AC and DC global electric circuit properties and the height profile of atmospheric conductivity ANNALS OF GEOPHYSICS, 59, 5, 2016, A0545; doi:10.4401/ag-6870 A0545 AC and DC global electric circuit properties and the height profile of atmospheric conductivity Irina G. Kudintseva1, Alexander P. Nickolaenko2,*, Michael J. Rycroft3,4, Anna Odzimek5 1 V.N. Karazin Kharkov State University, Kharkov, Ukraine 2 A.Ya. Usikov Institute for Radio-Physics and Electronics, National Academy of Sciences of the Ukraine, Kharkov, Ukraine 3 CAESAR Consultancy, Cambridge, United Kingdom 4 University of Bath, Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, Bath, United Kingdom 5 Institute of Geophysics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland ABSTRACT An apparent discrepancy is pointed out - at all heights, and by up to an order of magnitude - between the height profiles of atmospheric conduc- tivity derived at AC using ELF propagation studies, especially from in- formation on Schumann resonance of the Earth-ionosphere cavity, and using a model of the DC global atmospheric electric circuit. This serious issue is resolved by creating a hybrid profile of these two mid-latitude pro- files, the first of which refers to conditions by day and the second by night. This hybrid profile is thus a first order attempt to represent globally aver- aged conditions. Close to the Earth’s surface, where the resistance of the atmosphere is largest, the properties of the DC global model exert the greatest influence, whereas in the middle atmosphere, at heights between 40 and 100 km, full wave computations show that the AC results are the more crucial. The globally averaged hybrid profile presented here has some limitations, and the physical reasons for these are addressed. They are due to the presence of aerosol particles of ice and/or of meteoric material which reduce the ionospheric D-region conductivity by an order of mag- nitude over only ~2 km of height, thereby causing ledges of ionisation. In the context of the globally averaged profile, published observations of the ionospheric effects of the giant gamma-ray flare from SGR 1806-20 (a neutron star having an enormously large magnetic field) occurring at 21:30 U.T. on December 27, 2004, are briefly discussed. 1. Introduction The atmospheric electrical conductivity is defined as v = e (µ+n+ + µ−n−), where e is the magnitude of the charge on the electron, µ+ and µ− are, respectively, the mean positive and negative ion mobilities (where the ion mobility is the stationary velocity acquired by an ion in a unit electric field) and n+ and n− are the con- centrations of small positive and negative ions present in the atmosphere [Rycroft et al. 2008]. The conductiv- ity thus depends mainly on the positive and negative ion densities. Knowledge of the vertical profile of the atmos- pheric electrical conductivity is important when solv- ing many problems in geophysics. For example, the conductivity within the boundary layer essentially de- termines the strength of the fair weather electric field at the Earth’s surface. The conductivity of the air con- trols the leakage current in the global Earth–ionos- phere electric circuit. The conductivity at 70 - 90 km altitude determines the crucial properties of the Earth– ionosphere waveguide, namely the phase velocity and the attenuation rate of radio waves from VLF trans- mitters. At lower frequencies, natural electromagnetic oscillations of the Earth–ionosphere cavity, termed Schumann resonances, were predicted theoretically by Schumann [1952]. They have been observed at fre- quencies between a few Hz and several tens of Hz and they have been interpreted to give conductivity infor- mation; see, e.g., Balser and Wagner [1960], Chapman and Jones [1964], Galejs [1965], Rycroft [1965], Jones [1976], Sao et al. [1973], Bliokh et al. [1977], Tran and Polk [1979a,b], Polk [1983], Sentman [1990, 1995, 1996], Fullekrug [2000, 2005], Fullekrug et al. [2002], Nicko- laenko and Hayakawa [2002, 2014], Kulak et al. [2003], Rakov and Uman [2003, Section 13.4], Sato and Fuku- nishi [2003], Roldugin et al. [2004], Williams et al. [2006], Sátori et al. [2013] and Dyrda et al. [2015] and references therein. For their interpretation, the air con- ductivity has to be considered across the entire range Article history Received September 15, 2015; accepted September 1, 2016. Subject classification: Vertical conductivity profile of atmosphere, Global electric circuit, ELF radio wave propagation, Schumann resonances, Characteristic heights, D-region ionosphere, Effects of aerosols, Fair weather field. of altitudes from 0 to 100 km. Having a realistic con- ductivity profile is mandatory for successful modelling of the Schumann resonances using modern direct tech- niques of computation such as the finite difference time domain (FDTD) method; see, e.g., Simpson and Taflove [2002], Otsuyama et al. [2003], Soriano et al. [2005], Yang and Pasko [2005], Yang et al. [2006], Simpson [2009], and Zhou and Qiao [2015]. Unfortunately, experimental data on middle at- mosphere conductivity are rather scarce. One of the reasons for this is that for radio physical remote sensing methods in the ELF frequency range ( f < 3 kHz) there are no man-made sources available. Direct measure- ments made from aircraft can only be undertaken at up to about 15 km altitude or from balloons up to about 35 km [e.g., Holzworth 1991, Curto et al. 2001]. Only geo- physical rockets are able to provide information on the conductivity in the altitude range from 35 - 100 km, but such launches are relatively rare and very expensive. Thus, the observational base of directly measured con- ductivity profiles is rather limited. Much information on the electron and ion concen- trations in the lower ionosphere is obtained by differ- ent methods including various probes aboard sounding rockets, and radio wave propagation experiments to re- ceivers aboard rockets (see, e.g., Hale et al. [1981], Hale [1984], Friedrich and Torkar [2001]) and also different ground-based radar systems. Hale [1984] shows a sharp electron density ledge at the bottom of the D-layer. Using such data sets, Mechtly et al. [1972], Park and De- jnakarintra [1973], Widdel et al. [1976], Swider [1988] and Croskey et al. [1990] published models of the height profile of conductivity. A fairly recent and very valuable review by Friedrich and Rapp [2009] presented rocket observations, which typically show sharp gradi- ents of electron density (termed “ledges”) and also a variation of electron density at any particular height above 70 km by up to ± one order of magnitude, par- ticularly at auroral latitudes. Friedrich and Rapp [2009] considered the impor- tance of nanometer-sized particles as aerosols in the lower ionosphere. Electrons are captured by these aerosols, causing a marked reduction of the electron density and hence of the electrical conductivity. Aerosol ions are heavier than atmospheric molecular ions and this effect also contributes to reducing the conductivity. Tiny ice crystals (especially at high latitudes during summer) and ablated meteoric material [Plane 2003] form these aerosols. McNeil et al. [1998] showed that the bottoms of the sodium, calcium and magnesium ion layers were found at altitudes between 83 and 90 km. Williams et al. [2015] have emphasized the role played by meteoric ions in forming a sharp ledge in the conductivity at ~85 km altitude. Their calculations show that “the conduction current and the displacement current are matched at the height of the observed ledge over a wide range of VLF frequencies, pinning this altitude as the sharp boundary for the global VLF waveguide”. Friedrich et al. [2013] presented high latitude rocket observations obtained by several techniques si- multaneously which show a very sharp ledge at night at 80 km on one night and at 79 km on two other occa- sions. The electron density (and hence also the con- ductivity) increases by two orders of magnitude from 80 to 90 km altitude. Schlegel and Fullekrug [2002] eval- uated the conductivity profile, v(h), from 70 to 100 km using EISCAT measurements at high latitude. They showed that the conductivity was between 3.10-5 and 3.10-4 S/m at 84 km, and with the scale height for the variation of log10 v with altitude lying between 6 and 8 km. In their Figure 2d, Kero et al. [2014] have com- pared EISCAT (high latitude) observations made at al- titudes down to 60 km with results derived from their new spectral riometer technique. Han et al. [2011] have interpreted observed day- time mid-latitude VLF sferics produced by lightning dis- charges to find the electron density profile from 50 to 90 km, with the electron density typically increasing from 107 to 1010 m-3. They compared this with values derived from other observations of VLF transmitter signals, from the ionospheric reference ionosphere (IRI) model and from the FIRI model of Friedrich and Torkar [2001]. A general, rather than near perfect, agreement was found. Sferics observed at night, known as tweeks, exhibit a fundamental cut-off frequency near 1.8 kHz and higher harmonics (see Han et al. [2011], and refer- ences therein). These are interpreted by Tan et al. [2015] to show that at low latitudes the average electron den- sity increases from 3·107 m-3 at 82 km to 2·108 m-3 at 87 km, i.e. by nearly an order of