Phillip Hess Jie Zhang, Dusan Odstrcil

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
K. Fujiki, H. Ito, M. Tokumaru Solar-Terrestrial Environment Laboratory (STELab), Nagoya University. SOLAR WIND FORECAST BY USING INTERPLANETARY SCINTILLATION.
Advertisements

7-13 September 2009 Coronal Shock Formation in Various Ambient Media IHY-ISWI Regional Meeting Heliophysical phenomena and Earth's environment 7-13 September.
The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory SHINE 2005, July 11-15, 2005 Transient Shocks and Associated Energetic Particle Events Observed.
Assume the axial symmetric CR density distribution with the minimum along with the axis of a cylinder Then the observed –G points toward the density minimum.
Global Properties of Heliospheric Disturbances Observed by Interplanetary Scintillation M. Tokumaru, M. Kojima, K. Fujiki, and M. Yamashita (Solar-Terrestrial.
Heliospheric Propagation of ICMEs: The Drag-Based Model B. Vršnak 1, T. Žic 1, M. Dumbović 1, J. Čalogović 1, A. Veronig 2, M. Temmer 2, C. Moestl 2, T.
ICMEs and Magnetic Clouds Session Summary Charlie Farrugia and Lan Jian.
Valbona Kunkel June 18, 2013 Hvar, Croatia NEW THEORITICAL WORK ON FLUX ROPE MODEL AND PROPERTIES OF MAGNETIC FIELD.
CAS Key Laboratory of Geospace Environment, USTC The Deflection of 2008 September 13 CME in Heliosphere Space ISEST, Hvar, Croatia,2013 June 17 Collaborators:
STEREO AND SPACE WEATHER Variable conditions in space that can have adverse effects on human life and society Space Weather: Variable conditions in space.
COMESEP: Forecasting the Space Weather Impact Norma Crosby 1, Astrid Veronig 2, Eva Robbrecht 3, Bojan Vrsnak 4, Susanne Vennerstrøm 5, Olga Malandraki.
Heliospheric MHD Modeling of the May 12, 1997 Event MURI Meeting, UCB/SSL, Berkeley, CA, March 1-3, 2004 Dusan Odstrcil University of Colorado/CIRES &
CME-driven Shocks in White Light Observations SOHO/LASCO C3 – CME May 5 th, 1999 CME-driven Shock We demonstrate that CME-driven shocks: (1) can be detected.
C. May 12, 1997 Interplanetary Event. Ambient Solar Wind Models SAIC 3-D MHD steady state coronal model based on photospheric field maps CU/CIRES-NOAA/SEC.
CISM solar wind metrics M.J. Owens and the CISM Validation and Metrics Team Boston University, Boston MA Abstract. The Center for Space-Weather Modeling.
In both cases we want something like this:
World Solar Challenge. The Race For solar (photovoltaic) powered vehicles Darwin to Adelaide: 3000km First Race 1987 Currently held every two years.
Identifying Interplanetary Shock Parameters in Heliospheric MHD Simulation Results S. A. Ledvina 1, D. Odstrcil 2 and J. G. Luhmann 1 1.Space Sciences.
Generic Simulation Approach for Multi-Axis Machining, Part 2: Model Calibration and Feed Rate Scheduling Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering.
C. May 12, 1997 Interplanetary Event. May 12, 1997 Interplanetary Coronal Mass Ejection Event CU/CIRES, NOAA/SEC, SAIC, Stanford Tatranska Lomnica, Slovakia,
Coronal and Heliospheric Modeling of the May 12, 1997 MURI Event MURI Project Review, NASA/GSFC, MD, August 5-6, 2003 Dusan Odstrcil University of Colorado/CIRES.
The “cone model” was originally developed by Zhao et al. ~10 (?) years ago in order to interpret the times of arrival of ICME ejecta following SOHO LASCO.
MHD Modeling of the Large Scale Solar Corona & Progress Toward Coupling with the Heliospheric Model.
RT Modelling of CMEs Using WSA- ENLIL Cone Model
Kinematics and coronal field strength of an untwisting jet in a polar coronal hole observed by SDO/AIA H. Chen, J. Zhang, & S. Ma ILWS , Beijing.
Numerical simulations are used to explore the interaction between solar coronal mass ejections (CMEs) and the structured, ambient global solar wind flow.
Space Weather Tools Demonstration R. Mullinix and M. L. Mays NASA GSFC Heliophysics Science Division, Space Weather Laboratory 25 September 2013
A = B = C = u – speed of CME.
Evolution of the 2012 July 12 CME from the Sun to the Earth: Data- Constrained Three-Dimensional MHD Simulations F. Shen 1, C. Shen 2, J. Zhang 3, P. Hess.
Assessing Predictions of CME Time- of-Arrival and 1 AU Speed to Observations Angelos Vourlidas Vourlidas- SHINE
Magnetic Storm Generation by Various Types of Solar Wind: Event Catalog, Modeling and Prediction N. S. Nikolaeva, Yu.I. Yermolaev, and I. G. Lodkina Space.
