Forecasting ionospheric total electron content: a case study of the June 2012 geomagnetic storm X. Meng, A. J. Mannucci, O. P. Verkhoglyadova, and B. T. Tsurutani Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology Copyright 2017. California Institute of Technology. All Rights Reserved.

j p l . n a s a . g o v

Background

•  We have performed forecast-mode ionospheric-thermospheric model runs for 30+ CIR/HSS and CME storms.

•  Models –  Global Ionosphere-Thermosphere Model (GITM) –  Thermosphere Ionosphere Electrodynamics General Circulation Model (TIE-

GCM) –  Coupled Thermosphere Ionosphere Plasmasphere Electrodynamics Model

(CTIPe)

•  Forecast-mode run inputs are predictable: solar wind, F10.7 flux –  60 runs with actual solar wind and forecasted F10.7 (via CCMC) –  20 runs with actual solar wind and actual F10.7 –  More runs planned

LWS TIM 2017 2

j p l . n a s a . g o v

Motivation

LWS TIM 2017 3

•  GITM and TIE-GCM overestimate the June 2012 CIR/HSS storm response in similar regions.

GITM TIE-GCM

GIM: GPS TEC

22UT on 01 July 2012

j p l . n a s a . g o v

Motivation

LWS TIM 2017 4

2012-07-01 22UT Geographic 140°W - 110°W

-90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90Geographic latitude [deg]

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

TEC

[TEC

U]

GIMGITMTIE-GCMQuiet day 06/24

•  Extended equatorial anomaly region

Local time ~ 2PM

j p l . n a s a . g o v

Motivation

LWS TIM 2017 5

GITM

06/24 06/25 06/26 06/27 06/28 06/29 06/30 07/01 07/02 07/030

10

20

30

40

TEC

[TEC

U] Quiet Day 06/24

TIE-GCM

06/24 06/25 06/26 06/27 06/28 06/29 06/30 07/01 07/02 07/030

10

20

30

40

TEC

[TEC

U]

GIM

06/24 06/25 06/26 06/27 06/28 06/29 06/30 07/01 07/02 07/03Date in 2012

0

10

20

30

40

TEC

[TEC

U]

Geographic 140°W - 110°W, 20°S - 40°S

•  Enhanced TEC

storm starts

j p l . n a s a . g o v

Modeling Experiment Set-up

•  GITM Test 1: “quiet” solar wind + actual F10.7

•  GITM Test 2: “quiet” solar wind + “quiet” F10.7

LWS TIM 2017 6

F10.7 for June 2012 event

06/24 06/25 06/26 06/27 06/28 06/29 06/30 07/01 07/02 07/03Date in 2012

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

F10.

7 flu

x [W

/m2 /H

z]

daily

81-day average

quiet F10.7

Bx

By

Bz

Vx

Vy

Vz n

T

AE

SYM-H

j p l . n a s a . g o v

Modeling Experiment Results

LWS TIM 2017 7

GITM

06/24 06/25 06/26 06/27 06/28 06/29 06/30 07/01 07/02 07/030

10

20

30

40TE

C [T

ECU

] Quiet Day 06/24 Test 1: Quiet SW

TIE-GCM

06/24 06/25 06/26 06/27 06/28 06/29 06/30 07/01 07/02 07/030

10

20

30

40

TEC

[TEC

U]

GIM

06/24 06/25 06/26 06/27 06/28 06/29 06/30 07/01 07/02 07/03Date in 2012

0

10

20

30

40

TEC

[TEC

U]

Geographic 140°W - 110°W, 20°S - 40°S

j p l . n a s a . g o v

Modeling Experiment Results

LWS TIM 2017 8

GITM

06/24 06/25 06/26 06/27 06/28 06/29 06/30 07/01 07/02 07/030

10

20

30

40TE

C [T

ECU

] Quiet Day 06/24 Test 1: Quiet SW Test 2: Quiet SW and quiet F10.7

TIE-GCM

06/24 06/25 06/26 06/27 06/28 06/29 06/30 07/01 07/02 07/030

10

20

30

40

TEC

[TEC

U]

