Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userMagnetic Helicity Estimations in Models and Observations of the Solar Magnetic Field. Part III: Twist Number Method
86
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
We study the writhe, twist and magnetic helicity of different magnetic flux ropes, based on models of the solar coronal magnetic field structure. These include an analytical force-free Titov--Demoulin equilibrium solution, non force-free magnetohydrodynamic simulations, and nonlinear force-free magnetic field models. The geometrical boundary of the magnetic flux rope is determined by the quasi-separatrix layer and the bottom surface, and the axis curve of the flux rope is determined by its overall orientation. The twist is computed by the Berger--Prior formula that is suitable for arbitrary geometry and both force-free and non-force-free models. The magnetic helicity is estimated by the twist multiplied by the square of the axial magnetic flux. We compare the obtained values with those derived by a finite volume helicity estimation method. We find that the magnetic helicity obtained with the twist method agrees with the helicity carried by the purely current-carrying part of the field within uncertainties for most test cases. It is also found that the current-carrying part of the model field is relatively significant at the very location of the magnetic flux rope. This qualitatively explains the agreement between the magnetic helicity computed by the twist method and the helicity contributed purely by the current-carrying magnetic field.
rate research
Read More
In this ISSI-supported series of studies on magnetic helicity in the Sun, we systematically implement different magnetic helicity calculation methods on high-quality solar magnetogram observations. We apply finite-volume, discrete flux tube (in particular, connectivity-based) and flux-integration methods to data from Hinodes Solar Optical Telescope. The target is NOAA active region 10930 during a ~1.5 day interval in December 2006 that included a major eruptive flare (SOL2006-12-13T02:14X3.4). Finite-volume and connectivity-based methods yield instantaneous budgets of the coronal magnetic helicity, while the flux-integration methods allow an estimate of the accumulated helicity injected through the photosphere. The objectives of our work are twofold: A cross-validation of methods, as well as an interpretation of the complex events leading to the eruption. To the first objective, we find (i) strong agreement among the finite-volume methods, (ii) a moderate agreement between the connectivity-based and finite-volume methods, (iii) an excellent agreement between the flux-integration methods, and (iv) an overall agreement between finite-volume and flux-integration based estimates regarding the predominant sign and magnitude of the helicity. To the second objective, we are confident that the photospheric helicity flux significantly contributed to the coronal helicity budget, and that a right-handed structure erupted from a predominantly left-handed corona during the X-class flare. Overall, we find that the use of different methods to estimate the (accumulated) coronal helicity may be necessary in order to draw a complete picture of an active-region corona, given the careful handling of identified data (preparation) issues, which otherwise would mislead the event analysis and interpretation.
The electric current helicity density $displaystyle chi=langleepsilon_{ijk}b_ifrac{partial b_k}{partial x_j}rangle$ contains six terms, where $b_i$ are components of the magnetic field. Due to the observational limitations, only four of the above six terms can be inferred from solar photospheric vector magnetograms. By comparing the results for simulation we distinguished the statistical difference of above six terms for isotropic and anisotropic cases. We estimated the relative degree of anisotropy for three typical active regions and found that it is of order 0.8 which means the assumption of local isotropy for the observable current helicity density terms is generally not satisfied for solar active regions. Upon studies of the statistical properties of the anisotropy of magnetic field of solar active regions with latitudes and with evolution in the solar cycle, we conclude that the consistency of that assumption of local homogeneity and isotropy requires further analysis in the light of our findings.
In the solar corona, magnetic helicity slowly and continuously accumulates in response to plasma flows tangential to the photosphere and magnetic flux emergence through it. Analyzing this transfer of magnetic helicity is key for identifying its role in the dynamics of active regions (ARs). The connectivity-based helicity flux density method was recently developed for studying the 2D and 3D transfer of magnetic helicity in ARs. The method takes into account the 3D nature of magnetic helicity by explicitly using knowledge of the magnetic field connectivity, which allows it to faithfully track the photospheric flux of magnetic helicity. Because the magnetic field is not measured in the solar corona, modeled 3D solutions obtained from force-free magnetic field extrapolations must be used to derive the magnetic connectivity. Different extrapolation methods can lead to markedly different 3D magnetic field connectivities, thus questioning the reliability of the connectivity-based approach in observational applications. We address these concerns by applying this method to the isolated and internally complex AR 11158 with different magnetic field extrapolation models. We show that the connectivity-based calculations are robust to different extrapolation methods, in particular with regards to identifying regions of opposite magnetic helicity flux. We conclude that the connectivity-based approach can be reliably used in observational analyses and is a promising tool for studying the transfer of magnetic helicity in ARs and relate it to their flaring activity.
In the present work we study evolution of magnetic helicity in the solar corona. We compare the rate of change of a quantity related to the magnetic helicity in the corona to the flux of magnetic helicity through the photosphere and find that the two rates are similar. This gives observational evidence that helicity flux across the photosphere is indeed what drives helicity changes in solar corona during emergence. For the purposes of estimating coronal helicity we neither assume a strictly linear force-free field, nor attempt to construct a non-linear force-free field. For each coronal loop evident in Extreme Ultraviolet (EUV) we find a best-matching line of a linear force-free field and allow the twist parameter alpha to be different for each line. This method was introduced and its applicability was discussed in Malanushenko et. al. (2009). The object of the study is emerging and rapidly rotating AR 9004 over about 80 hours. As a proxy for coronal helicity we use the quantity <alpha_i*L_i/2> averaged over many reconstructed lines of magnetic field. We argue that it is approximately proportional to flux-normalized helicity H/Phi^2, where H is helicity and Phi is total enclosed magnetic flux of the active region. The time rate of change of such quantity in the corona is found to be about 0.021 rad/hr, which is compatible with the estimates for the same region obtained using other methods Longcope et. al. (2007), who estimated the flux of normalized helicity of about 0.016 rad/hr.
It is generally believed that the evolution of magnetic helicity has a close relationship with solar activity. Before the launch of SDO, earlier studies have mostly used MDI/SOHO line of sight magnetograms and assumed that magnetic fields are radial when calculating magnetic helicity injection rate from photospheric magnetograms. However, this assumption is not necessarily true. Here we use the vector magnetograms and line of sight magnetograms, both taken by HMI/SDO, to estimate the effects of non-radial magnetic field on measuring magnetic helicity injection rate. We find that: 1) The effect of non-radial magnetic field on estimating tangential velocity is relatively small; 2) On estimating magnetic helicity injection rate, the effect of non-radial magnetic field is strong when active regions are observed near the limb and is relatively small when active regions are close to disk center; 3) The effect of non-radial magnetic field becomes minor if the amount of accumulated magnetic helicity is the only concern.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
