4.7 Article

LARGE-SCALE AZIMUTHAL STRUCTURES OF TURBULENCE IN ACCRETION DISKS: DYNAMO TRIGGERED VARIABILITY OF ACCRETION

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 744, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/744/2/144

关键词

accretion, accretion disks; dynamo; magnetic fields; magnetohydrodynamics (MHD); protoplanetary disks

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft DFG through DFG Forschergruppe [759]
  2. NASA through the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology
  3. Alexander von Humboldt Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We investigate the significance of large-scale azimuthal, magnetic, and velocity modes for the magnetorotational instability (MRI) turbulence in accretion disks. We perform three-dimensional global ideal MHD simulations of global stratified protoplanetary disk models. Our domains span azimuthal angles of pi/4, pi/2, pi, and pi p. We observe up to 100% stronger magnetic fields and stronger turbulence for the restricted azimuthal domain models pi/2 and pi/4 compared to the full 2 pi model. We show that for those models the Maxwell stress is larger due to strong axisymmetric magnetic fields generated by the alpha Omega dynamo. Large radial extended axisymmetric toroidal fields trigger temporal magnification of accretion stress. All models display a positive dynamo-alpha in the northern hemisphere (upper disk). The parity is distinct in each model and changes on timescales of 40 local orbits. In model 2 pi, the toroidal field is mostly antisymmetric with respect to the midplane. The eddies of the MRI turbulence are highly anisotropic. The major wavelengths of the turbulent velocity and magnetic fields are between one and two disk scale heights. At the midplane, we find magnetic tilt angles around 8 degrees-9 degrees increasing up to 12 degrees-13 degrees in the corona. We conclude that an azimuthal extent of pi is sufficient to reproduce most turbulent properties in three-dimensional global stratified simulations of magnetized accretion disks.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据