首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     


Magnetic Field Configuration Models and Reconstruction Methods for Interplanetary Coronal Mass Ejections
Authors:N. Al-Haddad  T. Nieves-Chinchilla  N. P. Savani  C. Möstl  K. Marubashi  M. A. Hidalgo  I. I. Roussev  S. Poedts  C. J. Farrugia
Affiliation:1. Centrum voor Plasma-Astrofysica, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Celestijnenlaan 200B, 3001, Leuven, Belgium
2. Heliospheric Physics Lab., GSFC-NASA, Greenbelt, MD, USA
3. IACS-CUA, Washington, DC, USA
4. UCAR, Boulder, CO, USA
5. NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, USA
6. Space Science Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA
7. Space Research Institute, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Graz, 8042, Austria
8. Kanzelh?he Observatory-IGAM, Institute of Physics, University of Graz, Universit?tsplatz 5, 8010, Graz, Austria
10. 660-73 Mizuno, Sayama, Saitama, 3350-1317, Japan
9. Korea Astronomy and Space Science Institute, Daejeon, 305-348, Republic of Korea
11. SRG-UAH, Alcala de Henares, Madrid, Spain
12. Institute for Astronomy, University of Hawaii, 2680 Woodlawn Dr., Honolulu, HI, 96822, USA
13. Space Science Center and Department of Physics, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, USA
Abstract:This study aims to provide a reference for different magnetic field models and reconstruction methods for interplanetary coronal mass ejections (ICMEs). To understand the differences in the outputs of these models and codes, we analyzed 59 events from the Coordinated Data Analysis Workshop (CDAW) list, using four different magnetic field models and reconstruction techniques; force-free fitting, magnetostatic reconstruction using a numerical solution to the Grad–Shafranov equation, fitting to a self-similarly expanding cylindrical configuration and elliptical, non-force-free fitting. The resulting parameters of the reconstructions for the 59 events are compared statistically and in selected case studies. The ability of a method to fit or reconstruct an event is found to vary greatly; this depends on whether the event is a magnetic cloud or not. We find that the magnitude of the axial field is relatively consistent across models, but that the axis orientation of the ejecta is not. We also find that there are a few cases with different signs of the magnetic helicity for the same event when we leave the boundaries free to vary, which illustrates that this simplest of parameters is not necessarily always clearly constrained by fitting and reconstruction models. Finally, we examine three unique cases in depth to provide a comprehensive idea of the different aspects of how the fitting and reconstruction codes work.
Keywords:
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号