Center for Space Environment Modeling Numerical Model of Solar Eruption on 1998 May 2 Ilia Roussev, Igor Sokolov & Tamas Gombosi.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Estimating the magnetic energy in solar magnetic configurations Stéphane Régnier Reconnection seminar on Thursday 15 December 2005.
Advertisements

CME/Flare Mechanisms Solar “minimum” event this January For use to VSE must be able to predict CME/flare Spiro K. Antiochos Naval Research Laboratory.
Construction of 3D Active Region Fields and Plasma Properties using Measurements (Magnetic Fields & Others) S. T. Wu, A. H. Wang & Yang Liu 1 Center for.
TOWARDS A REALISTIC, DATA-DRIVEN THERMODYNAMIC MHD MODEL OF THE GLOBAL SOLAR CORONA Cooper Downs, Ilia I. Roussev, Bart van der Holst, Noe Lugaz, Igor.
Modeling the Magnetic Field Evolution of the December Eruptive Flare Yuhong Fan High Altitude Observatory, National Center for Atmospheric Research.
Simulation of Flux Emergence from the Convection Zone Fang Fang 1, Ward Manchester IV 1, William Abbett 2 and Bart van der Holst 1 1 Department of Atmospheric,
Center for Space Environment Modeling Numerical Model of Solar Eruption on 1998 May 2 Ilia Roussev, Igor Sokolov, & Tamas Gombosi.
Chip Manchester 1, Fang Fang 1, Bart van der Holst 1, Bill Abbett 2 (1)University of Michigan (2)University of California Berkeley Study of Flux Emergence:
SHINE Campaign Event: 1-2 May 1998 Brian Welsch (& Yan Li) Space Sciences Laboratory, UC Berkeley Introduction: Data, Context, etc. Work: Completed & Ongoing.
Two energy release processes for CMEs: MHD catastrophe and magnetic reconnection Yao CHEN Department of Space Science and Applied Physics Shandong University.
High-latitude activity and its relationship to the mid-latitude solar activity. Elena E. Benevolenskaya & J. Todd Hoeksema Stanford University Abstract.
Center for Space Environment Modeling T. H. Zurbuchen, on behalf of W. Manchester, J. Kota, I. Roussev, T. H. Zurbuchen, N.
Understanding Magnetic Eruptions on the Sun and their Interplanetary Consequences A Solar and Heliospheric Research grant funded by the DoD MURI program.
Rapid Changes in the Longitudinal Magnetic Field Associated with the July gamma -ray Flare Vasyl Yurchyshyn, Haimin Wang, Valentyna Abramenko,
Understanding Magnetic Eruptions on the Sun and their Interplanetary Consequences A Solar and Heliospheric Research grant funded by the DoD MURI program.
Center for Space Environment Modeling Ward Manchester University of Michigan Yuhong Fan High Altitude Observatory SHINE July.
Ward Manchester University of Michigan Coupling of the Coronal and Subphotospheric Magnetic Field in Active Regions by Shear Flows Driven by The Lorentz.
The May 1,1998 and May 12, 1997 MURI events George H. Fisher UC Berkeley.
Observations of December 2006 events Yang Liu – Stanford University
Flows in NOAA AR 8210: An overview of MURI progress to thru Feb.’04 Modelers prescribe fields and flows (B, v) to drive eruptions in MHD simulations MURI.
Generation of Solar Energetic Particles (SEP) During May 2, 1998 Eruptive Event Igor V. Sokolov, Ilia I. Roussev, Tamas I. Gombosi (University of Michigan)
Center for Space Environment Modeling Numerical Model of CME Initiation and Shock Development for the 1998 May 2 Event Ilia.
On the Origin of Strong Gradients in Photospheric Magnetic Fields Brian Welsch and Yan Li Space Sciences Lab, UC-Berkeley, 7 Gauss Way, Berkeley, CA ,
Study of magnetic helicity in solar active regions: For a better understanding of solar flares Sung-Hong Park Center for Solar-Terrestrial Research New.
Space Weather Forecast With HMI Magnetograms: Proposed data products Yang Liu, J. T. Hoeksema, and HMI Team.
Center for Space Environment Modeling W. Manchester 1, I. Roussev, I.V. Sokolov 1, 1 University of Michigan AGU Berkeley March.
The Effect of Sub-surface Fields on the Dynamic Evolution of a Model Corona Goals :  To predict the onset of a CME based upon reliable measurements of.
Active Region Flux Transport Observational Techniques, Results, & Implications B. T. Welsch G. H. Fisher
Using Simulations to Test Methods for Measuring Photospheric Velocity Fields W. P. Abbett, B. T. Welsch, & G. H. Fisher W. P. Abbett, B. T. Welsch, & G.
Sung-Hong Park Space Weather Research Laboratory New Jersey Institute of Technology Study of Magnetic Helicity and Its Relationship with Solar Activities:
UCB MURI Team Introduction An overview of ongoing work to understand a well observed, eruptive active region, along with closely related studies…..
