English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Between the 13 and 16 of February 2011 a series of coronal mass ejections(CMEs) erupted from multiple polarity inversion lines within active region11158. For seven of these CMEs we use the Graduated Cylindrical Shell (GCS)flux rope model to determine the CME trajectory using both Solar TerrestrialRelations Observatory (STEREO) extreme ultraviolet (EUV) and coronagraphimages. We then use the Forecasting a CME's Altered Trajectory (ForeCAT) modelfor nonradial CME dynamics driven by magnetic forces, to simulate thedeflection and rotation of the seven CMEs. We find good agreement between theForeCAT results and the reconstructed CME positions and orientations. The CMEdeflections range in magnitude between 10 degrees and 30 degrees. All CMEsdeflect to the north but we find variations in the direction of thelongitudinal deflection. The rotations range between 5\mydeg and 50\mydeg withboth clockwise and counterclockwise rotations occurring. Three of the CMEsbegin with initial positions within 2 degrees of one another. These three CMEsall deflect primarily northward, with some minor eastward deflection, androtate counterclockwise. Their final positions and orientations, however,respectively differ by 20 degrees and 30 degrees. This variation in deflectionand rotation results from differences in the CME expansion and radialpropagation close to the Sun, as well as the CME mass. Ultimately, only one ofthese seven CMEs yielded discernible in situ signatures near Earth, despite theactive region facing near Earth throughout the eruptions. We suggest that thedifferences in the deflection and rotation of the CMEs can explain whether eachCME impacted or missed the Earth.

Deflection and Rotation of CMEs from Active Region 11158