Geomagnetic variations caused by Lipetsk meteoroid passage and explosion: measurement results
| 1Chernogor, LF 1V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, Kharkiv, Ukraine |
| Kinemat. fiz. nebesnyh tel (Online) 2020, 36(2):58-81 |
| https://doi.org/10.15407/kfnt2020.02.058 |
| Start Page: Dynamics and Physics of Solar System Bodies |
| Language: Ukrainian |
Abstract: The first observations of the magnetic effect and its theoretical explanation ware made back in the middle of the 20th century. The mechanisms for the magnetic effect of large celestial bodies (of 1...10 m) fundamentally differ from the mechanisms for disturbances in the geomagnetic field with meteors at ionospheric heights. The large meteoroid passage through the atmosphere and its explosion is accompanied by the generation of a powerful shock wave, the formation of a plume, which result in the geomagnetic effect. To the present day, researchers are divided on the main geomagnetic effect of large meteoroids. The Tungus and Chelyabinsk meteoroid measurements are available for researchers. In the case of the Chelyabinsk meteoroid, the variations in the geomagnetic field are detected and explained both prior to and after the explosion of this celestial body. The analysis of observations of the passage of any large enough celestial body is of considerable theoretical and practical interest. The purpose of work is the presentation of analysis of magnetic field variations that arise as a result of Lipetsk meteoroid passage through the Earth’s magnetosphere and the atmosphere, the estimate and discussion of the magnetic effect and its mechanisms. The rate of passage of such meteoroids events is equal to 0.68 yr–1. Using the data provided by the Kharkiv V. N. Karazin National University Magnetic Observatory (Kharkiv, Ukraine), the temporal variations in the horizontal components of the geomagnetic field on June 21, 2018, the day of the Lipetsk meteoroid passage, and on June 20 and 22, 2018, the reference days, have been analyzed. The meteoroid initial speed was equal to 14.4 km/s, the initial mass equal to 113 t, and the initial size equal to approximately 4 m. The distance from the site where the meteoroid explosion-like release of energy occurred to the observatories is equal to 360 km. The passage of the Lipetsk meteoroid in the magnetosphere and the atmosphere has been shown to be accompanied by alternating-sign variations in the geomagnetic field components. The magnetic effect of the magnetosphere was observed 54...56 min before the meteoroid explosion, the amplitude of the disturbance in the geomagnetic field did not exceed 0.5...1 nT, and the duration 15...20-min. After the meteoroid explosion, with an ~6-min delay, alternating-sign spikes (first positive, then negative) in the H-component level were observed. The spike amplitude was equal to ~1.2...1.5 nT, while the duration of the magnetic effect from the ionosphere was equal tens of minutes. The models for the magnetic effects observed are suggested and theoretical estimates performed. The observations and the estimates are in good agreement. |
| Keywords: explosive process, geomagnetic variations, Lipetsk meteoroid, magnetic effect of the ionosphere, magnetic effect of the magnetosphere, shock wave, theoretical models |
References:
1. I. S. Astapovich, Meteor Phenomena in Earth’s Atmosphere (Fizmatgiz, Moscow, 1958) [in Russian].
2. V. A. Bronshten, Tunguska Meteorite: A History of Research (A. D. Sel’yanov, Moscow, 2000).
3. V. A. Bronshten. Magnetic effect of the Tungus meteorite, Geomagn. Aeron. (Engl. Transl.) 42, 816–818 (2002).
4. V. D. Gol’din. On the interpretation of some geophysical phenomena accompanying the fall of the Tunguska meteorite, in Cosmic Matter and the Earth, Ed. by Yu. A. Dolgov (Nauka, Novosibirsk, 1986), pp. 44–62 [in Russian].
5. A. V. Zolotov, The Problem of 1908 Tunguska Catastrophe (Nauka Tekh., Minsk, 1969) [in Russian].
6. K. G. Ivanov. The geomagnetic phenomena, which were being observed on the Irkutsk magnetic observatory, following the explosion of the Tunguska meteorite, Meteoritika, No. 21, 46–49 (1961).
