Difference between revisions of "GEM/CEDAR M3-I2 Sessions"

From gem
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(26 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
<!-- ============ TITLE SECTION ============== -->
 
<!-- ============ TITLE SECTION ============== -->
 
<h1> 2016 GEM/CEDAR JOINT MEETING -- Santa Fe, NM </h1>
 
<h1> 2016 GEM/CEDAR JOINT MEETING -- Santa Fe, NM </h1>
−
 
 
<!-- ============ CONVENORS SECTION ============== -->
 
<!-- ============ CONVENORS SECTION ============== -->
−
<br>
 
 
<h2> Co-Chairs for M3-I2 Sessions </h2>
 
<h2> Co-Chairs for M3-I2 Sessions </h2>
−
<br>
+
[http://clasp.engin.umich.edu/people/shashaz  Shasha Zou, U. of Michigan/CLaSP]
−
<br>
 
−
[http://clasp.engin.umich.edu/people/shashaz  Shasha Zho, U. of Michigan/CLaSP]
 
 
<br>
 
<br>
 
[http://science.gsfc.nasa.gov/sed/bio/barbara.giles Barbara Giles, NASA/GSFC/GPL]
 
[http://science.gsfc.nasa.gov/sed/bio/barbara.giles Barbara Giles, NASA/GSFC/GPL]
Line 13: Line 9:
 
[http://cass.usu.edu/htm/faculty-staff-students/research-scientists?memberID=10190 Vince Eccles, USU/CASS]
 
[http://cass.usu.edu/htm/faculty-staff-students/research-scientists?memberID=10190 Vince Eccles, USU/CASS]
 
<br>
 
<br>
−
 
 
<!-- ============ SESSIONS ============== -->
 
<!-- ============ SESSIONS ============== -->
  
−
<h2>Session 1: Monday PM1 - Status, Questions, & Opportunities<br>Magnetospheric Effects of Ionospheric Ingection</h2>
+
<h2>Session 1: Monday PM1 - Status, Questions, & Opportunities<br>Magnetospheric Effects of Ionospheric Injection</h2>
−
 
 
 
Attendence: ~45
 
Attendence: ~45
−
<br>
 
 
<br>
 
<br>
 
Summary:
 
Summary:
−
<br>
 
 
<br>
 
<br>
 
It has become apparent to the magnetospheric and inner magnetospheric
 
It has become apparent to the magnetospheric and inner magnetospheric
Line 31: Line 23:
 
magnetosphere-ionosphere-thermosphere (M-I-T) coupled system.
 
magnetosphere-ionosphere-thermosphere (M-I-T) coupled system.
 
This must truly be a GEM-CEDAR joint effort to address:
 
This must truly be a GEM-CEDAR joint effort to address:
−
<br> <br>
+
<br>
 
<li> the ionosphere boundary layer,
 
<li> the ionosphere boundary layer,
 
<li> the ion energization region of the polar wind
 
<li> the ion energization region of the polar wind
 
<li> the magnetospheric response to solar wind drivers and the ionospheric outflow
 
<li> the magnetospheric response to solar wind drivers and the ionospheric outflow
 
<li> the feedback into the lower ionosphere-thermosphere
 
<li> the feedback into the lower ionosphere-thermosphere
−
<br> <br>
+
<br><br>
 
Invited speakers reviewed the status of current understanding and
 
Invited speakers reviewed the status of current understanding and
 
modeling of the effects of ionospheric ion injections on the magnetosphere.
 
modeling of the effects of ionospheric ion injections on the magnetosphere.
Line 43: Line 35:
 
for metric studies on plasma sheet, ring current, and substorm dynamics
 
for metric studies on plasma sheet, ring current, and substorm dynamics
 
to direct improvements in the current Geospace General Circulation Models (GGCMs).
 
to direct improvements in the current Geospace General Circulation Models (GGCMs).
−
 
 
<br><br>
 
<br><br>
 
Speakers:
 
Speakers:
−
<br><br>
+
<br>
−
 
 
 
