Paper detail

Comparing generic models for interplanetary shocks and magnetic clouds axis configurations at 1 AU

Interplanetary Coronal Mass Ejections are the manifestation of solar transient eruptions, which can significantly modify the plasma and magnetic conditions in the heliosphere. They are often preceded by a shock, and a magnetic flux rope is detected in situ in a third to half of them. The main aim of this study is to obtain the best quantitative shape for the flux rope axis and for the shock surface from in situ data obtained during spacecraft crossings of these structures. We first compare the orientation of the flux ropes axes and shock normals obtained from independent data analyses of the same events, observed in situ at 1AU from the Sun. Then, we carry out an original statistical analysis of axes/shock normals by deriving the statistical distributions of their orientations. We fit the observed distributions using the distributions derived from several synthetic models describing these shapes. We show that the distributions of axis/shock orientations are very sensitive to their respective shape. One classical model, used to analyze interplanetary imager data, is incompatible with the in situ data. Two other models are introduced, for which the results for axis and shock normals lead to very similar shapes; the fact that the data for MCs and shocks are independent strengthen this result. The model which best fit all the data sets has an ellipsoidal shape with similar aspect ratio values for all the data sets. These derived shapes for the flux rope axis and shock surface have several potential applications. First, these shapes can be used to construct a consistent ICME model. Second, these generic shapes can be used to develop a quantitative model to analyze imager data, as well as constraining the output of numerical simulations of ICMEs. Finally, they will have implications for space weather forecasting, in particular for forecasting the time arrival of ICMEs at the Earth.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.