A numerical study of the interaction between two ejecta in the interplanetary medium: one- and two-dimensional hydrodynamic simulations

González-Esparza, A.; Santillán, Alfredo; Ferrer, Javier

doi:10.5194/angeo-22-3741-2004

Cited by 21 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The inclusion of the first CME was needed to match observed values of the hydrodynamic parameters at 1 AU, even though the two CMEs have not fully interacted by 1 AU. The propagation and interaction of two ejecta from 18 R to 1 AU have also been recently modeled using a two-dimensional hydrodynamic code (Gonzalez-Esparza et al 2004). Schmidt & Cargill (2004) studied the interaction of two CMEs in the LASCO coronographs' fields of view (1.7Y32 R ) using 2.5-dimensional MHD simulations; the authors investigated different scenarios with and without direct magnetic interactions between the flux ropes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Numerical Investigation of the Homologous Coronal Mass Ejection Events from Active Region 9236

Lugaz

Manchester

Roussev

et al. 2007

ApJ

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present a three-dimensional compressible magneto-hydrodynamics (MHD) simulation of the three coronal mass ejections (CMEs) of 2000 November 24, originating from NOAA active region 9236. These three ejections, with velocities around 1200 km s À1 and associated with X-class flares, erupted from the Sun in a period of about 16.5 hr. In our simulation, the coronal magnetic field is reconstructed from MDI magnetogram data, the steady-state solar wind is based on a varying polytropic index model, and the ejections are initiated using out-of-equilibrium semicylindrical flux ropes with a size smaller than the active region. The simulations are carried out with the Space Weather Modeling Framework. We are able to reproduce the shape and velocity of the CMEs as observed by the LASCO C3 coronograph. The complex ejecta resulting from the interaction of the three CMEs is preceded at Earth by a single shock wave, which, in our simulation, arrives at Earth 10 hr later than the shock observed by the Wind spacecraft. This article discusses the three-dimensional aspects of the propagation, interaction, and merging of the forward shock waves associated with the three ejections. Synthetic images from the Heliospheric Imagers onboard the STEREO spacecraft are produced, and we predict that the large density jump associated with the interaction of the shocks should be observed by those coronographs in the near future. Subject headingg s: MHD -shock waves -Sun: coronal mass ejections (CMEs)

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Numerical Investigation of the Homologous Coronal Mass Ejection Events from Active Region 9236

Lugaz

Manchester

Roussev

et al. 2007

ApJ

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Dynamical response and ensuing geoeffectiveness of these structures are directly associated with the interaction during their formation and evolution. Numerical simulations have been applied to study most of the complex structures: e.g., the interaction of a shock wave with an MC [ Vandas et al , 1997; Odstrcil et al , 2003; Xiong et al , 2006], and the interaction of two MCs [ Odstrcil et al , 2003; Gonzalez‐Esparza et al , 2004; Lugaz et al , 2005; Wang et al , 2005].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Magnetohydrodynamic simulation of the interaction between interplanetary strong shock and magnetic cloud and its consequent geoeffectiveness: 2. Oblique collision

Xiong¹,

Zheng²,

Wang³

et al. 2006

J. Geophys. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

[1] Numerical studies of the interplanetary ''shock overtaking magnetic cloud (MC)'' event are continued by a 2.5-dimensional magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) model in heliospheric meridional plane. Interplanetary direct collision (DC)/oblique collision (OC) between an MC and a shock results from their same/different initial propagation orientations. For radially erupted MC and shock in solar corona, the orientations are only determined respectively by their heliographic locations. OC is investigated in contrast with the results in DC (Xiong, 2006). The shock front behaves as a smooth arc. The cannibalized part of MC is highly compressed by the shock front along its normal. As the shock propagates gradually into the preceding MC body, the most violent interaction is transferred sideways with an accompanying significant narrowing of the MC's angular width. The opposite deflections of MC body and shock aphelion in OC occur simultaneously through the process of the shock penetrating the MC. After the shock's passage, the MC is restored to its oblate morphology. With the decrease of MC-shock commencement interval, the shock front at 1 AU traverses MC body and is responsible for the same change trend of the latitude of the greatest geoeffectiveness of MC-shock compound. Regardless of shock orientation, shock penetration location regarding the maximum geoeffectiveness is right at MC core on the condition of very strong shock intensity. An appropriate angular difference between the initial eruption of an MC and an overtaking shock leads to the maximum deflection of the MC body. The larger the shock intensity is, the greater is the deflection angle. The interaction of MCs with other disturbances could be a cause of deflected propagation of interplanetary coronal mass ejection (ICME).Citation: Xiong, M., H. Zheng, Y. Wang, and S. Wang (2006), Magnetohydrodynamic simulation of the interaction between interplanetary strong shock and magnetic cloud and its consequent geoeffectiveness: 2.

show abstract

“…[2] However, the interaction between two CMEs close to the Sun [Gopalswamy et al, 2001[Gopalswamy et al, , 2002 and between magnetic clouds near the Earth [see, e.g., Burlaga et al, 2001;Berdichevsky et al, 2003;Gonzalez-Esparza et al, 2004;Farrugia et al, 2006a;and ' Xie et al [2006] studied 37 long-lived geomagnetic storms (LLGMS events) with Dst < À100 nT and the associated CMEs which occurred during 1998-2002 and found that 24 of 37 events were caused by successive CMEs and number of interacting magnetic clouds was observed from 2 up to 4.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[2] However, the interaction between two CMEs close to the Sun [Gopalswamy et al, 2001[Gopalswamy et al, , 2002 and between magnetic clouds near the Earth [see, e.g., Burlaga et al, 2001;Berdichevsky et al, 2003;Gonzalez-Esparza et al, 2004;Farrugia et al, 2006a; and references therein] has been reported. A number of papers showed that several strong magnetic storms (see, for instance, events on 31 March, 2001, minimum Dst value of À387 nT, 11 -13 April, 2001, Dst min = À271 nT [Wang et al, 2003]; 28-30 October, 2003, Dst min = À363 nT [Veselovsky et al, 2004;Skoug et al, 2004];20 November, 2003, Dst min = À472 nT [Ermolaev et al, 2005]; 8 -10 November, 2004, Dst min = À373 nT [Yermolaev et al, 2005]) have been generating by multiple interacting magnetic clouds.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comment on “Interplanetary origin of intense geomagnetic storms (Dst < −100 nT) during solar cycle 23” by W. D. Gonzalez et al.

Yermolaev¹,

Yermolaev²

2008

Geophysical Research Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A numerical study of the interaction between two ejecta in the interplanetary medium: one- and two-dimensional hydrodynamic simulations

Cited by 21 publications

References 23 publications

Numerical Investigation of the Homologous Coronal Mass Ejection Events from Active Region 9236

Numerical Investigation of the Homologous Coronal Mass Ejection Events from Active Region 9236

Magnetohydrodynamic simulation of the interaction between interplanetary strong shock and magnetic cloud and its consequent geoeffectiveness: 2. Oblique collision

Comment on “Interplanetary origin of intense geomagnetic storms (Dst < −100 nT) during solar cycle 23” by W. D. Gonzalez et al.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About