magnitude over a height range of 5 km. Their electron density values were slightly less than those given by the IRI-2012 model. However, these observations do not show a sharp ledge in the electron density. The relative lack of observations is compensated in part by modern numerical simulations. Equations for the ionisation balance are used for the multi-compo- nent plasma in the framework of a more or less realis- tic model of the density and composition of the atmosphere, and accounting for the ionising electro- magnetic radiation. For example, Pavlov [2014, 2016] has investigated the photochemistry of the ionospheric D-region in detail. In such a way the altitude profiles for the concentration of the conducting particles (heavy ions from several different sources, ion complexes and various aerosols and dust particles) and free electrons KUDINTSEVA ET AL. 2 3 may be calculated and the resulting conductivity of the medium may be determined. The system of balance equations comprises up to 200 equations, which are solved by modern computers using the Monte Carlo method, e.g., Inan et al. [2007]. It is found that the con- ductivity v(h) increases rapidly at altitudes above about 55 km, where the concentration of electrons exceeds the negative ion density. Therefore, the v(h) profile bends sharply at around 55 km; it exhibits a “knee” at this altitude. The objective of the present paper is simply to demonstrate the applicability of Schumann resonance phenomena as a probe for testing the conductivity pro- files found by other techniques, including for models of the DC global circuit, many important contributions to which have been discussed by Wilson [1929], Roble and Tzur [1986], Williams [2003, 2009], Markson [2007], Rycroft et al. [2008, 2012], Rycroft and Harrison [2012], and Williams and Mareev [2014]. For these demonstra- tions we shall use the particular profiles suggested by Cole and Pierce [1965], which is a model daytime pro- file, and by Rycroft et al. [2007], a model night-time pro- file designed to apply to conditions when sprites are observed (see also Huang et al. [1999], and Fullekrug et al. [2006]). It is noteworthy, but not at all surprising, that the values of conductivity in the first model exceed these of the second one at all heights by about an order of magnitude. 2. Conductivity profiles using DC and AC global cir- cuit data In models of the DC global atmospheric electric circuit (see, e.g., Rycroft et al. [2000]), various different empirical or semi-empirical height profiles of the con- ductivity of the air have been used; see, for example, Hays and Roble [1979], Roble and Hays [1979], Makino and Ogawa [1984, 1985], Ogawa [1985], Roble and Tzur [1986], Sapkota and Varshneya [1990], Tinsley and Zhou [2006], Rycroft et al. [2007, 2008], Tinsley [2008], Rycroft and Odzimek [2010], Odzimek et al. [2010], Rycroft and Harrison [2012] and Rycroft et al. [2012]. In all such models the conductivity of the air is considered to be produced near the Earth’s surface by radioactive elements escaping from the surface and, higher up, by galactic cosmic rays colliding with air molecules [Har- rison et al. 2014]. In some models, spatial variations due to orography and temporal variations due to changing solar/geomagnetic activity and to volcanic aerosols are included. Electrons become detached and then rapidly attach themselves to molecules of air to form relatively heavy negative ions. The peak ion production rate occurs at heights near 15 km [Harrison et al. 2014]. Thus the conductivity of the air rises rapidly from values ~10-14 S/m just above the surface of the Earth to values about a thousand times greater at 30 km altitude, in the strat- osphere. The conductivity continues to increase, reach- ing values exceeding 10-7 S/m in the lowest ionosphere. Figure 1 depicts the average conductivity profiles of the atmosphere considered in this work. The origi- nal smooth red line is the night-time profile used for DC global electric circuit studies [Rycroft et al. 2007]. For the DC circuit, the most crucial region is below 15 km altitude; as shown by Rycroft et al. [2008], more than 95% of the resistance of the global circuit lies here. This profile was defined up to 80 km altitude, and we have extended it above 75 km with an exponential function having a scale height of 2.57 km. It may be noted that in this night-time model the conductivity in- creases by two orders of magnitude from 80 km up to 91 km, but there is no 2 km thin ledge. The black line with dots shows the classical profile introduced by Cole and Pierce [1965]. This daytime profile was derived by considering theoretically the production and loss (but not transport) of ionisation throughout the atmosphere due to radioactivity from the ground, cosmic rays and solar radiation. Ions heav- ier than normal atmospheric ions were, however, not considered; thus, their conductivity value at a particu- lar height may be an overestimate. Ionic conductivity dominates below 50 km and electron conductivity above 60 km. The knee in this profile near 55 km alti- tude is crucial for the AC circuit properties owing to the fact that the so-called “electric” characteristic height is found here. This is the height where the conduction current density and the displacement current density become equal at the fundamental Schumann resonance frequency of 8 Hz. Physically, this is the height above which the electric field of this Schumann resonance starts to decrease rapidly with altitude [Greifinger and Greifinger 1978, Nickolaenko and Rabinowicz 1982, Kirillov 1993, Sentman 1995, Kirillov 1996, Sentman AC AND DC GEC PROPERTIES AND AIR CONDUCTIVITY Figure 1. Comparison of height profiles of air conductivity v, given in units of S/m. 1996, Fullekrug 2000, Mushtak and Williams 2002, Pe- chony and Price 2004, Williams et al. 2006, Greifinger et al. 2007, Pechony 2007, Galuk et al. 2015]. The other important characteristic (“magnetic”) height is ~95 km: the wave magnetic field penetrates to this altitude. Un- fortunately, the Cole and Pierce [1965] profile does not match either the DC or AC observational data. The function v(h) must be transformed to somewhat lower values in the troposphere and to higher conductivities above 40 km altitude, thus forming the hybrid day/night profile, which is thus a global profile, aver- aging over all local times (blue line with stars in Figure 1). This modification allows us to fit the Schumann res- onance data well [Nickolaenko et al. 2016]. The hybrid profile is coincident with the DC red profile in the troposphere and it matches the classical Cole and Pierce [1965] height dependence around 25 - 30 km altitude, remaining rather close to this profile above 40 km. As we shall see below, deviations from this classical profile lead to realistic values of the ELF radio propagation constant and to reasonable Schu- mann resonance patterns. The values relevant to this global hybrid profile are listed in Table 1 in the Appendix. The table contains the altitude above the ground, the relevant conductivity of the air column of 1 m2 cross-section, and the logarithm of air conductivity, in units of S/m. 3. Full wave solution of the Schumann resonance problem and standard ELF propagation constant A realistic model of the Earth–ionosphere cavity incorporates the perfectly conducting spherical Earth surrounded by a poorly conducting air shell bounded by the horizontally stratified ionospheric plasma. The relative dielectric constant of the medium above the ground is given by f(r) =1+ i v(r)— ~f0 , where r is the radius vector in a spherical coordinate system (r, i, {) with the origin at the Earth’s centre. The electromagnetic prob- lem in an isotropic inhomogeneous resonator is solved via the following steps (see, e.g., Bliokh et al. [1980], Nickolaenko and Hayakawa [2002]). After writing Maxwell’s equations for the electric and magnetic field components and introducing scalar (or Debye) poten- tials, we choose the potential and the Helmholtz equa- tion corresponding to the transverse magnetic wave (E - wave), as only this wave propagates at ELF. The Earth–ionosphere cavity is taken to be uniform in the angular coordinates i and {, while its electric proper- ties vary along the radius; the relative permittivity of the atmosphere is f=f(r, ~). This allows us to separate variables in the usual way, to obtain the standard tesseral functions, and to arrive at the following equa- tion for the radial function [Bliokh et al. 1980]: (1) The solutions to Equation (1) are expressed as the spherical Hankel functions h(1)n (kr√f) and h (2) n (kr√f). The relevant details can be found in the books by Wait [1962, 1970], Galejs [1972], Bliokh et al. [1980] and Nick- olaenko and Hayakawa [2002]. The electromagnetic problem is solved for a sys- tem of thin horizontal layers of constant f for both upward going and down going radio waves. The conti- nuity condition holds at each interface for the tangen- tial fields. Thus, a system of linear algebraic equations is obtained for the amplitudes of waves within the lay- ers. If one applies N layers, the linear system contains 2N equations. Such a treatment is regarded as the full wave solution, e.g., Wait [1970]. It was used in the Schu- mann resonance band by Knott [1998] and Jones and Knott [1999, 2003]. A more convenient variant of the full wave