7. K. G. Ivanov. On the causes of the subsequent field changes in the geomagnetic effect of the Tunguska meteorite, Geomagn. Aeron. 1, 616–618 (1961).
8. K. G. Ivanov. Geomagnetic effects of explosions in the lower atmosphere, Geomagn. Aeron. 2, 153–160 (1962).
9. K. G. Ivanov. Geomagnetic effect of Tunguska event, Meteoritika, No. 24, 141–151 (1964).
10. K. G. Ivanov. Once again on the problem of modeling the geomagnetic effect of the Tungus impact, Geomagn. Aeron. (Engl. Transl.) 42, 819–820 (2002).
11. G. M. Idlis and Z. V. Karyagina. On the cometary origin of the Tunguska meteorite, Meteoritika, No. 21, 32–43 (1961).
12. A. G. Kalashnikov. Observation of the magnetic effect of meteors by the induction method, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 66, 373–376 (1949).
13. A. G. Kalashnikov. Magnetic effect of meteors, Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR, Ser. Geofiz., No. 6, 7–20 (1952).
14. Catastrophic Events Caused by Cosmic Objects, Ed. by V. V. Adushkin and I. V. Nemchinov, (Akademkniga, Moscow, 2005; Springer-Verlag, Dordrecht, 2008).
15. A. T. Kovalev, I. V. Nemchinov, and V. V. Shuvalov. Ionospheric and magnetospheric disturbances caused by impacts of small comets and asteroids, Sol. Syst. Res. 40, 57–67 (2006).
https://doi.org/10.1134/S0038094606010023
16. A. F. Kovalevskii. Revisiting the problem of geomagnetic effects of large explosions, Tr. Sib. Fiz.-Tekh. Inst. Tomsk. Gos. Univ. Im. V. V. Kuibysheva, No. 41, 87–91 (1962).
17. A. F. Kovalevskii. Magnetic effect of the Tunguska meteorite explosion, in The Problem of Tunguska Meteorite (Tomsk. Gos. Univ., Tomsk, 1963), pp. 187–194.
18. O. V. Lazorenko and L. F. Chernogor, Ultra-Wideband Signals and Processes: Monograph (Khark. Nats. Univ. Im. V. N. Karazina, Kharkiv, 2009) [in Russian].
19. O. A. Molchanov, Low-Frequency Waves and Induced Radiation in the Near-Earth Plasma (Nauka, Moscow, 1985) [in Russian].
20. G. O. Obashev. On the geomagnetic effect of the Tunguska meteorite, Meteoritika, No. 21, 49–52 (1961).
21. V. M. Sorokin and G. V. Fedorovich, Physics of Slow MHD Waves in the Ionospheric Plasma (Energoizdat, Moscow, 1982) [in Russian].
22. L. F. Chernogor. Advanced methods of spectral analysis of quasiperiodic wave-like processes in the ionosphere: Specific features and experimental results, Geomagn. Aeron. (Engl. Transl.) 48, 652–673 (2008).
https://doi.org/10.1134/S0016793208050101
23. L. F. Chernogor, Radiophysical and Geomagnetic Effects of Rocket Engine Burn: Monograph (Khark. Nats. Univ. Im. V. N. Karazina, Kharkiv, 2009) [in Russian].
24. L. F. Chernogor. Oscillations of the geomagnetic field caused by the flight of Vitim bolide on September 24, 2002, Geomagn. Aeron. (Engl. Transl.) 51, 116–130 (2011).
https://doi.org/10.1134/S0016793211010038
25. L. F. Chernogor, Physics and Ecology of the Catastrophes (Khark. Nats. Univ. Im. V. N. Karazina, Kharkiv, 2012) [in Russian].
