Science Buddies: "Ask an Expert"

I recently went to the library and found a lot of books that have really good information about my topic (better than the information in my background research). I want to include this information in my log book, however, i have already finished making my hypothesis and experimental procedure. So, is it ok for me to do that?

Good for you! As long as you did this extra research before you did the experiment, it's fine to adjust your hypothesis and the experiment accordingly. What you CANNOT do is apply the new information to your experimental data after the fact.

You'll be using the new information in your discussion regardless. If it turns out that you find it afterwards and it explains why your experiment failed, you'll apply that information in the discussion.

Thanks! I'll include the new information I found in my logbook before I start my experiment like you said.

The purpose of my project is to determine whether or not geomagnetic storm activity is correlated with errors in GPS signals. I will then use this data to see if I can use errors in GPS signals to track geomagnetic storm activity. I will test this by recording GPS errors and geomagnetic storm activity over the course of six weeks. I know my controlled variables are the location and times that I take my readings at, but I'm unsure of my independent and dependent variables. Since my experiment is testing how geomagnetic storm activity/intensity changes as a result of errors in GPS signals, I'm thinking that my independent variable is the magnitude of error in GPS signals and my dependent variable is geomagnetic storm activity/intensity. Am I right?

The independent variable is the thing that you're changing to see an effect, or a variable you can't control that you're monitoring to see how it makes an effect. The dependent variable is the result of how the system reacts when the independent variable changes.

Imagine pouring water on your little brother. He's sitting quietly watching TV and you sneak up on him. If you pour lukewarm water on his head, he'll stand up and say "Hey what are you doing!" But if you pour icy cold water water on him instead, he'll jump up high in the air, screech and then chase you. So if the size of his reaction is the dependent variable, what is the independent variable in this experiment?

In your example, what is the result of the system changing and what is the variable that's causing the change?

My experiment is about how GPS errors change as a result of geomagnetic storm activity. So, would my variables be:
Independent: Geomagnetic storm activity
Dependent: Magnitude of GPS error signals

I am currently in the process of registering my project in my city's regional fair and am required to indicate which topics my project involves from a list of topics such as life science, astronomy, etc. One of the topics is mathematical sciences. My project is determining whether or not there is a correlation between geomagnetic storms and GPS errors. Since I will be using the correlation formula, would I say that my project involves mathematical science when i register? (I am entering the fair as an independent and my mom is acting as my coordinator, so, i don't have a coordinator at my school to ask)

coolgirl285 - I read through this Science Buddies project and felt that it was a very nice experiment looking at a single variable, position accuracy, and possible correlation with geomagnetic storm activity affecting the ionosphere and radio propagation. The collection of data plotted geometric storm activity versus position accuracy as determined by the GPS location with WAAS enabeled (errors compensated for) and non-WAAS data, which had position error. I didn't see a formula used, but there are many formulas for calculating correlation from observed data. If you are trying to categorize your project in the Mathematical Sciences, just because of the use of a formula, it might be a stretch. I think your experiment is very novel and may fit nicely into another category inside physical sciences. I don't know what your other choices are. In looking into this a bit before replying, I came upon this report by the FAA for a three month period in 2013. It observed that there were no significant errors within the GPS system attributable to geomagnetic storms during the 90 days. I only point this out because it's possible that your observations may have a similar period of "inactivity" and prevent you from observing significant error data.

You may look into the other phenomena that introduce error into GPS readings such as S/A, or selective availability.

http://www.nstb.tc.faa.gov/reports/PAN82_0713.pdf

Rick Marz

Thanks for your reply! I guess it isn't necessary for me to categorize my project into mathematical sciences since I will only be using one formula. I did take into account the sun's periods of increased and decreased activity before starting my project to make sure there is enough geomagnetic storm activity for me to proceed with my experiment, and so far, it looks like there is. I am however, noting any radio blackouts and solar radiation storms during my experiment to see how they affect GPS errors when there is no geomagnetic storm activity. Just in case I am wrong about there not being enough geomagnetic storm activity during my experiment, are there any other factors, other than S/A, that you suggest I should use in my experiment? Also, if there isn't enough solar activity, do i need to change my hypothesis since it is based on geomagnetic storm activity I have one more concern about my experiment: In the procedure I found on Science Buddies, it said to record baseline data for 3 weeks and conduct the actual experiment for another 3, but I want to do six. Six is all I can do since I need to finish the project by mid February and I will be starting recording baseline data tomorrow (I had trouble installing my GPS usb to my computer) Do you think six weeks is enough? Sorry for all these questions, I just really want to do well with my project.

coolgirl285 - Sounds like you've done a thorough job of considering the important factors. I couldn't tell you if three weeks is a long enough period to give you sufficient data. Your sample time may well experience various levels of activity. All things considered, if you take your readings from the same location and at the same time, you are compensating for some potential induced error. Good luck. Sounds like you have it all in good control.