[http://sw04.spaceweather.usu.edu/~eccles/M3I2/2016_GEMCEDAR/Ion_Outflow_Overview_Rick_Chappell_GEMCEDAR2016.pdf Charles R. Chappell (Vanderbilt U): Changing the Paradigm! -- The Ionospheric Role in Filling the Magnetosphere with Plasma and Driving Its Dynamics]
 
[http://sw04.spaceweather.usu.edu/~eccles/M3I2/2016_GEMCEDAR/Ion_Outflow_Overview_Rick_Chappell_GEMCEDAR2016.pdf Charles R. Chappell (Vanderbilt U): Changing the Paradigm! -- The Ionospheric Role in Filling the Magnetosphere with Plasma and Driving Its Dynamics]
 +
<br>
 +
[http://sw04.spaceweather.usu.edu/~eccles/M3I2/2016_GEMCEDAR/Ion_Outflow_MHD_Effects_Daniel_Welling_GEMCEDAR2016.pdf Daniel Welling (U Mich): Outflow Really Matters! -- What GLobal MHD Modeling Tells Us About Outflow and the Magnetosphere]
 
<br><br>
 
<br><br>
−
[http://sw04.spaceweather.usu.edu/~eccles/M3I2/2016_GEMCEDAR/Ion_Outflow_MHD_Effects_Daniel_Welling_GEMCEDAR2016.pdf Daniel Welling (U Mich): Outflow Really Matters! -- What GLobal MHD Modeling Tells Us About Outflow and the Magnetosphere]
 
−
<br> <br>
 
 
Other Contributors:
 
Other Contributors:
−
<br> <br>
+
<br>
 
Barbara Giles (NASA/GSFC): MMS Opportunities <br>
 
Barbara Giles (NASA/GSFC): MMS Opportunities <br>
 
Matina Gkioulidou (APL/JHU): Van Allen Probe Ring Current Observations<br>
 
Matina Gkioulidou (APL/JHU): Van Allen Probe Ring Current Observations<br>
Line 60: Line 50:
 
Chris Mouikis (UNH): Dst storm epoch study of ion outflow<br>
 
Chris Mouikis (UNH): Dst storm epoch study of ion outflow<br>
 
Lynn Kistler (UNH): Multi-satellite view of sawtooth storm morphology<br>
 
Lynn Kistler (UNH): Multi-satellite view of sawtooth storm morphology<br>
−
 
+
<br>
 +
*Notes from [[M3-I2 Session 1 - Mag Effects]] (scribe - Vince Eccles)
  
 
<h2>Session 2: Monday PM2 - Status, Questions, & Opportunities<br>Polar Wind and the Ionospheric Boundary</h2>
 
<h2>Session 2: Monday PM2 - Status, Questions, & Opportunities<br>Polar Wind and the Ionospheric Boundary</h2>
−
 
 
Attendence: ~35
 
Attendence: ~35
−
<br>
 
 
<br>
 
<br>
 
Summary:
 
Summary:
 
<br>
 
<br>
−
<br>
 
−
 
 
Invited speakers reviewed the status of current understanding and modeling
 
Invited speakers reviewed the status of current understanding and modeling
 
of ion upflow initiated in the ionospheric boundary. This is key for
 
of ion upflow initiated in the ionospheric boundary. This is key for
Line 79: Line 66:
 
in the polar and sub-auroral regions for appropriate comparison of PW model
 
in the polar and sub-auroral regions for appropriate comparison of PW model
 
results to satellite data.
 
results to satellite data.
−
<br> <br>
+
<br><br>
 
The GEM Focus Group Chairs present goals and moderated a discussion on
 
The GEM Focus Group Chairs present goals and moderated a discussion on
 
the open questions of ion upflow/outflow. This effort should strive
 
the open questions of ion upflow/outflow. This effort should strive
Line 86: Line 73:
 
CEDAR scientists are strongly encouraged to participate in this session
 
CEDAR scientists are strongly encouraged to participate in this session
 
as a collaborative GEM-CEDAR Session on M-I-T coupling.
 
as a collaborative GEM-CEDAR Session on M-I-T coupling.
−
<br> <br>
+
<br><br>
 +
Speakers:
 +
<br>
 
