 |  |
Astron. Astrophys. 318, 963-969 (1997)
3. The plume model
As discussed in the introduction, plumes appear to be associated
with magnetic field concentrations at the coronal base. In this case
the potential unperturbed field could be modelled by solving
Eq. (6) with an appropriate boundary condition at
. However, observations show that plumes
structure is mainly radial from onwards (Fisher
& Guhathakurta, 1995), hence the simple radial case will be
assumed first as a starting approximation in order to investigate more
easily the physical implications of the model. The analysis of the
general case will be done in Sect. 3.2, where the resulting plume
structure near the coronal base will be compared with observational
data.
3.1. The radial case
Consider the zeroth order radial field
![[EQUATION]](img37.gif)
in a region around the plume axis (where
). Through the definition of the Mach number
![[EQUATION]](img39.gif)
and using the continuity equation to eliminate
, the radial derivative of the Bernoulli
equation yields (the prime denotes a derivative in respect to
r)
![[EQUATION]](img41.gif)
This is simply the famous Parker equation for radial, isothermal
winds (Parker, 1958). It is well known that the corresponding phase
plane contains four different regions depending
on the position relative to the sonic point .
The only physically relevant solution for the solar wind problem is
the one crossing the sonic point with (Parker
or transonic solution) and eventually connecting via a shock to the
interstellar medium. Recently the breeze solutions (i.e. those always
subsonic in the phase diagram) have been shown to be unstable (Velli,
1994), thus confirming the necessity of the transonic solution for
steady, isothermal outflows.
In the present model the temperature is a function of the field
lines, hence the sonic radius will be a
function of the field lines too. This means that the flow becomes
supersonic at different radii for different values of
. Imposing the transonic condition, the equation
for M can be integrated again to give
![[EQUATION]](img46.gif)
where is the magnitude of the magnetic field
and . Notice that, because of the transonic
condition, the function must be now derived
from Eq. (10) and hence it is no longer free.
The density is related to the Mach number through the Bernoulli
equation, which yields
![[EQUATION]](img50.gif)
where the relationship has been assumed and
where gives the density profile at
in the static case (for solar values
, hence the dynamic effects are actually
negligible at the base of the corona). Note that for a constant
temperature everywhere the Mach number does not depend upon
(from Eq. (10)) and therefore the density
profile across the field lines remains the same at all heights.
In order to investigate the behaviour of the physical quantities in
our model, the shapes of the two arbitrary functions
and have to be chosen.
Here the following functional forms will be assumed:
![[EQUATION]](img55.gif)
![[EQUATION]](img56.gif)
where the density (temperature) is considered to be
non-dimensionalized against its value in the inter-plume region at the
coronal hole base, so that
( ) gives the ratio between the densities
(temperatures) on the plume axis and in the background coronal hole.
Observed values of are in the range 3-5.
Expression (12) has been chosen following Ahmad & Withbroe (1977),
where a gaussian-like density profile is shown to provide the best fit
to the observed EUV intensities when the temperature is constant (the
same analysis has been applied in X-rays by Ahmad & Webb, 1978).
An example of the resulting 2-D density structure near the plume base
is shown in Fig. 1, in which the radial decaying behaviour and
the conservation of the profile at all heights
(for a constant temperature) are clearly visible.
![[FIGURE]](img65.gif) |
Fig. 1. The density , non-dimensionalized against its value at the base of the coronal hole, as a function of and r. The parameters are , , and . Here is defined as the characteristic angular half width at which the density drops by a factor in respect to the corresponding axial value.
|
As pointed out earlier, the main effect of a variable temperature
is that the sonic point becomes a function of ,
thus affecting also the radial density decay. Assuming a background
coronal hole temperature of the resulting sound
speed is and . In
Fig. 2 the sonic point position is shown as a function of
for different values of ,
whereas number density and velocity radial variations are given in
Fig. 3 at the plume axis (PL) and for the coronal hole (CH).