Rick Marz

Hello. We noticed you had three different threads going for the same topic. We merged them into a single thread. Although it seems you started a new thread with each phase of your experiment, it helps to keep all questions to one thread so that our experts can best help you based on what has already been discussed.

Good luck, and thanks for using Science Buddies!

After doing a lot of research about the sun's solar cycle it looks like there is less solar activity this January, which is when i was planning on doing my experiment. This project is a science buddies project: https://www.sciencebuddies.org/science- ... ml#summary
It says that in the case of a solar minimum, historical data should be used, but it doesn't tell me how to do that. Please help!

There was a similar question a few years back whose answer might give you a leg up on the data, at least. I'm not sure how you'd get historical GPS accuracy data though.

https://www.sciencebuddies.org/science- ... php?t=5871

I also found quite a bit by putting "geomagnetic storm data" in a search engine. This isn't my area of expertise or interest so I wasn't easiy recognizing the data you needed but between that older list of sources and search tools (concentrate on NOAA) I hope you'll find what you need.

I found a good source for historical data for geomagnetic storms but what should I do for GPS data?

This is a longshot and hopefully someone else here has a better idea, but I'd contact the FAA satellite navigation group responsible for WAAS (http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/hea ... /contacts/) , explain what you're doing and see if they can help you. There must be a record of GPS accuracy helped out by WAAS and if anyone has it, the FAA certainly would. Be polite but respectful - I'd hope they'd at least answer your request.

Good luck with your project.

Howard

I've contacted the FAA and it seems they cannot help me acquire the GPS data. Would it be possible for me to get in touch with someone on this forum who is an expert on my topic?
- Thanks,
coolgirl

I am doing a project about how GPS errors correlate with geomagnetic storm activity/intensity. I am using historical data for my experiment and have already found a variety of reliable sources for geomagnetic storm activity, but have nothing for GPS data. I have contacted the FAA and they are unable to provide me with the GPS data i need. To clarify, the data i need is GPS readings for longitude, latitude, and altitude with and without the WAAS correction. The procedure I am following is based on this science buddies project: https://www.sciencebuddies.org/science- ... ml#summary
(except I will be using historical data)
- Thanks for reading,
coolgirl

The FAA doesn't have the data I need, so where else can I get histotical gps data?

Hi coolgirl285,

Finding the historical GPS data you need will be tricky. Looking at the project, you need data from a single GPS station that made repeated measurements with WAAS on and WAAS off. I've been able to find several publicly available GPS data sets from NOAA, NASA, the USGS, US Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, and USAID. None of these include both WAAS on and WAAS off measurements, so none of these would work for the project. If you have a GPS that would work for the project, I strongly recommend doing the project with the GPS. You can comment on the effect of sunspot activity and the solar minimum in the discussion and conclusions section of your project.

Based on your earlier posts, it sounds like you DO have a GPS that can make WAAS-on and WAAS-off measurements. But, if you do not, don't give up yet! I think there's another approach to this project that will work for you. It's not as straightforward, but should lead to a similar result. Instead of comparing Kp with the "error" you calculate between WAAS-enabled and non-WAAS-enabled GPS measurements, you can look at the correlation between the Kp index and the ionospheric grid point (IGP) delay in WAAS. The IGP delay is one of the factors in the WAAS correction, so this strategy (comparing IGP delay with geomagnetic storm data), will still let you evaluate the relationship between the WAAS correction and magnetic activity. It's answering the same question in a different way.

As you've probably read in your background research, GPS receivers communicate with GPS satellites using electromagnetic waves. The time it takes the signal to travel from the travel to the receiver (and vis versa) is essential to correctly calculating locations using GPS. Any delays or offsets in the travel time of the signals will cause errors in the measured GPS location. The IGP delay is a calculation of how much error is introduced into GPS position measurements by ionospheric activity. The ionosphere responds to the magnetic fields produced by stellar activity, so the IGP delay is sensitive to geomagnetic storms.

