Comparative Accuracies of Models for Drag Prediction During Geomagnetically Disturbed Periods: A First Principles Model Versus Empirical Models
Abstract We examine the accuracy of density prediction by the first principles model Thermosphere Ionosphere Electrodynamics General Circulation Model (TIEGCM) developed by the National Center for Atmospheric Research and compare it to the accuracy of three empirical models: Jacchia 71, the Naval Re...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2023-05-01
|
| Series: | Space Weather |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1029/2022SW003332 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1841536498661326848 |
|---|---|
| author | R. L. Walterscheid M. W. Chen C.‐C. Chao S. Gegenheimer J. Cabrera‐Guzman J. McVey |
| author_facet | R. L. Walterscheid M. W. Chen C.‐C. Chao S. Gegenheimer J. Cabrera‐Guzman J. McVey |
| author_sort | R. L. Walterscheid |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract We examine the accuracy of density prediction by the first principles model Thermosphere Ionosphere Electrodynamics General Circulation Model (TIEGCM) developed by the National Center for Atmospheric Research and compare it to the accuracy of three empirical models: Jacchia 71, the Naval Research Laboratory Mass Spectrometer Incoherent Scatter Extended 2000 (NRLMSIS), Jacchia 1971, and Jacchia‐Bowman 2008. Comparisons are made for three large storms: the October 2003 storm, the March 2013 storm, and the March 2015 storm. To evaluate the accuracy of these models we use tracking data for nine space objects in low Earth orbit. Additionally, we evaluate the accuracy of the TIEGCM and NRLMSIS with data from high precision accelerometers on the Challenging Minisatellite Payload (CHAMP) and Gravity field and Circulation Explorer (GOCE) satellites. The goal is to assess the use of a first principles model as a potential tool for forecasting satellite drag during large magnetic storms. For the storms considered, we found the TIEGCM, JB2008, and NRLMSIS models to be substantially more accurate than the Jacchia 71 model. The accuracies of the TIEGCM and JB2008 models were similar, but overall, the TIEGCM was more accurate. We found smaller differences for TIEGCM versus CHAMP than for NRLMIS for the Halloween Storm, and smaller differences than results published for JB2008 and the assimilative model HASDM. The empirical models are at present more practical for operational purposes, but the TIEGCM, developed as a research model, with a greater focus on operational use offers the potential for improved utility during stressing conditions. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-874ad20e7a894eb987f2866b19e97846 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1542-7390 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2023-05-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Space Weather |
| spelling | doaj-art-874ad20e7a894eb987f2866b19e978462025-01-14T16:26:43ZengWileySpace Weather1542-73902023-05-01215n/an/a10.1029/2022SW003332Comparative Accuracies of Models for Drag Prediction During Geomagnetically Disturbed Periods: A First Principles Model Versus Empirical ModelsR. L. Walterscheid0M. W. Chen1C.‐C. Chao2S. Gegenheimer3J. Cabrera‐Guzman4J. McVey5Space Science Applications Laboratory The Aerospace Corporation Los Angeles CA USASpace Science Applications Laboratory The Aerospace Corporation Los Angeles CA USAAstrodynamics Department The Aerospace Corporation Los Angeles CA USAAstrodynamics Department The Aerospace Corporation Los Angeles CA USASpace Science Applications Laboratory The Aerospace Corporation Los Angeles CA USAAstrodynamics Department The Aerospace Corporation Los Angeles CA USAAbstract We examine the accuracy of density prediction by the first principles model Thermosphere Ionosphere Electrodynamics General Circulation Model (TIEGCM) developed by the National Center for Atmospheric Research and compare it to the accuracy of three empirical models: Jacchia 71, the Naval Research Laboratory Mass Spectrometer Incoherent Scatter Extended 2000 (NRLMSIS), Jacchia 1971, and Jacchia‐Bowman 2008. Comparisons are made for three large storms: the October 2003 storm, the March 2013 storm, and the March 2015 storm. To evaluate the accuracy of these models we use tracking data for nine space objects in low Earth orbit. Additionally, we evaluate the accuracy of the TIEGCM and NRLMSIS with data from high precision accelerometers on the Challenging Minisatellite Payload (CHAMP) and Gravity field and Circulation Explorer (GOCE) satellites. The goal is to assess the use of a first principles model as a potential tool for forecasting satellite drag during large magnetic storms. For the storms considered, we found the TIEGCM, JB2008, and NRLMSIS models to be substantially more accurate than the Jacchia 71 model. The accuracies of the TIEGCM and JB2008 models were similar, but overall, the TIEGCM was more accurate. We found smaller differences for TIEGCM versus CHAMP than for NRLMIS for the Halloween Storm, and smaller differences than results published for JB2008 and the assimilative model HASDM. The empirical models are at present more practical for operational purposes, but the TIEGCM, developed as a research model, with a greater focus on operational use offers the potential for improved utility during stressing conditions.https://doi.org/10.1029/2022SW003332neutral densityorbital drag predictiongeomagnetic stormsthermospheric model |
| spellingShingle | R. L. Walterscheid M. W. Chen C.‐C. Chao S. Gegenheimer J. Cabrera‐Guzman J. McVey Comparative Accuracies of Models for Drag Prediction During Geomagnetically Disturbed Periods: A First Principles Model Versus Empirical Models Space Weather neutral density orbital drag prediction geomagnetic storms thermospheric model |
| title | Comparative Accuracies of Models for Drag Prediction During Geomagnetically Disturbed Periods: A First Principles Model Versus Empirical Models |
| title_full | Comparative Accuracies of Models for Drag Prediction During Geomagnetically Disturbed Periods: A First Principles Model Versus Empirical Models |
| title_fullStr | Comparative Accuracies of Models for Drag Prediction During Geomagnetically Disturbed Periods: A First Principles Model Versus Empirical Models |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparative Accuracies of Models for Drag Prediction During Geomagnetically Disturbed Periods: A First Principles Model Versus Empirical Models |
| title_short | Comparative Accuracies of Models for Drag Prediction During Geomagnetically Disturbed Periods: A First Principles Model Versus Empirical Models |
| title_sort | comparative accuracies of models for drag prediction during geomagnetically disturbed periods a first principles model versus empirical models |
| topic | neutral density orbital drag prediction geomagnetic storms thermospheric model |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1029/2022SW003332 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT rlwalterscheid comparativeaccuraciesofmodelsfordragpredictionduringgeomagneticallydisturbedperiodsafirstprinciplesmodelversusempiricalmodels AT mwchen comparativeaccuraciesofmodelsfordragpredictionduringgeomagneticallydisturbedperiodsafirstprinciplesmodelversusempiricalmodels AT ccchao comparativeaccuraciesofmodelsfordragpredictionduringgeomagneticallydisturbedperiodsafirstprinciplesmodelversusempiricalmodels AT sgegenheimer comparativeaccuraciesofmodelsfordragpredictionduringgeomagneticallydisturbedperiodsafirstprinciplesmodelversusempiricalmodels AT jcabreraguzman comparativeaccuraciesofmodelsfordragpredictionduringgeomagneticallydisturbedperiodsafirstprinciplesmodelversusempiricalmodels AT jmcvey comparativeaccuraciesofmodelsfordragpredictionduringgeomagneticallydisturbedperiodsafirstprinciplesmodelversusempiricalmodels |