Cross-Shock Potential in Rippled Versus Planar Quasi-Perpendicular Shocks Observed by MMS

E. L.M. Hanson; O. V. Agapitov; F. S. Mozer; V. Krasnoselskikh; S. D. Bale; L. Avanov; Y. Khotyaintsev; B. Giles

doi:10.1029/2018GL080240

Cross-Shock Potential in Rippled Versus Planar Quasi-Perpendicular Shocks Observed by MMS

E. L.M. Hanson, O. V. Agapitov, F. S. Mozer, V. Krasnoselskikh, S. D. Bale, L. Avanov, Y. Khotyaintsev, B. Giles

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

23 Scopus citations

Abstract

The unprecedented detail of measurements by the four Magnetospheric Multiscale (MMS) spacecraft enable deeper investigation of quasi-perpendicular collisionless shocks. We compare shock normals, planarities, and Normal Incidence Frame cross-shock potentials determined from electric field measurements and proxies, for a subcritical interplanetary shock and a supercritical bow shock. The subcritical shock's cross-shock potential was 26±6 V. The shock scale was 33 km, too short to allow comparison with proxies from ion moments. Proxies from electron moments provided potential estimates of 40±5 V. Shock normals from magnetic field minimum variance analysis were nearly identical, indicating a planar front. The supercritical shock's cross-shock potential was estimated to be from 290 to 440 V from the different spacecraft measurements, with shock scale 120 km. Reflected ions contaminated the ion-based proxies upstream, whereas electron-based proxies yielded reasonable estimates of 250±50 V. Shock normals from electric field maximum variance analysis differed, indicating a rippled front.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	2381-2389
Number of pages	9
Journal	Geophysical Research Letters
Volume	46
Issue number	5
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL080240
State	Published - Mar 16 2019
Externally published	Yes

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
The authors thank the entire MMS team for providing such excellent data, which is publicly available (https://lasp.colorado.edu/mms/sdc/public/about/how-to/). The authors thank C. T. Russell, S. J. Schwartz, and R. B. Torbert for fruitful discussion and valuable comments. E.?H. acknowledges the support of NESSF grant HELIO17R-0008. The work by O.?A. and F.?M. was performed under THEMIS NASA contract NAS5-02099, NASA 80NSSC18K0155 contract, and JHU/APL contract 922613 (RBSP-EFW). V.?K. was supported by the STEREO-WAVES Invited Scientist grant. The authors acknowledge NASA contract NAS5-02099 and V. Angelopoulos for use of data from the THEMIS Mission and K. H. Glassmeier, U. Auster, and W. Baumjohann for the use of FGM data provided under the lead of the Technical University of Braunschweig and with financial support through the German Ministry for Economy and Technology and the German Center for Aviation and Space (DLR) under contract 50 OC 0302.

Funding Information:
The authors thank the entire MMS team for providing such excellent data, which is publicly available (https://lasp. colorado.edu/mms/sdc/public/about/ how‐to/). The authors thank C. T. Russell, S. J. Schwartz, and R. B. Torbert for fruitful discussion and valuable comments. E. H. acknowledges the support of NESSF grant HELIO17R‐0008. The work by O. A. and F. M. was performed under THEMIS NASA contract NAS5‐02099, NASA 80NSSC18K0155 contract, and JHU/APL contract 922613 (RBSP‐ EFW). V. K. was supported by the STEREO‐WAVES Invited Scientist grant. The authors acknowledge NASA contract NAS5‐02099 and V. Angelopoulos for use of data from the THEMIS Mission and K. H. Glassmeier, U. Auster, and W. Baumjohann for the use of FGM data provided under the lead of the Technical University of Braunschweig and with financial support through the German Ministry for Economy and Technology and the German Center for Aviation and Space (DLR) under contract 50 OC 0302.

Publisher Copyright:
©2019. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.