The data you need comes from two web sites, both run by the FAA. These sites do not include historical data (at least that I've been able to find online); however, it does give real time data (updated every 3 minutes!). So, doing the project this way would involve recording data from these websites over a period of time. For example you could record data for 3 weeks, like the procedure says, but you could also do shorter or longer, depending on when you project is due. The longer you collect data, the clearer the trend will become. To do the project this way, you would first pick one of the grid points shown on the map in the link below. You will be interested in the lower of the two maps titled "WAAS Ionospheric Grid Point Delay (meters)".

http://www.nstb.tc.faa.gov/RT_WaasSIGPStatus.htm

Make sure you can easily tell which point you picked so that you can get the data for the same point every day. You will need to write down the latitude and longitude of this point, which you can estimate by the location of the dot on the map (e.g., the second dot from the left in the middle row of points over Hawaii is -160 degrees longitude, 20 degrees latitude). Once you have picked an IGP, go to

http://www.nstb.tc.faa.gov/IGPDelays.htm

and find the line for the latitude and longitude of the point you chose on the map. The first column in the table is longitude, the second column is latitude, and the third column is the IGP delay, in meters. The data are grouped into "chunks" by latitude, so you will find it easiest to scroll down to the "chunk" of data with the correct latitude, and then find the longitude of the IGP you selected. Write down the grid delay in your lab notebook. It's a little bit confusing--the data are really about a time delay, but the units are meters. That's because software has calculated how much the time delay (in units of time, such as seconds) affects the accuracy of measured GPS positions (in units of distance, such as meters). The grid delay you record in your notebook is the amount of error in location, in meters, caused by the delay in signal travel time associated with ionospheric activity.

Everything I described from "The data you will need . . ." to the end of the paragraph above would replace step 1 of the experimental procedure in the Project Idea. You would do step 2 as written. In step 3, you would repeat recording the IGP delay for the location you selected instead of repeating the GPS measurements. In step 4, you would replace the phrase "GPS error signal" with "IGP delay". Step 5 would be "Is there a correlation between the IGP delay and the Kp index? How reliable is the IGP delay as an indicator of geomagnetic storm activity?"

Let me know if you have questions about this. The IGP and delay times might be harder concepts to understand, but I think you can do it! I'm happy to help in whatever way I can!

Thanks so much for your help! I was really confused! I like the idea of using igp delay, and I will hopefully be starting the experiment tomorrow. I was wondering if there were certain times of day you would recommend I do my experiment at, or does the time not matter? Thanks,
coolgirl285

I just started my experiment today and chose 6 am and 6 pm to record my readings (6 am is convenient for me because i get ready for school around that time). I was wondering if my results could be improved by taking my readings more frequently instead of twice a day to be able to see how IGP changes as geomagnetic storms develop. I also would also like to know if the FAA had archives for IGP that I could use to compare to my data once i've completed my experiment.
Thanks,
- coolgirl285

Hi coolgirl285,

I'm glad you started your experiment! The Kp index is reported on a 3 hour basis, so you won't be able compare IGP to Kp more than 8 times a day (once every 3 hours). And, since you're hopefully sleeping for about 9 of those hours, that leaves, at most 5 three hour intervals. There's nothing to lose by collecting data more often, but I'm not sure how much it will improve your results. Whether or not you collect data more frequently is really up to you. You could do 3 times a day (6am, noon, 6pm)--that would be every other Kp period (for the time you are awake!).

If you haven't found it already, you can get Kp from this website:

http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/products/planetary-k-index.

The FAA undoubtedly archives the IGP delay, but I'm not sure where, exactly, that data is located. I will do some digging and let you know what I find.

Thanks for your reply. I am unfortunately having some issues with my experiment. If I haven't already mentioned this, for my experiment I will also be taking note of radio blackouts and solar radiation storms that occur at the same time as my experiment to see how they affect my data. Yesterday, there was a solar radiation storm that occurred (I wasn't able to find the time), and I guess it either didn't start or was over at the times I was recording my data at because I wasn't able to record it. My fear is that throughout my experiment, geomagnetic storms, solar radiation storms, and radio blackouts will occur at times I am not recording data at. So, should I just record my data at the five 3 hour intervals you mentioned? Another thing I have noticed is that IGP delay changes strangely throughout the day. For instance, at 6 am yesterday, the IGP delay I recored was 0.750, then at 6 pm it was 2.875. I will do more research on IGP delay to figure out why this is. In the science buddies experimental procedure my experiment was originally following when I was recording GPS errors instead of IGP delay, it says to record baseline data for GPS for three weeks. Even though IGP delay and GPS are two different things, should I also do this for IGP delay? If so, how should I go about doing this? It would be a HUGE help if I could use archives for IGP delay for my experiment, rather than recording it live, because I already have access to various sources for historical data for geomagnetic storms, so, I could use historical data to do my whole experiment.
P.S Thanks for the link to the planetary k-index
Thank you,
- coolgirl285

