49 4 to —— ey a Dan 7 118 Pcs pease yee Biss Gorse ad ac Sone obi Helicity is Unnecessary for Alpha Effect Dynamos, But it Helps ANDREW D. GILBERT’, URIEL FRISCH and ANNICK POUQUET CNRS, Observatoire de Nice, BP 139, 06003 Nice Cedex, France (Received 20 June 1987; in inal form 2 December 1987) We present « two-scale analysis ehowing that helicity is mot required for an alpha tect end associated. dynamo instability, and that lack of panty-invaranee io, the elocty Teld ib sulfiient, We give an example of a non-heical velocity field which Suppor alpha effect dynamo action end demonstrate this effect mumetically KEY WORDS: Dynamo processes helity, parity, 1, INTRODUCTION In the kinematic dynamo problem it is well-understood how a small- scale flow can act on a large-scale mean magnetic field, B, so as 1 generate a mean electromotive force [Parker (1953) Stenbeck et ak (1966); see Moffatt (1978) for a review]. This mean eml, & may be expanded in terms of the derivatives of the large-scale magnetic Held: B= 0458+ BeBe a away fom the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theorelcs! PRYScs Silver Street, Cambridge CB3 9EW, UK. st182 A.D. GILBERT, U. FRISCH AND A, POUQUET where aj and Pip are functionals of the velocity field. The first term in this expansion is the alpha effect; if it is non-zero, the mean em. may destabilise the large-scale magnetic field giving alpha effect dynamo action. Now the alpha effect is a pseudo-effect since the emf, changes sign when the operation of parity-reversal is applied to the small-scale flow, u; that is, under the transformation XH x, ulx)ey u(x), we have yh — ay If the velocity field is parity-invariant, there is no alpha effect. The helicity of the small-scale flow is also a pseudo-quantity and is zero when the flow is parity-invariant. Although parity-invariance thus implies the vanishing of helicity, the converse is not true; velocity fields may be constructed which lack helicity, yet which are not parity-invariant. In this paper, we show that helicity is not requiced for an alpha effect and associated dynamo instability, and that lack of parity-invariance suffices. This research was stimulated by the recent discovery of an analogue to the alpha effect in ordinary hydrodynamics, the aniso- tropic kinetic alpha (AKA) effect (Frisch et al, 1987). A’ large-scale advection superposed on a forced small-scale flow leads to a mean Reynolds stress which can destabilise the large-scale flow. For the existence of an AKA effect, itis required that the small-scale flow be anisotropic and lack parity-invariance, but helicity is not needed. We re-examine the kinematic dynamo problem and find that here too the weaker property of lack of party-invariance is sufficient for dynamo action; however anisotropy is not a prerequisite, in contrast with the AKA effect. We shall employ an expansion in which the magnetic Reynolds ‘number of the small-scale flow is taken to be small (Roberts, 1970; Childress, 1969). We shall construct an alpha effect dynamo in which the velocity field has zero helicity and zero helicity spectrum. The existonce of alpha effect dynamos with zero helicity but non-zero helicity spectrum has already been noted by Zeldovich et al (1983). Roberts (1972) has analysed three velocity fields which have zeroA. NON-HELICAL DYNAMO 153 helicity and finds dynamo action, not through the alpha effect, but through a negative eddy diffusivity effet (Kraichnan, 1976); in fact these flows were chosen so that the alpha effect alone does not give dynamo action. In this case the second term, fizV)B., in Eq. (1) becomes important; the corresponding transport effect on the large- scale magnetic field is an eddy diffusivity. At sufficiently large magnetic Reynolds numbers this may become negative and overcome the molecular diffusivity, leading to unstable growth of magnetic field. Dynamos acting by this mechanism of negative eddy diffusivity are called second order by Roberts (1972). These non- helical dynamos are distinct from the one we shall construct, which ‘operates through an alpha effect, and is first order in his terminology. 