Summary of UCB MURI workshop on vector magnetograms Have picked 2 observed events for targeted study and modeling: AR8210 (May 1, 1998), and AR8038 (May.
The May 1997 and May 1998 MURI events George H. Fisher UC Berkeley.
Numerical simulations are used to explore the interaction between solar coronal mass ejections (CMEs) and the structured, ambient global solar wind flow.
Quick changes of photospheric magnetic field during flare-associated surges Leping Li, Huadong Chen, Suli Ma, Yunchun Jiang National Astronomical Observatory/Yunnan.
Evolution of the 2012 July 12 CME from the Sun to the Earth: Data- Constrained Three-Dimensional MHD Simulations F. Shen 1, C. Shen 2, J. Zhang 3, P. Hess.
Semi-Empirical MHD Modeling of the Solar Wind Igor V. Sokolov, Ofer Cohen, Tamas I. Gombosi CSEM, University of Michigan Ilia I Roussev, Institute for.
Coronal Mass Ejection As a Result of Magnetic Helicity Accumulation
Locating the solar source of 13 April 2006 Magnetic Cloud K. Steed 1, C. J. Owen 1, L. K. Harra 1, L. M. Green 1, S. Dasso 2, A. P. Walsh 1, P. Démoulin.
R. Oran csem.engin.umich.edu SHINE 09 May 2005 Campaign Event: Introducing Turbulence Rona Oran Igor V. Sokolov Richard Frazin Ward Manchester Tamas I.
1 THE RELATION BETWEEN CORONAL EIT WAVE AND MAGNETIC CONFIGURATION Speakers: Xin Chen
Lecture 16 Simulating from the Sun to the Mud. Space Weather Modeling Framework – 1 [Tóth et al., 2007] The SWMF allows developers to combine models without.
Three-dimensional MHD simulation of a flux rope driven CME Manchester IV, W.B., Gombosi, T.I., Roussev, I., De Zeeuw, D.L., Sokolov, I.V., Powell, K.G.,
SHINE SEP Campaign Events: Long-term development of solar corona in build-up to the SEP events of 21 April 2002 and 24 August 2002 A. J. Coyner, D. Alexander,
The Solar Wind.
Center for Space Environment Modeling Solar Energetic Particles: Acceleration and Transport in Realistic Magnetic Fields Igor.
Nonlinear force-free coronal magnetic field extrapolation scheme for solar active regions Han He, Huaning Wang, Yihua Yan National Astronomical Observatories,
1 SPD Meeting, July 8, 2013 Coronal Mass Ejection Plasma Heating by Alfvén Wave Dissipation Rebekah M. Evans 1,2, Merav Opher 3, and Bart van der Holst.
Validation of the SWMF Coupled Model for Solar Corona – Inner Heliosphere – CME With the Observations of the May 12, 1997 Event Ofer Cohen(1), Igor V.
Katharine K. Reeves 1, Terry G. Forbes 2, Jon Linker 3 & Zoran Mikić 3 1 Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics 2 University of New Hampshire 3 Science.
Simulation Study of Magnetic Reconnection in the Magnetotail and Solar Corona Zhi-Wei Ma Zhejiang University & Institute of Plasma Physics Beijing,
Center for Space Environment Modeling Numerical Challenges in Modeling CMEs and SEP Events Ilia Roussev, Igor Sokolov, Chip.
Observations and nonlinear force-free field modeling of active region Y. Su, A. van Ballegooijen, B. W. Lites, E. E. DeLuca, L. Golub, P. C. Grigis,
1 Yongliang Song & Mei Zhang (National Astronomical Observatory of China) The effect of non-radial magnetic field on measuring helicity transfer rate.
Modeling 3-D Solar Wind Structure Lecture 13. Why is a Heliospheric Model Needed? Space weather forecasts require us to know the solar wind that is interacting.
A Numerical Study of the Breakout Model for Coronal Mass Ejection Initiation P. MacNeice, S.K. Antiochos, A. Phillips, D.S. Spicer, C.R. DeVore, and K.
Center for Astrophysics and Space Sciences, University of California, San Diego 9500 Gilman Drive #0424, La Jolla, CA , U.S.A
Coronal Mass Ejection: Initiation, Magnetic Helicity, and Flux Ropes. L. Boundary Motion-Driven Evolution Amari, T., Luciani, J. F., Aly, J. J., Mikic,
Helicity Thinkshop 2009, Beijing Asymmetry of helicity injection in emerging active regions L. Tian, D. Alexander Rice University, USA Y. Liu Yunnan Astronomical.
Driving 3D-MHD codes Using the UCSD Tomography
Studies on Twisted Magnetic Flux Bundles
Ward Manchester University of Michigan
Magnetic Helicity in Emerging Active Regions: A Statistical Study
Corona Mass Ejection (CME) Solar Energetic Particle Events
Abstract We simulate the twisting of an initially potential coronal flux tube by photospheric vortex motions. The flux tube starts to evolve slowly(quasi-statically)
Observations of December 2006 events
Takashi Sakurai National Astronomical Observatory of Japan
Preflare State Rust et al. (1994) 太陽雑誌会.
Correlation between halo coronal mass ejections
Taiyou Zasshikai on May 17, 2004
Presentation transcript:

Center for Space Environment Modeling Numerical Model of Solar Eruption on 1998 May 2 Ilia Roussev, Igor Sokolov & Tamas Gombosi University of Michigan Terry Forbes & Marty Lee University of New Hampshire

Center for Space Environment Modeling NOAA AR8210: Summary of Observations bSeries of intense flares and CMEs, including homologous events, occurred in NOAA AR8210 from April through May of 1998; bCME event we consider took place on 1998 May 2 near disk center (S15 o,W15 o ), and CME speed inferred from observations by LASCO was in excess of 1,040 km/s; bX1.1/3B flare occurred in NOAA AR8210 at 13:42 UT, which was associated with SEP event observed by NOAA GOES-9 satellite. Ground-level event was observed by CLIMAX neutron monitor; bTotal magnetic energy estimated from EIT dimming volume during eruption was 2.0x10 31 ergs; bAR8210 constituted classic delta-spot configuration; main spot in AR8210 had large negative polarity, and it appeared to rotate relative to surrounding magnetic structures; bSequence of cancellation events took place between central spot and newly emerging magnetic features of opposite polarity in surrounding region; bFlux emergence and subsequent cancellation may have been responsible for triggering solar eruption!

Center for Space Environment Modeling Bibliography on AR8210 bNOAA AR8210 was studied extensively around the Globe: from Alabama, California, Hawaii, and Montana in USA, across France & Germany in Europe, through the Great Wall, to China and Japan: Wang et al. (2002, ApJ, 572); Xia et al. (2002, Chinese A&A, 26); Sterling et al. (2001, ApJ, 561); Sterling et al. (2001, ApJ, 560); Pohjolainen et al. (2001, ApJ, 556); Warmuth et al. (2000, Sol. Phys., 194). bRoussev et al. (2004, ApJ, in press) presented numerical model of solar eruption on 1998 May 2.

Center for Space Environment Modeling Surface flow pattern of NOAA AR8210 (MURI/SHINE event: 1998 May 1-2) Reconstruction of Surface Flows Local Correlation Tracking shows shear along neutral line! (from Fisher et al. 2003)

Center for Space Environment Modeling Observations of Field Evolution MDI movie showing time-evolution of NOAA AR8210 from 30 o E to 30 o W (from Sam Coradetti ) Field Structure of NOAA AR8210 on 1998 May 1 (Mees Observatory)

Center for Space Environment Modeling bWe start with magnetic field obtained using Potential Field Source Surface Method. bSpherical harmonic coefficients are obtained from magnetogram data of Wilcox Solar Observatory. They are derived using Carrington maps for rotations 1935 and bWe use empirical model presented by Roussev et al. (2003, ApJ, 595, L57) to evolve MHD solution to steady-state solar wind, with helmet-type streamer belt around Sun. bOnce steady-state is achieved, we begin inducing transverse motions at solar surface localized to AR8210. bThese boundary motions resemble following observational facts: Sunspot rotation; and Magnetic flux cancellation. bNumerical techniques similar to ours have been used in past to create flux ropes and initiate CMEs in idealized, bi-polar (Inhester et al. 1992; Amari et al. 1999, 2000, 2003), and multi-polar (Antiochos et al. 1999) type magnetic configurations; Numerical Model

