Paper detail

On the utility of flux rope models for CME magnetic structure below 30$R_{\odot}$

We present a comprehensive analysis of the three-dimensional magnetic flux rope structure generated during the Lynch et al. (2019) magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) simulation of a global-scale, 360 degree-wide streamer blowout coronal mass ejection (CME) eruption. We create both fixed and moving synthetic spacecraft to generate time series of the MHD variables through different regions of the flux rope CME. Our moving spacecraft trajectories are derived from the spatial coordinates of Parker Solar Probe's past encounters 7 and 9 and future encounter 23. Each synthetic time series through the simulation flux rope ejecta is fit with three different in-situ flux rope models commonly used to characterize the large-scale, coherent magnetic field rotations observed in a significant fraction of interplanetary CMEs (ICMEs). We present each of the in-situ flux rope model fits to the simulation data and discuss the similarities and differences between the model fits and the MHD simulation's flux rope spatial orientations, field strengths and rotations, expansion profiles, and magnetic flux content. We compare in-situ model properties to those calculated with the MHD data for both classic bipolar and unipolar ICME flux rope configurations as well as more problematic profiles such as those with a significant radial component to the flux rope axis orientation or profiles obtained with large impact parameters. We find general agreement among the in-situ flux rope fitting results for the classic profiles and much more variation among results for the problematic profiles. We also examine the force-free assumption for a subset of the flux rope models and quantify properties of the Lorentz force within MHD ejecta intervals. We conclude that the in-situ flux rope models are generally a decent approximation to the field structure, but all the caveats associated with in-situ flux rope models will still apply...

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors2 topics

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.