solu- tion exploits the ratio of horizontal electric to hori- zontal magnetic field at each boundary, d(r), i.e. the surface impedance. The problem is reduced to a non- linear differential equation of the first order (Riccati equation), see, e.g., Wait [1970]. Its solution is con- structed numerically using an iterative procedure [e.g., Hynninen and Galuk 1972, Bliokh et al. 1977, Galuk and Ivanov 1978, Bliokh et al. 1980, Galuk et al. 2015]. For the time dependence exp[+i~t], we obtain the fol- lowing equation: (2) Here, d(r) is the spherical surface impedance at the strata interface (see Nickolaenko and Hayakawa [2002], Chapter 2), o(~) is the sought complex propa- gation constant, ~ = 2rf is the circular wave frequency, k =~/c is the wave number in free space, c is the veloc- ity of light in free space, and r is the radius vector of the spherical coordinate system (r, i, {); f(r) is the com- plex dielectric constant of the medium varying with height, and f0 is the permittivity of free space. The operator of the problem is defined in the height interval from zero to infinity, and its eigen-value is m=o(o+1). At the perfectly conducting ground, the spherical surface impedance d(a) = 0, where a denotes the Earth’s radius. This is the first boundary condition. An ELF radio wave of frequency f penetrates into the ionosphere and rapidly attenuates there, so that the plasma properties above some virtual altitude given by dr d k r r n n r dr d r rRrR r 1 1 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 f f f + - + - = Q Q Q Q Q V V V V V# & G J .dr d r r r ik r ik ikr 1 02 2d f d f o o - + + + =Q Q Q Q QV V V V V KUDINTSEVA ET AL. 4 5 r1 have only a very minor impact on the sub-ionos- pheric radio propagation. This altitude varies with fre- quency. However, it does not exceed the 100 km level: r1 = a + 100 km. We may suggest that the ionosphere is vertically uniform above this 100 km altitude, and the surface impedance at r1 is equal to d(r1) = [f(r1)] -½, where |f(r1)|= const >> 1. This is the second boundary condition for Equation (2). The problem of finding the complex eigen-value is reduced to solving the equation (3) with respect to the parameter m. The d(a; m) function is found by the numerical integration of Equation (2) from the top r = r1 to the bottom r = a. The roots of the equation are found by iterations starting from o= ka. Let mm be the m-th iteration to the eigen-value m; then the next, m + 1, iteration is found by following Newton’s procedure: After obtaining the (m + 1)-th iteration, we repeat the downward integration of Equation (2) along the ra- dius with the new eigen-value, and thus we obtain the surface impedance at the ground for the next iteration. The initial value is: m0 = ka (ka + 1). The iterations stop when the relative difference between the new and the previous eigen-value is smaller than 10-7. The deriva- tive —̂̂ m d(a; m) is found concurrently with the d(r) func- tion by integrating the differential equation for the function d1(r) = —̂̂m d(r,m). The relevant equation and the condition at r = r1 are obtained by differentiation of Equation (2) with respect to the parameter m: The upper height r1 was established by an ex- haustive search when the solutions were constructed for a set of r1 values. Finally, the height r1 = 100 km was chosen since the relative change of the output eigen- value did not exceed 10-7 when the starting height ex- ceeded 100 km. It is only above this height that the anisotropy of the ionosphere, which is due to the pres- ence of the Earth’s magnetic field [Madden and Thompson 1965, Rishbeth and Garriott 1969], be- comes very important in determining the tensor value of the conductivity. It is interesting to note that the approach described allows us to obtain not only the eigen-value of the zero- th mode in the Earth–ionosphere waveguide, but also the roots of the “trapped” higher order modes. Newton’s method converges toward the eigen-value closest to the initial one. To treat the higher order modes, we have to exclude the roots of lower modes that have already been found. For this purpose we use Bézout’s theorem [Korn and Korn 1968, Section 1.7.2]: the function is used in the process instead of the initial function {(m) = 0, where m are the roots of the {(m) function which have already been found, and n denotes the num- ber of these already established roots. Prior to computing the ELF field components, we have to compute the so-called normalizing integrals. These are found automatically in the above scheme, as the following relation is valid: The normalizing integral N0 allows us to obtain the lower characteristic height of the Earth–ionosphere cavity [Kirillov 1993, Kirillov 1996, Kirillov et al. 1997, Kirillov and Kopeykin 2002]: (8) (Heights which are complex quantities are shown as capital (upper case) letters, to emphasize this fact). This characteristic height is regarded as the “capaci- tance”, or the “electric”, height of the Earth–ionos- phere system: (9) It is used when obtaining the capacitance elements of the artificial two-dimension RLC circuit of the Earth–ionosphere cavity resolved with the help of the 2D telegraph equations [Madden and Thompson 1965, Kirillov 1993, Kirillov 1996, Kirillov et al. 1997, Kirillov and Kopeykin 2002, Pechony and Price 2004, Pechony 2007] or in the approximate formulas for the ELF propagation constant [Greifinger and Greifinger 1978, Nickolaenko and Rabinowicz 1982, Mushtak and Williams 2002]. The upper characteristic height, the “inductance” (or the “magnetic”) height m m1 m m= -+ ; ; . a a m m 2 2 m d m d mQ Q V V . . dr d r ik r r r ikr r r 2 1 0 0 21 1 1 d f d d f d - + = = Q Q Q Q Q QV V V V V V n i n 1 { { { = = Q% im- V ; .N ika a ika a0 2 2 12 2 m d m d= =Q QV V .H f i h dh ika a 1C 00 2 1, v ~f d - = 3 Q Q QV V V# , , .H E a E a dr1C r r a i i i= 3 Q Q QV V V# ;a 0d m =Q V AC AND DC GEC PROPERTIES AND AIR CONDUCTIVITY (4) (5) (6) (7) is introduced by using the relation: (10) Heights HC and HL are physically equivalent to the now popular electric and magnetic characteristic heights hE and hM. These are the altitudes above which the rel- evant fields start to rapidly decrease. The distinction is that heights HC and HL are found from the rigorous full wave solution, which exploits the continuous conduc- tivity profile, while the characteristic heights hE and hM are introduced by the approximate heuristic relations [e.g., Mushtak and Williams 2002, Williams et al. 2006]. To stress this distinction, we use different notations for the heights. The standard description for sub-ionospheric radio wave propagation in the extremely low frequency band (ELF: 3 Hz - 3 kHz) uses the propagation constant o( f ), the source–observer distance i, and the current mo- ment of the dipole source MC( f ). The relevant equa- tions can be found in Nickolaenko and Hayakawa [2002, 2014]. We use here the commonly accepted stan- dard frequency dependence o( f ) suggested by Ishaq and Jones [1977], which incorporated the vast collec- tion of experimental material from the global array of the Schumann resonance observatories available at that time. According to this model, the complex propaga- tion constant o( f ) is found from the following heuris- tic equations presented by Ishaq and Jones [1977]: where o is the dimensionless ELF propagation con- stant, S is the complex sine function relevant to Bril- louin waves in the Earth–ionosphere cavity [e.g., Wait 1970], V and c are the phase velocity of radio wave and velocity of light, respectively, the parameter a which accounts for the wave attenuation is in Napier/radian, and f is measured in Hz. Figure 3 shows frequency variations of the imagi- nary part of the propagation constant, or the losses in uniform cavity. We must remind the reader here that we take into account only the vertical (radial) non-unifor- mity of ionosphere. The real ionosphere is characterized by the day-night boundary and the polar non-uniformity, and the plasma becomes an anisotropic medium above ~80 km altitude. All these features are ignored at present, as our goal is only to present an average (on the global scale) v(h) profile, which is in reasonable agreement with both DC and AC observations and models. Accounting for the above mentioned details is a possible area of de- manding future work. It is interesting to note in this regard that recent satellite observations have demonstrated the presence of Schumann resonance signals in the topside iono- sphere [Simoes et al. 2011, Dudkin et al. 2015], indicat- ing that energy is being lost from the cavity, even though this is inconsistent with considerations of r1 dis- cussed earlier. This indicates that an explanation of the space-borne observations of sub-ionospheric Schu- mann resonances should be based on the possible in- , ,H H a a r H r dr1L 0 i i i= 3 { { Q Q QV V V# HL1 HLo o+ =Q V .HL C . . , . ,f . . . , . ln ln f kaS S c V i f c V f f f 0 25 0 5 5 49 1 64 0 1759 0 01791 0 063 / . 