Hi coolgirl285,

Long posts are great--they give lots of detail, which is helpful for figuring out how to help you.

Your fear about missing a crucial geomagnetic/solar radiation event makes total sense. It's a problem scientists run into frequently: the things we want to study take place at certain times, but can't make measurements all of the time. So, we don't always "catch" what we hope to. For example, I study Ceres, a dwarf planet in the asteroid belt. A few months ago, some colleagues published a paper that showed Ceres was spouting water into space at certain points in its orbit. It's a very exciting observation. A NASA spacecraft, called Dawn, will arrive at Ceres in a few months. Unfortunately, Dawn won't be studying Ceres at a place in its orbit when Ceres was seen emitting water. We will still learn a lot about Ceres--a ton, actually--but it's possible we might not see Ceres "in action". That would be a bit of a bummer, but the mission has cost constraints, time constraints, etc. So, this issue of “missing interesting stuff” is a very real one. Frankly, kudos to you for realizing it’s a problem!

One thing to keep in mind is that how frequently you "need" to measure something depends on how often the thing you are trying to measure happens or, alternatively, how long it lasts. As I mentioned in my prior post, it doesn't make sense to make more than 1 measurement every three hours because Kp is based on a three hour time period. In addition, geomagnetic storms usually last more than a few hours and sometimes for two to three days. So, while you might miss one of the shorter geomagnetic storms, you won't miss all of them, and you should catch at least part of most of the space weather events. Check out, if you haven't already, these pages from SWRI (a well-respected research institute; I have colleagues who work there) that discuss the duration of geomagnetic storms.

http://pluto.space.swri.edu/image/glossary/dst.html
http://pluto.space.swri.edu/image/gloss ... storm.html

If you take a look at the link to Kp that I gave in my prior post and focus on the data for today and yesterday, you'll notice a spike in Kp (red-colored bars) very early this morning. The GOES proton flux peaked late last night, but has been elevated all day (http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/products/goes-proton-flux). So, if you made a measurement this morning, you DID catch the solar radiation storm. You can check the GOES proton flux each time you make an IGP delay measurement and make notes about what has been happening with the proton flux and Kp in between your measurements. For example, you might write something like in your lab notebook (this is made up data):

"Date = 12/19/14
"Time = 6:00am
"IGP delay = 1.5 m
"Kp = 2
"In between 6pm yesterday and this morning, Kp was constant and the GOES proton flux was flat. A geomagnetic or solar radiation storm isn't happening."

.
.
.

"Date = 12/20/14
"Time = 6:00pm
"IGP delay = 1.9 m
"Kp = 5
"Between 6:00am this morning and right now, both Kp and the GOES proton flux have been increasing. A space weather storm is going on."

At the end of the project, you can compare all of the observations made when storms weren't going on to the observations made when storms were happening and look for differences.

As far as recording data goes, yes, you should record IGP delay/Kp data for 3 weeks. You could do shorter (2 weeks) if your project is due really soon. You could also go longer (e.g., 4+ weeks). A longer observation period will help you see trends in your data more clearly. But, make sure you leave enough time to write up your report and put your display together.

The time intervals for Kp are, as best I can tell, midnight to 3am, 3am to 6am, 6am to 9am, 9am to noon, noon to 3pm, 3pm to 6pm, 6pm to 9pm. I assumed you would be sleeping from 9pm to 6am, so the 5 three hour intervals would be

6am to 9am
9am to noon
noon to 3pm
3pm to 6pm
6pm to 9 pm

I haven't yet been able to find archived IGP delays, at least on a daily basis. I've found lots of other archived information, though. I was able to find these reports, which are linked to specific geomagnetic/space weather events:

http://www.nstb.tc.faa.gov/DisplayDiscrepancyReport.htm

You could look at these and get information from specific times (e.g., the last report was for Sep. 12-13). The reports are primarily concerned with the amount of area covered by WAAS, but it also gives Kp and position errors of certain sites (e.g., p. 13 of the Sep. 12-13 report). Remember that IGP delay is related to position error. There are monthly summary reports as well, but those won't be helpful for what you are trying to do.

