The RAM‐SCB model includes two fully coupled modules: a kinetic ring current‐atmosphere interaction model (RAM) [Jordanova et al., 1994, 2006, 2010] self‐consistently coupled with a 3‐D equilibrium magnetic field (B) code [Zaharia et al., 2004, 2006, 2010]. It has been validated via a variety of spaceborne observations and geomagnetic indices [Yu et al., 2012]. The model determines the magnetic field configuration in three dimensions and the particle distribution functions Ql(R,ϕ,E,α) from bounce‐averaged Fokker‐Planck equations for both ring current ions and electrons in the equatorial plane: where Ql (l represents different species) is a function of radial distance R from 2 to 6.5 Re with spatial resolution of 0.25 Re, geomagnetic east longitude ϕ with resolution of 15°, energy E between 0.15 and 400 keV, and pitch angle α from 0 to 90°.
Initial fluxes - usually taken from measurements at quiet times, such as from Van Allen Probes SCB's magnetic field boundary is usually taken from a magnetic field model or global MHD simulations
ion and electron fluxes (0.15 - 400 keV) as a function of radial distance, local time, energy, pitch angle; also time dependent 3-D magnetic field configurations
Model is time-dependant.
- Magnetosphere / Inner Magnetosphere / RingCurrent
Space Weather Impacts
- Near-earth radiation and plasma environment (aerospace assets functionality)
- Jordanova, V. K., J. U. Kozyra, G. V. Khazanov, A. F. Nagy, C. E. Rasmussen, and M.‐C. Fok (1994), A bounce‐averaged kinetic model of the ring current ion population, Geophys. Res. Lett., 21(25), 2785-2788. doi:10.1029/94GL02695.
- Jordanova, V. K., Y. S. Miyoshi, S. Zaharia, M. F. Thomsen, G. D. Reeves, D. S. Evans, C. G. Mouikis, and J. F. Fennell (2006), Kinetic simulations of ring current evolution during the Geospace Environment Modeling challenge events, J. Geophys. Res., 111, A11S10, doi:10.1029/2006JA011644.
- Jordanova, V. K., S. Zaharia, and D. T. Welling (2010), Comparative study of ring current development using empirical, dipolar, and self‐consistent magnetic field simulations, J. Geophys. Res., 115, A00J11, doi:10.1029/2010JA015671.
- Zaharia, S., C. Z. Cheng, and K. Maezawa (2004),3‐D force‐balanced magnetospheric configurations, Ann. Geophys., 22,251-265,https://doi.org/10.5194/angeo-22-251-2004
- Zaharia, S., V. K. Jordanova, M. F. Thomsen, and G. D. Reeves (2006), Self‐consistent modeling of magnetic fields and plasmas in the inner magnetosphere: Application to a geomagnetic storm, J. Geophys. Res., 111, A11S14, doi:10.1029/2006JA011619.
- Zaharia, S., V. K. Jordanova, D. Welling, and G. Tóth (2010), Self‐consistent inner magnetosphere simulation driven by a global MHD model, J. Geophys. Res., 115, A12228, doi: 10.1029/2010JA015915.
- Yu, Y., V. Jordanova, S. Zaharia, J. Koller, J. Zhang, and L. M. Kistler (2012), Validation study of the magnetically self‐consistent inner magnetosphere model RAM‐SCB, J. Geophys. Res., 117, A03222, doi: 10.1029/2011JA017321.
- Yu, Y., et al (2019), Initial Results From the GEM Challenge on the Spacecraft Surface Charging Environment, Space Weather, 17, 299-312.
Code Languages: Fortran
In addition to any model-specific policy, please refer to the General Publication Policy.