Redefining the Boundaries of Interplanetary Coronal Mass Ejections From Observations at the Ecliptic Plane

Cid, C.; Palacios, J.; Sáiz, E.; Guerrero, Antonio José Moreno

doi:10.3847/0004-637x/828/1/11

Cited by 11 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this paper, we investigate the stealth event of 2015 January 3 presented in the studies of Cid et al (2016) and Nitta & Mulligan (2017). The stealth event led to an ICME that resulted in a strong geomagnetic storm upon its arrival at Earth.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determining the source and eruption dynamics of a stealth CME using NLFFF modelling and MHD simulations

Yardley

Pagano

Mackay

et al. 2021

A&A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Context. Coronal mass ejections (CMEs) that exhibit weak or no eruption signatures in the low corona, known as stealth CMEs, are problematic as upon arrival at Earth they can lead to geomagnetic disturbances that were not predicted by space weather forecasters. Aims. We investigate the origin and eruption of a stealth event that occurred on 2015 January 3 that was responsible for a strong geomagnetic storm upon its arrival at Earth. Methods. To simulate the coronal magnetic field and plasma parameters of the eruption we use a coupled approach. This approach combines an evolutionary nonlinear force-free field model of the global corona with a MHD simulation. Results. The combined simulation approach accurately reproduces the stealth event and suggests that sympathetic eruptions occur. In the combined simulation we found that three flux ropes form and then erupt. The first two flux ropes, which are connected to a large AR complex behind the east limb, erupt first producing two near-simultaneous CMEs. These CMEs are closely followed by a third, weaker flux rope eruption in the simulation that originated between the periphery of AR 12252 and the southern polar coronal hole. The third eruption coincides with a faint coronal dimming, which appears in the SDO/AIA 211 Å observations, that is attributed as the source responsible for the stealth event and later the geomagnetic disturbance at 1 AU. The incorrect interpretation of the stealth event being linked to the occurrence of a single partial halo CME observed by LASCO/C2 is mainly due to the lack of STEREO observations being available at the time of the CMEs. The simulation also shows that the LASCO CME is not a single event but rather two near-simultaneous CMEs. Conclusions. These results show the significance of the coupled data-driven simulation approach in interpreting the eruption and that an operational L5 mission is crucial for space weather forecasting.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determining the source and eruption dynamics of a stealth CME using NLFFF modelling and MHD simulations

Yardley

Pagano

Mackay

et al. 2021

A&A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the paper of Cid et al(2016) we describe thoroughly the event. The occurrence was a faint CME ejected in 2015 January 3, that left a dimming close to a boundary of the southern pole coronal hole.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Cid et al(2016) we discarded many of the possible sources of the CME, finally concluding that the CME is peeled off from a location that is very close to the northeasternmost rim of the coronal hole. This location suffered an important dimming (transient reduced density area in the corona) from 2015 January 3 00:00 UT to January 3 12:00 UT.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Photospheric magnetic field of an eroded-by-solar-wind coronal mass ejection

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We have investigated the case of a coronal mass ejection that was eroded by the fast wind of a coronal hole in the interplanetary medium. When a solar ejection takes place close to a coronal hole, the flux rope magnetic topology of the coronal mass ejection (CME) may become misshapen at 1 AU as a result of the interaction. Detailed analysis of this event reveals erosion of the interplanetary coronal mass ejection (ICME) magnetic field. In this communication, we study the photospheric magnetic roots of the coronal hole and the coronal mass ejection area with HMI/SDO magnetograms to define their magnetic characteristics.

show abstract

“…Behind the magnetic cloud, an interaction region (IR) preceded a fast stream reaching Wind during the second half of 11 January. The large proton density value (>150/cm 3 ) reached at the rear of the magnetic cloud, one of the largest ever observed, provides a signature of the interaction between the magnetic cloud and the fast stream (Cid et al, ).…”

Section: Ip Signatures Triggering Substorms During the Eventsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental Conditions During the Reported Charging Anomalies of the Two Geosynchronous Satellites: Telstar 401 and Galaxy 15

2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Charging and subsequent electrostatic discharge is recognized as a serious operational threat to spacecraft. This paper concentrates on an analysis of the environmental conditions (geomagnetic measurables, but not the particle fluxes, that were associated with the geomagnetic disturbances) and the interplanetary signatures prior to the anomalies that affected the two geostationary satellites Telstar 401 and Galaxy 15, which were believed to have been caused by spacecraft charging/electrostatic discharge. In terms of geomagnetic conditions, the planetary Kp index was very different around the two events, despite Kp commonly being used to characterize periods that are hazardous for spacecraft charging. On the contrary, local geomagnetic records, both from GOES satellites and from ground records, reveal that each anomaly took place during the expansion phase of a triggered substorm. Combined with a large and south directed interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) Bz, northward turnings of negative IMF Bz and large fluctuations in IMF By played major roles in the magnetospheric responses of the substorms. The interplanetary features of the two events were also similar: the interplanetary counterpart of coronal mass ejections interacted with high-speed streams, favoring the substorm triggers. Although there are several differences in the preconditioning and the inner conditions of the magnetosphere before the anomalies, in each case the respective spacecraft crossed the plasma sheet in the magnetotail during enhanced substorm activity, with a dipolarization event that took place close to the spacecraft location, indicating that each satellite was in the wrong place at a critical moment.

show abstract

Redefining the Boundaries of Interplanetary Coronal Mass Ejections From Observations at the Ecliptic Plane

Cited by 11 publications

References 55 publications

Determining the source and eruption dynamics of a stealth CME using NLFFF modelling and MHD simulations

Determining the source and eruption dynamics of a stealth CME using NLFFF modelling and MHD simulations

Photospheric magnetic field of an eroded-by-solar-wind coronal mass ejection

Environmental Conditions During the Reported Charging Anomalies of the Two Geosynchronous Satellites: Telstar 401 and Galaxy 15

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About