2V 1 2 2$ 0 64 o a a = + - = - = - + = Q Q Q Q V 2V V V ! ! $ 2$ KUDINTSEVA ET AL. 6 Figure 2. Real parts of the ELF propagation constant obtained with the full wave solution for the Cole and Pierce [1965] profile (black line with dots); profile based on the global circuit data (red smooth line); the hybrid profile (blue curve with stars). These are compared with the reference model (green curve with diamonds). Figure 3. Imaginary part of the ELF propagation constant obtained with the full wave solution for the Cole and Pierce [1965] profile (black line with dots); profile based on the global circuit data (red smooth line); the hybrid profile (blue curve with stars). The ELF Standard reference model (Equations 10 to 13) is shown by the green curve with diamonds. (11) (12) (13) (14) 7 fluence of ionospheric anisotropy on ELF propagation through the plasma. Consider a sub-ionospheric trans- verse electromagnetic (TEM) wave entering the ionos- pheric plasma; its magnetic field reaches the altitude of 80 - 90 km where the plasma anisotropy becomes im- portant. Here, the electromagnetic wave transforms into an ELF hydromagnetic wave that penetrates up to satellite altitudes, as was mentioned by Madden and Thompson [1965] in their seminal paper which contains rigorous numerical computations for both day and night conditions. The theoretical treatment of Madden and Thompson [1965] estimated that one third of the Schumann resonance energy escapes from the cavity at night, that the “ionisation levels at around 40 - 50 km are very important for the Schumann resonances” and that most damping occurs near these heights. They also stated that “conduction currents dominate over the dis- placement currents above about 60 km”. Further, they mentioned that dust from meteor showers could influ- ence Schumann resonances. The full wave solutions of Madden and Thomp- son [1965] are obtained only at altitudes above about 25 km. Below this altitude, of great relevance for the global circuit, their system of linear algebraic equations can- not obtain the reflection and transmission coefficients at the interfaces between different slabs. That is why we have used the Riccati equation for the surface im- pedance [Bliokh et al. 1977], which works below 25 km. The models of the imaginary part of the propa- gation constant provide different results here. The val- ues deduced from parameters of the night-time DC global circuit (red curve) result in the smallest radio wave attenuation. The black line with dots based on the Cole and Pierce [1965] daytime model shows the high- est attenuation rate. The ELF Standard reference model (green line with diamonds) is rather close to the blue line with stars computed for the hybrid (global average, over all local times) conductivity profile, which is in- troduced in this paper. The plots presented in Figure 2 and Figure 3 in- dicate that the red profile describing the leakage cur- rent between the Earth and the ionosphere (the DC circuit) overestimates the phase velocity of radio wave and underestimates the ELF attenuation rate. In con- trast, the Cole and Pierce [1965] profile underestimates the phase velocity and the Schumann resonance fre- quencies correspondingly, and it overestimates the ELF attenuation rate. Physically this means that the real conductivity at altitudes ~50 km and above is somewhat higher than DC model predicts and lower than that of classical conductivity profile. However, such a detail could not be sensed in the static electric field within the tropo- sphere where the major part of the ionosphere-to- ground potential difference exists; only Schumann res- onance parameters are sensitive to the conductivity at this altitude. The very small modifications of the DC electric field at ground level are within the measurement accu- racy and within the variations with Universal Time, known as the Carnegie curve [Harrison 2013]. If we turn to the Earth–ionosphere leakage current, changes in the air conductivity around 50 km altitude definitely will not alter the fair weather field at the ground. It is only at the “electrosphere”, the height where “hori- zontal spreading” of the current occurs, that will be re- duced from, say, 70 to 60 km. The classical conductivity profile presented by Cole and Pierce [1965] overestimates the losses in the cavity. To match the ELF Standard propagation model, we have to slightly increase the air conductivity start- ing from the stratosphere. In this case the blue curve is obtained as being very close to the ELF Standard model. 4. Power spectra for globally uniform distribution of lightning strokes The dispersion curves of Figure 2 and Figure 3 allow us to compute the power spectral density of the vertical electric field in the Schumann resonance band, which was first observed experimentally by Balser and Wagner [1960]. The resonance pattern depends on the source–observer distance. To eliminate any influence of this factor, we apply a globally uniform spatial dis- tribution of lightning strokes [Bliokh et al. 1977, Bliokh et al. 1980, Sentman 1995, Sentman 1996, Nickolaenko and Hayakawa 2002, Williams et al. 2006, Nickolaenko and Hayakawa 2014]. We suggest that independent ran- dom lightning strokes occur with the same probability at any point of the globe, i.e., the probability density of the source coordinates is the constant: Electromagnetic radiation from global thunder- storms forms a random succession of independent ELF pulses at the radio receiver, and the delay of the pulse arrival times is supposed to have an exponential distribution. In this case we speak of a Poisson ran- dom process [Middleton 1960, Korn and Korn 1968 (Section 18.11.5), Tikhonov 1982]. The mutual inter- ference of pulses disappears in the averaged power spectrum of such a process, and “individual power spectra of pulses are summed”. The resulting power spectrum of the vertical electric field is found from the following equation: ,w 4 1 i { r =Q V AC AND DC GEC PROPERTIES AND AIR CONDUCTIVITY (15) where n = 0, 1, 2, 3... is the Schumann resonance mode number. The series in Equation (16) was obtained by integrating the probability density (15) multiplied by the product of two zonal harmonic series for the elec- tric field (see Bliokh et al. [1980], Nickolaenko and Hayakawa [2002], Nickolaenko and Hayakawa [2014], for details). The series (16) converges rather fast, and the computations are simple. Figure 4 shows the power spectra given by (16) computed for the three propagation constants o( f ), ex- cept the one relevant to the Cole and Pierce [1965] pro- file. The abscissa here shows the frequency ranging from 4 to 50 Hz, and the ordinate depicts the power spectral density in arbitrary units. We may note that the Schumann resonance pattern is clearly observed in all graphs. As was expected, the maxima of the red curve occur at higher frequencies, and this is explained by the higher values of Re[o( f )] noted in Figure 2. Owing to the smaller attenuation factor (Figure 3), the peaks of the red resonance curve (based on the DC global circuit model) have smaller widths in compari- son with those for the standard black spectrum and for the global hybrid profile (blue line). The green and blue lines in Figure 4 are close to each other in the vicinity of the first three resonance modes (i.e. for n = 0, 1, 2, 3). This is explained by the proximity of the relevant lines in Figure 2 and Figure 3. However, we notice that the resonance pattern is more sensitive to the slight deviations in the dispersion curves. Indeed, the green and blue lines of Re[o( f )] functions (phase veloci- ties) are almost coincident in Figure 2, while the positions of the spectral peaks are obviously different in Figure 4. Deviations in the phase velocity and in the wave attenu- ation cause the evident differences between the green and blue spectra, especially at the higher modes n ≥ 4. This indicates that the hybrid profile does not exactly match the standard ELF propagation model. Such deviations are quite acceptable from the prac- tical point of view, as only three Schumann resonance modes are clearly observed in the experimental records and are used in interpretations. Of course, this does not mean that a better conductivity profile might be con- structed that fits the standard spectrum (and observa- tions) in a better way. When comparing the red (the DC data) and blue (AC data) spectra in Figure 4, we note obvious devia- tions. These are due to differences between the profiles within the middle atmosphere. The global electromag- netic resonance is sensitive to the conductivity in the mesosphere and thus it can be used for selecting the models based on the DC ground-based observations. 