4.5 Article

A background correction algorithm for Van Allen Probes MagEIS electron flux measurements

Journal

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-SPACE PHYSICS
Volume 120, Issue 7, Pages 5703-5727

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1002/2015JA021171

Keywords

radiation belt; inner radiation belt; background contamination; spacecraft engineering; outer radiation belt; particle measurements

Funding

  1. RBSP-ECT - JHU/APL contract under NASA [967399, NAS5-01072]
  2. NASA [NNX10AK93G]
  3. U.S. Department of Energy
  4. NASA Van Allen Probes mission
  5. NASA [NNX10AK93G, 130412] Funding Source: Federal RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We describe an automated computer algorithm designed to remove background contamination from the Van Allen Probes Magnetic Electron Ion Spectrometer (MagEIS) electron flux measurements. We provide a detailed description of the algorithm with illustrative examples from on-orbit data. We find two primary sources of background contamination in the MagEIS electron data: inner zone protons and bremsstrahlung X-rays generated by energetic electrons interacting with the spacecraft material. Bremsstrahlung X-rays primarily produce contamination in the lower energy MagEIS electron channels (approximate to 30-500keV) and in regions of geospace where multi-MeV electrons are present. Inner zone protons produce contamination in all MagEIS energy channels at roughly L < 2.5. The background-corrected MagEIS electron data produce a more accurate measurement of the electron radiation belts, as most earlier measurements suffer from unquantifiable and uncorrectable contamination in this harsh region of the near-Earth space environment. These background-corrected data will also be useful for spacecraft engineering purposes, providing ground truth for the near-Earth electron environment and informing the next generation of spacecraft design models (e.g., AE9).

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available