CMSO 2005 Mean field dynamos: analytical and numerical results Fausto Cattaneo Center for Magnetic-Self Organization and Department.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Spectrum of MHD turbulence
Advertisements

Dynamo Effects in Laboratory Plasmas S.C. Prager University of Wisconsin October, 2003.
Self-consistent mean field forces in two-fluid models of turbulent plasmas C. C. Hegna University of Wisconsin Madison, WI Hall Dynamo Get-together PPPL.
P.W. Terry K.W. Smith University of Wisconsin-Madison Outline
Magnetic Relaxation in MST S. Prager University of Wisconsin and CMSO.
Turbulent transport of magnetic fields Fausto Cattaneo Center for Magnetic Self-Organization in Laboratory and Astrophysical.
Ion Heating Presented by Gennady Fiksel, UW-Madison for CMSO review panel May 1-2, 2006, Madison.
Control of Magnetic Chaos & Self-Organization John Sarff for MST Group CMSO General Meeting Madison, WI August 4-6, 2004.
Plans for Dynamo Research Presented by F. Cattaneo, S. Prager.
Progress and Plans on Magnetic Reconnection for CMSO For NSF Site-Visit for CMSO May1-2, Experimental progress [M. Yamada] -Findings on two-fluid.
Madison 2006 Dynamo Fausto Cattaneo ANL - University of Chicago Stewart Prager University of Wisconsin.
Collaborators: Jungyeon Cho --- Chungnam U.
Self-consistent mean field forces in two-fluid models of turbulent plasmas C. C. Hegna University of Wisconsin Madison, WI CMSO Meeting Madison, WI August.
The solar dynamo(s) Fausto Cattaneo Center for Magnetic Self-Organization in Laboratory and Astrophysical Plasmas Chicago 2003.
Chicago, October 2003 David Hughes Department of Applied Mathematics University of Leeds Nonlinear Effects in Mean Field Dynamo Theory.
Dynamo and Magnetic Helicity Flux Hantao Ji CMSO & PPPL CMSO General Meeting Princeton, October 5-7, 2005 Contributors: Eric Blackman (Rochester) Stewart.
Magnetic Chaos and Transport Paul Terry and Leonid Malyshkin, group leaders with active participation from MST group, Chicago group, MRX, Wisconsin astrophysics.
CMSO (PPPL) Solitary Dynamo Waves Joanne Mason (HAO, NCAR) E. Knobloch (U.California, Berkeley)
CMSO 2005 Simulation of Gallium experiment * § Aleksandr Obabko Center for Magnetic-Self Organization Department of Astronomy and Astrophysics.
Outline Dynamo: theoretical General considerations and plans Progress report Dynamo action associated with astrophysical jets Progress report Dynamo: experiment.
The Kinetic Theory of Gases
Chapter 1 Electromagnetic Fields
INI 2004 Astrophysical dynamos Fausto Cattaneo Center for Magnetic Self-Organization Computations Institute Department of Mathematics.
The Origin of the Solar Magnetic Cycle Arnab Rai Choudhuri Department of Physics Indian Institute of Science.
Turbulent Models.  DNS – Direct Numerical Simulation ◦ Solve the equations exactly ◦ Possible with today’s supercomputers ◦ Upside – very accurate if.
TAE-EP Interaction in ARIES ACT-I K. Ghantous, N.N Gorelenkov PPPL ARIES Project Meeting,, 26 Sept
Self-propelled motion of a fluid droplet under chemical reaction Shunsuke Yabunaka 1, Takao Ohta 1, Natsuhiko Yoshinaga 2 1)Department of physics, Kyoto.
Pacific Secular Variation A result of hot lower mantle David Gubbins School of Earth Sciences University of Leeds.
Cosmological Structure Formation A Short Course
New Mechanism of Generation of Large-Scale Magnetic Field in Turbulence with Large-Scale Velocity Shear I. ROGACHEVSKII, N. KLEEORIN, E. LIVERTS Ben-Gurion.
1 A. Derivation of GL equations macroscopic magnetic field Several standard definitions: -Field of “external” currents -magnetization -free energy II.
Jordanian-German Winter Academy 2006 NATURAL CONVECTION Prepared by : FAHED ABU-DHAIM Ph.D student UNIVERSITY OF JORDAN MECHANICAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT.
23-28 September 2003 Basic Processes in Turbulent Plasmas Forecasting asymptotic states of a Galerkin approximation of 2D MHD equations Forecasting asymptotic.
Derivation of the Gaussian plume model Distribution of pollutant concentration c in the flow field (velocity vector u ≡ u x, u y, u z ) in PBL can be generally.
Lecture of : the Reynolds equations of turbulent motions JORDANIAN GERMAN WINTER ACCADMEY Prepared by: Eng. Mohammad Hamasha Jordan University of Science.
