Physics of auroral phenomena : proceedings of the 35th Annual seminar, Apatity, 28 Februaru – 02 March, 2012 / [ed. board: A. G. Yahnin, A. A. Mochalov]. - Апатиты : Издательство Кольского научного центра РАН, 2012. - 187 с. : ил., табл.

“P h ysics o f A u roral Phenom ena", Proc. X X X V A n n u al Sem inar, A p a tity, p p . I l l -1 1 4 , 2 0 1 2 © Kola Science Centre, Russian Academy of Science, 2012 Polar Geophysical Institute VARIOUS MAGNETOSPHERIC INPUTS TO THE GSM TIP MODEL FOR INVESTIGATION OF IONOSPHERIC RESPONSE TO GEOMAGNETIC STORM EVENT ON 2-3 MAY 2010 M.V. Klimenko, V.V. Klimenko, N.A. Korenkova (West Department o f Pushkov IZMIRANRAS, 41, Pobedy Av., Kaliningrad, 236017, Russia; e-mail: maksim.klimenko@mail.ru) V.G. Vorobjov, O.I. Yagodkina ( Polar Geophysical Institute KSC RAS, Apatity, Russia) K.G. Ratovsky ( Institute o f Solar-Terrestrial Physics SB RAS, Irkutsk, Russia ) Y. Sahai, P.R. Fagundes, R. de Jesus, A.J. de Abreu (Universidade do Vale do Paraiba (UNIVAP), Sao Jose dos Campos, SP, Brazil) Abstract. Recent modifications to the Global Self-Consistent Model of the Thermosphere, Ionosphere and Protonosphere (GSM TIP) resulted in better representation of ionospheric effects during geomagnetic storms. This study presents the GSM TIP numerical simulations of the ionospheric response to the geomagnetic storm event on 2-3 May 2010. We try to investigate the problem of the model input parameters setting at the simulations of geomagnetic storms. In numerical experiments, such model input parameters as electric cross-polar cap potential and R2 FAC were set as function of different geomagnetic activity indices, solar wind and interplanetary magnetic field parameters. Current simulation also uses two empirical models for high-energy particle precipitation. The obtained calculation results were compared with experimental data obtained at different mid- and low-latitude stations. Introduction The modeling studies of the ionospheric response to geomagnetic storms with used the first principal self-consistent model of the thermosphere-ionosphere-electrodynamics system need to account for the changes of Cross-Polar Cap Potential (CPCP), Region 2 Field-Aligned Currents (R2 FAC) spatial-temporal variations, energy and flux energy of high-energy particle precipitation. The inclusion of such inputs to the global numerical model allows accurate description of the Joule heating, effects of the prompt penetration electric field, overshielding, and disturbance dynamo electric field. The Global Self-consistent Model of the Thermosphere, Ionosphere, Protonosphere (GSM TIP) (Namgaladze et al., 1988), developed and modified by Klimenko et al. (2006, 2007) in WD IZMIRAN allows modeling studies with all these drivers. The comparison of the different ionospheric parameters calculated with use the GSM TIP model during geomagnetic storm sequence on September 2005 with the observational data at different mid-latitude locations, presented in earlier study by Klimenko et al. (201 la), has revealed the qualitative agreement. Suggested reasons for model/data differences included the coarse temporal resolution of the model input parameters (e.g. three-hour Kv- index), the use of the dipole approach of geomagnetic field in the GSM TIP model, and the absence of solar flare effects in the model. Subsequent study (Klimenko et al., 201 lb) has shown that the use of several updates in the GSM TIP model can significantly improve the agreement between the calculation results and the observational data. These updates are: a) AE index with 1-min temporal resolution as an independent variable instead of the 3-hour Kv- index for modeling the time dependence of CPCP; b) the new empirical model of high-energy particle precipitation, depending on the A^-index (Zhang and Paxton, 2008); c) description of the R2 FAC according to the currently available experimental data and theoretical concepts (Iijima and Potemra, 1976; Sojka et al., 1994; Snekvik et al., 2007; Cheng et al., 2008; Kikuchi et al., 2008); d) inclusion in the model the effects of solar flares. In this paper, we continue our investigation of the ionospheric effects during geomagnetic storm. For this reason, we considered the geomagnetic storm event on May 2-3, 2010. Description o f the storm event and model runs Figure 1 describes the behavior of Dst-, Kf-, AL- and AE- indices of geomagnetic activity, solar wind velocity Vsw and Interplanetary Magnetic Field for the period of 1-3 May 2010. We have used two different dependences of CPCP changes as input model parameters: (1) АФ = 38 + 0.089хЛ£, kV (Feshchenko and Maltsev, 2003); (2) АФ = 10-4 x Fsw2 (km/s) + 11.7 x |SIMF! (nT) x sin (6/2) (Boyle et al., 1997), where в = arcos (SZIMF/|51MF|)- Current simulations also use two empirical models by Zhang and Paxton (2008) and Vorobjov and Yagodkina (2005, 2007) for high-energy particle precipitation. We performed four different model 111 Table 1. Geomagnetic latitude of R2 FAC Condition GMLat of R2 FAC АФ <40 kV ±65° 40 kV <АФ < 50 kV ±60° 50 kV < z )0< 88 .5 kV ±55° 88.5 kV <АФ < 127 kV ±50° 127 kV <АФ < 165.4 kV ±45° 165.4 kV </(Ф <200 kV ±40° АФ > 200 kV ±35°