2. ANALYSIS We follow the analysis reviewed in Moffatt (1978), starting with the magnetic induction equation: §B=Vx(uxB)+2AB, V-B=V-u=0. We assume there is a separation in scale between a mean magnetic field, B, varying on large scales, L, and the flow, u, on small scales, I. We define an average <*>, over the small scales, and decompose B into a mean field and a Huctuating field: B=B+b with , = = 5 — (K-07) Uk(k B)(A* ik x @), (5) \(k, 2) is the Fourier transform of u. Now the helicity is = KuVxuy= a ik, 6 and we may identify 0*-ik x as the helicity in Fourier mode (k, 0). We see that the presence of helical modes is necessary for an alpha effect at this order, the alpha tensor being given by a weighted sum of the heictes of these modes. Suppose a? is of such a form as to give an instability of the large-scale field (for example if a® is isotropic). In this case helical B modes on sufficient large scales, L=O(IR,?), are destabilise; only at these scales can the industion term, Vx (ux), overcome diffusion, 2AB, This justifies our earlier assumption of a separation between the scale of the mean magnet field, and that ofthe velocity fel.A NON-HELICAL DYNAMO 155 We observe that in the sums in Eqs. (5) and (6), the helicity per mode is weighted differently; thus one can easily construct flows (even random isotropic flows) with zero total helicity, %=0, but with a 40, and giving a dynamo instability at this order (Zeldovich et al, 1983). We wish however to proceed and consider flows which are totally non-helical, that is, the helicity of every Fourier mode is eto: OFikxO=0 Yk. ‘This means that the helicity spectrum is identically zero; it does not imply that the helicity density, u-Vxu, vanishes at all points in physical space. Then a” is zero; by solving Eq, (4), we may calculate the eml. to the next order in magnetic Reynolds number: Ki (k-B)@"-t 0) Bad Bedaxbd= 7 Gk? +ia VF ia) ag where @'=A(k',), ete, We see that a! involves three different Fourier modes; the vector triple product, 0-4 x0, indicates the pseudo-tensor nature of a!, and shows how a combination of three ron-helical velocity modes may lack parity-invariance, In fact only the symmetric part of the alpha tensor is of interest to us, since the antisymmetric part just gives an advection of the large-scale magnetic field (Moffatt, 1978). The symmetric part, a, is given by aS aS [U2kt +0?)(2K + WV +o" 7)Y12ATm (0 4) x [(kK bok ER 0" Y(0'k — ok) FRR ERK) P+ 0°(0°R?— 01k) (kk + ke (2k'4 + 90k" — 0") o ‘The J.’ means that for each triangle of modes with k-+K'+k’=0 and @+@/ +0" ‘we have included in the sum all permutations of the modes {(k, a), (kcr)(k’,a")}, a8 wel as of the modes ((—k, ~©),156 A.D. GILBERT, U, FRISCH AND A. POUQUET (-K, 0}, (-k, 09}. Note that a steady velocity field gives no contfibution to the symmetric component of the alpha tensor at this order, this is in agreement with Childress’ (1969) analysis of dynamo action in steady flows. It is now easy to show that such totally non-helical lows lacking parity-invariance can produce an alpha effect and lead to a dynamo instability. Consider, for example, the time-dependent flow =ulsin [holy +2)— sin(kg 0) —sin[kg(x-+2)—2opt], sin( ky) gf) —sin(kex—eot)}, ® with ; the numerical factor 3!” is chosen to maximize the alpha effect. Using Eq, (7) we find that this flow gives the emf. B= (uxb,)=a(—B,, —B,,2B3), R232. Here the magnetic Reynolds number is defined i/Ake. ‘The equations for the large-scale mean field, for the case in which B depends only on z, are given by B,=20,B,+202B,, 0,B,=—a0,B,+202B,. ‘The eigenfunctions are waves of maximal (positive or negative) helicity B, + 1B, =exp(+iKz)exp[(-taK —AK?)r], Those of maximal negative helicity grow exponentially provided that ak ~2K?