Axial vs. equatorial dipolar dynamo models with implications for planetary magnetic fields

被引:46
|
作者
Aubert, J [1 ]
Wicht, J [1 ]
机构
[1] Max Planck Inst Aeron, D-37191 Katlenburg Lindau, Germany
关键词
numerical dynamo simulation; axial dipole; equatorial dipole; Uranus; Neptune; magnetic field;
D O I
10.1016/S0012-821X(04)00102-5
中图分类号
P3 [地球物理学]; P59 [地球化学];
学科分类号
0708 ; 070902 ;
摘要
We present several numerical simulations of a self-consistent dynamo model in a rotating spherical shell. The solutions have two different field configurations. Besides magnetic fields dominated by the axial dipole component, we also find configurations where a dipole in the equatorial plane is the dominating component. Both types are stable in a parameter regime of intermediate shell thickness and Rayleigh numbers close to onset of convection. Axial dipole solutions are subcritical in all the simulations explored while the equatorial dipole cases are supercritical at low Rayleigh numbers but become metastable at higher Rayleigh numbers. The magnetic field strength saturates at a much lower amplitude for the equatorial dipole dynamos, and the Elsasser number is significantly smaller than in the axial configuration. The reason is that the mainly horizontal field in the equatorial dipole solution is incompatible with the motion of convective cyclones and anticyclones. The axial dipole field, on the other hand, is predominantly aligned with the axis of anticyclones, only cyclones are disrupted by horizontal field lines passing through. This configuration can therefore accomodate stronger convective flows and, consequently, is the only one remaining stable at higher Rayleigh numbers. These arguments should pertain in all planetary dynamos that are governed by strong rotational constraints. They offer an explanation why the Elsasser numbers inferred for Uranus and Neptune are much lower than. the Elsasser numbers of Jupiter, Saturn, and Earth. (C) 2004 Elsevier B.V: All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:409 / 419
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] The influence of magnetic fields in planetary dynamo models
    Soderlund, Krista M.
    King, Eric M.
    Aurnou, Jonathan M.
    [J]. EARTH AND PLANETARY SCIENCE LETTERS, 2012, 333 : 9 - 20
  • [2] Quiet sun magnetic fields vs. polar faculae -: local vs. global dynamo?
    Okunev, OV
    Cerdeña, ID
    Puschmann, KG
    Kneer, F
    Almeida, JS
    [J]. ASTRONOMISCHE NACHRICHTEN, 2005, 326 (3-4) : 205 - 207
  • [3] PLANETARY MAGNETIC FIELDS AS A TEST OF DYNAMO THEORY
    RUNCORN, SK
    [J]. GEOPHYSICAL JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY, 1968, 15 (1-2): : 183 - +
  • [4] PLANETARY MAGNETIC FIELDS AVERAGED IN THEIR DYNAMO REGIONS
    Starchenko, S., V
    [J]. MAGNETOHYDRODYNAMICS, 2019, 55 (1-2): : 201 - 205
  • [5] The influence of magnetic fields in planetary dynamo models (vol 333, pg 9, 2014)
    Soderlund, K. M.
    King, E. M.
    Aurnou, J. M.
    [J]. EARTH AND PLANETARY SCIENCE LETTERS, 2014, 392 : 121 - 123
  • [6] Planetary magnetic fields: Observations and models
    Schubert, G.
    Soderlund, K. M.
    [J]. PHYSICS OF THE EARTH AND PLANETARY INTERIORS, 2011, 187 (3-4) : 92 - 108
  • [7] Cosmological magnetic fields vs. CMB
    Kahniashvili, T
    [J]. NEW ASTRONOMY REVIEWS, 2005, 49 (2-6) : 79 - 82
  • [8] Hematite vs. magnetite as the signature for planetary magnetic anomalies?
    Kletetschka, G
    Wasilewski, PJ
    Taylor, PT
    [J]. PHYSICS OF THE EARTH AND PLANETARY INTERIORS, 2000, 119 (3-4) : 259 - 267
  • [9] FLUCTUATIONS OF MAGNETIC-FIELDS IN COUPLED-DISK DYNAMO MODELS AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS FOR GEOMAGNETIC SECULAR VARIATIONS
    SHIMIZU, M
    HONKURA, Y
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GEOMAGNETISM AND GEOELECTRICITY, 1986, 38 (06): : 611 - 632
  • [10] Numerical dynamo models of Uranus' and Neptune's magnetic fields
    Stanley, Sabine
    Bloxham, Jeremy
    [J]. ICARUS, 2006, 184 (02) : 556 - 572