DEM Temperature Analysis of Post-Flare Loops Using Hinode's X-Ray - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

dem temperature analysis of post flare loops using hinode
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

DEM Temperature Analysis of Post-Flare Loops Using Hinode's X-Ray - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

DEM Temperature Analysis of Post-Flare Loops Using Hinode's X-Ray Telescope Kathy Reeves and Mark Weber Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics DEM Method SSW routine xrt_dem_iterative Forward fitting routine - a solution is


slide-1
SLIDE 1

DEM Temperature Analysis

  • f Post-Flare Loops Using

Hinode's X-Ray Telescope

Kathy Reeves and Mark Weber Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

slide-2
SLIDE 2

DEM Method

  • SSW routine xrt_dem_iterative
  • Forward fitting routine - a solution is

guessed and iterated upon until the χ2 between the actual and model observations is minimized.

  • Monte Carlo runs on the data using

values varied normally by the sigma error gives an estimate of the error in the DEM.

slide-3
SLIDE 3

DEM Method

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 Log DEM (cm!5 K!1)

DEM from obs

slide-4
SLIDE 4

DEM Method

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 Log DEM (cm!5 K!1)

DEM from obs

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 '() + (-) 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 '() 234 (56!5 -!1)

MC simulations

slide-5
SLIDE 5

DEM Method

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 Log DEM (cm!5 K!1)

DEM from obs

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 '() + (-) 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 '() 234 (56!5 -!1)

MC simulations

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 Log DEM (cm!5 K!1)

Median in each bin

slide-6
SLIDE 6

DEM Method

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 Log DEM (cm!5 K!1)

DEM from obs

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 '() + (-) 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 '() 234 (56!5 -!1)

MC simulations

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 Log DEM (cm!5 K!1)

Median in each bin

6.0 6.5 %.0 %.5 8.0 '()*T*,-. 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 '()*234*,56!5*-!1.

DEM closest to median

slide-7
SLIDE 7
  • Flare peak at 12:40 UT.
  • A total of 7 filter combinations were
  • bserved by XRT starting at 13:10 and 13:20

UT:

  • Al-poly/Ti-poly
  • thick-Al
  • C-poly/thick-Al
  • Al-poly
  • Ti-poly
  • thin-Be
  • med-Be

July 10, 2007 C8.2 Flare

slide-8
SLIDE 8

A total of 7 filter combinations were observed by XRT:

  • Al-poly/Ti-poly
  • thick-Al
  • C-poly/thick-Al
  • Al-poly
  • Ti-poly
  • thin-Be
  • med-Be

July 10, 2007 C8.2 Flare

Al/Poly Al/Poly Be-thin Be-thin Thick Al Thick Al 13:10 13:20

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Emission Measure Maps

2-3 MK 3-5 MK 5-8 MK 8-13 MK 2-3 MK 3-5 MK 5-8 MK 8-13 MK 13:10 13:20

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Some Example DEMs

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Some Example DEMs

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM

1310 1320

1 1

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Some Example DEMs

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM

1310 1320

1 1

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM

1310 1320

2 2

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Some Example DEMs

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM

1310 1320

1 1

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM

1310 1320

2 2

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM

1310 1320

3 3

slide-14
SLIDE 14

DEM errors

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM

13:10 13:10 13:10 13:20 13:20 13:20

slide-15
SLIDE 15

DEM errors

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM

13:10 13:10 13:10 13:20 13:20 13:20

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Emission measure: 2-13 MK

Red = EM gain Blue = EM loss

  • Loop characterized by

emission measure loss

  • Decrease in intensity

in XRT images due to decreasing emission measure, not decreasing temperature

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Dec 13, 2007 B8 Flare

Al/Poly Al/Poly

  • Flare peak at approximately 4:04 UT.
  • A total of 8 filter combinations were
  • bserved by XRT starting at 4:15 and 4:30 UT:
  • C-poly
  • Al-poly/Ti-poly
  • thick-Al
  • thick-Be
  • Al-poly
  • Ti-poly
  • thin-Be
  • med-Be
slide-18
SLIDE 18

Dec 13, 2007 B8 Flare

Al/Poly Al/Poly

Al/Poly Al/Poly

Be-thin Be-thin Thick Al Thick Al 4:15 4:30

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Emission Measure Maps

2-3 MK 3-5 MK 5-8 MK 8-13 MK 2-3 MK 3-5 MK 5-8 MK 8-13 MK 4:15 4:30

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Some example DEMs

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Some example DEMs

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM

0415 0430

1 1

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Some example DEMs

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM

0415 0430

1 1

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM

0415 0430

2 2

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Some example DEMs

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM

0415 0430

1 1

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM

0415 0430

2 2

6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 Log T (K) 20 21 22 23 24 Log DEM

0415 0430

3 3

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Emission measure: 2-13 MK

Red = EM gain Blue = EM loss

  • Some emission

measure loss near the footpoints, some emission measure gain in the loop

  • Signature of

chromospheric evaporation?

  • Cooling causes

intensity decrease in XRT images

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Conclusions

  • The July 10, 2007 flare decreases in

XRT intensity due to decreasing emission measure in the loop

  • The December 13, 2007 flare decreases

in XRT intensity due to cooling of the flare plasma

  • The DEM method is a useful tool for

deconvolving temperature and density effects on intensity

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Future and related work

  • Better data sets: many-filter sets with a

higher cadence, non-saturated data closer to peak of flare

  • Incorporate data from other Hinode

instruments: EIS for temperature and emission measure comparisons, SOT for underlying magnetic field structure

  • See posters by DeLuca, Weber, Schmelz

& Hannah.