Physics of auroral phenomena : proceedings of the 33rd Annual seminar, Apatity, 02 - 05 March, 2010 / [ed.: A.G. Yahnin, A. A. Mochalov]. - Апатиты : Издательство Кольского научного центра РАН, 2011. - 206 с. : ил.

М. V. Klimenko, and V. V. Klimenko However, we have tried to remove two other reasons of distinctions. The results o f this research are presented in the given paper. As the modeled event has been described in detail in (Klimenko, Klimenko, 2009; Klimenko et al., 2010), we at once shall pass to the description o f new statement of the problem. The new statement of the problem The ionospheric parameters in quiet geomagnetic conditions were calculated with taken into account the change of the solar activity index FWj from day to day within the limits of 101 up to 120. Thus, the PDPC was set equal 38 kV at geomagnetic latitudes ±75°, and FAC2 were set equal 3 x l0 '9 A/m2 at geomagnetic latitudes ±70°. Instead of functional dependence o f model input parameters during storm time only from 3-hour Лр-index, we used the dependences both on A'p-index and on ^4£-index with the time resolution in one-minute. In Table 1, it is shown how we have divided the considered period into separate intervals for the set of FAC2 depending on storm phases. The PDPC was set equal А Ф - 38 + 0.089xAE, kV according to Feshchenko, Maltsev (2003) at geomagnetic latitudes ±75°. FAC2 were set according to Cheng et al. (2008); Snekvik et al. (2007): j 2 = ЗхЮ'9 + 6x l 0 ' l2x AE, A/m2in quiet conditions and at recovery phase of storm; j 2 = 3 x l0 ‘9 + 1.5x Щ п хАЕ, A/m2at SSC with 30 min delay relatively to the PDPC changes; j 2 = 3 x l0 ‘9 + 3.6x 10 'u xAE, A/m2 during main phase o f storm. The displacement o f FAC2 to the lower latitudes was set as by Sojka et al. (1994): ±65° for АФ < 40 kV; ±60° for 40 kV < АФ < 50 kV; ±55° for 50 kV < АФ< 88.5 kV; ±50° for 88.5 kV < АФ< 127 kV; ±45° for 127 kV < АФ< 165.4 kV; ±40° for 165.4 kV < АФ < 200 kV; ±35° for 200 kV < А Ф. Fig. 1 shows the behavior o f these input parameters. Besides, now we realized in the model GSM TIP the empirical model o f particle precipitation by Zhang and Paxton, 2008. In this empirical model the energy and the energy flux of precipitating particles depends from .Kp-index of geomagnetic activity. In Fig. 2, the energy and energy flux of precipitating particles for the different values o f Kp index are shown. It is visible the increase in the mean energy of precipitating particles and displacement o f particle precipitation region to the lower latitudes with growth of geomagnetic activity. At last, in our calculations we have considered the effects o f five solar flares shown in the Table 2 that took place during the examined period. Model calculation results and discussion The calculation results obtained with use of the model GSM TIP are analyzed and compared with SPIDR experimental data above stations Millstone Hill (42.6°N, 71.5°W), Ascension Island (8.0°S, 14.0°W), Grahamstown (33.3°S, 26.5°E), Leningrad (60.0°N, 30.7°E) and Tashkent (41.3°N, 69.6°E). In Fig. 3, it is shown the foF2 behavior above these ionospheric stations during geomagnetic storm sequence on September 9-14, 2005. Above station Millstone Hill, the negative foF2 disturbances are formed in all days. Exceptions are the positive disturbances on September 9 and 10, obtained in the model GSM TIP and observed in experiment. These positive disturbances in foF2 obtained in calculation results are a little less, than in experiment. In addition, it is visible the effects of solar flare as thin structure of foF2 variations during geomagnetic disturbances on September 13. The daytime positive electron density disturbances above Ascension Kp = 0.0 EO.keV 09:00 UT 09.09.2005 QO,erg/(cm2«) 09:00 UT 09.09,2005 MagneticLongitude,dcg Geomagndic1-ongitude,dcg Kp= 5.0 E0,k«V 21:00 UT 10.09.2005 QO,erg/(cra20 21:00UT 10.09.2005 MagneticLongitude,deg GcanagKncLongitude,dcg Kp = 6.0 EO.keV 18:00UT 11.09.2005 QO, erg/(cm20 18:00UT 11.09.2005 MagneticLongitude,dcg Geena^eic Longitude,deg Kp = 7.7 EO.keV 06:00 UT 11.09.2005 Q0, erg/(cm2*) 06:00 UT 11.09.2005 Fig. 2. Calculated particle precipitation energy and energy fluxes for different Ap-indices. MagneticLongitude,dcg Kp = EO.keV 15:00 UT 13.09.2005 2.0 Q0, erg/(cm2s) 15:00 UT 13.09.2005 MagneticLongitude,deg Kp = EO.keV 03:00UT 11.09.2005 GeamapKticLongitude,dcg 7.0 Q0, erg/(cra2s) 03:00 UT 11.09.2005 MagneticLongin.dc.deg &я™*геисUmg>tude.deg Kp = 4.0 EO.keV 06:00UT 10.09.2005 Q0,erg/(cm2*) 06:00 UT 10 09 2005 30