1 / 18

아리랑 위성 1 호 (KOMPSAT-1) 궤도 변화와 우주환경 변화 비교

아리랑 위성 1 호 (KOMPSAT-1) 궤도 변화와 우주환경 변화 비교. 박진영 1,2 , 문용재 2 , 조경석 2 , 김해동 3 , 김관혁 2 , 김연한 2 , 박영득 2 , 이유 1 1 충남대학교 , 2 한국천문연구원 , 3 한국항공우주연구원 2006 년 2 월 9 일 “ 태양 - 지구 - 행성계 우주환경 ” workshop. Contents. 1. Introduction 2. Analysis of KOMPSAT-1 Drag data

denzel
Download Presentation

아리랑 위성 1 호 (KOMPSAT-1) 궤도 변화와 우주환경 변화 비교

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 아리랑 위성 1호(KOMPSAT-1)궤도 변화와 우주환경 변화 비교 박진영1,2, 문용재2, 조경석 2,김해동3, 김관혁 2, 김연한 2,박영득 2, 이유1 1충남대학교, 2한국천문연구원, 3한국항공우주연구원 2006년 2월 9일 “태양-지구-행성계 우주환경”workshop

  2. Contents 1. Introduction 2. Analysis of KOMPSAT-1 Drag data 3. MSISE-90 density vs estimated density 4. Summary 5. Future work

  3. Space Environment Variations Sun Coronal Mass Ejections Soft X-ray fluxes Energetic Charged Particles Coronal Holes EUV fluxes (10.7 cm flux) Geomagnetic Field Neutral Atmosphere Density Radiation Environment Ionosphere Effects on Satellites

  4. Space Environment Variations Sun Coronal Mass Ejections 2~3 day ~ 8 min Soft X-ray fluxes Energetic Charged Particles Coronal Holes F10.7 EUV fluxes (10.7 cm flux) Dst, PC, Ap Geomagnetic Field Neutral Atmosphere Density Radiation Environment Ionosphere Effects on Satellites

  5. Two key sources of atmospheric heating Solar radiation (80%) F10.7 Joule heating (20%) Dst, PC Upper Atmosphere Solar EUV radiation is the single largest contributor to the upper atmospheric heating budget (Knipp, 2002)

  6. Two key sources of atmospheric heating during extreme events Solar radiation Joule Heating (~50%) Upper Atmosphere Geomagnetic heating constituted approximately 50% of the energy budget (Knipp, 2002)

  7. Drag acceleration equation drag coefficient total density direction unit vector aD= ½CD A/M r Vr2 u (Knowles et al.,2001) area/mass ratio relative velocity < KOMPSAT-1 data > aD, C D = program A = 5.871m2 M = 448kg Vr = 7.5 m/sec2 Density r

  8. 2.Analysis of KOMPSAT-1 Drag1) 2001 March 28 (Both effects)

  9. 2) 2001 November 21 (Dst= -221nT)

  10. 3) 2001 December 28 (Both effect)

  11. 4) 2002 July 20 (Strong Flare)

  12. * F10.7 vs Drag at 2002 July 20 A lag of approximately 1 day was found between solar activity and inferred density (Jacchia, 1973)

  13. 5) 2002 August 30 (Dst= -109nT)

  14. Relation of Dst and Drag

  15. 3. MSISE-90 density vs estimated density • What makes the difference? - Current atmospheric models are statistical and do not allow a short term prediction for a give altitude. (Space Weather Effects Catalogue, ESWS, 2001) 2002 July 20 2001 March 28

  16. * Ratio of estimated den. to MSISE90 den.

  17. 4. Summary • Satellite Drag acceleration started to increase with solar EUV radiation with the best cross-correlation (r=0.92) for 1 day delayed F10.7. • Five abrupt changes of drag acceleration were coincident with geomagnetic storms. • Background variation of the drag acceleration are governed by solar radiation, their short term variations by geomagnetic storms. • The model does not well account for the density variation during the extreme geomagnetic activity but during solar EUV radiation effect.

  18. 5. Further work 1. Investigate more events in long term 2. Compare the Drag with empirical high atmosphere models such as NRLMSISE-00. 3. Compare the Drag with TEC map

More Related