[http://sw04.spaceweather.usu.edu/~eccles/M3I2/2016_GEMCEDAR/Ion_Outflow_Modeling_Roger_Varney_GEMCEDAR2016.pdf Roger Varney (SRI): Areas for Improvement in Ion Outflow Modeling]
 
[http://sw04.spaceweather.usu.edu/~eccles/M3I2/2016_GEMCEDAR/Ion_Outflow_Modeling_Roger_Varney_GEMCEDAR2016.pdf Roger Varney (SRI): Areas for Improvement in Ion Outflow Modeling]
−
<br> <br>
+
<br>
 
George Khazanov (NASA/GSFC): Polar Wind M-I-T Coupling: Kinetic vs Hydrodynamic</a>
 
George Khazanov (NASA/GSFC): Polar Wind M-I-T Coupling: Kinetic vs Hydrodynamic</a>
 
<br> <br>
 
<br> <br>
 
Other Contributors:
 
Other Contributors:
−
<br> <br>
+
<br>
−
Shunrong Zhang (U Mich): ISR campaign opportunities<br>
+
Shunrong Zhang (MIT Haystack): ISR campaign opportunities<br>
 
Bruce Fritz (UNH): RENU2 Sounding Rocket<br>
 
Bruce Fritz (UNH): RENU2 Sounding Rocket<br>
 
Douglas Rowland (NASA/GSFC): VISIONS Sounding Rocket<br>
 
Douglas Rowland (NASA/GSFC): VISIONS Sounding Rocket<br>
 
W. K. (Bill) Peterson (LASP): ePoP Status<br>
 
W. K. (Bill) Peterson (LASP): ePoP Status<br>
 +
<br><br>
 +
*Notes from [[M3-I2 Session 2 - Ionosphere Boundary to Outflow]] (scribe - Barbara Giles)
 +
<br>
  
 
<h2>Session 3 & 4: Friday PM - Recap, Organize, Planning</h2>
 
<h2>Session 3 & 4: Friday PM - Recap, Organize, Planning</h2>
−
 
+
<br>
 
Attendence: ~25 and ~15
 
Attendence: ~25 and ~15
−
<br>
 
 
<br>
 
<br>
 
Summary:
 
Summary:
−
<br>
 
 
<br>
 
<br>
 
Invited speaker reviewed the big picture possibilities of the
 
Invited speaker reviewed the big picture possibilities of the
Line 111: Line 101:
 
moderated a discussion on issues to address:
 
moderated a discussion on issues to address:
 
<br> <br>
 
<br> <br>
−
Robert Strangeway: What are the Questions of Ion Injection and Magnetospheric Response
+
Speakers:<br>
 +
[http://gem.epss.ucla.edu/mediawikiwiki/images/4/4c/GEM_2016_Strangeway.pdf Robert Strangely (UCLA): What are the Questions of Ion Injection and Magnetospheric Response]
 +
<br>
 +
Naritoshi Kitamura (ISAS/JAXA): Comparison between GPW and Akabono data
 
<br> <br>
 
<br> <br>
 
Other Contributors:
 
Other Contributors:
−
<br> <br>
+
<br>
 
Vince Eccles: Generalized Polar Wind Model (GPW)<br>
 
Vince Eccles: Generalized Polar Wind Model (GPW)<br>
−
Naritoshi Kitamura: Model and Measurement Comparisons of Ion Outflow<br>
+
<br>
 +
Open Floor
 +
<br><br>
 +
*Notes from [[M3-I2 Session 2 - Recap and Organize]] (scribe - Shasha Zou)
 
<br>
 
<br>

Latest revision as of 10:20, 31 August 2016

2016 GEM/CEDAR JOINT MEETING -- Santa Fe, NM

Co-Chairs for M3-I2 Sessions

Shasha Zou, U. of Michigan/CLaSP
Barbara Giles, NASA/GSFC/GPL
Vince Eccles, USU/CASS

Session 1: Monday PM1 - Status, Questions, & Opportunities
Magnetospheric Effects of Ionospheric Injection