Thermal Properties of Crystal Lattices
Plasma Dynamos UCLA January 5th 2009 Steve Cowley, UKAEA Culham and Imperial Thanks to Alex Schekochihin, Russell Kulsrud, Greg Hammett and Mark Rosin.
GEOMAGNETISM: a dynamo at the centre of the Earth Lecture 2 How the dynamo works.
Physics of fusion power
Origin, Evolution, and Signatures of Cosmological Magnetic Fields, Nordita, June 2015 Evolution of magnetic fields in large scale anisotropic MHD flows.
Kinetic Effects on the Linear and Nonlinear Stability Properties of Field- Reversed Configurations E. V. Belova PPPL 2003 APS DPP Meeting, October 2003.
BsysE595 Lecture Basic modeling approaches for engineering systems – Summary and Review Shulin Chen January 10, 2013.
Simulations of Compressible MHD Turbulence in Molecular Clouds Lucy Liuxuan Zhang, CITA / University of Toronto, Chris Matzner,
Effect of Magnetic Helicity on Non-Helical Turbulent Dynamos N. KLEEORIN and I. ROGACHEVSKII Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, ISRAEL.
Magnetic structures created by localised velocity shear and magnetic buoyancy Nic Brummell Kelly Cline Fausto Cattaneo Nic Brummell (303) JILA,
Large scale magnetic fields and Dynamo theory Roman Shcherbakov, Turbulence Discussion Group 14 Apr 2008.
Mass Transfer Coefficient
Sedimentation of a polydisperse non- Brownian suspension Krzysztof Sadlej IFT UW IPPT PAN, May 16 th 2007.
Turbulent Dynamo Stanislav Boldyrev (Wisconsin-Madison) Fausto Cattaneo (Chicago) Center for Magnetic Self-Organization in Laboratory and Astrophysical.
3 March 2005ICTP Trieste David Hughes Department of Applied Mathematics University of Leeds Some Aspects of Mean Field Dynamo Theory.
Session 3, Unit 5 Dispersion Modeling. The Box Model Description and assumption Box model For line source with line strength of Q L Example.
Turbulent Dynamos: How I learned to ignore kinematic dynamo theory MFUV 2015 With Amir Jafari and Ben Jackel.
Numerical simulations of astrophysical dynamos Axel Brandenburg (Nordita, Stockholm) Dynamos: numerical issues Alpha dynamos do exist: linear and nonlinear.
Waves, irreversibility, and turbulent diffusion in MHD turbulence Shane R. Keating Patrick H. Diamond Center for Astrophysics and Space Sciences University.
ITP 2008 MRI Driven turbulence and dynamo action Fausto Cattaneo University of Chicago Argonne National Laboratory.
Gas-kineitc MHD Numerical Scheme and Its Applications to Solar Magneto-convection Tian Chunlin Beijing 2010.Dec.3.
Geophysical wave interactions in turbulent magnetofluids Shane R. Keating University of California San Diego Collaborators: Patrick H. Diamond (UCSD) L.
Magnetic field transport in turbulent compressible convection Nic Brummell (303) JILA, University of Colorado Steve.
May 23, 2006SINS meeting Structure Formation and Particle Mixing in a Shear Flow Boundary Layer Matthew Palotti University of Wisconsin.
Solar Magnetism: Solar Cycle Solar Dynamo Coronal Magnetic Field CSI 662 / ASTR 769 Lect. 03, February 6 Spring 2007 References: NASA/MSFC Solar Physics.
Spectrum and small-scale structures in MHD turbulence Joanne Mason, CMSO/University of Chicago Stanislav Boldyrev, CMSO/University of Madison at Wisconsin.
H. Isobe Plasma seminar 2004/06/16 1. Explaining the latitudinal distribution of sunspots with deep meridional flow D. Nandy and A.R. Choudhhuri 2002,
INI 2004 Small-scale dynamos Fausto Cattaneo Department of Mathematics University of Chicago.
THE DYNAMIC EVOLUTION OF TWISTED MAGNETIC FLUX TUBES IN A THREE-DIMENSIONALCONVECTING FLOW. II. TURBULENT PUMPING AND THE COHESION OF Ω-LOOPS.
Spherical Collapse and the Mass Function – Chameleon Dark Energy Stephen Appleby, APCTP-TUS dark energy workshop 5 th June, 2014 M. Kopp, S.A.A, I. Achitouv,
Overview of dynamos in stars and galaxies
Chapter 1 Electromagnetic Fields
Numerical Simulations of Solar Magneto-Convection
An overview of turbulent transport in tokamaks
A low order dynamo model and possible applications
Presentation transcript:

CMSO 2005 Mean field dynamos: analytical and numerical results Fausto Cattaneo Center for Magnetic-Self Organization and Department of Mathematics University of Chicago