1 Determination of CME 3D Trajectories using COR Stereoscopy + Analysis of HI1 CME Tracks P. C. Liewer, E. M. DeJong, J. R. Hall, JPL/Caltech; N. Sheeley,
On the February 14-15, 2011 CME-CME interaction event and consequences for Space Weather Manuela Temmer(1), Astrid Veronig(1), Vanessa Peinhart(1), Bojan.
Arrival time of halo coronal mass ejections In the vicinity of the Earth G. Michalek, N. Gopalswamy, A. Lara, and P.K. Manoharan A&A 423, (2004)
Space weather forecasters perspective: UK David Jackson and Mark Gibbs SEREN Bz workshop, Abingdon, 9-10 July 2014.
1 Acceleration and Deceleration of Flare/Coronal Mass Ejection Induced Shocks S.T. Wu 1, C.-C. Wu 2, Aihua Wang 1, and K. Liou 3 1 CSPAR, University of.
P. Bobik, G. Boella, M. J. Boschini, M. Gervasi, D. Grandi, K. Kudela, S. Pensotti, P.G. Rancoita 2D Stochastic Monte Carlo to evaluate the modulation.
Questions that we are facing in forecasting CME’s arrival Yuming Wang & Chenglong Shen STEP USTC Croatia.
1 Topics in Space Weather Topics in Space Weather Lecture 14 Space Weather Effects On Technological Systems Robert R. Meier School of Computational Sciences.
Effective drift velocity and initiation times of interplanetary type-III radio bursts Dennis K. Haggerty and Edmond C. Roelof The Johns Hopkins University.
1 University of California, San Diego, U.S.A., 2 NASA - Goddard Space Flight Center, U.S.A., 3 George Mason University, U.S.A., 4 Naval Research Laboratory,
Improving Space Weather Forecasts Using Coronagraph Data S.P. Plunkett 1, A. Vourlidas 1, D.R. McMullin 2, K. Battams 3, R.C. Colaninno 4 1 Naval Research.
Modeling of CME-driven Shock propagation with ENLIL simulations using flux-rope and cone-model inputs Using observations from STEREO/SECCHI and SOHO/LASCO,
Modeling 3-D Solar Wind Structure Lecture 13. Why is a Heliospheric Model Needed? Space weather forecasts require us to know the solar wind that is interacting.
Heliospheric Simulations of the SHINE Campaign Events SHINE Workshop, Big Sky, MT, June 27 – July 2, 2004 Dusan Odstrcil 1,2 1 University of Colorado/CIRES,
State of NOAA-SEC/CIRES STEREO Heliospheric Models STEREO SWG Meeting, NOAA/SEC, Boulder, CO, March 22, 2004 Dusan Odstrcil University of Colorado/CIRES.
1 Pruning of Ensemble CME modeling using Interplanetary Scintillation and Heliospheric Imager Observations A. Taktakishvili, M. L. Mays, L. Rastaetter,
Detecting, forecasting and modeling of the 2002/04/17 halo CME Heliophysics Summer School 1.
New tools to relate imagery with in-situ and modeling data and their application to space-weather forecasting Alexis P. Rouillard 1,2 D. Odstrcil 3, B.Lavraud.
H.-S. Yu 1, B.V. Jackson 1, P.P. Hick 1, A. Buffington 1, M. M. Bisi 2, D. Odstrcil 3,4, M. Tokumaru 5 1 CASS, UCSD, USA ; 2 STFC RALab, Harwell Oxford,
CME-driven Shocks in White Light Observations Verónica Ontiveros National University of Mexico, MEXICO George Mason University,USA Angelos Vourlidas Naval.
Southwest Research Institute
Driving 3D-MHD codes Using the UCSD Tomography
ICME in the Solar Wind from STEL IPS Observations
Y. C.-M. Liu, M. Opher, O. Cohen P.C.Liewer and T.I.Gombosi
Skydiver.
Lecture 12 The Importance of Accurate Solar Wind Measurements
2014SWW - S9 3D Reconstruction of IPS Remote-sensing Data: Global Solar Wind Boundaries for Driving 3D-MHD Models Hsiu-Shan Yu1, B.V. Jackson1, P.P. Hick1,
ST23-D2-PM2-P-013 The UCSD Kinematic Global Solar Wind Boundary for use in ENLIL 3D-MHD Forecasting Bernard JACKSON1#+, Hsiu-Shan YU1, Paul HICK1, Andrew.
Predicting the Probability of Geospace Events Based on Observations of Solar Active-Region Free Magnetic Energy Dusan Odstrcil1,2 and David Falconer3,4.
Suprathermal Particle Density Variations over the Solar Cycle
D. Odstrcil1,2, V.J. Pizzo2, C.N. Arge3, B.V.Jackson4, P.P. Hick4
Modeling the SEP/ESP Event of December 13, 2006
N. Gopalswamy, H. Xie, S. Akiyama, P. Mäkelä, S. Yashiro, I. Usoskin
Magnetic clouds and their driven shocks/sheaths near Earth: geoeffective properties studied with a superposed epoch technique Dasso S.1,2, Masías-Meza.
Forecasting the arrival time of the CME’s shock at the Earth
Coronal Loop Oscillations observed by TRACE
International Workshop
Problems Involving Drag
A NEW TECHNIQUE FOR DERIVING PROMINENCE MASS FROM SOHO/EIT Fe XII (19
Presentation transcript:

Comparison of the Drag Model, ENLIL Model and Observations for the July 12, 2012 CME+Shock Event Phillip Hess Jie Zhang, Dusan Odstrcil George Mason University Fairfax, VA 22032 ISEST Workshop Hvar, Croatia 06/19/2013

Purpose To use prior events for which we have multiple data sets to constrain the physics of the Aerodynamic Drag Model to make CME and shock arrival predictions based only on initial conditions as accurate as possible Provide a comparison between observations, analytic and numeric models for a well observed CME event

Snapshot of CME at 17:54 UT from three viewpoints fit with GCS Model (Thernisien 2006, 2009)

ENLIL Data courtesy D. Odstrcil

ENLIL Data courtesy D. Odstrcil

ENLIL Data courtesy D. Odstrcil

ENLIL Data courtesy D. Odstrcil

Aerodynamic Drag Model Where γ is the drag parameter, v0 is the initial CME speed, vsw is the ambient solar wind speed, r0 is the initial CME speed (Vrsnak et al 2012) Where cd is the drag coefficient, A is the CME cross-section, ρsw is the ambient solar wind density, ρ is the initial CME density, L is the CME thickness, ρsw0 is the initial ambient solar wind density, and ρ0 is the initial CME density, ρsw1AU is the ambient solar wind at 1AU, and ρ1AU is the CME density at 1 AU. The first three steps are described in detail in Vrsnak et al, the fourth and fifth were obtained by making three assumptions: (1) That L (CME thickness) could be approximated by r. This is essentially a spherical assumption. (2) That ρsw ~ 1/r2 and (3) That ρ0 ~ 1/r3 Or, to make fitting simpler γ can be treated as a constant

Comparison of Parameters In-Situ ENLIL Drag Model Fitting Drag Model with varying γ 1 AU Driver Velocity (km/s) 487.7 533.1 492.5 477.8 1 AU Shock Velocity (km/s) 608.3 707.5 621.4 614.4 For both fronts, ENLIL over estimates the velocity by 10-15% but the drag model does well, whether the data points are being fit to data with a constant γ or γ varies to provide the best comparison with in-situ arrival Constant γ Max γ Min γ Avg. γ Driver 2.78e-8 5.07e-8 2.36e-8 3.23e-8 Shock 2.02e-8 2.95e-8 1.26e-8 1.79e-8 For both fronts, the constant γ falls between the min and max γ but the average value of the varying γ is above the constant γ

Conclusions If more events are studied, a unique CD can be determined for each event based on initial knowledge, improving the accuracy of predictions For this predictive scheme to work, the best way of determining the initial CME velocity and density and the ambient solar wind density and velocity will have to be determined By comparing, observations to analytical and numerical models, we can understand more about all three