Attendence: ~45
Summary:
It has become apparent to the magnetospheric and inner magnetospheric modeling community that model results are dramatically altered by the presence and placement of ionospheric ions throughout the magnetosphere. Both quiet time and storm time ionospheric upflow and outflow must be correctly established to advance a better understanding of the magnetosphere-ionosphere-thermosphere (M-I-T) coupled system. This must truly be a GEM-CEDAR joint effort to address:

  • the ionosphere boundary layer,
  • the ion energization region of the polar wind
  • the magnetospheric response to solar wind drivers and the ionospheric outflow
  • the feedback into the lower ionosphere-thermosphere

    Invited speakers reviewed the status of current understanding and modeling of the effects of ionospheric ion injections on the magnetosphere. The GEM Focus Group Chairs presented goals-overview of plans and moderate a discussion on new in situ observational opportunities for metric studies on plasma sheet, ring current, and substorm dynamics to direct improvements in the current Geospace General Circulation Models (GGCMs).

    Speakers:
    Charles R. Chappell (Vanderbilt U): Changing the Paradigm! -- The Ionospheric Role in Filling the Magnetosphere with Plasma and Driving Its Dynamics
    Daniel Welling (U Mich): Outflow Really Matters! -- What GLobal MHD Modeling Tells Us About Outflow and the Magnetosphere

    Other Contributors:
    Barbara Giles (NASA/GSFC): MMS Opportunities
    Matina Gkioulidou (APL/JHU): Van Allen Probe Ring Current Observations
    Naritoshi Kitamura (ISAS/JAXA): MMS FPI Observations
    Jonathan Krall (NRL): Plasmapause in the SAMI3 model
    Chris Mouikis (UNH): Dst storm epoch study of ion outflow
    Lynn Kistler (UNH): Multi-satellite view of sawtooth storm morphology

    Session 2: Monday PM2 - Status, Questions, & Opportunities
    Polar Wind and the Ionospheric Boundary

    Attendence: ~35
    Summary:
    Invited speakers reviewed the status of current understanding and modeling of ion upflow initiated in the ionospheric boundary. This is key for proper M-I-T coupling. There are many open questions on ion energization for the ionospheric polar wind that the community still must address. To address this question properly, the spatial and temporal variations of the ionospheric boundary (below 600km) must be defined accurately in the polar and sub-auroral regions for appropriate comparison of PW model results to satellite data.

    The GEM Focus Group Chairs present goals and moderated a discussion on the open questions of ion upflow/outflow. This effort should strive to marshal new in situ and ground-based observational abilities with current modeling capabilities to addressing these open issues. CEDAR scientists are strongly encouraged to participate in this session as a collaborative GEM-CEDAR Session on M-I-T coupling.

    Speakers:
    Roger Varney (SRI): Areas for Improvement in Ion Outflow Modeling
    George Khazanov (NASA/GSFC): Polar Wind M-I-T Coupling: Kinetic vs Hydrodynamic</a>

    Other Contributors:
    Shunrong Zhang (MIT Haystack): ISR campaign opportunities
    Bruce Fritz (UNH): RENU2 Sounding Rocket
    Douglas Rowland (NASA/GSFC): VISIONS Sounding Rocket
    W. K. (Bill) Peterson (LASP): ePoP Status



    Session 3 & 4: Friday PM - Recap, Organize, Planning


    Attendence: ~25 and ~15
    Summary:
    Invited speaker reviewed the big picture possibilities of the Focus Area for advancing community capabilities and GGCMs. The Chairs summarized results of the previous two breakout sessions and moderated a discussion on issues to address:

    Speakers:
    Robert Strangely (UCLA): What are the Questions of Ion Injection and Magnetospheric Response
    Naritoshi Kitamura (ISAS/JAXA): Comparison between GPW and Akabono data

    Other Contributors:
    Vince Eccles: Generalized Polar Wind Model (GPW)

    Open Floor


    • Retrieved from "https://gem.epss.ucla.edu/mediawiki/index.php?title=GEM/CEDAR_M3-I2_Sessions&oldid=3251"