GIM

06/24 06/25 06/26 06/27 06/28 06/29 06/30 07/01 07/02 07/03Date in 2012

0

10

20

30

40

TEC

[TEC

U]

Geographic 140°W - 110°W, 20°S - 40°S

j p l . n a s a . g o v

Modeling Experiment Results

LWS TIM 2017 9

2012-07-01 22UT Geographic 140°W - 110°W

-90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90Geographic latitude [deg]

0

10

20

30

40

50

60TE

C [T

ECU

]GIMGITMTIE-GCMQuiet day 06/24

GITM Test 1

j p l . n a s a . g o v

Modeling Experiment Results

LWS TIM 2017 10

2012-07-01 22UT Geographic 140°W - 110°W

-90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90Geographic latitude [deg]

0

10

20

30

40

50

60TE

C [T

ECU

]GIMGITMTIE-GCMQuiet day 06/24

GITM Test 1GITM Test 2

j p l . n a s a . g o v

Questions

•  Model accuracy degrades when solar irradiance is large?

•  Model gets wrong solar irradiance from F10.7?

LWS TIM 2017 11

j p l . n a s a . g o v

Another Test

LWS TIM 2017 12

GITM

06/24 06/25 06/26 06/27 06/28 06/29 06/30 07/01 07/02 07/030

10

20

30

40

TEC

[TEC

U] Test 3: Quiet SW and FISM

Quiet Day 06/24 Test 1: Quiet SW Test 2: Quiet SW and quiet F10.7

TIE-GCM

06/24 06/25 06/26 06/27 06/28 06/29 06/30 07/01 07/02 07/030

10

20

30

40

TEC

[TEC

U]

GIM

06/24 06/25 06/26 06/27 06/28 06/29 06/30 07/01 07/02 07/03Date in 2012

0

10

20

30

40

TEC

[TEC

U]

Geographic 140°W - 110°W, 20°S - 40°S

•  GITM Test 3: Quiet solar wind + Flare Irradiance Spectral Model (FISM)

j p l . n a s a . g o v

Answers

•  Model accuracy degrades when solar irradiance is strong?

Not evident based on GITM experiments

•  Model gets wrong solar irradiance from F10.7? Very likely! F10.7 EUVAC solar flux model GITM/TIE-GCM

LWS TIM 2017 13

[Richards et al., JGR, 1994]

j p l . n a s a . g o v

Discussion and Future Work

•  Modeled TEC response to the June 2012 event depends much more on the F10.7 flux than the interplanetary conditions.

•  The EUVAC solar flux model and/or F10.7 index can fail to provide accurate solar irradiance and induce significant TEC forecast errors.

•  Next steps –  Similar modeling experiments with TIE-GCM. –  Understanding EUVAC model/F10.7 “fail”

LWS TIM 2017 14

j p l . n a s a . g o v

Acknowledgement

•  Living With A Star Targeted Research and Technology NASA/NSF Partnership for Collaborative Space Weather Modeling Program

•  Model developers: A. J. Ridley et al. (GITM), R. G. Roble

et al. (TIE-GCM), T. Fuller-Rowell et al. (CTIPe)

•  CCMC for conducting the TIE-GCM run

LWS TIM 2017 15

jp l .nasa.gov

j p l . n a s a . g o v

Backup I

•  Jason TEC vs. GIM TEC

LWS TIM 2017 17

j p l . n a s a . g o v

Backup II

•  Jason TEC vs. GITM TEC

LWS TIM 2017 18

-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60Latitude [deg]

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

VTEC

[TEC

U]

Jason2 GITM

Around 22UT on 01 July 2012

j p l . n a s a . g o v

Backup III

•  GITM Test 3

LWS TIM 2017 19

2012-07-01 22UT Geographic 140°W - 110°W

-90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90Geographic latitude [deg]

0

10

20

30

40

50

60TE

C [T

ECU

]GIMGITMTIE-GCMQuiet day 06/24

GITM Test 1GITM Test 2GITM Test 3