5. Discussion The validity of the vertical profiles of atmospheric conductivity at different altitudes might be checked by measurements of the low frequency electromagnetic fields and of the fair weather field observed in the tro- posphere and at ground level [e.g., Harth 1982, Holz- worth and Chiu 1982, Holzworth 1991, 1995]. The ELF/ VLF radio waves are particularly sensitive to the prop- erties of the ionosphere over narrow (~ few km) height ranges between 50 and 120 km [Galejs 1961, Wait 1962, Madden and Thompson 1965, Wait 1970, Galejs 1972], whereas the fair weather field mainly depends on the conductivity of the troposphere [e.g., Ogawa 1985, Rycroft et al. 2007, Rycroft et al. 2008]. Schumann res- onance signals “sense” the conductivity in the range of heights from ~40 to ~100 km and therefore their inter- pretation can contribute to the information derived from the sparse data derived from different observations. The applicability of the blue conductivity profile can be verified by comparing the wave attenuation with direct measurements of monochromatic radio signals from ELF transmitters [Bannister 1999, Nickolaenko 2008]. Data used in the paper by Bannister [1999] exploit the amplitude monitoring of ELF signals from the US Navy transmitter, regarded as the Wisconsin test facility (WTF). The average attenuation at the 76 Hz frequency was equal to 1.08 dB/Mm, and the relative standard de- viation due to seasonal variations was ±25%. The imaginary part of the propagation constant at this frequency for the hybrid profile is equal to Im[o( f )] f =76 Hz = 0.86 Napier/radian, and this value corresponds to the attenuation factor c(76 Hz) = 1.17 dB/Mm. This attenuation is practically coincident with observations, and this fact is certainly in favour of the model. ,E fQ fr n nQ n 2 1 1 1 2 1 n 2 2 2 0 \1 2 fr o oQ o oQ + + - + + 3 = fQ oQ nQ oQV V V V| KUDINTSEVA ET AL. 8 Figure 4. Power spectra of vertical electric field in arbitrary units (see text for a full explanation). (15) 9 The wave attenuation measured at 82 Hz was also published by Nickolaenko [2008]. It was equal to Im[o( f )] f =82 Hz = 0.92 Napier/radian, which corre- sponds to the attenuation factor c(82 Hz) = 1.25 dB/Mm. This attenuation rate was inferred from the distance de- pendence of the signal amplitude detected in the verti- cal electric field of the radio wave emitted by the Soviet Kola Peninsula transmitter [Velikhov 2014]. The model attenuation is exactly equal to the value measured ex- perimentally. Thus, the comparison with observations of man-made ELF radio transmissions supports the va- lidity of the hybrid conductivity profile very well. We now evaluate the value of the fair weather field for the three conductivity profiles. The altitude variations of atmosphere conductivity v(h) shown in Figure 1 were transformed into the air resistance t(h) = 1 /v(h) for this purpose. The relevant plots are shown in the upper frame of Figure 5 for all three model profiles. The smooth red curve shows the global circuit model of Rycroft et al. [2007], and the blue and black lines depict profiles perti- nent to the hybrid model and to the classical Cole and Pierce [1965] profile, respectively. The upper plot in Fig- ure 5 indicates that the resistance of the air column hav- ing 1 m2 cross-section varies from 1014-1013 Ohm m at the ground to about 1010 Ohm m at around 40 km alti- tude. The values obtained for the different models vary by about one order of magnitude. Plots in the lower frame of Figure 5 depict the volt- age drop across a 1 m gap in the air (the strength of the fair weather field at different altitudes) corresponding to the three conductivity profiles. These values are readily obtained using Ohm’s law, by multiplying the air resist- ance t(h) = 1 /v(h) by the leakage current of global cir- cuit of j = 1.3 pA/m2 [Rycroft et al. 2000]. The relevant fair weather field at ground level becomes equal to 86 V/m in the hybrid and the global circuit models and 12 V/m in the Cole and Pierce [1965] model. If we integrate the voltage drop with altitude, we find that the iono- sphere-to-ground potential difference, VI, is equal to 247 kV for the hybrid model, 263 kV for the Rycroft et al. [2007] model, but only 61 kV for the Cole and Pierce [1965] profile. That value is unrealistically low, due to the large daytime conductivity values of that profile. The resistance profile based on the conductivity of the global circuit model of Rycroft et al. [2007] proved to be useful in elaborating the source of a parametric Q-burst [Nickolaenko 2011] caused by the giant galac- tic gamma-ray flare that arrived from the magnetar SGR 1806−20 at Earth at 21:30:26 U.T. on December 27, 2004. The illuminated hemisphere was practically coincident with the dayside of the globe: the sub-flare point was only 450 km away from the centre of the day- time hemisphere. The gamma-flare also transformed the Schumann resonance spectra for a short time [Nickolaenko et al. 2010, Tanaka et al. 2011]. Feasible “parametric” pulsed excitation of the Earth–ionosphere cavity was pre- dicted [Nickolaenko 2011] caused by modification of the global electric circuit. Such a source deviates from the ordinary lightning strokes, which excite Schumann resonances, and the major features of ELF transient are conditioned by the great horizontal size of the modifi- cation to the cavity, covering almost a hemisphere. Such a coherent source drives only the lowest modes of Schu- mann resonance, and this was confirmed experimen- tally [Nickolaenko et al. 2010, Schekotov et al. 2013, Nickolaenko et al. 2014]. In modeling the parametric ELF source, VLF in- formation was also used, being relevant to the particu- lar gamma-flare; the lower edge of the dayside ionosphere fell suddenly from 60 to 40 km as a result of ionisation produced in the mesosphere and upper stratosphere [Inan et al. 2007]. The modification covered the whole AC AND DC GEC PROPERTIES AND AIR CONDUCTIVITY Figure 5. Altitude profiles of the air resistance (upper plot, in Ohm m) and fair weather field amplitude (in V/m, lower plot). The cor- responding value of the ionospheric potential VI is shown in the leg- end for the lower plot found in the Rycroft et al. [2007] model, for the hybrid model presented here, and for the Cole and Pierce [1965] model (CP). The value derived for the latter model is certainly far too low, whereas the small discrepancy between the red and blue values is within the range of variations with Universal Time on a particular day and within the observed day-to-day variability. of the Pacific Ocean, and it was recorded at the Antarc- tic Palmer Station for different VLF paths up to 60° from the sub-flare point. The modification of the air re- sistance was estimated by using the conductivity pro- file of Rycroft et al. [2007] as a starting model for several modifications [Nickolaenko 2011]. Computations indi- cated that changes below the tropopause were defi- nitely important for the source current of the parametric ELF transient. The final model provided a sudden in- crease of the Earth–ionosphere leakage current from 1 pA/m2 to 6 pA/m2 associated with the two-fold reduc- tion of the air resistance at ground level (the modifica- tion of air conductivity increased linearly with altitude). We do not know whether there are any experimental observations, which could confirm or negate this pre- diction of a much increased fair weather conduction current density during this most unusual event. 6. Conclusions We have shown here that a model for the globally averaged height profile of air conductivity which is a hy- brid (blue curve) between the early Cole and Pierce [1965] daytime profile (black curve) and the empirical night-time profile (red curve) used in a model of the DC global electric circuit by Rycroft et al. [2007] satisfies both ob- servations of Schumann resonance (AC global circuit properties) and fair weather observations of the electric field throughout the atmosphere (DC global circuit prop- erties) very well. The crucial height regions for the DC part are the lowest 15 km, i.e. the troposphere; around the knee in the profile at ~55 km altitude is most crucial for the AC part. This new hybrid model leads to a realis- tic variation of the electric field strength through the fair weather regions of the atmosphere and to a realistic value of the potential of the ionosphere with respect to the Earth’s surface, namely VI = 247 kV. This value fits within the range observed by Markson [2007]. We suggest that this hybrid profile, a global profile which harmonises AC and DC profiles, which is in overall agreement with many different types of observations - but not those as- sociated with aerosols and showing a sharp conductivity ledge from 84 to 86 km altitude at some locations and at some times - should be useful in future studies of both AC and DC global circuit phenomena. Acknowledgements. The authors are most grateful to many colleagues in different countries for sharing their ideas on the top- ics discussed here, and especially to the referee for raising several points which necessitated further consideration and clarification be- fore publication. References Balser, M., and C. Wagner (1960). Observations of Earth-ionosphere cavity resonances, Nature, 188, 638-641. Bannister, P.R. (1999). Further examples of seasonal variations of ELF radio propagation parameters, Radio Sci., 34, 199-208. Bliokh, P.V., Yu.P. Galuk, E.M. Hynninen, A.P. Nicko- laenko and L.M. Rabinowicz (1977). On the resonance phenomena in the Earth-ionosphere cavity, Izv. VUZOV, Radiofizika, 20 (14), 501-509, (in Russian). Bliokh, P.V., A.P. Nickolaenko and Yu. F. Filippov (1980). Schumann resonances in the Earth–ionosphere cav- ity, D. Ll. Jones (ed.), Peter Peregrinus, New York, London, Paris, 168 p. Chapman, F., and D. Jones (1964). Earth–ionosphere cavity resonances and the propagation of extremely low frequency radio waves, Nature, 202, 654-657. Cole, R.K., and E.T. Pierce (1965). Electrification in the Earth’s atmosphere from altitudes between 0 and 100 kilometers, J. Geophys. Res., 70, 2735-2749. Croskey, C.L., L.C. Hale and J.D. Mitchell (1990). Elec- trical stratification in the middle atmosphere, Adv. Space Res., 10, 49-52. Curto, J.J., L.F. Alberca, R.H. Holzworth, B. de la Morena, J. Battlo, J.G. Sole and D. Altadill (2001). Electric conductivity and electric field in the strato- sphere: Middle-latitude balloon flight results, J. Geo- phys. Res., 106, 21337-21342. Dudkin, F., V. Korepanov, D. Dudkin, V. Pilipenko, V. Pronenko and S. Klimov (2015). Electric field of the power terrestrial sources observed by microsatellite Chibis-M in the Earth’s ionosphere in frequency range 1-60 Hz, Geophys. Res. Lett., 42, 5686-5693; doi:10.1002/2015GL064595. Dyrda, M., A. Kulak, J. Mlynarczyk and M. Ostrowski (2015). Novel analysis of a sudden ionospheric dis- turbance using Schumann resonance measurements, J. Geophys. Res., 120, 2255-2262; doi:10.1002/2014J A020854. Friedrich, M., and K.M. Torkar (2001). FIRI: A semi- empirical model of the lower ionosphere, J. Geophys. Res., 106, 21409-21418; doi:10.1029/2001JA900070. Friedrich, M., and M. Rapp (2009). News from the lower ionosphere: A review of recent developments, Surv. Geophys., 30, 525-559. Friedrich, M., K.M. Torkar, U.