Back to Search Start Over

Comparison between IRI-2012, IRI-2016 models and F2 peak parameters in two stations of the EIA in Vietnam during different solar activity periods

Authors :
Ngoc Luong Thi
Thanh Le Truong
Minh Le Huy
Hung Luu Viet
Hong Pham Thi Thu
Christine Amory Mazaudier
Kornyanat Hozumi
Dung Nguyen Thanh
Institute of Geophysics [Hanoi]
Vietnam Academy of Science and Technology (VAST)
Graduate University of Science and Technology [Hanoi] (GUST)
Laboratoire de Physique des Plasmas (LPP)
Observatoire de Paris
Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-Université Paris sciences et lettres (PSL)-École polytechnique (X)-Sorbonne Université (SU)-Université Paris-Saclay-Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS)
Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics [Trieste] (ICTP)
Ho Chi Minh city University of Technology and Education
National Institute of Information and Communications Technology [Tokyo, Japan] (NICT)
Source :
Advances in Space Research, Advances in Space Research, Elsevier, 2020, (in press). ⟨10.1016/j.asr.2020.07.017⟩
Publication Year :
2021
Publisher :
Elsevier BV, 2021.

Abstract

International audience; This paper presents observations of the F2-layer critical frequency (foF2) and height (hmF2) obtained at Phu Thuy (21.03°N, 105.95°E) and Bac Lieu (9.28°N, 105.73°E) observatories in Vietnam. The data have been examined for all seasons, during high and low solar activities, and compared with the foF2 and hmF2 of the International Reference Ionosphere model (IRI-2012, IRI-2016 two options: AMTB, SHU). Phu Thuy observatory is located at the Northern Crest of the EIA and Bac Lieu in the trough of the EIA, therefore the foF2 values at Phu Thuy are higher than at Bac Lieu. The results show that the IRI-2012 model estimates well the observed foF2 at both stations during high and low solar activities.During high solar activity, models estimate well the calculated hmF2 in summer for both stations. At Phu Thuy in equinoxes AMTB reproduces the night peak better than IRI-2012 and SHU, but higher and later about 2-3 hours, in winter the performance of AMTB is worst. At Bac Lieu, the IRI-2016 options reproduce the night peak and underestimates it, but IRI-2012 does not do it. The pre-noon peaks are underestimated by all the models, except IRI-2012 which overestimates the hmF2 pre-noon peaks at Bac Lieu. At Phu Thuy the pre-noon hmF2 peak is higher than the post-dusk one. At Bac Lieu the post-dusk peak is higher except in summer.During low solar activity, the IRI models estimate relatively well the shape of the calculated hmF2 at both stations. The IRI-2012 models explained better the observed foF2 (deviation of 2.5%) during solstices than during equinoxes (14.2%) for high solar activity. The IRI-2012 model explained better the observed foF2 in spring (7.8%) than in autumn (19.9%), matched better the calculated hmF2 in solstice (5.4%) than during equinoxes (11.8%).The performance of AMTB is worst at both stations for both the high and low solar activity periods except in autumn at Bac Lieu for the low solar year. IRI-2012 is best at the stations for both high and low solar activity periods, except in summer for the high solar activiy year when SHU is the best at Phu Thuy. These results can be used to improve the future IRI model.

Details

ISSN :
02731177
Volume :
68
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
Advances in Space Research
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....323f897a39ddbc6beacd4aa459cee828