WAM Physics: Applying Russell's Poynting flux model to get better Joule heating calculation in WAM

[ZhuxiaoLi66]

Russell developed an Empirical model of poynting flux derived from Satellite FAST data. The poynting flux calculated in this model includes the contribution from electric field variability which is lack in WAM and we are trying to use the Joule heating factor to represent its contribution to produce the Joule heating.

[ZhuxiaoLi66]

The model input are as following, sw_angle, swbt, swvel, swden, sin(tilt), sw_bx or AL(magnetic activity).

The following plot is based on the output of a test run pf the poynting flux model with input of sw_angle = 292.7, sw_bt= 5.2, sw_vel= 522.3, sw_den =3.6, sin(tilt) = -0.14, sw_bx= 4.7

[ZhuxiaoLi66]

the above result is consistent with the result in Russell's paper as show in the following plot,

The global integral Energy Flux is about 65 GW, which is between 45 GW (315deg) and 91GW (270 deg).

[ZhuxiaoLi66]

Since the dipole tilt is not a variable in WAM input parameter sheet, the code to calculate it and do the time series output is under construction.

[ZhuxiaoLi66]

the following plots are the jh_flux comparison between the poynting_flux model and WAM for 2013 and 2015 St. Patrick storms.

[ZhuxiaoLi66]

2015 St. Patrick storm.

[timfullerrowell]

Thanks Zhuxiao, This looks promising. The 2013 storm ratios look about a factor of 2, what we use now. The 2015 storm ratio looks significantly less, which is what we want, and what the saturation curve was trying to do.

Is it possible to plot the time series of the ratio between Poynting flux and WAM? Might need to do a running ~60 min average of each, before calculating the ratio, but try without first. I'll be back in Wednesday. Tim

On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 2:46 PM ZhuxiaoLi notifications@github.com wrote:

the following plots are the jh_flux comparison between the poynting_flux model and WAM for 2013 and 2015 St. Patrick storms.

[image: poynting_flux_20130311_0319_WAM] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/22546571/67707687-d421f180-f9b2-11e9-97d6-2954b6767322.png [image: poynting_flux_20130311_0320_WAM_new] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/22546571/67707850-24994f00-f9b3-11e9-8c86-37af040aebfe.png [image: poynting_flux_ratio_20130311_0320] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/22546571/67707864-2d8a2080-f9b3-11e9-91ca-24160cac3334.png

— You are receiving this because you were assigned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/SWPC-IPE/WAM-IPE/issues/353?email_source=notifications&email_token=AH5BFODGDVYNPOAKMIQWJY3QQ4XOZA5CNFSM4I77N4B2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOECN7JZY#issuecomment-547091687, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AH5BFOAEJCTFSEC5IUKPKYLQQ4XOZANCNFSM4I77N4BQ .

[ZhuxiaoLi66]

Hi Tim, the bottom panels only has blue curve are the direct ratio. talk later.

[timfullerrowell]

Ooops, yes of course, sorry I didn't look carefully. Still looks promising. Tim

On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 8:44 PM ZhuxiaoLi notifications@github.com wrote:

Hi Tim, the bottom panels only has blue curve are the direct ratio. talk later.

— You are receiving this because you were assigned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/SWPC-IPE/WAM-IPE/issues/353?email_source=notifications&email_token=AH5BFOCYIL27OO3KGQYDLTDQQ6BPPA5CNFSM4I77N4B2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOECO3PMY#issuecomment-547207091, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AH5BFOC4IZNJRMTTXX3X6OTQQ6BPPANCNFSM4I77N4BQ .

[ZhuxiaoLi66]

Nice to know. Zhuxiao

[ZhuxiaoLi66]

Further investigating the time series of the integral Joule Heating from WAM and poynting flux model. Found that there is a slight time lag in integral JH from WAM compared with poynting flux model, maybe it is resulted by the input parameters average over the former 20 mins. there are some other fine features need further study.

[ZhuxiaoLi66]

It has been found that the different input for poynting_flux model and WAM runs caused the large&spiky ratio and phase time lag in above plots. When we use the same input, we got much reasonable ratio plots (less than 6. and no negative value) and integral flux plots for 2013 and 2015 St. Patrick storm.

[ZhuxiaoLi66]

[ZhuxiaoLi66]

While it seems that the apply of the output of the real poynting_flux doesn't make the ratio (to the output of poynting_flux model) more consistent and lower than the WAM Joule heating one.