 |  |
Astron. Astrophys. 325, 305-317 (1997)
Appendix A: off disk-centre transformations
The analysis of magnetograms taken away from the center of the
solar disk requires the elimination of projection effects. This
implies the transformation of both the measured vector magnetic field
(Hagyard 1987) and the image plane spatial coordinates
(Venkatakrishnan et al., 1988). The total transformation from the
image coordinates (where
are parallel to the magnetogram axes and is
directed to the observer) to the heliographic coordinates
( are the local
horizontal coordinates, x directed to the solar West, y
to the North and z is the local vertical) has been given by
Gary & Hagyard (1990). These authors show that the solar curvature
can be neglected in the analysis of an AR if it is closer than
from the centre of the disk. More precisely,
for a region of 100 Mm width and located at
from disk centre neglecting the curvature leads to a maximum position
error of 2 Mm at its border, that is the typical size of a magnetogram
pixel. Because the distance between H kernels is
in general less than 100 Mm, the solar curvature has a negligible
effect on the relative positioning of the brightenings and the field
topology.
The QSLs determined with and without the previous transformation
lie very close for all the studied configurations except for AR 2511
on June 13, 1980. This AR was located at E26 N20 on that date and it
is the farthest one from disk centre with which we have dealt. When
the observed region is far from the centre of the disk,
is a mixture of the vertical and horizontal
field components, which can be separated only badly by the model
because the photospheric field is not a force-free field. This fact is
in particular important on June 13 region because the flare kernels
(and QSLs also) associated to the following polarity are located in a
weak field zone, while the ones associated to the preceding polarity
lie on a more intense field. The resulting model shows a "laughing
face" feature in located towards the left of
the preceding spots (Fig. 5b). This is clearly an artifact because the
magnetic data obtained on June 14 are not consistent with the
existence of this positive flux zone (see Démoulin et al.,
1993). Supposing that the photospheric field is nearly vertical, so
that is proportional to ,
and transforming only the spatial coordinates we obtain a more
satisfactory result where QSLs are found close to flare kernels and
extrapolated coronal field-lines link them like in all the other
flares studied (Fig. 5c,d). Clearly, when the AR is far from the
centre of the disk (say by more than ) we need a
precise measurement and calibration of the transverse field together
with a good resolution of the ambiguity so that
the vertical field can be deduced (see Venkatakrishnan & Gary,
1989). When only the longitudinal component is available, it is better
to suppose that the field is vertical than to use the longitudinal
component as a boundary condition for the extrapolation.
Appendix B: numerical precision on QSLs
Added to the errors in the magnetic calibration (when transforming
the observed polarization in Fe lines to the magnetic field
components) and to the spatial resolution of the magnetograph
( Mm), there are errors intrinsic to the
extrapolation method. First, the photospheric magnetic field is
measured in a region where it is not force-free, second the derived
electric currents appear more concentrated than the ones resulting
from a linear force-free field assumption, and third there are
numerical errors due to the numerical method used. In the absence of
precise chromospheric magnetograms, the first limitation can partially
be overcome because the magnetic field becomes nearly force-free just
above the photosphere (at a height of km; see
Metcalf et al., 1995) and the flux of the vertical component is
approximately preserved. The second problem could be avoided using a
nonlinear force-free extrapolation, but this is still a research
domain (see e.g. Amari & Démoulin, 1992). We describe below
the effects of the third limitation.
Magnetograms have usually a magnetic flux unbalance of a few
. This unbalance can be taken into account in
the Fourier transform extrapolation including the zero harmonic; but
since this is a constant, implying an infinite energy in the field, we
have decided to discard it. This change in the original data can be
reduced by enlarging the size L of the computed region to
several times the size of the magnetogram. In practice, an enlargement
by a factor 2 typically leads to a uniform modification of the data of
less than 10 G. This enlargement is at the detriment of the maximum
shear that can possibly be considered ( ). For
larger than , the
large-scale harmonic solutions become periodic with height, implying
again an infinite energy in the field. These solutions can be
discarded but the boundary conditions are then changed. We rather
choose and, therefore, restrict our analysis to
magnetic regions which are not highly sheared.