-P. Hoppe, T.-A. Bekkung, A. Barjatya and M. Rapp (2013). Multi-instrument comparisons of D-region plasma measurements, Annales Geophysicae, 31, 135-144. Fullekrug, M. (2000). Dispersion relation for spherical electromagnetic resonances in the atmosphere, Physics Letters A, 275, 80-89. Fullekrug, M., A.C. Fraser-Smith and K. Schlegel (2002). Global ionospheric D-layer height monitoring, Eu- rophys. Lett., 59, 626-632. KUDINTSEVA ET AL. 10 11 Fullekrug, M. (2005). Detection of thirteen resonances of radio waves from particularly intense lightning discharges, Geophys. Res. Lett., 32, L13809; doi:10.1 029/2005GL023028. Fullekrug, M., E. Mareev and M. Rycroft, eds. (2006). Sprites, elves and intense lightning discharges, vol. 225, Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 398 p. Galejs, J. (1961). Terrestrial extremely low frequency noise spectrum in the presence of exponential ionos- pheric conductivity profiles, J. Geophys. Res., 66, 2789-2793. Galejs, J. (1965). Schumann resonances, J. Res. NBS, 69D, 1043-1055. Galejs, J. (1972). Terrestrial propagation of long electro- magnetic waves, Pergamon Press, New York, 362 p. Galuk, Yu.P., and V.I. Ivanov (1978). Deducing the prop- agation characteristics of VLF fields in the cavity Earth - non-uniform along the height anisotropic ionosphere, in Problems of diffraction and radio wave propagation, Leningrad State University, 16, 148-153 (in Russian). Galuk, Yu.P., M. Hayakawa and A.P. Nickolaenko (2015). Knee model: comparison between heuristic and rigorous solutions for the Schumann resonance problem, J. Atmos. Sol.-Terr. Phys., 135, 85-91, 1364- 6826; doi:10.1016/j.jastp.2015.10.008. Greifinger, C., and P. Greifinger (1978). Approximate method for determining ELF eigenvalues in the Earth-ionosphere waveguide, Radio Sci., 13, 831- 837. Greifinger, P.S., V.C. Mushtak and E.R. Williams (2007). On modeling the lower characteristic ELF altitude from aeronomical data, Radio Sci., 42, RS2S12; doi:10.1029/2006RS003500. Hale, L.C., C.L. Croskey and J.D. Mitchell (1981). Meas- urements of middle-atmospheric electric fields and associated electrical conductivity, Geophys. Res. Lett., 8, 927-931. Hale, L.C. (1984), Middle atmosphere electrical struc- ture, dynamics, and coupling, Adv. Space Res., 4, 175-186. Han, F., S.A. Cummer, J. Li and G. Lu (2011). Daytime ionospheric D region sharpness derived from VLF radio atmospherics, J. Geophys. Res., 116, A05314; doi:10.1029/2010JA016299. Harrison, R.G. (2013). The Carnegie curve, Surv. Geo- phys., 34, 209-232. Harrison, R.G., K.A. Nicoll and K.L. Aplin (2014). Ver- tical profile measurements of lower troposphere ionisation. J. Atmos. Sol.-Terr. Phys., 119, 203-210; doi:10.1016/j.jastp.2014.08.006. Harth, W. (1982). Theory of low frequency wave prop- agation, In: H. Volland (ed.), CRC Handbook of At- mospherics, vol. 2, CRC Press Inc., Boca Raton, Florida, 134-203. Hays, P.B., and R.G. Roble (1979). A quasi-static model of global atmospheric electricity, 1. The lower at- mosphere, J. Geophys. Res., 84, 3291-3305. Holzworth, R.H., and Y.T. Chiu (1982). Spherics in the stratosphere, In: H. Volland (ed.), CRC Handbook of Atmospherics, vol. 2, CRC Press Inc., Boca Raton, Florida, 2-19. Holzworth, R.H. (1991). Conductivity and electric field variations with altitude in the stratosphere, J. Geo- phys. Res., 96, 12857-12864. Holzworth, R.H. (1995). Quasistatic Electromagnetic Phenomena in the Atmosphere and Ionosphere, In: H. Volland (ed.), CRC Handbook of Atmospherics, CRC Press Inc., Boca Raton, Florida, 235-266. Huang, E., E. Williams, R. Boldi, S. Heckman, W. Lyons, M. Taylor, T. Nelson and C. Wong (1999). Criteria for sprites and elves based on Schumann resonance observations, J. Geophys. Res., 104, 16943- 16964. Hynninen, E.M., and Yu.P. Galuk (1972). Field of verti- cal dipole over the spherical Earth with non-uni- form along height ionosphere, in Problems of diffraction and radio wave propagation, Leningrad State Universtity, 11, 109-120 (in Russian). Inan, U.S., N.G. Lehtinen, R.C. Moore, K. Hurley, S. Boggs, D.M. Smith and G.J. Fishman (2007). Mas- sive disturbance of the daytime lower ionosphere by the giant gamma-ray flare from magnetar SGR 1806-20, Geophys. Res. Lett., 34, L08103; doi:10.10 29/2006GL029145. Ishaq, M., and D.Ll. Jones (1977). Method of obtaining radiowave propagation parameters for the Earth- ionosphere duct at ELF, Electronic Lett., 13, 254- 255. Jones, D.Ll. (1976). Schumann resonances and E.L.F. propagation for inhomogeneous isotropic ionos- pheric profiles, J. Atmos. Terr. Phys., 29, 1037-1044. Jones, D.Ll., and M. Knott (1999). Comparison of sim- plified and full-wave ELF propagation models, Ab- stracts of Reports at URSI General Assembly, Toronto, Session E6, August 1999. Jones, D.Ll., and M. Knott (2003). Computations of electromagnetic resonance in the Earth–ionosphere cavity using full wave solution and approximate model, Radio-Physics and Electronics, 8, 55-66 (in Russian). Kero, A., J. Vierinen, D. McKay-Bukowski, C.-F. Enell, M. Sinor, L. Roininen and Y. Ogawa (2014). Ionos- pheric electron density profiles inverted from a spec- tral riometer measurement, Geophys. Res. Lett., 41, 5370-5375; doi:10.1002/2014GL060986. AC AND DC GEC PROPERTIES AND AIR CONDUCTIVITY Kirillov, V.V (1993). Parameters of the Earth-ionosphere waveguide at ELF, In: Problems of radio wave dif- fraction and propagation, Leningrad State Univer- stity, 23, 35-52 (in Russian). Kirillov, V.V (1996). 2D theory of ELF electromagnetic wave propagation in the Earth–ionosphere cavity, Izv. VUZOV, Radiofizika, 39, 1103-1112 (in Russian). Kirillov, V.V., V.N. Kopeykin and V.C. Mushtak (1997). Electromagnetic waves of ELF band in the Earth- ionosphere cavity, Geomagn. Aeron., 37, 114-120 (in Russian). Kirillov, V.V., and V.N. Kopeykin (2002). Solution of 2D telegraph equations with anisotropic parameters, Izv. VUZOV Radiofizika, 45, 1011-1024 (in Russian). Knott, M. (1998). Computations of ELF EM Fields in the Earth-Ionosphere Duct. Report, Physics Dept., King’s College, London, 45 p. Korn, G.A., and T.M. Korn (1968). Mathematical Hand- book, second edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, San Francisco, Toronto, Sydney, 831 p. Kulak, A., J. Kubisz, A. Michalec, S. Zięba and Z. Nieckarz (2003). Solar variations in extremely low frequency propagation parameters: 2. Observations of Schumann resonances and computation of the ELF attenuation parameter, J. Geophys. Res., 108, 1271-1279; doi:10.1029/ 2002JA009305. Madden, T., and W. Thompson (1965). Low frequency electromagnetic oscillations of the Earth–ionos- phere cavity, Rev. Geophys., 3, 211-254. Makino, M., and T. Ogawa (1984). Responses of at- mospheric electric field and air-earth current to vari- ations of conductivity profile, J. Atmos. Terr. Phys., 46, 431-445. Makino, M., and T. Ogawa (1985). Quantitative estima- tion of global circuit, J. Geophys. Res., 90, 5961-5966. Markson, R. (2007). The global circuit intensity: Its measurement and variation over the last 50 years, Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc., 88, 223-241. McNeil, W.J., S.T. Lai and E. Murad (1998). Differential ablation of cosmic dust and implications for the rel- ative abundances of atmospheric metals, J. Geo- phys. Res., 103, 10899-10911. Mechtly, E.A., S.A. Bowhill and L.G. Smith (1972). Changes of lower ionosphere electron concentra- tions with solar activity, J. Atmos. Terr. Phys., 34, 1899-1907. Middleton, D. (1960), An Introduction to Statistical Communication Theory, vol. 1, ch. 11.2-2, McGraw- Hill, New York, San Francisco, Toronto, Sydney. Mushtak, V.C., and E.R. Williams (2002). ELF propa- gation parameters for uniform models of the Earth- ionosphere waveguide, J. Atmos. Sol.