Journal cover Journal topic
Annales Geophysicae An interactive open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union
Journal topic

Journal metrics

Journal metrics

  • IF value: 1.585 IF 1.585
  • IF 5-year value: 1.698 IF 5-year
    1.698
  • CiteScore value: 1.62 CiteScore
    1.62
  • SNIP value: 0.820 SNIP 0.820
  • IPP value: 1.52 IPP 1.52
  • SJR value: 0.781 SJR 0.781
  • Scimago H <br class='hide-on-tablet hide-on-mobile'>index value: 83 Scimago H
    index 83
  • h5-index value: 24 h5-index 24
Discussion papers
https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-2019-131
© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-2019-131
© Author(s) 2019. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Submitted as: regular paper 05 Sep 2019

Submitted as: regular paper | 05 Sep 2019

Review status
This discussion paper is a preprint. A revision of the manuscript is under review for the journal Annales Geophysicae (ANGEO).

Ionosonde Total Electron Content Evaluation Using IGS Data

Telmo dos Santos Klipp1, Adriano Petry1, Gabriel Sandim Falcão1, Jonas Rodrigues de Souza2, Eurico Rodrigues de Paula2, and Haroldo Fraga de Campos Velho2 Telmo dos Santos Klipp et al.
  • 1National Institute for Space Research, Southern Regional Space Research Center, Av Roraima, campus UFSM, prédio do INPE/CRS, sala 2023, P.O. box 5021, 97105-970, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil
  • 2National Institute for Space Research, Av. dos Astronautas, 1758 – Jardim da Granja, São José dos Campos/SP – CEP12227-010, Brazil

Abstract. In this work, a period of two years (2016–2017) of vertical total electron content (VTEC) from ionosondes operating in Brazil is compared to the International GNSS Service (IGS) data. Sounding instruments from National Institute for Space Research (INPE) provided the ionograms used, which were filtered based on confidence score (CS) and C-level flags evaluation. Differences between TEC from IGS maps and ionograms were accumulated in terms of root mean square error (RMSE). It has been noticed the TEC values provided by ionograms are systematically underestimated, which is attributed to a limitation in the electron density modeled for the ionogram topside that considers maximum height only around 800–900 Km, while IGS takes in account electron density from GNSS stations up to the satellite network orbits. The ionogram topside profiles covering the plasmasphere were re-modeled using an adaptive alpha-Chapman exponential decay that includes a transition function between the F2 layer and plasmasphere, and electron density integration height was extended to compute TEC. Chapman parameters for the F2 layer were extracted from each ionogram, and plasmaspheric scale height was set to 10,000 Km. Our analysis has shown the plasmaspheric basis electron density, assumed to be proportional to the electron peak density, plays an important role to reduce the RMSE values. Depending on the proportionality coefficient choice, mean RMSE reached a minimum of 5.32 TECU, that is 23 % lower than initial ionograms TEC errors.

Telmo dos Santos Klipp et al.
Interactive discussion
Status: final response (author comments only)
Status: final response (author comments only)
AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment
[Login for Authors/Topical Editors] [Subscribe to comment alert] Printer-friendly Version - Printer-friendly version Supplement - Supplement
Telmo dos Santos Klipp et al.
Telmo dos Santos Klipp et al.
Viewed  
Total article views: 241 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)
HTML PDF XML Total BibTeX EndNote
187 51 3 241 4 1
  • HTML: 187
  • PDF: 51
  • XML: 3
  • Total: 241
  • BibTeX: 4
  • EndNote: 1
Views and downloads (calculated since 05 Sep 2019)
Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 05 Sep 2019)
Viewed (geographical distribution)  
Total article views: 185 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 182 with geography defined and 3 with unknown origin.
Country # Views %
  • 1
1
 
 
 
 
Cited  
Saved  
No saved metrics found.
Discussed  
No discussed metrics found.
Latest update: 14 Nov 2019
Publications Copernicus
Download
Citation