Skip to main content
Log in

Differences in the Dynamics of the Asymmetrical Part of the Magnetic Disturbance during the Periods of Magnetic Storms Induced by Different Interplanetary Sources

  • Published:
Geomagnetism and Aeronomy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The differences in the dynamics of the asymmetrical part of the geomagnetic disturbance at middle and low latitudes during magnetic storms initiated by different interplanetary sources are analyzed. The analysis is performed with the SYM-H, ASY-H, and Dst indices from the OMNI database during the periods of 58 intense magnetic storms with –270 ≤ Dstmin ≤ –90 nT that were recorded in 1995–2017 and initiated by one of the solar wind structures: compressed corotating interaction regions (CIRs); interplanetary coronal mass ejections (ICMEs) including magnetic clouds (MCs) and Ejecta “pistons”; and compressed Sheath regions in front of ICMEs. The interplanetary sources were identified on the basis of the catalog of large-scale solar-wind phenomena (ftp://ftp.iki.rssi.ru/pub/omni/). A double superposed epoch analysis with reference points at the onset of the storm and during Dstmin was used. It is shown that the ASY-H values during Sheath-driven storms are, on average, 40% higher than for storms of other groups and that the ASY-H maximum occurs ~3 h earlier than Dstmin during Sheath-driven storms and 1–2 h earlier during MC-driven storms, which may indicate a more intense and uneven energy inflow during these periods. It is assumed that this energy inflow may be provided by the proton flux with energies of >10 MeV observed by the GOES geostationary satellites, which increases by more than two orders of magnitude in the intervals of Sheath-driven storms as compared to storms of other groups.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 6.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Akasofu, S.-I., Solar-wind disturbances and the solar wind–magnetosphere energy coupling function, Sol. Space Sci. Rev., 1983, vol. 34, pp. 173–183.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Barkhatov, N.A., Levitin, A.E., and Tserkovnyuk, O.M., Relation of the indices characterizing the symmetric (SYM) and asymmetric (ASY) ring currents to the AE (AU, AL) indices of auroral electrojet activity, Geomagn. Aeron. (Engl. Transl.), 2008, vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 499–503.

  3. Barkhatova, O.M., Nonlinear relationships of auroral (AU, AL) and midlatitude (SYM-H and ASY-H) geomagnetic activity indices in the main phase of magnetic storm, Soln.–Zemnaya Fiz., 2013, vol. 23, pp. 100–108.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Borovsky, J.E. and Denton, M.H., Differences between CME-driven storms and CIR-driven storms, J. Geophys. Res., 2006, vol. 28, pp. 121–190.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Boroyev, R.N., Relationship between substorm activity and the interplanetary medium parameters during the main phase of strong magnetic field, Adv. Space Res., 2019, vol. 63, pp. 302–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Boroyev, R.N. and Vasiliev, M.S., Substorm activity during the main phase of magnetic storms induced by the CIR and ICME events, Adv. Space Res., 2018, vol. 61, pp. 348–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Boroyev, R.N. and Vasiliev, M.S., Relationship of the ASY-H index with interplanetary medium parameters and auroral activity in magnetic storm main phases during CIR and ICME events, Sol.-Terr. Phys., 2020, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 35–40.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bothmer, V., The solar and interplanetary causes of space storms in solar cycle 23, IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., 2004, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 1411–1414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Burton, R.K., McPherron, R.L., and Russell, C.T., An empirical relationship between interplanetary conditions and Dst, J. Geophys. Res., 1975, vol. 80, pp. 4204–4214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Crooker, N.U., Solar and heliospheric geoeffective disturbances, J. Atmos. Sol.-Terr. Phys., 2000, vol. 62, pp. 1071–1085.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Despirak, I.V., Lubchich, A.A., and Kleimenova, N.G., High-latitudes magnetic substorms under different types of the solar wind large-scale structure, Sun Geosphere, 2018, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 57–61.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Dremukhina, L.A., Yermolaev, Yu.I., and Lodkina, I.G., Dynamics of interplanetary parameters and geomagnetic indices during magnetic storms induced by different types of solar wind, Geomagn. Aeron. (Engl. Transl.), 2019, vol. 59, no. 6, pp. 639–650.