-Terr. Phys., 64, 1989-2001. Nickolaenko, A.P., and L.M. Rabinowicz (1982). Possi- ble global electromagnetic resonances on the planets of the solar system, translated from Kosmicheskie Issledovaniya, vol. 20, No. 1, Plenum Publishing Corporation, 82-88. Nickolaenko, A.P., and M. Hayakawa (2002). Reso- nances in the Earth-ionosphere cavity, Kluwer Aca- demic Publishers, Dordrecht, Boston, London, 380 p. Nickolaenko, A.P. (2008). ELF attenuation factor de- rived from distance dependence of radio wave ampli- tude propagating from an artificial source, Telecomm. Radio Eng+, 67, 1621-1629. Nickolaenko, A.P., I.G. Kudintseva, O. Pechonaya, M. Hayakawa, T. Nakamura, Y. Hobara and Y. Tanaka (2010). Impact of a gamma-ray burst on the Schu- mann resonance, Radiophys. Quantum El., 53 (9/10), 542-556; doi:10.1007/s11141-011-9249-9. Nickolaenko, A.P. (2011). Source models for “paramet- ric” Q-burst, Journal of Atmospheric Electricity, 31, 95-110. Nickolaenko, A., and M. Hayakawa (2014). Schumann Resonance for Tyros (Essentials of Global Electro- magnetic Resonance in the Earth-Ionosphere Cav- ity), Springer, Geophysics Series XI, 348 p. Nickolaenko, A.P., A.Yu. Schekotov, M. Hayakawa, Y. Hobara, G. Sátori, J. Bor and M. Neska (2014). Multi- point detection of the ELF transient caused by the gamma flare of December 27, 2004, Radiophys. Quantum El., 57, 125-140. Nickolaenko, A.P., Yu.P. Galuk and M. Hayakawa (2016), Vertical profile of atmospheric conductivity that matches Schumann resonance observations, Springer- Plus, 5, 108, doi:10.1186/s40064-016-1742-3. Odzimek, A., M. Lester and M. Kubicki (2010). EGATEC: A new high-resolution engineering model of the global atmospheric electric circuit - Currents in the lower atmosphere, J. Geophys. Res., 115, D18; doi:10.1029/2009JD013341. Ogawa, T. (1985). Fair weather electricity, J. Geophys. Res., 90, 5951-5961. Otsuyama, T., D. Sakuma and M. Hayakawa (2003). FDTD analysis of ELF wave propagation and Schu- mann resonances for a subionospheric waveguide model, Radio Sci., 38, 1103; doi:10.1029/2002RS00 2752. Park, C.G., and M. Dejnakarintra (1973). Penetration of thundercloud electric fields into the ionosphere and magnetosphere: 1. Middle and subauroral lati- tudes, J. Geophys. Res., 78, 6623-6633; doi:10.1029/J A078i028p06623. Pavlov, A.V (2014). Photochemistry of ions at D-region altitudes of the ionosphere: a review, Surv. Geophys., 35, 259-334; doi:10.1007/s10712-013-9253-z. KUDINTSEVA ET AL. 12 13 Pavlov, A.V (2016). Influence of atmospheric solar ra- diation absorption on photodestruction of ions at D-region altitudes of the ionosphere, Surv. Geophys., 37; doi:10.1007/s10712-016-9371-5. Pechony, O. (2003). Modeling and Simulations of Schu- mann Resonance Parameters Observed at the Mitzpe Ramon Field Station, Ph.D. Thesis, Tel-Aviv Uni- versity, Israel, 92 p. Pechony, O., and C. Price (2004). Schumann resonance parameters computed with a partially uniform knee model on Earth, Venus, Mars and Titan, Radio Sci., 39, RS5007; doi:10.1029/2004RS003056. Plane, J.M.C. (2003). Atmospheric chemistry of mete- oric metals, Chem. Rev., 103, 4963-4984. Polk, C. (1983). Natural and man-made noise in the Earth-ionosphere cavity at extremely low frequencies (Schumann resonances and man-made ‘interference’), Space Sci. Rev., 35, 83-89. Rakov, V.A., and M.A. Uman (2003). Lightning: Physics and Effects, Cambridge University Press, 687 p. Rishbeth, H. and O.K. Garriott (1969). Introduction to ionospheric physics, Academic Press, New York and London, 331 pp. Roble, R.G., and P.B. Hays (1979). A quasi-static model of global atmospheric electricity, 2. Electrical cou- pling between the upper and lower atmosphere, J. Geophys. Res., 84, 7247-7256. Roble, R.G., and I. Tzur (1986). The global atmos- pheric-electrical circuit, In: E.P. Krider and R.G. Roble (eds.), The Earth’s electrical environment, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 206-231. Roldugin, V.C., Y.P. Maltsev, A.N. Vasiljev, A.Y. Schoko- tov and G.G. Belyajev (2004). Schumann resonance frequency increase during solar X-ray bursts, J. Geo- phys. Res. 109, A01216; doi:10.1029/2003JA010019. Rycroft, M.J. (1965). Resonances of the Earth-ionosphere cavity observed at Cambridge, England, J. Res. NBS, 69D, 1071-1081. Rycroft, M.J., S. Israelsson and C. Price (2000). The global atmospheric electric circuit, solar activity and climate change, J. Atmos. Sol.-Terr. Phys., 62, 1563- 1576. Rycroft, M.J., A. Odzimek, N.F. Arnold, M. Fullekrug, A. Kulak and T. Neubert (2007). New model simula- tions of the global atmospheric electric circuit driven by thunderstorms and electrified shower clouds: The roles of lightning and sprites, J. Atmos. Sol.-Terr. Phys., 69, 2485-2509. Rycroft, M.J., R.G. Harrison, K.A Nicoll and E.A. Ma- reev (2008). An overview of Earth’s global electric circuit and atmospheric conductivity, In: F. Leblanc et al. (eds.), Planetary Atmospheric Electricity, Springer, 83-105; doi:10.1007/978-0-387-87664-1_6. Rycroft, M.J., and A. Odzimek (2010). Effects of light- ning and sprites on the ionospheric potential, and threshold effects on sprite initiation, obtained using an analog model of the global atmospheric electric circuit, J. Geophys. Res., 115, A00E37; doi:10.1029/ 2009JA014758. Rycroft, M.J., and R.G. Harrison (2012). Electromag- netic atmosphere-plasma coupling: the global at- mospheric electric circuit, Space Sci. Rev., 168, 363-384; doi:10.1007/s11214-011-9830-8. Rycroft, M.J., K.A. Nicoll, K.L. Aplin and R.G. Harrison (2012). Recent advances in global electric circuit coupling between the space environment and the troposphere, J. Atmos. Sol.-Terr. Phys., 90-91, 198- 211; doi:10.1016/j.jastp.2012.03.015. Sao, K., M. Yamashita, S. Tanahashi, H. Jindoh and K. Ohta (1973). Experimental investigations of Schu- mann resonance frequencies, J. Atmos. Terr. Phys., 35, 2047-2053; . Sapkota, B.K., and N.C. Varshneya (1990). On the global atmospheric electric circuit, J. Atmos. Terr. Phys., 52, 1-22. Sato, M., and H. Fukunishi (2003). Global sprite occur- rence locations and rates derived from triangulation of transient Schumann resonance events, Geophys. Res. Lett. 30, 1859-1863; doi:10.1029/2003GL017291. Sátori, G., M. Rycroft, P. Bencze, F. Märcz, J. Bór, V. Barta, T. Nagy and K. Kovács (2013). An overview of thunderstorm-related research on the atmos- pheric electric field, Schumann resonances, sprites, and the ionosphere at Sopron, Hungary, Surv. Geo- phys., 34, 1-38. Schekotov, A.Yu., A.P. Nickolaenko, M. Hayakawa, Y. Hobara, G. Sátori, J. Bor and M. Neska (2013). Worldwide detection of ELF transient associated with the gamma flare of December 27, 2004, Telecomm. Radio Eng+, 72, 1695-1718; doi:10.1615/ TelecomRadEng.v72.i18.60. Schlegel, K., and M. Fullekrug (2002). A D-region con- ductivity model from EISCAT VHF measurements, Annales Geophysicae, 20, 1439-1445; doi:10.5194/ angeo-20-1439-2002. Schumann, W. (1952). Uber die strahlungslosen Eigen- schwingungen einer leitenden Kugel, die von einer Luftschicht und einer Ionospharenhulle umgeben ist, Z. Naturforsch., 7a, 149-154. Sentman, D.D. (1990). Approximate Schumann reso- nance parameters for a two scale-height ionosphere, J. Atmos. Terr. Phys., 52, 35-46. Sentman, D.D. (1995). Schumann Resonances, In: H. Volland (ed.), Handbook of Atmospheric Electro- dynamics, vol. 1, Atmospheric electricity, CRC Press Inc., Boca Raton, Florida, 267-298. AC AND DC GEC PROPERTIES AND AIR CONDUCTIVITY Sentman, D.D (1996). Schumann resonance spectra in a two-scale-height Earth–ionosphere cavity, J. Geo- phys. Res., 101, 9479-9487. Simoes, F.A., R.F. Pfaff and H.T. Freudenreich (2011). Satellite observations of Schumann resonances in the Earth’s ionosphere, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L22101; doi:10.1029/2011GL049668. Simpson, J.J., and A. Taflove (2002). Two-dimensional FDTD model of antipodal ELF propagation and Schumann resonance of the Earth, IEEE Antenn. Wirel. Pr., 1, 53-56. Simpson, J.J. (2009), Current and future applications of 3-D global Earth-ionosphere models based on the full-vector Maxwell’s equations FDTD method, Surv. Geophys., 30, 105-130; doi:10.1007/s10712-009-9063-5. Soriano, A., E.A. Navarro, D.L. Paul, J.A. Portí, J.A. Morente and I.J. Craddock (2005). Finite Difference Time Domain simulation of the Earth-ionosphere resonant cavity: Schumann resonances, IEEE An- tenn. Wirel. Pr., 53, 1535-1541. Swider, W. (1988). Ionic mobility, mean mass, and con- ductivity in the middle atmosphere from near ground level to 70 km, Radio Sci., 23, 389-399. Tanaka, Y.T., M. Hayakawa, Y. Hobara, A.P. Nicko- laenko, K. Yamashita, M. Sato, Y. Takahashi, T. Tera- sawa and T. Takahashi (2011). Detection of transient ELF emission caused by the extremely intense cosmic gamma-ray flare of 27 December 2004, Geophys. Res. Lett., 38, L08805; doi:10.1029/2011GL047008. Tikhonov, V.I (1982). Statistical Radio Technique, sec- ond edition, Radio and Communications, Moscow, ch. 2.7 (in Russian). Tinsley, B.A., and L. Zhou (2006). Initial results of a global circuit model with variable stratospheric and tropospheric aerosols, J. Geophys. Res., 111, D16205; doi:10.1029/2005JD006988. Tinsley, B.A. (2008). The global atmospheric electric cir- cuit and its effects on cloud microphysics, Rep. Prog. Phys., 71; doi:10.1088/0034-4885/71/6/066801. Tran, A., and C. Polk (1979a). Schumann resonances and electrical conductivity of the atmosphere and lower ionosphere - I. Effects of conductivity at var- ious altitudes on resonance frequencies and attenu- ation, J. Atmos. Terr. Phys., 41, 1241-1248. Tran, A., and C. Polk (1979b). Schumann resonances and electrical conductivity of the atmosphere and lower ionosphere - II. Evaluation of conductivity profiles from experimental Schumann resonance data, J. Atmos. Terr. Phys., 41, 1249-1261. Velikhov, E.P., ed. (2014). Interaction of electromag- netic fields of ELF controlled sources with the ion- osphere and Earth’s crust, In: Proceedings of the All-Russian (with the International Participation) Research and Practice Workshop, Russian Academy of Sciences, Department of Earth Sciences, Geo- logical Institute Kola Science Centre, vol. 1, 206 p.; ISBN 978-5-902643-23-4. Wait, J.R. (1962). Electromagnetic Waves in Stratified Media, 1st edition, Pergamon Press, Oxford, 372 p. Wait, J.R. (1970). Electromagnetic Waves in Stratified Media, 2nd edition, Pergamon Press, Oxford, 608 p. Widdel, H.U., G. Rose and R. Borchers (1976). Experi- mental results on the variation of electric conduc- tivity and ion mobility in the mesosphere, J. Atmos. Terr. Phys., 81, 6217-6220. Williams, E.R. (2003). The global electrical circuit, In: J.R. Holton, J. Pyle and J.A. Curry (eds.), Encyclo- pedia of Atmospheric Sciences, vol. 2, 724-732. Williams, E.R., V. Mushtak and A.P. Nickolaenko (2006). Distinguishing ionospheric models using Schumann resonance spectra, J. Geophys. Res., 111, D16107; doi:10.1029/2005JD006944. Williams, E.R. (2009). The global electric circuit: A re- view, Atmos. Res., 91, 140-152. Williams, E., and E. Mareev (2014). Recent progress on the global electrical circuit, Atmos. Res., 135-136, 208-227. Williams, E.R., Y.