Three-dimensional MHD simulation of the evolution of the April 2000 CME event and its induced shocks using a magnetized plasma blob model

Shen, Fang; Feng, Xueshang; Wu, S. T.; Xiang, Changqing; Song, Wenbin

doi:10.1029/2010ja015809

Cited by 37 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 75 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Combined with the evidence in Figure that the two CMEs are launched in different directions, this means that there are no significant interactions between these two CMEs. We note that studies of interactions between CMEs and their shocks have been performed elsewhere, e.g., by Wang et al [], Shen et al [], and Liou et al [], but these interactions also not appear relevant to the two CMEs analyzed in this paper.…”

Section: Observationsmentioning

confidence: 80%

The solar type II radio bursts of 7 March 2012: Detailed simulation analyses

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Type II solar radio bursts are often indicators for impending space weather events at Earth.They are consequences of shock waves driven by coronal mass ejections (CMEs) that move outward from the Sun. We simulate such type II radio bursts by combining elaborate three-dimensional (3-D) magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) predictions of realistic CMEs near the Sun with an analytic kinetic radiation theory developed recently. The simulation approach includes the reconstruction of initial solar magnetic fields, the dimensioning of the initial flux rope of the CME with STEREO spacecraft data, and the launch of the CME into an empirical data-driven corona and solar wind. In this paper, we simulate a complicated double CME event (a very fast CME followed by a slower CME without interaction) and the related coronal and interplanetary type II radio bursts that occurred on 7 March 2012. We extend our previous work to show harmonic and interplanetary emission as well as the simulation's surprising ability (for these events at least) for predicting emission for two closely spaced CMEs leaving the same active region. We demonstrate that the theory predicts well the observed fundamental and harmonic emission from ∼20 MHz to 50 kHz or from the high corona to near 1 AU. Specifically, the theory predicts flux, frequency, and time variations that are consistent with the presence or absence of observed type II emissions when interfering emissions are absent and are not inconsistent with observations when interfering type III bursts are present. The predicted and observed type II emission is predominantly fundamental for these two events. Harmonic emission occurs for the second CME only for a short time interval, when an extended shock has developed that can drive flank emission. The coronal and interplanetary emission follow closely hyperbolic lines in frequency-time space, consisting of a succession of islands of emission with varying intensity. The islands develop due to competition between the shock moving through varying coronal and solar wind magnetic field structures (e.g., loops and streamers), growth of the driven radio source due to the spherical expansion of the shock, and movement of the active radio sources from the shock's nose to its flanks.

show abstract

Section: Observationsmentioning

confidence: 80%

The solar type II radio bursts of 7 March 2012: Detailed simulation analyses

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…where the U (1) , U (2) , and U (3) are the intermediate integration stages. The errors generated by the Runge-Kutta method in first three steps are relatively small as well as negligible.…”

Section: Time Discretizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, numerical solar wind models [1][2][3] based on the MHD theory are currently the only self-consistent mathematical descriptions that are capable of bridging the physical system from many Astronomical Units (A.U.) near the Sun to well beyond the Earth's orbit.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implicit predictor–corrector central finite difference scheme for the equations of magnetohydrodynamic simulations

Tsai

Hsieh

et al. 2015

Computer Physics Communications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This is still rather unaffordable due to the amount of computational resources needed for a 3D MHD model. Most of the currently available 3D MHD models applied to real SEP events up to 1 AU use a coarser resolution (e.g., Luhmann et al 2010;Shen et al 2011). For instance, Figure 10 of Shen et al (2011) shows a 3D simulation of the shock associated with the 2000 April 4 event, for which the simulated plasma jumps at the shock are not captured with enough resolution to be used in conjunction with the proton transport model, since we are seeking a relation between the source of particles at the shock and the plasma jumps.…”

Section: Modelling the Solar Wind And The Ip Shockmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most of the currently available 3D MHD models applied to real SEP events up to 1 AU use a coarser resolution (e.g., Luhmann et al 2010;Shen et al 2011). For instance, Figure 10 of Shen et al (2011) shows a 3D simulation of the shock associated with the 2000 April 4 event, for which the simulated plasma jumps at the shock are not captured with enough resolution to be used in conjunction with the proton transport model, since we are seeking a relation between the source of particles at the shock and the plasma jumps. In order to better constrain the values of the three free parameters of the disturbance model and to verify the adopted model, it would be desirable to perform simulations of multispacecraft SEP events such as that performed by Rodríguez-Gasén (2011).…”

Section: Modelling the Solar Wind And The Ip Shockmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modelling large solar proton events with the shock-and-particle model

Pomoell

Aran

Jacobs

et al. 2015

J. Space Weather Space Clim.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We have developed a new version of a model that combines a two-dimensional Sun-to-Earth magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) simulation of the propagation of a CME-driven shock and a simulation of the transport of particles along the interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) line connecting the shock front and the observer. We assume that the shock-accelerated particles are injected at the point along the shock front that intersects this IMF line, i.e. at the cobpoint. Novel features of the model are an improved solar wind model and an enhanced fully automated algorithm to extract the necessary plasma characteristics from the shock simulation. In this work, the new algorithms have been employed to simulate the 2000 April 4 and the 2006 December 13 SEP events. In addition to quantifying the performance of the new model with respect to results obtained using previous versions of the shock-and-particle model, we investigate the semi-empirical relation between the injection rate of shock-accelerated particles, Q, and the jump in speed across the shock, VR, known as the Q(VR) relation. Our results show that while the magnetic field and density compression at the shock front is markedly different than in our previous modeling, the evolution of VR remains largely similar. As a result, we confirm that a simple relation can still be established between Q and VR, which enables the computation of synthetic intensity-time profiles at any location in interplanetary space. Furthermore, the new shock extraction tool is found to yield improved results being in general more robust. These results are important not only with regard to efforts to develop coupled magnetohydrodynamic and particle simulation models, but also to improve space weather related software tools that aim to predict the peak intensities, fluences and proton intensity-time profiles of SEP events (such as the SOLPENCO tool).

show abstract

Three-dimensional MHD simulation of the evolution of the April 2000 CME event and its induced shocks using a magnetized plasma blob model

Cited by 37 publications

References 75 publications

The solar type II radio bursts of 7 March 2012: Detailed simulation analyses

The solar type II radio bursts of 7 March 2012: Detailed simulation analyses

Implicit predictor–corrector central finite difference scheme for the equations of magnetohydrodynamic simulations

Modelling large solar proton events with the shock-and-particle model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About