  13. Dungey, J.W., Interplanetary magnetic field and the auroral zone, Phys. Rev. Lett., 1961, no. 6, pp. 47–48.

  14. Feldshtein, Ya.I., Dremukhina, L.A., Veshchezerova, U.B., Golyshev, S.A., Kiziriya, L.V., Grafe, A., Modeling the geomagnetic field variation during a strong magnetic storm, Geomagn. Aeron., 1993, vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 58–66.

  15. Feldstein, Ya.I., Levinin, A.E., Golyshev, S.A., Dremukhina, L.A., Vestchezerova, U.B., Valtchuk, T.E., and Grafe, A., Ring current and auroral electrojets in connection with interplanetary medium parameters during magnetic storms, Ann. Geophys., 1994, vol. 12, no. 7, pp. 602–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Gonzalez, W.D. and Echer, E., A study on the peak Dst and peak negative Bz relationship during intense geomagnetic storms, Geophys. Res. Lett., 2005, vol. 32, L18103. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL023486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Gonzalez, W.D., Jozelyn, J.A., Kamide, Y., Kroehl, H.W., Rostoker, G., Tsurutani, B.T., and Vasyliunas, V.M., What is a geomagnetic storm?, J. Geophys. Res., 1994, vol. 899, no. A4, pp. 5771–5777.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gonzalez, W.D., Tsurutani, B.T., and Clua de Gonzalez, A.L., Interplanetary origin of geomagnetic storms, Space Sci. Rev., 1999, vol. 88, pp. 529–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Gosling, J.T. and Pizzo, V.J., Formation and evolution of corotating interaction regions and their three-dimensional structure, Space Sci. Rev., 1999, vol. 89, pp. 21–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Huttinen, K.E.J., Koskinen, H.E.J., Karinen, A., and Mursula, K., Asymmetric development of magnetic storms during magnetic clouds and sheath regions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 2006, vol. 33, L06107. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL024894

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Iyemori, T., Storm-time magnetospheric currents inferred from midlatitude geomagnetic field variation, J. Geomagn. Geoelectr., 1990, vol. 42, pp. 1249–1265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kalegaev, V.V., Dynamical models of the geomagnetic field, Soln.-Zemnaya Fiz., 2010, vol. 16, pp. 60–69.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kane, R.P., How good is the relationship of solar and inter-planetary plasma parameters with geomagnetic storms?, J. Geophys. Res., 2005, vol. 110. doi JA010799https://doi.org/10.1029/2004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kawasaki, K. and Akasofu, S.-I., Low-latitude DS component of geomagnetic storm field, J. Geophys. Res., 1971, vol. 76, pp. 2396–2405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. King, J.H. and Papitashvili, N.E., Solar wind spatial scales in and comparisons of hourly wind and ace plasma and magnetic field data, J. Geophys. Res., 2004, vol. 110, A02209.https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JA010804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Longden, N., Denton, M.H., and Honary, F., Particle precipitation during ICME-driven and CIR-driven geomagnetic storms, J. Geophys. Res., 2008, vol. 113, A06205. https://doi.org/10.1029/2007JA012752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Nikolaeva, N.S., Yermolaev, Yu.I., and Lodkina, I.G., Dependence of geomagnetic activity during magnetic storms on the solar wind parameters for different types of streams: 2. Main phase of storm, Geomagn. Aeron. (Engl. Transl.), 2012a, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 28–36.

  28. Nikolaeva, N.S., Yermolaev, Yu.I., and Lodkina, I.G., Dependence of geomagnetic activity during magnetic storms on the solar wind parameters for different types of streams: 3. Development of storm, Geomagn. Aeron. (Engl. Transl.), 2012b, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 37–48.