-J. Wu, M. Friedrich and R.-E. Hsu (2015). Meteor ablation as origin for the D-region ledge in electrical conductivity, paper AE22A-04, presented at AGU Fall Meeting, San Francisco, De- cember 2015. Wilson, C.T.R. (1929). Some thundercloud problems, J. Franklin Institute, 208, 1-12. Yang, H., and V.P. Pasko (2005). Three-dimensional fi- nite difference time domain modeling of the Earth– ionosphere cavity resonances, Geophys. Res. Lett., 32, L03114; doi:10.1029/2004GL021343. Yang, H., V.P. Pasko and Y. Yair (2006). Three-dimen- sional finite difference time domain modeling of the Schumann resonance parameters on Titan, Venus, and Mars, Radio Sci., 41, RS2S03; doi:10.1029/2005 RS003431. Zhou, H., and X. Qiao (2015). Studies on the variations of the first Schumann resonance frequency during the solar flare on 7 March 2012, J. Geophys. Res., 120, 4600-4612; doi:10.1002/2014JD022696. *Corresponding author: Alexander P. Nickolaenko, A.Ya. Usikov Institute for Radio-Physics and Electronics, National Academy of Sciences of the Ukraine, Kharkov, Ukraine; email: sasha@ire.kharkov.ua; sashanickolaenko@gmail.com. © 2016 by the Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia. All rights reserved. KUDINTSEVA ET AL. 14 15 Appendix 1. Here we show the data describing the hybrid profile. AC AND DC GEC PROPERTIES AND AIR CONDUCTIVITY h, km v(h), S/m lg(v) h, km v(h), S/m lg(v) 0 1.512E-14 -13.820 50 3.380E-10 -9.482 1 2.160E-14 -13.665 51 3.514E-10 -9.465 2 4.090E-14 -13.403 52 3.710E-10 -9.441 3 6.962E-14 -13.172 53 3.998E-10 -9.409 4 1.049E-13 -12.994 54 4.299E-10 -9.377 5 1.482E-13 -12.844 55 5.229E-10 -9.292 6 2.019E-13 -12.709 56 6.160E-10 -9.221 7 2.712E-13 -12.581 57 8.044E-10 -9.105 8 3.549E-13 -12.464 58 9.929E-10 -9.013 9 4.651E-13 -12.346 59 1.398E-9 -8.864 10 5.943E-13 -12.240 60 1.803E-9 -8.754 11 7.629E-13 -12.131 61 2.731E-9 -8.573 12 9.578E-13 -12.032 62 3.659E-9 -8.446 13 1.209E-12 -11.931 63 5.896E-9 -8.239 14 1.499E-12 -11.837 64 8.133E-9 -8.099 15 1.867E-12 -11.742 65 1.365E-8 -7.874 16 2.285E-12 -11.654 66 1.916E-8 -7.726 17 2.796E-12 -11.567 67 3.249E-8 -7.497 18 3.375E-12 -11.485 68 4.582E-8 -7.347 19 4.093E-12 -11.401 69 6.887E-8 -7.170 20 4.891E-12 -11.323 70 9.636E-8 -7.024 21 5.864E-12 -11.244 71 1.419E-7 -6.848 22 6.930E-12 -11.172 72 1.893E-7 -6.723 23 8.227E-12 -11.097 73 2.839E-7 -6.547 24 9.634E-12 -11.029 74 4.258E-7 -6.371 25 1.135E-11 -10.957 75 5.678E-7 -6.246 26 1.320E-11 -10.892 76 7.570E-7 -6.121 27 1.545E-11 -10.823 77 9.463E-7 -6.024 28 1.788E-11 -10.760 78 1.183E-6 -5.927 29 2.085E-11 -10.693 79 1.467E-6 -5.834 30 2.416E-11 -10.629 80 1.751E-6 -5.757 31 2.774E-11 -10.569 81 2.176E-6 -5.662 32 3.164E-11 -10.512 82 2.602E-6 -5.585 33 3.626E-11 -10.452 83 3.265E-6 -5.486 34 4.207E-11 -10.388 84 3.927E-6 -5.406 35 4.925E-11 -10.319 85 5.157E-6 -5.288 36 5.762E-11 -10.251 86 6.388E-6 -5.195 37 6.821E-11 -10.178 87 8.895E-6 -5.051 38 7.947E-11 -10.111 88 1.145E-5 -4.941 39 9.359E-11 -10.040 89 1.713E-5 -4.766 40 1.101E-10 -9.970 90 2.285E-5 -4.641 41 1.3461E-10 -9.882 91 3.686E-5 -4.433 42 1.555E-10 -9.819 92 5.091E-5 -4.293 43 1.840E-10 -9.746 93 9.042E-5 -4.044 44 2.097E-10 -9.689 94 1.230E-4 -3.886 45 2.410E-10 -9.629 95 2.652E-4 -3.576 46 2.651E-10 -9.587 96 4.005E-4 -3.397 47 2.855E-10 -9.555 97 9.690E-4 -3.014 48 2.991E-10 -9.535 98 1.538E-3 -2.813 49 3.183E-10 -9.508 99 2.338E-3 -2.631 Table 1. << /ASCII85EncodePages false /AllowTransparency false /AutoPositionEPSFiles false /AutoRotatePages /None /Binding /Left /CalGrayProfile (Dot Gain 20%) /CalRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CalCMYKProfile (U.S. Web Coated \050SWOP\051 v2) /sRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CannotEmbedFontPolicy /Warning /CompatibilityLevel 1.3 /CompressObjects /Tags /CompressPages true /ConvertImagesToIndexed true /PassThroughJPEGImages true /CreateJobTicket false /DefaultRenderingIntent /Default /DetectBlends true /DetectCurves 0.1000 /ColorConversionStrategy /LeaveColorUnchanged /DoThumbnails false /EmbedAllFonts true /EmbedOpenType false /ParseICCProfilesInComments true /EmbedJobOptions true /DSCReportingLevel 0 /EmitDSCWarnings false /EndPage -1 /ImageMemory 1048576 /LockDistillerParams true /MaxSubsetPct 100 /Optimize false /OPM 1 /ParseDSCComments true /ParseDSCCommentsForDocInfo true /PreserveCopyPage true /PreserveDICMYKValues true /PreserveEPSInfo true /PreserveFlatness true /PreserveHalftoneInfo false /PreserveOPIComments false /PreserveOverprintSettings true /StartPage 1 /SubsetFonts true /TransferFunctionInfo /Apply /UCRandBGInfo /Preserve /UsePrologue false /ColorSettingsFile (None) /AlwaysEmbed [ true /AndaleMono /Apple-Chancery /Arial-Black /Arial-BoldItalicMT /Arial-BoldMT /Arial-ItalicMT /ArialMT /CapitalsRegular /Charcoal /Chicago /ComicSansMS /ComicSansMS-Bold /Courier /Courier-Bold /CourierNewPS-BoldItalicMT /CourierNewPS-BoldMT /CourierNewPS-ItalicMT /CourierNewPSMT /GadgetRegular /Geneva /Georgia /Georgia-Bold /Georgia-BoldItalic /Georgia-Italic /Helvetica /Helvetica-Bold /HelveticaInserat-Roman /HoeflerText-Black /HoeflerText-BlackItalic /HoeflerText-Italic /HoeflerText-Ornaments /HoeflerText-Regular /Impact /Monaco /NewYork /Palatino-Bold /Palatino-BoldItalic /Palatino-Italic /Palatino-Roman /SandRegular /Skia-Regular /Symbol /TechnoRegular /TextileRegular /Times-Bold /Times-BoldItalic /Times-Italic /Times-Roman /TimesNewRomanPS-BoldItalicMT /TimesNewRomanPS-BoldMT /TimesNewRomanPS-ItalicMT /TimesNewRomanPSMT /Trebuchet-BoldItalic /TrebuchetMS /TrebuchetMS-Bold /TrebuchetMS-Italic /Verdana /Verdana-Bold /Verdana-BoldItalic /Verdana-Italic /Webdings ] /NeverEmbed [ true ] /AntiAliasColorImages false /CropColorImages true /ColorImageMinResolution 150 /ColorImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleColorImages true /ColorImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /ColorImageResolution 300 /ColorImageDepth -1 /ColorImageMinDownsampleDepth 1 /ColorImageDownsampleThreshold 1.10000 /EncodeColorImages true /ColorImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterColorImages true /ColorImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /ColorACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /ColorImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /JPEG2000ColorImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /AntiAliasGrayImages false /CropGrayImages true /GrayImageMinResolution 150 /GrayImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleGrayImages true /GrayImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /GrayImageResolution 300 /GrayImageDepth -1 /GrayImageMinDownsampleDepth 2 /GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.10000 /EncodeGrayImages true /GrayImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterGrayImages true /GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /GrayACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /GrayImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /JPEG2000GrayImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /AntiAliasMonoImages false /CropMonoImages true /MonoImageMinResolution 1200 /MonoImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleMonoImages true /MonoImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /MonoImageResolution 1200 /MonoImageDepth -1 /MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.08250 /EncodeMonoImages true /MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode /MonoImageDict << /K -1 >> /AllowPSXObjects false /CheckCompliance [ /None ] /PDFX1aCheck false /PDFX3Check false /PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false /PDFXNoTrimBoxError true /PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox true /PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfile (None) /PDFXOutputConditionIdentifier () /PDFXOutputCondition () /PDFXRegistryName (http://www.color.org) /PDFXTrapped /Unknown /CreateJDFFile false /SyntheticBoldness 1.000000 /Description << /ENU (Use these settings to create PDF documents with higher image resolution for high quality pre-press printing. The PDF documents can be opened with Acrobat and Reader 5.0 and later. These settings require font embedding.) /JPN /FRA /DEU /PTB /DAN /NLD /ESP /SUO /NOR /SVE /KOR /CHS /CHT /ITA >> >> setdistillerparams << /HWResolution [2400 2400] /PageSize [595.000 842.000] >> setpagedevice