To summarize and help you get "unlost":
1) Record the IGP delay for one site (always use the same one) and Kp at 6am and 6pm each day. You can check more often if you want to, but you don't have to.
2) When you record data in step 1, check the GOES proton flux and see what has happened in between your observations. Write down whether the GOES proton flux and Kp graphs indicate you are in a storm or not (see my examples above). This is how you will figure out if you "missed" something. It's OK if you miss something, but events should last long enough for you to catch at least part of them.
3) Repeat steps 1 and 2 for the next 2+ weeks.
4) Optional: If you want to use historical data, use the Display Discrepancy Reports to find out how much location error the storm/CME/flare caused.

Hang in there! This is a complicated project (it has the hardest difficulty rating possible on Science Buddies), but you're stepping up to it nicely. We're right here to help you whenever you need it. I'll be watching for your posts and respond within 24 hours (unless it's over a weekend, in which case I will check on Saturday and then Monday).

You can do this!

Thanks again for all the help! I don't quite understand the GOES proton flux (I couldn't find anything after googling it, so, could you give me a brief explanation on how to interpret it, as well as how to determine what day/time the data is for? You mentioned that I should've caught a solar radiation yesterday morning, but the space environment site said there were none. Why do you think I wasn't able to catch it? You also mentioned that I can use the GOES proton flux and planetary k index to determine whether or not there is a storm happening right now, but I don't understand this either.
Thanks,
- coolgirl285

I'm still really worried about missing space weather activity. Yesterday there was a geomagnetic storm and a radio blackout and they both didn't show up in my data.

Hi coolgirl285,

A little more information will help me help you better. Can you please post a link to where you are getting your space weather information from? In addition, can you explain how you are telling whether a geomagnetic storm is showing up in your data? The answer to these questions will be exceedingly helpful to me.

In regards to your questions about Kp and the GOES proton flux:

The planetary K index is related to disturbances in the horizontal component of Earth's magnetic field. To get these disturbances, NOAA collects information from a bunch of magnetometers on Earth. At any point on the Earth's surface (or in space, but let's focus on the Earth's surface), the geomagnetic field can be represented in two "parts"--a part that points straight down at the Earth's surface, and a part that is tangential to the Earth's surface. If you add these two parts together, you get a vector that describes the geomagnetic field at that point. Kp is only sensitive to changes in the part of the geomagnetic field that is horizontal, or tangential to the Earth's surface. Higher values of Kp (>4) indicate geomagnetic storms. To determine whether a storm is happening, look at the graph on the NOAA planetary K index website:

http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/products/planetary-k-index

The graph shows the date on the x-axis and the Kp index on the y-axis. If you look at the x-axis today, you will see the dates Dec 21, 22, 23, and 24 (from left to right), with narrow black vertical "tick marks" above the labels. All of the bars that fall in between two dates (e.g., Dec 22 and Dec 23) show the 8 Kp index readings for a single day (Dec 22, in this example). Let's focus on Dec. 22. You will see 8 colored bars in between the labels for Dec. 22 and Dec. 23. Two of these are red, one is yellow, and 5 are green. To read off the Kp index at a certain time, follow the top of one of these bars over to the y-axis and write down the corresponding value. For example, the yellow bar, which would be 6am to 9am universal time (count in three hour increments starting at midnight--the first red bar is midnight to 3am, the second red bar is 3am to 6am, etc.) corresponds to a Kp index of 4.. Since the two red bars to the left of the yellow one correspond to a Kp index of 5, which means a minor storm was happening, the Kp index of 4 means that we are catching the tail end of the storm.

One thing that I didn't mention before, but probably should have, is that you will need to convert universal time to whatever your local time is. If you go to this website:

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=what+time+is+it

It will tell you your local time and the current Greenwich Mean Time, which is the same as universal time. It will be important to take the difference in local time and universal time into account when you are trying to match geomagnetic and solar radiation activity to your observations.

