Secular variation in Germany from repeat station data and a recent global field model Monika Korte and Vincent Lesur Helmholtz Centre Potsdam, German Research.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Introduction to Geomagnetism The magnetic record of Earth's history that is frozen into crustal rocks has provided, perhaps, the most important geophysical.
Advertisements

Observatory data: Quality and use in repeat station data reduction Mioara Mandea (1), Monika Korte (1), Nils Olsen (2) (1) GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam,
Clima en España: Pasado, presente y futuro Madrid, Spain, 11 – 13 February 1 IMEDEA (UIB - CSIC), Mallorca, SPAIN. 2 National Oceanography Centre, Southampton,
European Repeat Station Workshop Bucharest May 2007 UK repeat station programme Tom Shanahan and Susan Macmillan.
No. 1 Characteristics of field-aligned currents derived from the Swarm constellation Hermann Lühr, Jaeheung Park, Jan Rauberg, Ingo Michaelis, Guram Kervalishvili.
Repeat station crustal biases and accuracy determined from regional field models M. Korte, E. Thébault* and M. Mandea, GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam (*now.
Geomagnetism (I).
The German Repeat Station Survey 2006 M. Korte and M. Fredow, GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam In 2006 a complete survey of the German repeat station network.
WANG Jianjun 1, YANG Dongmei 2 , ZHANG Suqing 2 , ZHU Rong 2 1 Earthquake Administration of Gansu Province, China, 2 Institute of Geophysics,
Seasonal Position Variations and Regional Reference Frame Realization Jeff Freymueller Geophysical Institute University of Alaska Fairbanks.
DEFINITION, CALCULATION, AND PROPERTIES OF THE Dst INDEX R.L. McPherron Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics University of California Los Angeles.
Coestimating models of the large-scale internal, external, and corresponding induced Hermean magnetic fields Michael Purucker and Terence Sabaka Raytheon.
Separating internal geomagnetic secular variation and long-term magnetospheric field variations Monika Korte Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum GFZ.
The European geomagnetic secular variation and acceleration over the last four decades Mioara MANDEA Giuliana Verbanac, Monika Korte Helmholtz-Zentrum.
Limits of static processing in a dynamic environment Matt King, Newcastle University, UK.
Space Weather Workshop, Boulder, CO, April 2013 No. 1 Ionospheric plasma irregularities at high latitudes as observed by CHAMP Hermann Lühr and.
Space Weather influence on satellite based navigation and precise positioning R. Warnant, S. Lejeune, M. Bavier Royal Observatory of Belgium Avenue Circulaire,
J. Ebbing & N. Holzrichter – University of Kiel Johannes Bouman – DGFI Munich Ronny Stolz – IPHT Jena SPP Dynamic EarthPotsdam, 03/04 July 2014 Swarm &
Two and a half problems in homogenization of climate series concluding remarks to Daily Stew Ralf Lindau.
MTR, swarm E2E study, Nov 11, 2003, DSRI Copenhagen, nio #1 7-Sep-15 swarm End-To-End Mission Performance Study Mid Term Review The swarm E2E Consortium.
4 th Swarm QWG Meeting 2 – 5 December 2014GFZ Potsdam/D Data Selection Model Parameterization Results: Statistics, Lithospheric Field, Core Field Perspective.
Detailed Analysis of ECMWF Surface Pressure Data E. Fagiolini 1, T. Schmidt 1, G. Schwarz 2, L. Zenner 3 (1) GFZ Department 1, Potsdam, Germany (2) DLR.
5 th European Space Weather Week, November 2008, Brussels Operational implementation of the SWIF model in DIAS system Tsagouri Ioanna Koutroumbas.
1 Average time-variable gravity from GPS orbits of recent geodetic satellites VIII Hotine-Marussi Symposium, Rome, Italy, 17–21 June 2013 Aleš Bezděk 1.
Water storage variations from time-variable gravity data Andreas Güntner Helmholtz Centre Potsdam - GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences Section.
© NERC All rights reserved UK Repeat Station Report T J G Shanahan and S Macmillan June 2009 MagNetE Workshop Helsinki, Finland.
© NERC All rights reserved Chris Turbitt Observatories Manager Geomagnetism Team British Geological Survey BGS Observatory Network.
Introducing POMME Potsdam Magnetic Model of the Earth Star camera calibration Ring current field Static and annually varying external fields Internal field.
GP33A-06 / Fall AGU Meeting, San Francisco, December 2004 Magnetic signals generated by the ocean circulation and their variability. Manoj,
