulse of geomagnetic storm sudden commencement, J. Atmos. Terr. Phys., 1979, vol. 41, pp. 917–925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Klibanova, Yu.Yu., Mishin, V.V., and Tsegmed, B., Specific features of daytime long-period pulsations observed during the solar wind impulse against a background of the substorm of August 1, 1998, Cosmic Res., 2014, vol. 52, no. 6, pp. 421–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Knipp, D.J., Synthesis of geomagnetically induced currents: commentary and research, Space Weather, 2015, vol. 13, pp. 727–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kozyreva, O.V., Pilipenko, V.A., Engebretson, M.J., Klimushkin, D.Yu., and Mager, P.N., Correspondence between the ULF wave power distribution and auroral oval, Sol.-Terr. Phys., 2016, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 46–65. doi 10.12737/20999Google Scholar
  29. Kurazhkovskaya, N.A. and Klain, B.I., Geomagnetic (MIE) and storm sudden commencement (SSC) impulse s in a high-latitude magnetosphere, Geomagn. Aeron., 2016, vol. 56, no. 1, pp. 30–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lee, D.-H. and Hudson, M.K., Numerical studies on the propagation of sudden impulses in the dipole magnetosphere, J. Geophys. Res., 2001, vol. 106, pp. 8435–8446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lysak, R.L. and Lee D., The response of the dipole magnetosphere to pressure pulse, Geophys. Rev. Lett., 1992, vol. 19, pp. 937–940.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Marsal, S., Torta, J.M., Segarra, A., and Araki, T., Use of spherical elementary currents to map the polar current systems associated with the geomagnetic sudden commencements on 2013 and 2015 St patrick’s Day storms, J. Geophys. Res., 2017, vol. 122, pp. 194–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nakariakov, V.M., Pilipenko, V.A., Heilig, B., et al., Magnetohydrodynamic oscillations in the solar corona and Earth’s magnetosphere: towards consolidated understanding, Space Sci. Rev., 2016, vol. 200, pp. 75–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nishida, A., Ionospheric screening effect and storm sudden commencement, J. Geophys. Res., 1964, vol. 69, pp. 1861–1874.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nishimura, Y., Kikuchi, T., Ebihara, Y., Yoshikawa, A., Imajo, S., Li, W., and Utada, H., Evolution of the current system during solar wind pressure pulses based on aurora and magnetometer observations, Earth, Planets Space, 2016, vol. 68, p. 144. doi 10.1186/s40623-016-0517-yCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Oliveira, D.M. and Raeder, J., Impact angle control of interplanetary shock geoeffectiveness, J. Geophys. Res., 2014, vol. 119, pp. 8188–8201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pallocchia, G., Samsonov, A.A., Bavassano Cattaneo, M.B., et al., Interplanetary shock transmitted into the Earth’s magnetosheath: cluster and double star observations, Ann. Geophys., 2010, vol. 28, pp. 1141–1156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Parkhomov, V.A., Oscillatory structure of the preliminary burst of storm sudden commencement, Geomagn. Aeron., 1990, vol. 30, pp. 210–215.Google Scholar
  39. Parkhomov, V.A., Borodkova, N.L., Yakhnin, A.G., et al., Global impulse burst of geomagnetic pulsations in the frequency range 0.2–5 Hz as a precursor of sudden commencement of St. Patrick’s Day 2015 geomagnetic storm, Cosmic Res., 2017, vol. 55, no. 5, pp. 307–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Piersanti, M., Cesaroni, C., Spogli, L., et al., Validation of the inferred ionospheric currents during a Sudden Impulse with GNSS TEC data over Italy, Proc. EGU General Assembly, 2016, p. 1451.Google Scholar
  41. Pilipenko, V., Belakhovsky, V., Murr, D., Fedorov, E., and Engebretson, M., Modulation of TEC/GPS by ULF Pc5 waves, Proc. XXXVI Annual Seminar “Physics of Auroral Phenomena,” Apatity, 2013, pp. 77–80.Google Scholar
  42. Ridley, A.J., Zeeuw, D.L., Manchester, W.B., and Hansen, K.C., The magnetospheric and ionospheric response to a very strong interplanetary shock and coronal mass ejection, Adv. Space Res., 2006, vol. 38, pp. 263–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rodger, C.J., Clilverd, M.A., Kavanagh, A.J., Watt, C.E.J., Verronen, P.T., and Raita, T., Contrasting the responses of three different ground-based instruments to energetic electron precipitation, Radio Sci., 2012, vol. 47. doi 10.1029/2011RS004971Google Scholar
  44. Safargaleev, V., Kozlovsky, A., Honary, F., Voronin, A., and Turunen, T., Geomagnetic disturbances on ground associated with particle precipitation during SC, Ann. Geophys., 2010, vol. 28, pp. 247–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Safrankova, J., Nemecek, Z., Prech, L., Samsonov, A.A., Koval, A., and Andreeova, K., Modification of interplanetary shocks near the bow shock and through the magnetosheath, J. Geophys. Res., 2007, vol. 112, A08212. doi 10.1029/2007JA012503Google Scholar