![[FIGURE]](img78.gif) |
Fig. 2. The position of the sonic point as a function of in units of (again and ). Three values of are shown: for ( , solid line), for ( , dashed line) and for ( , dotted line). Note that the sonic point is closer to the Sun for a hot plume and further for a cold plume.
|
![[FIGURE]](img87.gif) |
Fig. 3. The number density (in units of ) in logarithmic scale and the velocity V (in units of ). The solid lines refer to the plume axis (PL) whereas the dashed lines refer to the background coronal hole (CH). The parameters are , , , , and .
|
Note that the value of the temperature is a crucial parameter for
the density and velocity behaviour at large distances. A plume to
background temperature ratio as small as
implies a variation of in the sonic point
position and a density ratio which increases quite rapidly with
r. Unfortunately, as Habbal et al. (1993) pointed out in an
interesting review of previous observations, temperature measurements
in coronal holes are affected by so many unknown parameters
(temperature values can only be inferred using some models, where it
is usually supposed to be constant across the plume) and uncertain
quantities (like element abundances), that the accuracy in the
measurements cannot be better than 20%. Therefore, it is obvious that
there is no way to deduce our temperature profile in Eq. (13)
from observations (there is not even an agreement whether a plume
should be cooler or hotter than the surroundings), hence the
comparison with observational data in the next sub-section will be
done assuming . On the contrary, the present
model could be used to calculate the expected emission, for given
values of the parameters ,
, ,
and .
The results shown so far for the radial case may be considered as
simple applications of the hydrodynamic theory of isothermal winds,
since the magnetic effects have not been taken into account yet. The
last step left in our radial case analysis is to calculate the
modifications to the zeroth order radial magnetic field, due to the
unbalanced pressure gradient across the field lines. In fact, as
gravity and inertial forces act radially, Eq. (7) becomes
simply
![[EQUATION]](img95.gif)
where is the operator defined in
Eq. (6) and the pressure P has been defined in
Eq. (5). Making use of the expressions for
and M, the equation for can be written
in the form
![[EQUATION]](img98.gif)
where the approximation has been used. Note
that the sonic singularity is removed from the right-hand side thanks
to the choice of the arbitrary function
corresponding to the transonic solution.
Eq. (14) has been integrated numerically on a square grid
, with the condition
on all the boundaries. The solution
automatically satisfies the symmetry condition
at . The numerical technique implemented is a
linear multigrid solver using a v-cycle (see, for example, Wesseling
(1992) for general theory and Fiedler (1992), Longbottom et al. (1996)
for specific solar applications of multigrid methods). The multigrid
scheme used here results in the expected multigrid behaviour over
classical iterative schemes, i.e., the number of iterations to achieve
convergence to round off is independent of the number of grid
points.
As expected, the modifications to the field lines are very small as
long as the condition holds, and this also
defines the range within which our model retains its validity. In
Fig. 4 the plasma beta, both on the plume axis and in the
inter-plume region, is plotted together with the angular displacement
of the corrected field lines, given by
![[EQUATION]](img109.gif)
![[FIGURE]](img107.gif) |
Fig. 4. The plasma beta is shown at the plume axis (PL) and in the coronal hole region (CH) for . The field line displacement is also shown as a function of r at the plume half width . The values of the other parameters are the same as in Fig. 3.
|
It is interesting to notice that, apart from the line-tying effect
at the coronal base (the field lines are supposed to be anchored in
the sub-photospheric high-beta plasma), along each field line the
behaviour of follows exactly that of the
plasma . This may be seen from a simple
dimensional analysis of the equation for , since
and , thus
.
3.2. Flux concentration at the plume base
Although a background radial field is an excellent approximation at
large distances, observations show evidence for a super-radial
diverging field close to the plume base (see the introduction). As
discussed briefly at the beginning of this section, the zeroth order
potential field can be modelled by choosing a function
giving the non-radial contribution to
at the coronal base. A possible choice is
![[EQUATION]](img115.gif)
where b is a free parameter ( gives
the purely radial case) and where the angular width
is chosen to be the same as in Eqs. (12)
and (13) ( ). Hence, the radial field component
and the flux function at are
![[EQUATION]](img118.gif)
![[EQUATION]](img119.gif)
giving a radial field outside the plume for
.
Since has a negative minimum at
, where its value is ,
can be negative if ,
thus giving a region of negative emerging flux around
. In Fig. 5 an example is given with a
large value of b. Note that this situation resembles very
closely the proposed scenario for plume formation, with close loops
interacting with a stronger open flux concentration located at a
supergranular junction. The required heating might be provided in the
X-point region above the bipole, where a current sheet could form in
response to photospheric motions of the bipole.
