• journal/journal.article
• aip/pop
• /content/aip/journal/pop/16/5/10.1063/1.3086867
• pop.aip.org
1887
No data available.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Structure of the dissipation region in fluid simulations of asymmetric magnetic reconnectiona)
a)Paper JI1, Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 53, 119 (2008).
USD
10.1063/1.3086867
View Affiliations Hide Affiliations
Affiliations:
1 Department of Physics, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia 26506, USA
2 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware 19716, USA
c) Invited speaker.
Phys. Plasmas 16, 055704 (2009)
/content/aip/journal/pop/16/5/10.1063/1.3086867
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/pop/16/5/10.1063/1.3086867

## Figures

FIG. 1.

Schematic of the dissipation region during asymmetric reconnection. Magnetic field lines are (blue) solid lines; velocity flow are (red) dashed lines. The points and mark the -line and the stagnation point, which are not necessarily colocated. Reprinted from Ref. 19.

FIG. 2.

Two-fluid simulation with a magnetic field asymmetry of 2 and symmetric density (run ). (a) Out-of-plane magnetic field (grayscale) and magnetic field lines (white lines). (b) Out-of-plane current density (grayscale), with ion flow (white arrows) and electron flow (black arrows). Note that the two plots show different domains. (c) A cut across the -line showing the reconnecting magnetic field (solid black line), three times the ion (red dashed) and electron (blue dot-dashed) inflow speeds in the reference frame of the -line, and ten times the convection electric field (dot-dot-dot-dashed).

FIG. 3.

Predicted and measured values for the half-thickness of the dissipation region during asymmetric Hall reconnection. The filled circle corresponds to the symmetric reference case ; the (blue) squares are runs with asymmetric ; the (red) diamonds are runs with asymmetric , and the asterisk is the run with both and asymmetric .

FIG. 4.

Predictions vs simulation data for the dissipation region substructure: (a) , (b) , (c) , (d) , and (e) modified prediction for and . See Fig. 3 for symbol definitions.

FIG. 5.

Scaling results for asymmetric density Sweet–Parker simulations. Plotted as a function of density ratio are the (a) reconnection rate (normalized to ), (b) outflow velocity (normalized to ), and (c) half-thickness of the dissipation region (normalized to ). The solid dots have ; the open box has . The dashed lines are the predictions from the theory.

FIG. 6.

Distance from the stagnation point to the edge of the dissipation region above and below for asymmetric density Sweet–Parker simulations. Solid dots have ; the open box has . The dashed line denotes the two distances being equal. This result disagrees with Eq. (9). Data for and are almost identical (not shown).

FIG. 7.

Schematic showing a newly reconnected flux tube. While pressure is balanced in the fluid sense, mixing between the plasmas will occur due to kinetic effects.

FIG. 8.

Grayscale of the plasma density during two-fluid simulations with a density asymmetry of 2 (run ). (a) The upper half of the computational domain; (b) a zoom in of the outflow region denoted by the white box in (a).

## Tables

Table I.

Asymmetric Hall and Sweet–Parker reconnection simulations performed.

Table II.

Measured quantities during asymmetric Hall reconnection simulations. See the text for normalization.

Table III.

Measured quantities from the asymmetric density Sweet–Parker simulations. See the text for normalization.

/content/aip/journal/pop/16/5/10.1063/1.3086867
2009-03-24
2014-04-18

Article
content/aip/journal/pop
Journal
5
3

### Most cited this month

More Less
This is a required field