CMSO 2005 Historical considerations 1919 Dynamo action introduced (Larmor) 30s – 50sAnti-dynamo theorems (Cowling; Zeldovich) 50s - 60s Averaging is introduced Formulation of Mean Field Electrodynamics (Parker 1955; Braginskii 1964; Steenbeck, Krause & Radler 1966) 90s – now Large scale computing. MHD equations can be solved directly »Check validity of assumptions »Explore other types of dynamos Universal mechanism for generation of large-scale fields from turbulence lacking reflectional symmetry

CMSO 2005 Mean Field Theory Evolution equations for the Mean field (homogeneous, isotropic case) Transport coefficients determined by velocity and R m – mean inductionrequires lack of reflectional symmetry (helicity) –β turbulent diffusivity Many assumption needed –Linear relation between and –Separations of scales FOS (quasi-linear) approximation –Short correlation time – Assumed that fluctuations not self-excited

CMSO 2005 Troubles In order for MFT to work: fluctuations must be controlled by smoothing procedure (averages) system must be strongly irreversible When R m << 1 irreversibility provided by diffusion When R m >> 1, problems arise: development of long memory loss of irreversibility unbounded growth of fluctuations

CMSO 2005 Examples Exactly solvable kinematic model (Boldyrev & FC) –lots of assumptions –can be treated analytically Nonlinear rotating convection (Hughes & FC) –fewer assumptions –solved numerically ______________________________________________________________ Shear-buoyancy driven dynamo (Brummell, Cline & FC) –Intrinsically nonlinear dynamo –Not described by MFT

CMSO 2005 Solvable models Model for random passive advection (Kazentsev 1968; Kraichnan 1968) Velocity: zero mean, homogeneous, isotropic, incompressible, Gaussian and delta-correlated in time Exact evolution equation for magnetic field correlator Input: velocity correlator Ouput: magnetic correlator

CMSO 2005 Solvable models Exact evolution equation –Non-helical case (C= 0): Kazantsev 1968 –Helical case: Vainshtein & Kichatinov 1986; Kim & Hughes 1997 –Spectral version: Kulsrud & Anderson 1992; Berger& Rosner 1995 –Symmetric form: Boldyrev, Cattaneo & Rosner 2005 Operator in square brackets is self-adjoint

CMSO 2005 Solvable models Dynamo growth rate from MFT: In this model MFT is exact; with Dynamo growth rate of mean field: Dynamo growth rate of fluctuations: Large scale asymptotics of corresponding eigenfunction

CMSO 2005 Solvable models Conclusion: For a fixed time t, large enough spatial scales exist such that averages of the fluctuations are negligible. –on these scales the evolution of the average field is described by MFT However For any spatial scale x, contributions from mean field to the correlator at those scales quickly becomes subdominant Fluctuations eventually take over on any scale

CMSO 2005 Convectively driven dynamos with rotation Cattaneo & Hughes g hot cold B0B0 Energy densities time kinetic magnetic x 4

CMSO 2005 Rotating convection Turbulent convection with near-unit Rossby number System has strong small-scale fluctuations No evidence for mean field generation Non rotatingRotating Cattaneo & Hughes Energy: hor. averageEnergy ratioMagnetic fieldVelocity

CMSO 2005 What is going on? System has helicity, yet no mean field Consider two possibilities: –Nonlinear saturation of turbulent -effect (Cattaneo & Vainshtein 1991; Kulsrud & Anderson 1992; Gruzinov & Diamond 1994) – -effect is collisional and not turbulent

CMSO 2005 Averages and -effect emf: volume average emf: volume average and cumulative time average Introduce (external) uniform mean field. Compute below dynamo threshold. Calculate average emf. Extremely slow convergence. Cattaneo & Hughes time

CMSO 2005 Convectively driven dynamos The α-effect here is inversely proportional to Pm (i.e. proportional to η). It is therefore not turbulent but collisional Convergence requires huge sample size. –Divergence with decreasing η? Small-scale dynamo is turbulent but -effects is not!! Press this if running out of time

CMSO 2005 Something completely different B y + Interaction between localized velocity shear and weak background poloidal field generates intense toroidal magnetic structures Magnetic buoyancy leads to complex spatio-temporal beahviour Cline, Brummell & Cattaneo

CMSO 2005 Shear driven dynamo B y - B y + Slight modification of shear profile leads to sustained dynamo action System exhibits cyclic behaviour, reversals, even episodes of reduced activity

CMSO 2005 Conclusion In turbulent dynamos behaviour dominated by fluctuations Averages not well defined for realistic sample sizes In realistic cases large-scale field generation possibly driven by non-universal mechanisms –Shear –Large scale motions –Boundary effects

CMSO 2005 The end