![[FIGURE]](img127.gif) |
Fig. 5. The field lines of the potential field calculated using Eq. (16) as lower boundary condition. The values of the parameters are and . Since , closed structures are present (a large value of b has been chosen in order to enhance the effect). The dashed line indicates the X-point region where a current sheet might form in response to photospheric motions of the bipole.
|
The main feature of our solution, characteristic of a potential
analysis, is that all the modifications to the radial field occur only
at low heights, on a scale corresponding to that defined by the plume
width: at larger distances the contributions of the higher order
multipoles of the photospheric field decay away and the field assumes
a radial configuration. This is the same result found by Suess (1982)
and the conclusion that can be drawn is that the observed super-radial
expansion is indeed due to a magnetic effect, rather than a pressure
or inertial one. However, Suess's model does not include any
relationship between the density and the magnetic field, necessary to
compare the model with the observations, while this comes out quite
naturally and in a self-consistent way from our model. Notice that
similar results are found in coronal hole models, where the
super-radial expansion occurs out to much greater distances (2-3
, see, for example, Wang & Sheeley, 1990)
than in plumes, but where the angular width of the structure is also
larger by a corresponding factor.
The best values for the two parameters and
b, which determine the shape of the non-radial potential field
through Eqs. (15) and (16), may be obtained by fitting the
density structure derived from the theoretical model with some
observational data. In order to achieve this, the Bernoulli equation
has to be solved numerically for the transonic flow making use of the
non-radial, potential background field. However, since the non-radial
behaviour is confined to the coronal base, the position of the sonic
points remains unaltered and the Mach number is still given by
Eq. (10), where now refers to the general
potential solution. The modifications to the velocity are shown in
Fig. 6 and these result in a slight enhancement of the flow due
to the field concentration at the base.
![[FIGURE]](img132.gif) |
Fig. 6. The flow speed on the axis (solid line) and in the background coronal hole, where the field is radial (dashed line). The modifications due to the non-radial potential field appear only very close to the coronal base, whereas after the velocity follows exactly the behaviour expected for a purely radial field. The parameters used here are , , and .
|
The density distribution may be still derived from Eq. (11)
and the results are shown in Fig. 7, where a contour plot of the
density is presented together with the unperturbed (dashed) and
corrected (solid) field lines. The density contours are clearly
distorted by the field line concentration through the function
. For a fully isothermal atmosphere
( ) and neglecting the effects of the flow in
the low corona, this function is proportional to the ratio of the
density with its axial value at the same height r:
![[EQUATION]](img139.gif)
thus providing a means to compare density data with the magnetic
field used in the model. In Fig. 7 the thicker solid line refers
to a value in the density ratio, defined to be
the half angular width of the plume, whereas the diamonds are the
observed values taken from the analysis by Ahmad & Withbroe
(1977). A good fit appears to be obtained for the values
and .
![[FIGURE]](img137.gif) |
Fig. 7. The corrected field lines (solid), the unperturbed field lines (dashed) and a grey-scale density contour map (denser regions are darker). The thicker line corresponds to the theoretical plume width, defined as the angular distance at which the density drops by a factor with respect to the axial value at the same height, whereas the diamonds are taken from the EUV observations by Ahmad & Withbroe (1977) (the data refers to the NP1 plume in their paper). The parameters used are , , , and .
|
In spite of the impossibility of deriving with precision the shape
of the field lines from the data (a straight line would appear to fit
the data just as well!), it is important to remember that observations
of plumes taken at larger distances yield a radial behaviour. For
example, Fisher & Guhathakurta (1995) found that the density FWHM
of polar plumes remains constant in angular width as a function of
height extending from 1.16 to 5 . This
observational evidence clearly indicates that the super-radial
expansion vanishes on a scale comparable with the width of the plume,
thus supporting our potential model.
The modification to the zeroth order field has been worked out by
solving directly Eq. (7) and deriving the function
from the knowledge of M and
( ). Notice that, even
for not very small values of the plasma beta (
in Fig. 7), the corrections to the field lines remain extremely
small, thus justifying our method of linearisation with respect to the
magnetic field.
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1997
Online publication: July 3, 1998
helpdesk.link@springer.de  |