  46. Sakharov, Ya.A., Danilin, A.N., Ostafiychuk, R.M., Katkalov, Yu.V., and Kudryashova, N.V., Geomagnetically induced currents in the power systems of the Kola peninsula at solar minimum. Proc. 8th Int. Symp. on Electromagnetic Compatibility and Electromagnetic Ecology, St-Petersburg, 2009, pp. 237–238.Google Scholar
  47. Samsonov, A.A., Sibeck, D.G., and Imber, J., MHD simulation for the interaction of an interplanetary shock with the Earth’s magnetosphere, J. Geophys. Res., 2007, vol. 112, A12220. doi 10.1029/2007JA012627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Samsonov, A.A., Sibeck, D.G., and Yu, Y., Transient changes in magnetospheric-ionospheric currents caused by the passage of an interplanetary shock: northward interplanetary magnetic field case, J. Geophys. Res., 2010, A05207. doi 10.1029/2009JA014751Google Scholar
  49. Samsonov, A.A., Sibeck, D.G., Zolotova, N.V., Biernat, H.K., Chen, S.-H., Rastaetter, L., Singer, H.J., and Baumjohann, W., Propagation of a sudden impulse through the magnetosphere initiating magnetospheric Pc5 pulsations, J. Geophys. Res., 2011, vol. 116, A10216. doi 10.1029/2011JA016706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Seemala, G.K. and Valladares, C.E., Statistics of total electron content depletions observed over the South American continent for the year 2008, Radio Sci., 2011, vol. 46, RS5019. doi 10.1029/2011RS004722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sun, T.R., Wang, C., Li, H., and Guo, X.C., Nightside geosynchronous magnetic field response to interplanetary shocks: model results, J. Geophys. Res., 2011, vol. 116, A04216. doi 10.1029/2010JA016074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sun, T.R., Wang, C., Zhang, J.J., Pilipenko, V.A., Wang, Y., and Wang, J.Y., The chain response of the magnetospheric and ground magnetic field to interplanetary shocks, J. Geophys. Res., 2015, vol. 120, pp. 157–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Tamao, T., The structure of three-dimensional hydromagnetic waves in a uniform cold plasma, J. Geomagn. Geoelectr., 1964, vol. 16, pp. 89–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Vorontsova, E., Pilipenko, V., Fedorov, E., Sinha, A.K., and Vichare, G., Modulation of total electron content by global Pc5 waves at low latitudes, Adv. Space Res., 2016, vol. 57, pp. 309–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wang, Y., et al., On the propagation of a geoeffective coronal mass ejection during 15–17 March 2015, J. Geophys. Res., 2016, vol. 121, pp. 7423–7434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Waters, C.L. and Cox, S.P., ULF wave effects on high frequency signal propagation through the ionosphere, Ann. Geophys., 2009, vol. 27, pp. 2779–2788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Watson, C., Jayachandran, P.T., Singer, H.J., Redmon, R.J., and Danskin, D., Large-amplitude GPS TEC variations associated with Pc5–6 magnetic field variations observed on the ground and at geosynchronous orbit, J. Geophys. Res., 2015, vol. 120. doi 10.1002/2015JA021517Google Scholar
  58. Wedeken, U., Voelker, H., Knott, K., and Lester, M., Sscexcited pulsations recorded near noon on GEOS-2 and on the ground (CDAW 6), J. Geophys. Res., 1986, vol. 91, pp. 3089–3100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Yumoto, K., Isono, A., Shiokawa, K., Matsuoka, H., Tanaka, Y., Menk, F.W., and Fraser, B.J., Global cavity mode-like and localized field-line Pc3–4 oscillations stimulated by interplanetary impulses (SI/SC): initial results from the 210° MM magnetic observations, in Solar Wind Sources of Magnetospheric ULF Waves, Engebretson, M. J., Takahashi, K., and Scholer, M. Eds., AGU, 1994, pp. 335–344.Google Scholar
  60. Yumoto, K., Pilipenko, V., Fedorov, E., Kurneva, N.De., and Lauretis, M., Magnetospheric ULF wave phenomena stimulated by SSC, J. Geomagn. Geoelectr., 1997, vol. 49, pp. 1179–1195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Zhang, J.J., Wang, C., Sun, T.R., Liu, C.M., and Wang, K.R., GIC due to storm sudden commencement in low-latitude high-voltage power network in China: observation and simulation, Space Weather, 2015, vol. 13, pp. 643–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Zou, S., Ozturk, D., Varney, R., and Reimer, A., Effects of sudden commencement on the ionosphere: PFISR observations and global MHD simulation, Geophys. Rev. Lett., 2017, vol. 44. doi 10.1002/2017GL072678Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • V. A. Pilipenko
    • 1
  • M. Bravo
    • 2
  • N. V. Romanova
    • 2
  • O. V. Kozyreva
    • 3
  • S. N. Samsonov
    • 4
  • Ya. A. Sakharov
    • 5
  1. 1.Space Research InstituteRussian Academy of SciencesMoscowRussia
  2. 2.Universidad de Santiago de ChileSantiagoChile
  3. 3.Schmidt Institute of Physics of the EarthRussian Academy of SciencesMoscowRussia
  4. 4.Shafer Institute of Cosmophysical Research and Aeronomy, Siberian BranchRussian Academy of SciencesYakutskRussia
  5. 5.Polar Geophysical InstituteRussian Academy of SciencesApatityRussia

Personalised recommendations