DRAFT VERSION MARCH 13, 2020 Typeset using LATEX twocolumn style in AASTeX62 Simulation of Alfven´ wave propagation in magnetic chromosphere with radiative loss: effects of non-linear mode coupling on chromospheric heating YIKANG WANG1 AND TAKAAKI YOKOYAMA1 1Department of Earth and Planetary Science, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan ABSTRACT We perform magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) simulations to investigate the propagation of Alfven´ wave in magnetic chromosphere. We use the 1.5-dimensional expanding flux tube geometry setting and transverse perturbation at the bottom to generate the Alfven´ wave. Compared with previous studies, our expansion is that we include the radiative loss term introduced by Carlsson & Leenaarts(2012). We find that when an observation based transverse wave generator is applied, the spatial distribution of the time-averaged radiative loss profile in our simulation is consistent with that in the classic atmospheric model. In addition, the energy flux in the corona is larger than the required value for coronal heating in the quiet region. Our study shows that the Alfven´ wave driven model has the potential to explain chromospheric heating and transport enough energy to the corona simultaneously. 1. INTRODUCTION cal studies suggest that continuous input of transverse pertur- The problem how to heat the solar chromosphere and the bations at the photosphere, which behave as Alfven´ waves, corona to maintain their temperature at 104 K to 106 K is could contribute to coronal heating (Kudoh & Shibata 1999, still under debate. On average, energy fluxes of 3 × 105 erg hereinafter KS99; Antolin & Shibata 2010; Matsumoto & s−1 cm−2 and 2 × 106 erg s−1 cm−2 in the quiet region are Shibata 2010, hereinafter MS10). At the same time, as the required for coronal and chromospheric heating, respectively nonlinearity increases with expansion of the flux tube, the (Withbroe & Noyes 1977). The chromosphere is divided into non-linear mode coupling (Hollweg et al. 1982; Ulmschnei- high-beta non-magnetic region below the magnetic canopy der et al. 1991; McAteer et al. 2003) generates acoustic (slow (Gabriel 1976) and low-beta magnetic region in flux tubes mode) waves, which steepen to produce shocks and dissipate and higher chromosphere above the equipartition layer (β = to provide energy for chromospheric heating (Brady & Arber 1 layer). The height of the equipartition layer in the quiet 2016; Arber et al. 2016; Matsumoto & Suzuki 2012). As a region is 0.8 Mm - 1.6 Mm (Wiegelmann et al. 2014). result, the scenario in which Alfven´ waves carry energy to The dissipation of acoustic shock is considered to be a can- the higher chromosphere and the corona while the chromo- didate for chromospheric heating in non-magnetic chromo- spheric heating is powered by the shock dissipation of lon- sphere (Schwarzschild 1948; Anderson & Athay 1989; Jor- gitudinal waves, which are initialized by the mode coupling dan 1993). The dynamics of acoustic wave propagation in from these Alfven´ waves, has been promoted. non-magnetic chromosphere have been well studied by hy- Previous studies on Alfven´ wave propagation in magnetic drodynamic simulation with non-local thermodynamic equi- chromosphere have usually ignored or crudely treated the librium (non-LTE) radiative transfer (Carlsson & Stein 1995, radiative loss in the chromosphere, which is the most sig- 1997), which show that the synthesized emerging Ca II K nificant source of energy loss (Withbroe & Noyes 1977). line spectra is consistent with the observation. MS10 and Matsumoto & Suzuki(2012) do include radiative arXiv:2003.05796v1 [astro-ph.SR] 12 Mar 2020 However, it is difficult for acoustic waves to supply energy loss while applying the approximation in Anderson & Athay in high chromosphere (Ulmschneider & Stein 1982; Jordan (1989), where the radiative loss is only determined by the lo- 1993), as they dissapate energy fast at a lower position. At cal density, which means that the chromospheric plasma has heights above the equipartition layer, low-beta magnetic re- a constant cooling time. Brady & Arber(2016) also include gions occupy all the space where Alfven´ wave (Alfven´ 1942) radiative loss, where the radiative loss rate at a certain posi- is considered as an important energy transporter (e.g. Alfven´ tion is determined by the time average of the viscous heating 1947; Mathioudakis et al. 2013; Soler et al. 2019). Numeri- during the previous 160 s. However, as pointed out by Huen- erth & Ulmschneider(1995), radiative loss is much more nar- rowly concentrated in the hot region behind the shock. which [email protected] cannot be correctly reflected by the treatments used