GOES is a satellite that orbits Earth in a geostationary orbit. It has a detector on it that measures the proton flux, which is the number of protons of a certain energy that hit the detector in a certain amount of time. To give a simpler example of what this is, imagine that you are counting how many cars drive past a certain traffic camera. Let's say you spent 5 hours counting cars, and you counted 100 cars during that time. That's a flux: the number of cars that drive past the detector (the traffic camera) in a certain amount of time. We could call this the "coolgirl285 car flux" because you (coolgirl285) did the observing and you measured the car flux. In the same way, NOAA reports the "GOES proton flux" because GOES is the name of the satellite making observations, and the satellite measures the flux of protons. You can see the GOES proton flux on a graph here:

http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/products/goes-proton-flux

The x-axis of this graph is the date, just like the x-axis for the Kp graph. The y-axis on this graph is labeled "particles cm^-2 s^-1 sr^-1". That's short for "number of protons per centimeter square per second per steradian". Let's ignore the steradian part; it's not terribly important for our purposes. It's simply a unit that accounts for the fact that the GOES satellite is measuring the proton flux for a sphere instead of a plane. The rest of the units (particles cm^-2 s^-1) mean that the y-axis is the number of protons that pass through a square hole that is 1 cm by 1 cm on a side every second. The graph has three different sets of data on it: green (bottom), blue (middle), and red (top). These different colors correspond to different proton energies. Focus on the red line. When the red line spikes up, that indicates solar radiation activity.

NOAA uses Kp and the GOES proton flux to issue geomagnetic and solar radiation storm warnings, respectively. Read carefully--and then re-read to make sure you understand--the description of the NOAA space weather scales on this website to better understand how to use the Kp and GOES proton flux to understand what they mean for geomagnetic storms and solar radiation storms (see link below).

http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/noaa-scales-explanation

Hopefully between the additional details I've provided here and the information on the NOAA scales website, you will better understand how to use Kp and the GOES proton flux to tell whether a storm is happening. If not, let me know and I'll answer any questions you have.

Post back with your questions, and let me know how else I can help. It will really help me to better help you if you post back with the answer to the two questions I asked in the first paragraph of this post.

You can do this!

I am getting my space weather information from the NOAA 'space environment prediction center' website: http://www.swpc.noaa.gov When I said that space weather isn't showing up in my data, I meant that at the times that I was recording data, the website that I linked above said there were no geomagnetic storms, radio blackouts, or solar radiation storms. This is really frustrating because during the past few days since I've started my experiment, there has been either a radio blackout, geomagnetic storm, or solar radiation storm, but none of them occurred during the times I was recording data. This is why I had questions about recording data more often; I thought that if I recorded data more often, I would be able to catch some of these occurrences. Also, the space weather prediction center had updates about there being CME activity during the past few days, (which explains the space weather activity) and I don't want to miss the opportunity to record the space weather. I also have concerns about universal time: Should I be recording data at 6 am and 6 pm universal time converted into the time for where i live? For instance, if 6 am universal time is 8 am in my time, would I record data at 8 am?
Thanks,
- coolgirl285

I forgot to mention that I found this link on the NOAA site:http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/products/notif ... s-timeline I thought it might help with my time issues.

Hi coolgirl285,

Thanks for the added detail; it's very helpful. As a side note, both the planetary K-index and GOES proton flux graphs are at the bottom of http://www.swpc.noaa.gov. So, you can check those graphs on that page, instead of going to a separate web page for each graph (using the links I provided in my last post).

Recording data more frequently is a totally fine. It's actually a really good idea. You're right - recording data more frequently makes it more likely that you will catch an event "in action". You can record data as often as every three hours if you want to (recording more frequently than that doesn't allow you to compare IGP delay with new Kp values, since Kp is only calculated every three hours). Chose to record data however often works for you!

It makes sense that you feel frustrated by not recording data when events have happened in the past couple of days. Even if your collect data every three hours, you will still miss some events. However, over the next several weeks, you probably WILL catch some events in action. The longer you collect data for, the more likely you are to catch an event in action. That's why this project asks you to collect data for so long.

As far as the time difference goes (universal time vs. time zone you live in), what you said would work. But, I think it's easier to record data using the time zone that you are in. For example, if you record data at 6am your time, make a note that it is 4am universal time (if the difference is 2 hours, like you said in your post), and then look at the data for 4am on the Kp index and GOES proton flux. You don't need to worry about the time difference when you're recording IGP delays.

Post back with any questions!