Geocenter Variations Derived from GRACE Data Z. Kang, B. Tapley, J. Chen, J. Ries, S. Bettadpur Joint International GSTM and SPP Symposium GFZ Potsdam,
Swarm ASM-VFM meeting 9-10 Apr 2015ESTEC (NL) Ideas for improving the disturbance model or Welcome to the Null-Space! Nils Olsen, Lars Tøffner-Clausen,
27-Day Variations Of The Galactic Cosmic Ray Intensity And Anisotropy In Different Solar Magnetic Cycles ( ) M.V. Alania, A. Gil, K. Iskra, R.
VARIABILITY OF TOTAL ELECTRON CONTENT AT EUROPEAN LATITUDES A. Krankowski(1), L. W. Baran(1), W. Kosek (2), I. I. Shagimuratov(3), M. Kalarus (2) (1) Institute.
M. Gende, C. Brunini Universidad Nacional de La Plata, Argentina. Improving Single Frequency Positioning Using SIRGAS Ionospheric Products.
5/18/2994G21D-04 Spring AGU Realization of a Stable North America Reference Frame Thomas Herring Department of Earth Atmospheric and Planetary, Sciences,
Study on the Impact of Combined Magnetic and Electric Field Analysis and of Ocean Circulation Effects on Swarm Mission Performance by S. Vennerstrom, E.
1 Rosalia Daví 1 Václav Vavryčuk 2 Elli-Maria Charalampidou 2 Grzegorz Kwiatek 1 Institute of Geophysics, Academy of Sciences, Praha 2 GFZ German Research.
ESA living planet symposium Bergen Combination of GRACE and GOCE in situ data for high resolution regional gravity field modeling M. Schmeer 1,
Electron density profile retrieval from RO data Xin’an Yue, Bill Schreiner  Abel inversion error of Ne  Data Assimilation test.
Earth’s Dynamic Magnetic Field: The State of the Art Comprehensive Model Terence J. Sabaka Geodynamics Branch NASA/GSFC with special thanks to Nils Olsen.
12/12/01Fall AGU Vertical Reference Frames for Sea Level Monitoring Thomas Herring Department of Earth, Atmosphere and Planetary Sciences
Sensitivity Analysis and Building Laterally-Variable Ocean Conductivity Grid 1 N. R. Schnepf (UoC/CIRES) C. Manoj (UoC/CIRES) A. V. Kuvshinov (ETHZ)
OSTST Meeting, Hobart, Australia, March 12-15, 2007 On the use of temporal gravity field models derived from GRACE for altimeter satellite orbit determination.
IGARSS 2011, Vancuver, Canada July 28, of 14 Chalmers University of Technology Monitoring Long Term Variability in the Atmospheric Water Vapor Content.
Ionospheric characteristics above martian crustal magnetic anomalies Paul Withers, M Mendillo, H Rishbeth, D Hinson, and J Arkani-Hamed Abstract #33.02.
GALOCAD GAlileo LOcal Component for nowcasting and forecasting Atmospheric Disturbances R. Warnant, G. Wautelet, S. Lejeune, H. Brenot, J. Spits, S. Stankov.
Tom Wilson, Department of Geology and Geography Environmental and Exploration Geophysics I tom.h.wilson Department of Geology and.
Incorporation of geomagnetic data and services into EPOS infrastructure Pavel Hejda 1, Aude Chambodut 2, Juan-Jose Curto 3, Simon Flower 4, Elena Kozlovskaya.
AXK/JPL SBAS Training at Stanford University, October 27-30, 2003 Satellite Based Augmentation Systems Brazilian Ionosphere Group Training at Stanford.
Limits of static processing in a dynamic environment Matt King, Newcastle University, UK.
Geology 5660/6660 Applied Geophysics 30 Mar 2016
European Geosciences Union, General Assembly Vienna | Austria | 23–28 April 2017 Seismic zoning (first approximation) using data of the main geomagnetic.
What is the magnetic potential of a dipole?
The 3rd Swarm Science Meeting, June 2014, Copenhagen, Denmark
Introduction to Geomagnetism
Magnetic Splinter Meeting
Rapid core field variations just before Swarm
Search for Cosmic Ray Anisotropy with the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer on the International Space Station G. LA VACCA University of Milano-Bicocca.
Analysis of methods for estimating westward auroral electrojet current with meridian magnetometer chain data М.А. Evdokimova, А.А. Petrukovich Space Research.
Instrumental Surface Temperature Record
European Geosciences Union, General Assembly Vienna | Austria | 23–28 April 2017 Seismic zoning (first approximation) using data of the main geomagnetic.
New "quite time" concept: application to Champ lithospheric field modelling Nils Olsen, Jesper Gjerløv & Co.
P Kotzé (1), M Korte (2), M Mandea (2,3)
Instrumental Surface Temperature Record
Comparability and Reproducibility of RO Data
Principles of the Global Positioning System Lecture 11
Introduction to Geomagnetism
Instrumental Surface Temperature Record
Session 5: Higher level products (Internal)
Presentation transcript:

Secular variation in Germany from repeat station data and a recent global field model Monika Korte and Vincent Lesur Helmholtz Centre Potsdam, German Research Centre for Geosciences - GFZ Outline: Motivation German repeat station data The global field model GRIMM-2 Comparison of secular variation of model and data Conclusions

Motivation Since 1999 satellites like Ørsted and CHAMP provide a dense global geomagnetic data coverage. These, together with geomagnetic observatory data, lead to increa- singly accurate global field models with good secular variation descriptions. Do repeat station data from areas with relatively good observatory coverage provide additional useful signal?

German repeat station data - Overview Repeat station measurements in Germany started in 1999/2000 Improved data processing with local/regional variometer 12 variometer stations used in nearly each survey 3 geomagnetic observatories (WNG, NGK, FUR – BFO only established in 2005)

Why local variometers? Data processing to obtain internal field annual means for repeat stations: C(x i,t mean ) = C(x i,t i ) – C(O,t i ) + C(O, t mean ) Repeat station “annual mean” of component C Observatory annual mean of component C Repeat station measurement value at time t i Observatory recording at time t i Assumptions: - Secular variation is the same - External variations are the same - Induced variations are the same at repeat station and observatory This difference can be determined more robustly from (quiet) night time differences with a local variometer

German repeat station data - Details Surveys in 1999/2000 (half network per year) 2001/2002 (half network per year) 2003 (about 75% of full network) 2004 (full network) 2006 (full network) 2008 (full network) All data reduced to annual mean centered on the middle of the year the measurements were done.

Global field model GRIMM2 Continuous model valid for 2001 – 2008

Global field model GRIMM2 - Data CHAMP satellite data - X and Y in solar-magnetic (SM) coordinates between +/-55° magnetic latitude - geocentric X,Y,Z at high latitudes - selected for quality: acceptabel quality flags, corrected for orientation errors - selected for magnetically quiet data: IMF Z-componente positive, Vector Magnetic Disturbance (Thomson & Lesur, 2007) < 20 nT and norm of its derivative < 100 nT/day - low/mid latitude data addionally selected by local time: LT between 23:00 and 5:00, sun below horizon Observatory data - hourly means in same coordinate systems and with same selection criteria applied

Global field model GRIMM2 - Modelling Core field and secular variation - spherical harmonics with time dependence by 5 th order B-splines up to SH degree 16, knot-point spacing 400days - weak regularization by minimizing squared second time derivative of radial field at the CMB (high degree core field SH degrees influenced) - additional regularization to mitigate effect of additional degrees of freedom introduced by 5 th order B-splines: minimizing squared third time derivative of radial field at Earth’s surface (low SH degrees influenced) Toroidal magnetic field modelled to take into account field aligned currents over polar regions (constant term with annual variation) Ionospheric field over polar regions modelled by assumption of temporally varying currents in a thin shell (110 km above Earth)

Comparison of global model and annual means data “Annual means” of GRIMM2 obtained as average of 10 core field values per year Model values subtracted from repeat station and observatory annual means Annual mean data are not free from external field variations! (Example: annual means of European observatories ordered by geomag. Latitude with CM4 model core field subtracted)

Empirical external field correction WNG NGK FUR 1. Core field model removed: - lithospheric offset - external field influences 2. Constant offsets removed: - homogeneous residual pattern Black lines: average resisual pattern 3. Average residual pattern removed from data (black lines)

Field change from to Rather linear change X: ca. 70 nT or 9nT/yr Y: ca. 300 nT or 38 nT/yr Z: ca. 250 nT or 31 nT/yr NGK annual means

Locations of repeat stations with local variometer North component X East component Y Vertical component Z Vector anomaly maps R-SCHA model by Korte & Thébault, 2007

Residuals of repeat stations with local variometer

Scatter or systematic trends? Measurement uncertainties from scatter among measurements at one location in the order of D (Y) 1.6 nT H (X) 1 nT Z 0.7 nT Linear regression of variometer station time series: - trend up to +/- 1.1 nT/yr occur in all components - trends mostly in the order of 0 to 0.5 nT/yr in all components - often low correlation Problem: global model not reliable for and (ends), linear regression of data between and only (3 to 4 epochs per time series only, no proper statistics!): - trends in the same order in general, but hardly similar at the same stations - low correlation for about half of the time series

Scatter or systematic trends? Results where similar linear trends exist and correlation is [high: - tel X (0.53 nT/yr), Y (-0.51 nT/yr), Z (-0.56 nT/yr) - eil Y (-0.99 nT/yr) - [kar X (-0.53 to nT/yr)] These values are rather high, but not completely unreasonable compared to theory: Thébault et al. (2009) investigated the expected induced signal based on the vertically integrated susceptibility (VIS) model by Hemant and Maus (2005). Their results are: * 0.1 nT/yr for western Europe * up to 0.3 – 0.6 nT/yr for eastern Europe * maximal globally (very few regions) 0.65 – 1.3 nT/yr

Tentative interpolation of linear trends in residuals North component X East component Y Vertical component Z

Anomalies and linear trend - X North component X

Anomalies and linear trend - Y East component Y

Anomalies and linear trend - Z Vertical component Z

Residuals of further repeat stations Scatter of up to 10 nT in time series at many locations without variometer

Conclusions Regional secular variation is described well by recent global field models based on satellite and observatory data. High accuracy repeat station data might provide information about induced sources of crustal field, but it is very difficult to discriminate between signal and noise Longer time series are needed for more reliable statistics