in these 2 studies. On the other hand, models with advanced 3D radia- and the ideal gas equation of state which is given by tive MHD simulation (e.g. Iijima & Yokoyama 2017; Gudik- k sen et al. 2011) as well as synthesized observation is widely P = B ρT; (6) used in diagnostic of spectral lines formed in the chromo- m sphere and the transition region (e.g. Leenaarts et al. 2013; where ρ is the density; A is the cross-section area; t is the Rathore et al. 2015), however, their complexity adds the dif- time; s is the distance along the field line; Vs is the velocity ficulty in understanding the underlying physical process. along the s direction; P is the gas pressure; Vφ is the velocity To investigate the applicability of previous Alfven´ wave along the φ direction; g0 is the gravity; z is the height; Bs is driving model on chromospheric heating, we conduct MHD the magnetic field along the s direction, Bs does not change simulations with an improved treatment of radiative loss in- with time and we set BsA to be a constant to obtain the diver- troduced by Carlsson & Leenaarts(2012) (hereinafter CL12). gence free condition of the magnetic field; Ltrq is the trans- We ignore the longitudinal wave input at the photosphere to verse torque; Bφ is the magnetic field along the φ direction; avoid mixture of mode-coupling initiated and the input lon- V is the velocity vector; B is the magnetic field vector; Lrad gitudinal waves in the chromosphere. In this paper, we con- 5 is the radiative loss; γ is the ratio of specific heats, γ = 3 ; sider a similar geometry setting following KS99 and MS10. T is the temperature; m is the mass per particle, assuming −24 We study chromospheric heating by comparing the spatial m = mH = 1:67 × 10 g; kB is the Boltzmann constant, −16 −1 distributions of the radiative loss profile in our simulation and kB = 1:38 × 10 erg K ; and Sart is an artificial heating the classic model VALC (Vernazza et al. 1981). The setting term that is used to prevent the temperature from dropping of our simulation is introduced in Section 2. The results are too low. For the derivation of 1.5D MHD equations in curvi- shown in Section 3. Discussions and comparison with previ- linear coordinates, one could refer to Shoda & Yokoyama ous study are included in Section 4. Finally, we summarize (2018). our results in Section 5. We set the expanding flux tube geometry following KS99 by setting the radius of the flux tube r as a function of z. The 2. NUMERICAL SETTING radius r and cross section area A have the relation A = πr2. We solve 1.5D ideal compressible MHD equations on an The radius is given by expanding flux tube whose cross section area A is a function Z of the height z, which does not change with time. The ex- r = cos αds; (7) pression 1.5D indicates that we have a one-dimensional ge- ometry setting while the velocity and magnetic field has two Z components, namely the s direction and the φ direction. The z = sin αds; (8) s direction is curved along the flux tube, while the φ direction is the azimuthal direction. The basic equations are where α = αt + (αr − αt)fn; (9) @ @ (ρA) + (ρV A) = 0; (1) @t @s s −4H0 αr = −arctan( ); (10) 2 r @ @ 2 Bφ (ρVsA) + [(ρVs + P + )A] @t @s 8π 2 2 (2) αt = arctan[k cosh(z=zd) ]: (11) ρVφ dA dz = (P + ) − ρg0A ; 2 ds ds 1 f = − ftanh[(z − 0:2z )=(0:1z )] − 1g: (12) n 2 d d @ 3 @ BφBs 3 (ρVφA 2 ) + [(ρVφVs − ]A 2 )] = AρLtrq; (3) We set z = 2250 km and H = 150 km following KS99. @t @s 4π d 0 Also, r as a function of z is obtained by numerically solving @ p @ p the ordinary differential equation ( ABφ) + [(BφVs − BsVφ) A] = 0; (4) @t @s dr = cot α: (13) dz @ ρV2 P B2 [( + + )A] The degree of expansion can be varied by adjusting k in @t 2 γ − 1 8π Equation (11). We set k = 1:2 for a typical case, while k 2 2 @ ρV γP Bφ BsBφVφ is also adjusted for a parameter survey of the flux tubes with + f[( + + )Vs − ]Ag (5) @s 2 γ − 1 4π 4π expansion factor changing within observational range. In ad- dz p dition, we keep the radius of the flux tube r constant when = −L A − ρV g A + ρV AL + S A; rad s 0 ds φ trq art 3 z < 0:1 Mm and apply a Gaussian kernel smoothing with the velocity spectra. The transverse velocity at the bottom a width of 0.04 Mm to connect the low constant radius part has the form and the expanding part of the flux tube. This setting mimics X a flux tube expanding from the network region. The longitu- Vφ(t; z = 0) = Ci sin(2πνit + i); (17) dinal section of the flux tube is shown in Figure1. The radius i of the flux tube r at the lower boundary z = 0 is set to be 150 where Ci determines the power of the transverse velocity at km, which is approximately the length of the pressure gradi- frequency νi by using the veolicity spectra.