2018
DOI: 10.3847/1538-4357/aad806
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Three-dimensional MHD Simulation of Solar Wind Using a New Boundary Treatment: Comparison with In Situ Data at Earth

Abstract: Three-dimensional magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) numerical simulation is an important tool in the prediction of solar wind parameters. In this study, we improve our corona interplanetary total variation diminishing MHD model by using a new boundary applicable to all phases of solar cycles. This model uses synoptic magnetogram maps from the Global Oscillation Network Group as the input data. The empirical Wang–Sheeley–Arge relation is used to assign solar wind speed at the lower boundary, while temperature is speci… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
59
0
4

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(66 citation statements)
references
References 55 publications
3
59
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…We find that the average value of W R , W R , is about 69.4 W m −2 with a total uncertainty of at most 20%, which is similar to previous results based on long-term observations at greater distances and various latitudes (e.g., Schwenn & Marsch 1990;Meyer-Vernet 2006;Le Chat et al 2009McComas et al 2014). This result confirms that this quantity appears as a global solar constant, which is of importance since it is often used to deduce the solar wind density from the speed (or the reverse) in global heliospheric studies and modeling (e.g., Shen et al 2018;McComas et al 2014;McComas et al 2017McComas et al , 2020Krimigis et al 2019;Wang et al 2020).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…We find that the average value of W R , W R , is about 69.4 W m −2 with a total uncertainty of at most 20%, which is similar to previous results based on long-term observations at greater distances and various latitudes (e.g., Schwenn & Marsch 1990;Meyer-Vernet 2006;Le Chat et al 2009McComas et al 2014). This result confirms that this quantity appears as a global solar constant, which is of importance since it is often used to deduce the solar wind density from the speed (or the reverse) in global heliospheric studies and modeling (e.g., Shen et al 2018;McComas et al 2014;McComas et al 2017McComas et al , 2020Krimigis et al 2019;Wang et al 2020).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…But it is nevertheless important to remember that the MHD model should not be considered "perfect", and one of the issues of numerical MHD is the diffusive nature, which means that it does not readily capture velocity sharp gradients present in observations (e.g. Jian et al, 2015;Shen et al, 2018).…”
Section: Performance Evaluation: Ambient Solar Windmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Well‐known empirical relationships in this context are the Wang‐Sheeley (WS) model (Wang & Sheeley, 1990), Distance from the Coronal Hole Boundary (DCHB) model (Riley et al., 2001) and the Wang‐Sheeley‐Arge (WSA) model (Arge et al., 2003). More sophisticated three‐dimensional magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) codes such as CORHEL (Linker et al., 2016), LFM‐Helio (Merkin et al., 2016), SIP‐CESE (Feng et al., 2015) and COIN‐TVD MHD (Shen et al., 2018) are also used, with further examples being the Magnetohydrodynamics Algorithm outside a Sphere (Linker et al., 1999), Enlil (Odstrcil, 2003), the Space Weather Modeling Framework (Tóth et al., 2005), and the recently developed European Heliospheric Forecasting Information Asset (Pomoell & Poedts, 2018). Besides these MHD models, other modeling approaches based on empirical relationships and statistics (e.g., M. Owens, Lang, et al., 2020) have also been developed.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%