Found 2 results
Filters: Keyword is observations  [Clear All Filters]
Authors: De Pascuale S., Jordanova V K, Goldstein J, Kletzing C A, Kurth W S, et al.
Title: Simulations of Van Allen Probes Plasmaspheric Electron Density Observations
Abstract: We simulate equatorial plasmaspheric electron densities using a physics‐based model (Cold PLasma, CPL; used in the ring current‐atmosphere interactions model) of the source and loss processes of refilling and erosion driven by empirical inputs. The performance of CPL is evaluated against in situ measurements by the Van Allen Probes (Radiation Belt Storm Probes) for two events: the 31 May to 5 June and 15 to 20 January 2013 geomagnetic storms observed in the premidnight and postmidnight magnetic local time (MLT) sectors, respectively. Overall, CPL reproduces the radial extent of the plasmasphere to within a mean absolute difference of urn:x-wiley:jgra:media:jgra54637:jgra54637-math-0001 L. The model electric field responsible for E × B convection and the parameterization of geomagn. . .
Date: 11/2018 Publisher: Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics DOI: 10.1029/2018JA025776 Available at:
More Details
Authors: Goldstein J, De Pascuale S., Kletzing C., Kurth W., Genestreti K. J., et al.
Title: Simulation of Van Allen Probes Plasmapause Encounters
Abstract: We use an E × B-driven plasmapause test particle (PTP) simulation to provide global contextual information for in situ measurements by the Van Allen Probes (RBSP) during 15–20 January 2013. During 120 h of simulation time beginning on 15 January, geomagnetic activity produced three plumes. The third and largest simulated plume formed during enhanced convection on 17 January, and survived as a rotating, wrapped, residual plume for tens of hours. To validate the simulation, we compare its output with RBSP data. Virtual RBSP satellites recorded 28 virtual plasmapause encounters during 15–19 January. For 26 of 28 (92%) virtual crossings, there were corresponding actual RBSP encounters with plasmapause density gradients. The mean difference in encounter time between model and data is. . .
Date: 09/2014 Publisher: Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics DOI: 10.1002/2014JA020252 Available at:
More Details