Center for Space Environment Modeling How to Achieve Solar Eruption? b3D simulations of erupting flux ropes (after Amari et al. 1999, 2000) 1.Apply shear motions along polarity inversion line: Evolve potential field to non- potential, force-free field; Build energy in sheared field needed for solar eruption. 2.Apply converging motions towards polarity inversion line: Field lines begin to reconnect and form flux rope; Some energy (~8-17%) built during shearing phase is converted into heat and kinetic energy of plasma bulk motions. Numerical recipe to create flux ropes: Result: flux rope erupts! +

Center for Space Environment Modeling Boundary Motions Map of radial magnetic field strength (in units of Gauss), and structure of boundary motions near polarity inversion line (dashed line in green) of AR810. Vortex motions represent sunspot rotation Converging motions resemble effects of magnetic flux cancellation

Center for Space Environment Modeling Numerical Setup & Performance bComputations performed in cubic box: {-30<x<10,-20<y<20,-20<z<20}R S. bNon-uniform Cartesian block-adaptive grid: 9 levels of body-focused refinement with finest cells near Sun; 2 additional levels of refinement in vicinity of AR8210 to better resolve boundary motions; Total number of cells of 3,116,352; smallest cell-size of 4.883x10 -3 R S ; largest cells-size of 2.5R S ; Numerical resolution increased along direction of flux rope propagation by adding 25% more cells (total of 3,890,944) via 4 levels of refinement (finest cells of size 0.156R S =109,200km). bBoundary conditions describe: “Impenetrable” and highly conducting spherical inner body at R=R S ; All velocity components at surface fixed at zero as MHD solution evolves towards steady-state (solar rotation not applied); Small positive mass flow through inner boundary is allowed to balance mass loss by solar wind; Line-tied boundary condition used for magnetic field; field remains frozen to plasma, except in regions where flux cancellation occurs; Zero-gradient condition applied to all variables at outer boundaries. bPerformance: CPU power: 15 dual AMD Athlon 1900XP nodes, 1,024MB RAM per node; Simulated time: 7.12hrs; Running time: 441hrs CPU time; - far from doing real time simulations at present!

Center for Space Environment Modeling Onset of Eruption and Evolution

Center for Space Environment Modeling View of Eruption at t=1hour Solid lines are magnetic field lines; false color code shows magnitude of current density. Flow speed is shown on translucent plane given by y=0. Values in excess of 1,000 km/s are blanked and shown in light grey. Inner sphere corresponds to R=R S ; color code shows distribution of radial magnetic field. Regions with radial field strength greater than 3 Gauss are blanked.

Center for Space Environment Modeling Trajectory curves of flux rope and shock (blue curves) in plane y=0. Radial velocities of rope and shock are shown by corresponding black curves. Trajectories & Speed Curves

Center for Space Environment Modeling Time-evolution of shock compression ratio and fast-wave Mach number (dashed red curve). Shock Evolution

Center for Space Environment Modeling Summary of Results Model: bOur model incorporates magnetogram data from Wilcox Solar Observatory and loss-of-equilibrium mechanism to initiate solar eruption. bEruption is achieved by slowly evolving boundary conditions for magnetic field to account for: Sunspot rotation; and Flux emergence. Results: bExcess magnetic energy built in sheared field prior to eruption is 1.311x10 31 ergs; bFlux rope ejected during eruption achieves maximum speed in excess of 1,040 km/s — in good agreement with observations; bCME-driven shock reaches fast-mode Mach number in excess of 4 and compression ratio greater than 3 at distance of 4 R S from solar surface. Conclusion: bCME-driven shock can develop close to Sun sufficiently strong to account for energetic solar protons up to 10 GeV! - more on this from Igor

Center for Space Environment Modeling Future Work bUse high-resolution vector magnetograph data and more realistic boundary motions to achieve eruption. bApply similar numerical procedure to simulate other MURI & SHINE events.

Center for Space Environment Modeling

Center for Space Environment Modeling Bibliography on AR8210 bNOAA AR8210 was studied extensively around the Globe: from Alabama, California, Hawaii, and Montana in USA, across France & Germany in Europe, through the Great Wall, to China and Japan: Wang et al. (2002, ApJ, 572); Xia et al. (2002, Chinese A&A, 26); Sterling et al. (2001, ApJ, 561); Sterling et al. (2001, ApJ, 560); Pohjolainen et al. (2001, ApJ, 556); Warmuth et al. (2000, Sol. Phys., 194). bRoussev et al. (2004, ApJ, in press) presented numerical model of solar eruption on 1998 May 2. Nominations?