Keywords

bow shock
cross-shock potential
electric field measurements
interplanetary shock
rippled shocks
solar wind

Publisher link

10.1029/2018GL080240

Find It

Find It at U of M Libraries

Cite this

@article{899deedead52460ba288cb05be722b98,

title = "Cross-Shock Potential in Rippled Versus Planar Quasi-Perpendicular Shocks Observed by MMS",

abstract = "The unprecedented detail of measurements by the four Magnetospheric Multiscale (MMS) spacecraft enable deeper investigation of quasi-perpendicular collisionless shocks. We compare shock normals, planarities, and Normal Incidence Frame cross-shock potentials determined from electric field measurements and proxies, for a subcritical interplanetary shock and a supercritical bow shock. The subcritical shock's cross-shock potential was 26±6 V. The shock scale was 33 km, too short to allow comparison with proxies from ion moments. Proxies from electron moments provided potential estimates of 40±5 V. Shock normals from magnetic field minimum variance analysis were nearly identical, indicating a planar front. The supercritical shock's cross-shock potential was estimated to be from 290 to 440 V from the different spacecraft measurements, with shock scale 120 km. Reflected ions contaminated the ion-based proxies upstream, whereas electron-based proxies yielded reasonable estimates of 250±50 V. Shock normals from electric field maximum variance analysis differed, indicating a rippled front.",

keywords = "bow shock, cross-shock potential, electric field measurements, interplanetary shock, rippled shocks, solar wind",

author = "Hanson, {E. L.M.} and Agapitov, {O. V.} and Mozer, {F. S.} and V. Krasnoselskikh and Bale, {S. D.} and L. Avanov and Y. Khotyaintsev and B. Giles",

note = "Funding Information: The authors thank the entire MMS team for providing such excellent data, which is publicly available (https://lasp.colorado.edu/mms/sdc/public/about/how-to/). The authors thank C. T. Russell, S. J. Schwartz, and R. B. Torbert for fruitful discussion and valuable comments. E.?H. acknowledges the support of NESSF grant HELIO17R-0008. The work by O.?A. and F.?M. was performed under THEMIS NASA contract NAS5-02099, NASA 80NSSC18K0155 contract, and JHU/APL contract 922613 (RBSP-EFW). V.?K. was supported by the STEREO-WAVES Invited Scientist grant. The authors acknowledge NASA contract NAS5-02099 and V. Angelopoulos for use of data from the THEMIS Mission and K. H. Glassmeier, U. Auster, and W. Baumjohann for the use of FGM data provided under the lead of the Technical University of Braunschweig and with financial support through the German Ministry for Economy and Technology and the German Center for Aviation and Space (DLR) under contract 50 OC 0302. Funding Information: The authors thank the entire MMS team for providing such excellent data, which is publicly available (https://lasp. colorado.edu/mms/sdc/public/about/ how‐to/). The authors thank C. T. Russell, S. J. Schwartz, and R. B. Torbert for fruitful discussion and valuable comments. E. H. acknowledges the support of NESSF grant HELIO17R‐0008. The work by O. A. and F. M. was performed under THEMIS NASA contract NAS5‐02099, NASA 80NSSC18K0155 contract, and JHU/APL contract 922613 (RBSP‐ EFW). V. K. was supported by the STEREO‐WAVES Invited Scientist grant. The authors acknowledge NASA contract NAS5‐02099 and V. Angelopoulos for use of data from the THEMIS Mission and K. H. Glassmeier, U. Auster, and W. Baumjohann for the use of FGM data provided under the lead of the Technical University of Braunschweig and with financial support through the German Ministry for Economy and Technology and the German Center for Aviation and Space (DLR) under contract 50 OC 0302. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright}2019. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.",

year = "2019",

month = mar,

day = "16",

doi = "10.1029/2018GL080240",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "46",

pages = "2381--2389",

journal = "Geophysical Research Letters",

issn = "0094-8276",

publisher = "American Geophysical Union",

number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cross-Shock Potential in Rippled Versus Planar Quasi-Perpendicular Shocks Observed by MMS

AU - Hanson, E. L.M.

AU - Agapitov, O. V.

AU - Mozer, F. S.

AU - Krasnoselskikh, V.

AU - Bale, S. D.

AU - Avanov, L.

AU - Khotyaintsev, Y.

AU - Giles, B.

