Source author record

N. Al-Haddad

N. Al-Haddad appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

physics.space-ph astro-ph.SR

Catalog footprint

What is connected

4works

2topics

4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Open graph Browse works

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

preprint2021arXiv

Investigating The Cross-section of Coronal Mass Ejections Through the Study of Non-Radial Flows with STEREO/PLASTIC

The solar wind, when measured close to 1 au, is found to flow mostly radially outward. There are, however, periods when the flow makes angles up to 15$^\circ$ away from the radial direction, both in the east-west and north-south directions. Stream interaction regions (SIRs) are a common cause of east-west flow deflections. Coronal mass ejections (CMEs) may be associated with non-radial flows in at least two different ways: 1) the deflection of the solar wind in the sheath region, especially close to the magnetic ejecta front boundary, may result in large non-radial flows, 2) the expansion of the magnetic ejecta may include a non-radial component which should be easily measured when the ejecta is crossed away from its central axis. In this work, we first present general statistics of non-radial solar wind flows as measured by STEREO/PLASTIC throughout the first 13 years of the mission, focusing on solar cycle variation. We then focus on the larger deflection flow angles and determine that most of these are associated with SIRs near solar minimum and with CMEs near solar maximum. However, we find no clear evidence of strongly deflected flows, as would be expected if large deflections around the magnetic ejecta or ejecta with elliptical cross-sections with large eccentricities are common. We use these results to develop a better understanding of CME expansion and the nature of magnetic ejecta, and point to shortcomings in our understanding of CMEs.

preprint2020arXiv

Inconsistencies Between Local and Global Measures of CME Radial Expansion as Revealed by Spacecraft Conjunctions

The radial expansion of coronal mass ejections (CMEs) is known to occur from remote observations; from the variation of their properties with radial distance; and from local in situ plasma measurements showing a decreasing speed profile throughout the magnetic ejecta (ME). However, little is known on how local measurements compare to global measurements of expansion. Here, we present results from the analysis of 42 CMEs measured in the inner heliosphere by two spacecraft in radial conjunction. The magnetic field decrease with distance provides a measure of their global expansion. Near 1 au, the decrease in their bulk speed provides a measure of their local expansion. We find that these two measures have little relation with each other. We also investigate the relation between characteristics of CME expansion and CME properties. We find that the expansion depends on the initial magnetic field strength inside the ME, but not significantly on the magnetic field inside the ME measured near 1 au. This is an indirect evidence that CME expansion in the innermost heliosphere is driven by the high magnetic pressure inside the ME, while by the time the MEs reach 1 au, they are expanding due to the decrease in the solar wind dynamic pressure with distance. We also determine the evolution of the ME tangential and normal magnetic field components with distance, revealing significant deviations as compared to the expectations from force-free field configurations as well as some evidence that the front half of MEs expand at a faster rate than the back half.

preprint2016arXiv

Factors Affecting the Geo-effectiveness of Shocks and Sheaths at 1 AU

We identify all fast-mode forward shocks, whose sheath regions resulted in a moderate (56 cases) or intense (38 cases) geomagnetic storm during 18.5 years from January 1997 to June 2015. We study their main properties, interplanetary causes and geo-effects. We find that half (49/94) such shocks are associated with interacting coronal mass ejections (CMEs), as they are either shocks propagating into a preceding CME (35 cases) or a shock propagating into the sheath region of a preceding shock (14 cases). About half (22/45) of the shocks driven by isolated transients and which have geo-effective sheaths compress pre-existing southward Bz. Most of the remaining sheaths appear to have planar structures with southward magnetic fields, including some with planar structures consistent with field line draping ahead of the magnetic ejecta. A typical (median) geo-effective shock-sheath structure drives a geomagnetic storm with peak Dst of -88 nT, pushes the subsolar magnetopause location to 6.3 Re, i.e. below geosynchronous orbit and is associated with substorms with a peak AL-index of -1350 nT. There are some important differences between sheaths associated with CME-CME interaction (stronger storms) and those associated with isolated CMEs (stronger compression of the magnetosphere). We detail six case studies of different types of geo-effective shock-sheaths, as well as two events for which there was no geomagnetic storm but other magnetospheric effects. Finally, we discuss our results in terms of space weather forecasting, and potential effects on Earth's radiation belts.

preprint2012arXiv

Magnetic Field Configuration Models and Reconstruction Methods for Interplanetary Coronal Mass Ejections

This study aims to provide a reference to different magnetic field models and reconstruction methods for interplanetary coronal mass ejections (ICMEs). In order to understand the differences in the outputs of those models and codes, we analyze 59 events from the Coordinated Data Analysis Workshop (CDAW) list, using four different magnetic field models and reconstruction techniques; force-free fitting (Goldstein,1983,Burlaga,1988,Lepping et al.,1990), magnetostatic reconstruction using a numerical solution to the Grad-Shafranov equation (Hu and Sonnerup, 2001), fitting to a self-similarly expanding cylindrical configuration (Marubashi and Lepping, 2007) and elliptical, non-force free fitting (Hidalgo,2003). The resulting parameters of the reconstructions for the 59 events are compared statistically, as well as in selected case studies. The ability of a method to fit or reconstruct an event is found to vary greatly: the Grad-Shafranov reconstruction is successful for most magnetic clouds (MCs) but for less than 10% of the non-MC ICMEs; the other three methods provide a successful fit for more than 65% of all events. The differences between the reconstruction and fitting methods are discussed, and suggestions are proposed as to how to reduce them. We find that the magnitude of the axial field is relatively consistent across models but not the orientation of the axis of the ejecta. We also find that there are a few cases for which different signs of the magnetic helicity are found for the same event when we do not fix the boundaries, illustrating that this simplest of parameters is not necessarily always well constrained by fitting and reconstruction models. Finally, we look at three unique cases in depth to provide a comprehensive idea of the different aspects of how the fitting and reconstruction codes work.