Comparing the results of 1D and 2D modelling of prominence thread

1
Comparing the results of 1D and 2D modelling of
prominence thread

• P. Schwartz, P. Heinzel, S. Gunár

2
Introduction

• REASON
• 2D modelling takes a long time even if using
  parallel algorithm
• 1D modelling could be suitable for detailed study
  of prominence, i.e. fitting many profiles using
  the method of large catalogues of models

3
Kippenhahn-Schluter model
series of magnetic dips forming a prominence
4
1D slab model 2D MHS structure of a prominence
5
MHS equilibrium of the 2D structure
(Heinzel Anzer, 2001,AA 375, 1082)
6
2D distribution of the temperature
7
2D distribution of pressure computed using MHS
equilibrium
8
Comparison of the results of1D and 2D modeling
for different sets of input parameters
For all tested models Po 0.03 dyn/cm2 Ttr 100
000 K yo 1000 km Vturb/ Vsound 0.5 ?3
2 height above the solar surface 10 000 km
9
Model No.1

• Mo2.0x10-4 g/cm2
• Bxo 8.37 Gauss
• To 8000 K
• ?2 30
• ?1 5
• cut across magn. f.l.
• through the center of the 2D struc.

10
(No Transcript)
11
Model No.1

• Mo2.0x10-4 g/cm2
• Bxo 8.37 Gauss
• To 8000 K
• ?2 30
• ?1 5
• cut along magn. f.l.
• through the center of the 2D struc.

12
(No Transcript)
13
Model No.1

• Mo2.0x10-4 g/cm2
• Bxo 8.37 Gauss
• To 8000 K
• ?2 30
• ?1 5
• cut along magn. f.l.
• through the center of the 2D struc., but
  irra-
• diation across m.f.l.

14
(No Transcript)
15
Model No.2

• Mo2.0x10-4 g/cm2
• Bxo 8.37 Gauss
• To 8000 K
• ?2 30
• ?1 5
• cut across magn. f.l.
• through the 2D struc.
• at 1/3 of xmax/2 from the center

16
(No Transcript)
17
Model No.2

• Mo2.0x10-4 g/cm2
• Bxo 8.37 Gauss
• To 8000 K
• ?2 30
• ?1 5
• cut along magn. f.l.
• through the 2D struc.
• at 1/3 of yo/2 from the center
• irradiation across m.f.l.

18
(No Transcript)
19
Model No.3

• Mo2.0x10-4 g/cm2
• Bxo 8.37 Gauss
• To 8000 K
• ?2 30
• ?1 5
• cut across magn. f.l.
• through the 2D struc.
• at 1/2 of xmax/2 from the center

20
(No Transcript)
21
Model No.3

• Mo2.0x10-4 g/cm2
• Bxo 8.37 Gauss
• To 8000 K
• ?2 30
• ?1 5
• cut along magn. f.l.
• through the 2D struc.
• at 1/2 of yo/2 from the center
• irradiation across m.f.l.

22
(No Transcript)
23
Model No.4

• Mo5.0x10-5 g/cm2
• Bxo 3.9 Gauss
• To 6000 K
• ?2 30
• ?1 5
• cut across magn. f.l.
• through the 2D struc.
• at 1/2 of xmax/2 from the center

24
(No Transcript)
25
Model No.4

• Mo5.0x10-5 g/cm2
• Bxo 3.9 Gauss
• To 6000 K
• ?2 30
• ?1 5
• cut along magn. f.l.
• through the 2D struc.
• at 1/2 of yo/2 from the center
• irradiation across m.f.l.

26
(No Transcript)
27
Conclusions and future plans

• HYPOTHESIS thread of the prominence cannot be
  modelled reliably using 1D RTE and 2D MHS
  structure
• To prove this hypothesis
• test numerical stability of the code
• improve method for 1D RTE as much as possible
• When hypothesis is proved
• using methode of fast 2D RTE for thread modelling