N1 - Funding Information: The authors thank the entire MMS team for providing such excellent data, which is publicly available (https://lasp.colorado.edu/mms/sdc/public/about/how-to/). The authors thank C. T. Russell, S. J. Schwartz, and R. B. Torbert for fruitful discussion and valuable comments. E.?H. acknowledges the support of NESSF grant HELIO17R-0008. The work by O.?A. and F.?M. was performed under THEMIS NASA contract NAS5-02099, NASA 80NSSC18K0155 contract, and JHU/APL contract 922613 (RBSP-EFW). V.?K. was supported by the STEREO-WAVES Invited Scientist grant. The authors acknowledge NASA contract NAS5-02099 and V. Angelopoulos for use of data from the THEMIS Mission and K. H. Glassmeier, U. Auster, and W. Baumjohann for the use of FGM data provided under the lead of the Technical University of Braunschweig and with financial support through the German Ministry for Economy and Technology and the German Center for Aviation and Space (DLR) under contract 50 OC 0302. Funding Information: The authors thank the entire MMS team for providing such excellent data, which is publicly available (https://lasp. colorado.edu/mms/sdc/public/about/ how‐to/). The authors thank C. T. Russell, S. J. Schwartz, and R. B. Torbert for fruitful discussion and valuable comments. E. H. acknowledges the support of NESSF grant HELIO17R‐0008. The work by O. A. and F. M. was performed under THEMIS NASA contract NAS5‐02099, NASA 80NSSC18K0155 contract, and JHU/APL contract 922613 (RBSP‐ EFW). V. K. was supported by the STEREO‐WAVES Invited Scientist grant. The authors acknowledge NASA contract NAS5‐02099 and V. Angelopoulos for use of data from the THEMIS Mission and K. H. Glassmeier, U. Auster, and W. Baumjohann for the use of FGM data provided under the lead of the Technical University of Braunschweig and with financial support through the German Ministry for Economy and Technology and the German Center for Aviation and Space (DLR) under contract 50 OC 0302. Publisher Copyright: ©2019. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.

PY - 2019/3/16

Y1 - 2019/3/16

N2 - The unprecedented detail of measurements by the four Magnetospheric Multiscale (MMS) spacecraft enable deeper investigation of quasi-perpendicular collisionless shocks. We compare shock normals, planarities, and Normal Incidence Frame cross-shock potentials determined from electric field measurements and proxies, for a subcritical interplanetary shock and a supercritical bow shock. The subcritical shock's cross-shock potential was 26±6 V. The shock scale was 33 km, too short to allow comparison with proxies from ion moments. Proxies from electron moments provided potential estimates of 40±5 V. Shock normals from magnetic field minimum variance analysis were nearly identical, indicating a planar front. The supercritical shock's cross-shock potential was estimated to be from 290 to 440 V from the different spacecraft measurements, with shock scale 120 km. Reflected ions contaminated the ion-based proxies upstream, whereas electron-based proxies yielded reasonable estimates of 250±50 V. Shock normals from electric field maximum variance analysis differed, indicating a rippled front.

AB - The unprecedented detail of measurements by the four Magnetospheric Multiscale (MMS) spacecraft enable deeper investigation of quasi-perpendicular collisionless shocks. We compare shock normals, planarities, and Normal Incidence Frame cross-shock potentials determined from electric field measurements and proxies, for a subcritical interplanetary shock and a supercritical bow shock. The subcritical shock's cross-shock potential was 26±6 V. The shock scale was 33 km, too short to allow comparison with proxies from ion moments. Proxies from electron moments provided potential estimates of 40±5 V. Shock normals from magnetic field minimum variance analysis were nearly identical, indicating a planar front. The supercritical shock's cross-shock potential was estimated to be from 290 to 440 V from the different spacecraft measurements, with shock scale 120 km. Reflected ions contaminated the ion-based proxies upstream, whereas electron-based proxies yielded reasonable estimates of 250±50 V. Shock normals from electric field maximum variance analysis differed, indicating a rippled front.

KW - bow shock

KW - cross-shock potential

KW - electric field measurements

KW - interplanetary shock

KW - rippled shocks

KW - solar wind

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85062980707&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85062980707&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1029/2018GL080240

DO - 10.1029/2018GL080240

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85062980707

SN - 0094-8276

VL - 46

SP - 2381

EP - 2389

JO - Geophysical Research Letters

JF - Geophysical Research Letters

IS - 5

ER -

Cross-Shock Potential in Rippled Versus Planar Quasi-Perpendicular Shocks Observed by MMS

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Publisher link

Find It

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this