Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T14:13:02.726Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Reconstruction of magnetic clouds from in-situ spacecraft measurements and intercomparison with their solar sources

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 January 2014

Qiang Hu
Affiliation:
Dept. of Space Science/CSPAR, University of Alabama in Huntsville, Huntsville, AL 35805, USA email: qh0001@uah.edu
Jiong Qiu
Affiliation:
Physics Department, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 59717-3840, USA email: qiuj@mithra.physics.montana.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Coronal Mass Ejections (CMEs) are eruptive events that originate, propagate away from the Sun, and carry along solar material with embedded solar magnetic field. Some are accompanied by prominence eruptions. A subset of the interplanetary counterparts of CMEs (ICMEs), so-called Magnetic Clouds (MCs) can be characterized by magnetic flux-rope structures. We apply the Grad-Shafranov (GS) reconstruction technique to examine the configuration of MCs and to derive relevant physical quantities, such as magnetic flux content, relative magnetic helicity, and the field-line twist, etc. Both observational analyses of solar source region characteristics including flaring and associated magnetic reconnection process, and the corresponding MC structures were carried out. We summarize the main properties of selected events with and without associated prominence eruptions. In particular, we show the field-line twist distribution and the intercomparison of magnetic flux for these flux-rope structures.

Type
Contributed Papers
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2013 

References

Berger, M. A., & Field, G. B. 1984, Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 147, 133Google Scholar
Burlaga, L. 1995, Interplanetary Magnetohydrodynamics (New York: Oxford Univ. Press), 89Google Scholar
Dasso, S., Mandrini, C. H., Démoulin, P., & Luoni, M. L. 2006, Astron. Astrophys., 455, 349Google Scholar
Hu, Q., Farrugia, C. J., Osherovich, V. A., Möstl, C., Szabo, A., Ogilvie, K. W., & Lepping, R. P. 2013, Solar Phys., 284, 275Google Scholar
Li, Y. 2012, private communicationGoogle Scholar
Qiu, J., Hu, Q., Howard, T. A., & Yurchyshyn, V. B. 2007, Astrophys. J., 659, 758Google Scholar
Schmieder, B., Démoulin, P., & Aulanier, G. 2013, Adv. Space Res., 51, 1967. 1212.4014Google Scholar
van Ballegooijen, A. A., & Martens, P. C. H. 1989, Astrophys. J., 343, 971Google Scholar
Webb, G. M., Hu, Q., Dasgupta, B., & Zank, G. P. 2010, J. Geophys. Res., 115, A10112Google Scholar