26. L. F. Chernogor. Large-scale disturbances in the Earth’s magnetic field associated with the Chelyabinsk meteorite, Radiofiz. Elektron. 4(18) (3), 47–54 (2013).
27. L. F. Chernogor. The main physical effects associated with the Chelyabinsk bolide passage, in Proc. Asteroids and Comets. Chelyabinsk Event and Study of the Meteorite Falling into the Lake Chebarkul, Int. Sci-Pract. Conf., Cherbakul’, June 21–22,2013 (Krai Ra, Chelyabinsk, 2013), pp. 148–152.
28. L. F. Chernogor. Plasma, electromagnetic and acoustic effects of meteorite Chelyabinsk, Inzh. Fiz., No. 8, 23–40 (2013).
29. L. F. Chernogor. Geomagnetic field effects of the Chelyabinsk meteoroid, Geomagn. Aeron. (Engl. Transl.) 54, 613–624 (2014).
https://doi.org/10.1134/S001679321405003X
30. L. F. Chernogor. Magnetic and ionospheric effects of a meteoroid plume, Geomagn. Aeron. (Engl. Transl.) 58, 119–126 (2018).
https://doi.org/10.1134/S0016793218010048
31. L. F. Chernogor. Magnetospheric effects during the approach of the Chelyabinsk meteoroid, Geomagn. Aeron. (Engl. Transl.) 58, 252–265 (2018).
https://doi.org/10.1134/S0016793218020044
32. L. F. Chernogor. Parameters of acoustic signals generated by the atmospheric meteoroid explosion over Romania on January 7, 2015, Sol. Syst. Res. 52, 206–222 (2018).
https://doi.org/10.1134/S0038094618030048
33. L. F. Chernogor. The physical effects of Lipetsk meteoroid. 1, Kinematics Phys. Celestial Bodies 35, 174–188 (2019).
https://doi.org/10.3103/S0884591319040020
34. L. F. Chernogor. The physical effects of Lipetsk meteoroid. 2, Kinematics Phys. Celestial Bodies 35, 217–230 (2019).
https://doi.org/10.3103/S0884591319050027
35. L. F. Chernogor. The physical effects of Lipetsk meteoroid. 3, Kinematics Phys. Celestial Bodies 35, 271–285 (2019).
https://doi.org/10.3103/S0884591319060023
36. L. F. Chernogor and K. P. Garmash. Disturbances in geospace associated with the Chelyabinsk meteorite passage, Radiofiz. Radioastron. 18, 231–243 (2013).
37. L. F. Chernogor, K. P. Garmash, V. A. Podnos, and O. F. Tyrnov. The V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University Radio Physical Observatory — The tool for ionosphere monitoring in space experiments, in Space Project“Ionosat-Micro, Ed. by S. A. Zasukha and O. P. Fedorov (Akademperiodika, Kharkiv, 2013), pp. 160–182 [in Russian].
38. P. Brown, R. E. Spalding, D. O. Re Velle, and E. Tagliaferri. The flux of small near-Earth objects colliding with the Earth, Nature 420, 294–296 (2002).
https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01238
39. Catastrophic Events Caused by Cosmic Objects, Ed. by V. Adushkin and I. Nemchinov (Akademkniga, Moscow, 2005; Springer-Verlag, Dordrecht, 2008).
40. Center for Near Earth Object Studies. https://cneos.jpl.nasa.gov/fireballs/. Accessed March 12, 2019.
41. L. F. Chernogor and N. Blaunstein, Radiophysical and Geomagnetic Effects of Rocket Burn and Launch in the Near-the-Earth Environment (Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton, FL, 2017).
https://doi.org/10.1201/b15614
42. Infrasound Monitoring for Atmospheric Studies, Ed. by A. Le Pichon, A. Hauchecorne, and E. Blanc (Springer-Verlag, Dordrecht, 2010).
43. Space Weather Prediction Center National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. ftp://ftp.swpc.noaa.gov/ pub/lists/ace2/. Accessed February 18, 2019.