  29. Nikolaeva, N.S., Yermolaev, Yu.I., and Lodkina, I.G., Does magnetic storm generation depend on the solar wind type?, Geomagn. Aeron. (Engl. Transl.), 2017, vol. 57, no. 5, pp. 512–518.

  30. Perreault, P. and Akasofu, S.-I., A study of geomagnetic storms, Geophys. J. R. Astron. Soc., 1978, vol. 54, pp. 547–573. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.1978.tb05494.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Plotnikov, I.Y. and Barkova, E.S., Nonlinear dependence of Dst and AE indices on the electric field of magnetic clouds, Adv. Space Res., 2007, vol. 40, pp. 1858–1862.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Pulkkinen, T.I., Partamies, N., Huttunen, K.E.J., Reeves, G.D., and Koskinen, H.E.J., Differences in geomagnetic storms driven by magnetic clouds and ICME sheath regions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 2007, vol. 34, L02105. https://doi.org/10.1029/2006GL027775

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Russell, C.T., McPherron, R.L., and Burton, R.K., On the cause of magnetic storms, J. Geophys. Res., 1974, vol. 79, pp. 1105–1109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Solov’ev, S.I., Boroev, R.N, Baishev, D.G, Makarova, E.S., Moiseev, A.V., Potapov, A.S., Engebretson, M., and Yumoto, K., Development of substorm and low-latitude geomagnetic disturbances during supermagnetic storms of October 29 and 30, 2003 and November 20, 2003, Sol.-Zemnaya Fiz., 2005, vol. 8, pp. 132–134.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Sugiura, M. and Poros, D.J., Hourly values of equatorial Dst for the years 1957 to 1970, Rep. GSFC, Greenbelt, Maryland, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Yermolaev, Yu.I., Yermolaev, M.Yu., Nikolaeva, N.S, and Lodkina, I.G., Statistical investigation of heliospheric conditions resulting in magnetic storms, Cosmic Res., 2007, vol. 45, no. 6, pp. 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Yermolaev, Yu.I., Nikolaeva, N.S., Lodkina, I.G., and Yermolaev, M.Yu., Catalog of large-scale solar wind phenomena during 1976–2000, Cosmic Res., 2009, vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 81–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Yermolaev, Yu.I., Lodkina, I.G., Nikolaeva, N.S., and Yermolaev, M.Yu., Statistical study of interplanetary condition effect on geomagnetic storms, Cosmic Res., 2010a, vol. 48, no. 6, pp. 485–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Yermolaev, Y.I., Nikolaeva, N.S., Lodkina, I.G., and Yermolaev, M.Y., Specific interplanetary conditions for CIR-induced, Sheath-induced, and ICME-induced geomagnetic storms obtained by double superposed epoch analysis, Ann. Geophys., 2010b, vol. 28, pp. 2177–2186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Yermolaev, Yu.I., Lodkina, I.G., Nikolaeva, N.S., and Yermolaev, M.Yu., Statistical study of interplanetary condition effect on geomagnetic storms: 2. Variations of parameters, Cosmic Res., 2011, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 21–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Yermolaev, Y.I., Lodkina, I.G., Nikolaeva, N.S., and Yermolaev, M.Y., Influence of the interplanetary driver type on the durations of the main and recovery phases of magnetic storms, J. Geophys. Res., 2014, vol. 119, no. 10, pp. 8216–8136.https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JA019826

Download references

5. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors are grateful to the anonymous reviewer for helpful comments that have improved the quality of the article. The authors also express gratitude for the possibility to use the OMNI database (http://omniweb.gsfc.nasa.gov).

Funding

This study was funded by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, project no. 19-02-00177a.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to L. A. Dremukhina or Yu. I. Yermolaev.

Additional information

Translated by M. Chubarova

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dremukhina, L.A., Yermolaev, Y.I. & Lodkina, I.G. Differences in the Dynamics of the Asymmetrical Part of the Magnetic Disturbance during the Periods of Magnetic Storms Induced by Different Interplanetary Sources. Geomagn. Aeron. 60, 714–726 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1134/S0016793220060031

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S0016793220060031

Navigation