An evaluation of the AP9/AE9 radiation belt models for

Report
ESA Contract No.
4000108483/13/NL/AK
ESA Technical Officers
H. Evans, E.J. Daly
D.Heynderickx
DH Consultancy, Leuven, Belgium
P.R. Truscott
Kallisto Consultancy, Farnborough, UK
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
European Space Weather Week 11
Confronting the AP9/AE9 Radiation
Belt Models with Spacecraft Data
and Other Models
1
European Space Weather Week 11
• Concern in European space industry about higher fluxes (and
thus doses) predicted by AP9/AE9
• Analysis of differences with other models
• Implementation in SPENVIS
• User education
• Recommendations for ECSS space environment standard
• Feedback to the IRENE team of issues encountered during the
analysis
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
Context
2
• Run different models on a spacecraft trajectory set of points, for
representative orbits (LEO, MEO, GTO, GEO)
• Comparison of trajectory fluences
• Comparison of fluences used in radiation effects models (TID,
NIEL, solar cell degradation)
• Comparisons of model fluxes to spacecraft data
• Run models on the trajectory data in the various datasets, for the
energy bins of the instruments.
• Compare time series and fluence spectra.
• Try to account for anisotropy effects in LEO.
European Space Weather Week 11
• Intercomparison of models
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
Comparison methods
3
• Comparison with AP/AE-8, IGE
• GTO: inc 5°, perigee 300 km, apogee 36,000 km
• Comparison with AP/AE-8, CRRESELE, CRRESPRO
• MEO (Galileo GNSS): circular, altitude 23,222 km, inc 56°
• Comparison with AP/AE-8, CRRESELE, CRRESPRO
• MEO (GPS): altitude 20,200 km
• Comparison with AP/AE-8, CRRESPRO, CRRESELE, MEO-V1/2
• Sun-synchronous: altitude 800 km (inc 98.6°)
• Comparison with AP/AE-8
• Large Observatory for X-ray Timing (LOFT): circular, altitude
600 km
• Comparison with AP/AE-8
European Space Weather Week 11
• Geostationary at longitudes 75°, 180° and 285°
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
Test scenarios: generic trajectories
4
European Space Weather Week 11
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
SSO Proton spectra
5
European Space Weather Week 11
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
SSO Electron spectra
6
European Space Weather Week 11
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
SSO SHIELDOSE-2: protons
7
European Space Weather Week 11
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
SSO SHIELDOSE-2: e-, Bremsstrahlung
8
European Space Weather Week 11
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
GEO electron flux
9
European Space Weather Week 11
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
MEO (GPS) electron flux
10
• Convert spacecraft ephemeris to SPENVIS and IRENE trajectory
file format (identical for GDZ except for shift in MJD)
• Run models using the instrument energy channels
• Compare orbit evolution plus trajectory fluence spectra
• Datasets:
•
•
•
•
•
CRRES/MEA: 110 keV – 1.6 MeV electrons
AZUR/EI-88: 1.5–104 MeV protons
Giove-B/SREM: calibrated electron channels
Integral/SREM: calibrated electron channels
SAMPEX/PET: 19–500 MeV protons
European Space Weather Week 11
• Procedure:
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
Test scenarios: datasets
11
European Space Weather Week 11
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
AZUR data selection
12
European Space Weather Week 11
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
AZUR data comparison
13
European Space Weather Week 11
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
AZUR mission comparison
14
European Space Weather Week 11
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
CRRES/MEA data selection
15
European Space Weather Week 11
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
CRRES/MEA: quiet conditions
16
European Space Weather Week 11
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
CRRES/MEA: active conditions
17
European Space Weather Week 11
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
CRRES/MEA: active spectra
18
European Space Weather Week 11
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
Giove-B/SREM: active spectra
19
• AE-8 and AE-9 Mean are comparable, AE-9 extends the energy
range (needs evaluation).
• IGE2006 (ECSS model) is (much) lower.
• High energy flux predictions need further evaluation in view of
updates of ECSS
• Are longitudinal effects important?
• LEO
• AP-9 overestimates the extent of the SAA region.
• AP-9 overestimates below ~70 MeV and underestimates above.
• AE-9 is consistently higher than AE-8 except for >1.5 MeV
European Space Weather Week 11
• More analysis is needed to compare the models to longer
time averages of the datasets.
• GEO environment
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
Conclusions (1)
20
• MEOV2 mean is lower than AE-9 mean, MEOV2 upper is in good
agreement with AE-9 90%.
• High energy component needs further evaluation. Until then, AE8/MAX can be used in this region.
• Pending long term model to data comparisons, the ECSS
recommendation (MEOV2) can be maintained.
European Space Weather Week 11
• MEO
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
Conclusions (2)
21
• Construct (omni-)directional flux maps from AZUR/EI-88 and
SAMPEX/PET proton data
• Analyse PROBA-V/EPT data
• Analysis of the high energy electron spectrum
• Ingest AZUR/EI-88, SAMPEX/PET and RBSP/REPT/MAGEIS data
into the IRENE models.
• Provide more detailed information on the construction of the
IRENE models.
• Review the usage of the confidence level and Monte Carlo
versions of the models.
European Space Weather Week 11
• A more in-depth analysis is needed to evaluate the models
(IRENE and other) with longer time averages of spacecraft
data.
20 Nov 2014, Liège, Belgium
Recommendations
22

similar documents