When using a Green extrapolation method, the magnetic field is
usually assumed to be zero outside the magnetogram. As mentioned in
Sect. 2.2, with a discrete fast Fourier transform method the magnetic
field is implicitly supposed to be periodic along two orthogonal
horizontal directions ( ). In order to avoid
aliasing errors (Alissandrakis 1981; see also Schmieder et al., 1990),
due to the interaction between the studied region and its neighbour
images, we take an integration area of side Mm;
that is to say twice the size of any typical magnetogram used here,
the field being put to zero outside the observed region. As mentioned
in the previous paragraph, this value of L restricts the
maximum shear that can be considered to
Mm-1. For further properties of the method and comparison
to others see Gary (1989).
Besides, when using the Fourier transform method, the magnetic
field is computed on a uniform horizontal mesh at any height. In order
to save computer memory, we keep the results in a non-uniform grid.
The grid size is minimum at the centre of the integration area - let
us call it - and increases geometrically by a
factor towards the borders. The same kind of
grid is used in the vertical direction (z). In this direction
the minimum spacing, taken as , starts at the
photospheric level and the grid increases with height by a factor
. The height of the integration volume is
. With this non-uniform mesh, we keep only a
total number of points much lower than
.
We have seen in Sect. 3.2 that the thickness of the computed QSLs
can be much smaller than the magnetogram resolution. We analyse now
the influence of the discretization used on the properties of QSLs.
With this aim, we build up a magnetogram formed by a bipolar
background flux and by four flux concentrations of radius R (we
simply use a uniform field for both components). The
( ) coordinates in Mm for the positive
concentrations are (40.,0.) and (60.,0.), while for the negative ones
they are (0.,10.) and (0.,-10.). We take for this test
Mm, so that aliasing errors are negligible in
the determination of QSLs. This theoretical configuration, still close
to the observed ones, allows us to calculate the thicknesses of QSLs
down to the precision of the computer (with a relative value lower
than ).
The evolution of the decimal logarithm of the QSL thickness
( ) in meters as a function of
(Fig. 6a) shows that more than 200 Fourier
modes (in one direction) are required to obtain meaningful results
(i.e., we need to resolve the photospheric polarities:
Mm, being the radius of the flux concentrations
Mm). For the non-uniform grid with a number of
points and (leading to
with Mm) we have only
approximate results, but and
( ) are large enough and
no significant differences are found with respect to a mesh twice
finer ( and , leading to
; that is to say, a nearly uniform mesh). The
influence of the flux-concentration radius is shown in Fig. 6b for the
largest grid ( and ). The
QSL thickness can still be obtained with a good precision for a flux
concentration with a radius of 2 Mm ( Mm for the
figure) but not for a radius of 0.5 Mm ( Mm),
because is not large enough (even for
, R is two times smaller than
).
![[FIGURE]](img51.gif) |
Fig. 6.
Evolution of the logarithm of the QSL thickness (in m) with the number of Fourier modes for a theoretical configuration (see Appendix B). The three curves correspond to: a different resolution of the final non-uniform grid; b different radius R of the photospheric flux concentration.
|
The tests described above show that a QSL thickness much lower than
the pixel size has a meaning. The numerical grid needs only to be fine
enough to resolve the magnetic field spatial variations, so as to
calculate the magnetic field lines correctly. In our computations we
have found that, taking the maximum number of points allowed by the
computer memory, we have a numerical grid fine enough compared to the
magnetogram resolution. It is mainly the conversion from polarization
to magnetic field, the magnetogram resolution and the physical
equations used to model the coronal field, that limit the accuracy in
the computation of the properties of QSLs. With these limits kept in
mind, a more sophisticated extrapolation will give the coronal field
on a numerical mesh, so it is important that the QSLs thickness can
indeed be estimated for such numerical models.
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1997
Online publication: May 5, 1998
helpdesk.link@springer.de  |