Comparison of Observations at ACE and Ulysses with Enlil Model Results: Stream Interaction Regions During Carrington Rotations 2016-2018

被引:58
作者
Jian, L. K. [1 ]
Russell, C. T. [1 ]
Luhmann, J. G. [2 ]
MacNeice, P. J. [3 ]
Odstrcil, D. [3 ]
Riley, P. [4 ]
Linker, J. A. [4 ]
Skoug, R. M. [5 ]
Steinberg, J. T. [5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Inst Geophys & Planetary Phys, Los Angeles, CA 90095 USA
[2] Univ Calif Berkeley, Space Sci Lab, Berkeley, CA 94720 USA
[3] NASA, Goddard Space Flight Ctr, Greenbelt, MD 20771 USA
[4] Predict Sci Inc, San Diego, CA 92121 USA
[5] Los Alamos Natl Lab, Los Alamos, NM 87545 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
Coronal model; Corotating interaction region; Heliospheric model; Radial evolution; Solar wind; Space weather; CORONAL MASS EJECTIONS; SOLAR-WIND; MAGNETIC-FIELDS; INTERPLANETARY; AU; EVOLUTION; MISSION; CYCLE; INSTRUMENTATION; TRANSPORT;
D O I
10.1007/s11207-011-9858-7
中图分类号
P1 [天文学];
学科分类号
0704 ;
摘要
During the latitudinal alignment in 2004, ACE and Ulysses encountered two stream interaction regions (SIRs) each Carrington rotation from 2016 to 2018, at 1 and 5.4 AU, respectively. More SIR-driven shocks were observed at 5.4 AU than at 1 AU. Three small SIRs at 1 AU merged to form a strong SIR at 5.4 AU. We compare the Enlil model results with spacecraft observations from four aspects: i) the accuracy of the latest versions of models (WSA v2.2 and Enlil v2.7) vs. old versions (WSA v1.6 and Enlil v2.6), ii) the sensitivity to different solar magnetograms (MWO vs. NSO), iii) the sensitivity to different coronal models (WSA vs. MAS), iv) the predictive capability at 1 AU vs. 5.4 AU. We find the models can capture field sector boundaries with some time offset. Although the new versions have improved the SIR timing prediction, the time offset can be up to two days at 1 AU and four days at 5.4 AU. The models cannot capture some small-scale structures, including shocks and small SIRs at 1 AU. For SIRs, the temperature and total pressure are often underestimated, while the density compression is overestimated. For slow wind, the density is usually overestimated, while the temperature, magnetic field, and total pressure are often underestimated. The new versions have improved the prediction of the speed and density, but they need more robust scaling factors for magnetic field. The Enlil model results are very sensitive to different solar magnetograms and coronal models. It is hard to determine which magnetogram-coronal model combination is superior to others. Higher-resolution solar and coronal observations, a mission closer to the Sun, together with simulations of greater resolution and added physics, are ways to make progress for the solar wind modeling.
引用
收藏
页码:179 / 203
页数:25
相关论文
共 53 条
[1]   MAGNETIC FIELDS AND STRUCTURE OF SOLAR CORONA .I. METHODS OF CALCULATING CORONAL FIELDS [J].
ALTSCHULER, MD ;
NEWKIRK, G .
SOLAR PHYSICS, 1969, 9 (01) :131-+
[2]  
[Anonymous], ESA
[3]   Improvement in the prediction of solar wind conditions using near-real time solar magnetic field updates [J].
Arge, CN ;
Pizzo, VJ .
JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-SPACE PHYSICS, 2000, 105 (A5) :10465-10479
[4]   Stream structure and coronal sources of the solar wind during the May 12th, 1997 CME [J].
Arge, CN ;
Luhmann, JG ;
Odstrcil, D ;
Schrijver, CJ ;
Li, Y .
JOURNAL OF ATMOSPHERIC AND SOLAR-TERRESTRIAL PHYSICS, 2004, 66 (15-16) :1295-1309
[5]  
Arge CN, 2003, AIP CONF PROC, V679, P190, DOI 10.1063/1.1618574
[6]  
BALOGH A, 1992, ASTRON ASTROPHYS SUP, V92, P221
[7]  
BAME SJ, 1992, ASTRON ASTROPHYS SUP, V92, P237
[8]   Excess heating of He-4(2+) and O6+ relative to H+ downstream of interplanetary shocks [J].
Berdichevsky, D ;
Geiss, J ;
Gloeckler, G ;
Mall, U .
JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-SPACE PHYSICS, 1997, 102 (A2) :2623-2635
[9]   Ion cyclotron wave dissipation in the solar corona: The summed effect of more than 2000 ion species [J].
Cranmer, SR .
ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL, 2000, 532 (02) :1197-1208
[10]   Test particle energization by current sheets and nonuniform fields in magnetohydrodynamic turbulence [J].
Dmitruk, P ;
Matthaeus, WH ;
Seenu, N .
ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL, 2004, 617 (01) :667-679