Articles | Volume 19, issue 2
Nonlin. Processes Geophys., 19, 297–314, 2012

Special issue: Magnetic reconnection and turbulence in space, laboratory...

Nonlin. Processes Geophys., 19, 297–314, 2012

Research article 18 Apr 2012

Research article | 18 Apr 2012

Reconnection studies under different types of turbulence driving

G. Kowal1, A. Lazarian2, E. T. Vishniac3, and K. Otmianowska-Mazur4 G. Kowal et al.
  • 1Instituto de Astronomia, Geofísica e Ciências Atmosféricas, Universidade de São Paulo, Rua do Matão, 1226 – Cidade Universitária, CEP 05508-090, São Paulo/SP, Brazil
  • 2Department of Astronomy, University of Wisconsin, 475 North Charter Street, Madison, WI 53706, USA
  • 3Department of Physics and Astronomy, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, ON L8S 4M1, Canada
  • 4Obserwatorium Astronomiczne, Uniwersytet Jagielloński, ul. Orla 171, 30-244 Kraków, Poland

Abstract. We study a model of fast magnetic reconnection in the presence of weak turbulence proposed by Lazarian and Vishniac (1999) using three-dimensional direct numerical simulations. The model has been already successfully tested in Kowal et al. (2009) confirming the dependencies of the reconnection speed Vrec on the turbulence injection power Pinj and the injection scale linj expressed by a constraint Vrec ~ Pinj1/2linj3/4and no observed dependency on Ohmic resistivity. In Kowal et al. (2009), in order to drive turbulence, we injected velocity fluctuations in Fourier space with frequencies concentrated around kinj = 1/linj, as described in Alvelius (1999). In this paper, we extend our previous studies by comparing fast magnetic reconnection under different mechanisms of turbulence injection by introducing a new way of turbulence driving. The new method injects velocity or magnetic eddies with a specified amplitude and scale in random locations directly in real space. We provide exact relations between the eddy parameters and turbulent power and injection scale. We performed simulations with new forcing in order to study turbulent power and injection scale dependencies. The results show no discrepancy between models with two different methods of turbulence driving exposing the same scalings in both cases. This is in agreement with the Lazarian and Vishniac (1999) predictions. In addition, we performed a series of models with varying viscosity ν. Although Lazarian and Vishniac (1999) do not provide any prediction for this dependence, we report a weak relation between the reconnection speed with viscosity, Vrec ~ ν−1/4.