1 / 28

Implementation of Radiation Storm Forecasting with SOHO/COSTEP

4 th European Space Weather Week, Brussels, Belgium. Implementation of Radiation Storm Forecasting with SOHO/COSTEP. Bernd Heber 1 , Arik Posner 2,3 , Oliver Rother 1 , and Reinhold M üller-Mellin 1 IEAP, Universit ät Kiel, Germany Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, TX, USA

kolya
Download Presentation

Implementation of Radiation Storm Forecasting with SOHO/COSTEP

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. 4th European Space Weather Week, Brussels, Belgium Implementation of Radiation Storm Forecasting with SOHO/COSTEP Bernd Heber1, Arik Posner2,3, Oliver Rother1, and Reinhold Müller-Mellin1 IEAP, Universität Kiel, Germany Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, TX, USA also at NASA/HQ, SMD, Washington, DC, USA

  2. The Forecasting Technique: Alert 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  3. The Forecasting Technique: Hazard Arrival Travel Time to 1 AU: Relativistic Electrons: ~10 Minutes 50 MeV Protons: 30-80 Minutes 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  4. Risk from Fast-Rising EventsAstronaut Safety/Radiation Dose Rate Acute Radiation Sickness Threshold Particle intensities increase within a few hours to important values From Kim, Hu, and Cucinotta, AIAA, 2005 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  5. Prompt vs. delayed events Velocity dispersion indicates acceleration at the Sun, particle propagation in the heliosphere is important No Velocity dispersion indicates either local or less importance of particles propagation 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  6. Comparison of GOES and COSTEP proton intensities (Nov., 4, 2001) GOES: difficulties with corrected diff. flux data. SEM and COSTEP: onsets of SEM measurements are not useful for analysis. overcorrection, electrons and MIP ions contaminate proton channels. Low statistics but accurate measurements from COSTEP until main phase (level orange, then excluded). Level yellow: low geometric factor mode. 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  7. e-p Relationship in SEPsΦ: Onset Parameters from SOHO/COSTEP Data 0.3-1.2 MeV Electrons for Φe 31-50 MeV Protons for Φp Method 1Method 2 Method 1Method 2 COSTEP: (PI B. Heber) - Müller-Mellin et al., Sol. Phys., 1995 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  8. e-p Relationship in SEPs:Φe vs. Φp r = -0.83: Extremely Significant Correlation for Proton Flux Increase vs. Electron Flux Increase Key for Forecasting Incoming Ion Events Triangles: Low Geometric Factor Mode Squares: Extreme Fluxes, Unreliable Impulsive Events from List of Reames and Ng, ApJ, 2004 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  9. Why should it work? Assumptions: • Particles from the Sun • Propagate alongtheParkerspiral • Measuredprofiledepends on • Particleinjection (prompt) • Particlepropagation (diffusive) 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  10. Simultanous approximation of the intensity-time and anisotropy-time profiles 5 Dec 1997 107 keV electrons Wind 3DP PI: R.P.Lin Most important parameter: the parallel mean free path 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  11. Physical Causes for Correlation:Mean Free Paths Correlated Rigidity Dependence of Mean Free Paths: flat between 1–10 AU increasing towards lower rigidities increasing towards higher rigidities for MFPs 0.02 – 2 AU electrons ions Strong Correlation between Electrons and Ions, but Event-to-Event Variability! Origin unknown [Dröge, Ap.J. 537, 2000] But: How to explain drop-outs in impulsive events? 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  12. Defining/Testing the Method: Forecasting Matrix • Pairs of Relativistic Electron Parameters (Slope, momentary Flux) Define Locus in Matrix • Color Coding from +1 Hour Proton Intensity • Incorporates All Data from 1996-2002 • Tested in 2003 Forecasting 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  13. Early Test Results for 2003 only: 30-50 MeV Proton Forecast Black: Forecast Red: Observations Blue: Hazard Warnings Here: ~20 Minutes Warning with Intensity-Time Profile Prediction Posner, Space Weather, 2007 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  14. 2003-2007 Statistics 24 Proton Events beyond Threshold 10/11 Prompt Events Forecast (91%) with 122 min average warning time 9/13 Delayed Events Forecast (69%) Overall: 79%, 195 min average warning time 13 False Warning Series (10 from Decreases) 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  15. Analysis of False and Missed Warnings for Prompt Events Missed “Prompt” SEP Warning Only occurrence, “concealed” delayed event False SEP Warning Only occurrence 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  16. Summary • First SPE Ion Intensity-Time Profile Forecasts • Forecasting Successful because in Rise Phase, SPE Electron and Proton Intensities Closely Correlated • 4.5 Year Verification Highly Successful for Prompt SPEs • Method Helps with Delayed Events, but is not Sufficient (not Designed to do this) • Implementation with SOHO underway 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  17. Implementation • SOHO will Continue 16h/day Real-Time Coverage until End of 2009, Uncertain Thereafter • Held Informal Meetings with SOHO Project Scientists and COSTEP PI Team • Held SOHO Implementation Telecon (SOHO Project, COSTEP Team, JSC-SRAG, CCMC, NOAA/SEC, NASA/ESMD) • VMS-Based COSTEP Software Transfer to UNIX,Transition to SOHO Real-Time Stream • COSTEP Workstation to be Set Up at SOHO SOC (GSFC) for Real-Time Data Usage • Forecasting Software to be Adjusted to Real-Time Data Usage • Live Forecasting Web-Sites 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  18. Spare transperencies 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  19. 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  20. Superposed Epoch Analysis of GOES List (48) Events Prompt and Delayed Events • Ordered by Fluxes (str,med,wk), 16 each • ~40 MeV Protons Always Delayed over Electrons • Warning Time for Astronauts • Average 3-day Time Profiles: Possibility for Long-Term Forecasting 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  21. Physical Causes for Correlations:Magnetic Sector Structure as Transport Barrier Single Event in 2000 shows Two Slopes when Wind/MFI observes Multiple Sector Boundary Crossings 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  22. e-p Relationship in SEPs:Intensity Increase Parameter Φe vs. Connection Longitude Difference r=-0.59: Highly Significant Correlation for Electron Flux Increase with Connection Distance Triangles: High Flux Levels at COSTEP, low geometric factor mode Method 1 Method 2 Method 3: Steepest 10-min Slope Impulsive Events from List in Reames and Ng, ApJ, 2004 Method 3 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  23. e-p Relationship in SEPs:Intensity Increase Parameter Φp vs. Connection Longitude Difference r = -0.6: Highly Significant Correlation for Proton Flux Increase Triangles: High Flux Levels at COSTEP, low geometric factor mode Impulsive Events from List in Reames and Ng, ApJ, 2004 Method 1 Method 2 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  24. Impulsive vs. Gradual Events:The Paradigm Composition Differences? • Yes: 3He/4He Hsieh & Simpson 1970; e/p Reames, v. Rosenvinge & Lin 1985 • But: 3He Enhanced in Gradual Events (Desai et al., 2005); Charge States increase with E Reminiscent of Impulsive Events (Oetliker et al., 1997; Möbius et al., 1999; Labrador et al., 2003); higher 3He/4He Enhancements in smaller Flares (Reames & Ng, 2004). Differences in Φ Distributions? • No! Used Impulsive Event List of Reames & Ng (2004) for Comparison with GOES List 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  25. Adjustments to Solar Minimum? 1996-2002 Solar Minimum only 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  26. New Test Results – Part 1: 2003-2004 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  27. New Test Results – Part 2: 2005-2006 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

  28. 03/17/2003 12/02/2003 4th European Space Weather Week Brussels, November 7, 2007

More Related