>0, that is Tl kg/K > 324373). CO} Note that for this kind of non-helical dynamo we require a scale separation of order R=", whereas for a helical dynamo a smaller scale separation of order R? is sufcientwe = ‘A -NON-HELICAL DYNAMO 157 3, NUMERICAL RESULTS AND DISCUSSION We have performed numerical simulations to confirm the existence of a non-helical dynamo, and examine what happens at magnetic Reynolds numbers of order 1, which ate out of the range of the above analysis, The code used was a 72° de-aliased pseudo-spectral kinematic dynamo simulation running on a CRAY 2, This resolution was found to be necessary to reveal an effect that requires sub- stantial scale separation, The velocity field in Eq, (8) was used, with ky=18 and A=1, At magnetic Reynolds numbers greater than 1.1, ‘we observe non-helical dynamo action, due to the mode of maximal negative helicity with K=1 which is unstable; in a run from initial conditions chosen randomly, the magnetic field is soon dominated by the growth of this mode (Figure 1a). Equation (9) would seem to suggest that the critical magnetic Reynolds number for dynamo action is approximately 0.7, rather than the observed value of 1.1. [ | Figure 1 (4) A logarithm plot ofthe growth of total energy eons) and exes in thenstable Ke I'mode (pls sig) sunt tine, tne ron with Ry=1S, f= 18 and rm ial condins wih 1 othe ety in the unite mode, Aer on ial iene in he fot enrgy 6 othe sec ffl ns, he stable are Se mode deany ave. andthe total energy becomes dominated by the gronth of {he usable mode (end sll-eale nodes coupled fit through the veo el.158 A.D GILBERT, U. FRISCH AND A. POUQUET Figure 1 (b) Numerical measurements (interpolated by dotted lines) of the fletve alpha coeficient, (crosses), and effective diffusivity, (pus signe) agninst magnetic Reynolds number, taken by observing the growth ander decay rates of B modes of maximal negative and positive helicity. Values ofthe alpha coefficient gen by the leading order expression, a=? uR3/32, re shown asa solid line. ‘The reason for this discrepancy is that our analytical calculation gives the lowest order non-helical dynamo effect and is only strictly valid in the limit R,,-+0. For finite magnetic Reynolds numbers there are higher order (in R,) corrections to a and 2, which result in an effective alpha coefficient, a’ and an effective magnetic diffusivity, 2 the large-scale eigenmodes are now B+ iB, = exp(+iKz)expl(+t aK ~1'K?}e] ‘Thus, by observing the rates of growth and decay of large-scale modes of both positive and negative helicity, a’ and 2’ may be measured numerically. In Figure 1b these measurements are plotted against magnetic Reynolds number, Ry, together with the analyticali A NON-HELICAL DYNAMO 159 lll Sif. ° Wo . Figure 2 (a) Loops of mean magnetic il whic les in the y-ection, are pulled ‘out in the z-direction by a wave traveling In the y-direction () A second wave travelling inthe z-direction bends the loops inthe y-direction this gives en aerating ‘component of magnetic Fld in the (0, ~1, 1) dzeton. c) A thied wave traveling i the (0, 1, L-itetion pulls alternate lengths of magnetic fed in the positive and negative e-ivections, creating «secondary set of loops. The normals to thes loops tnd the coreaponding currents, ie in the j- plane, and have components paral to the mean fel160 ‘A.D. GILBERT, U. FRISCH AND A. POUQUET result valid only for small Ry For R,<04 there is a good agreement. At higher magnetic Reynolds numbers, the effective alpha coeflicient increases less quickly than the analytical formula, while the effective diffusivity increases from the molecular value of 1; the effect is to reduce the growth-rate of the instability, It is also worth mentioning the physics bebind this non-helical dynamo, in the spirit of Parker's (1955) cyclonic events. A wave of the small-scale flow draws out loops of mean magnetic field, and two successive waves pull the loops until their normals have components parallel to the mean magnetic field (Figure 2). This implies a current and an etn. with a component parallel to the mean field, and thus an alpha effect, It is clear that the phase relations between the waves are very important in a non-helical dynamo; for example, if in Eq, (8) the sines are changed to cosines, the instability vanishes, To obtain a non-helical dynamo, such phase relations between waves of the flow must be maintained over regions of size L=O(IR,;°) so as to give a consistent lack of parity-invariance over the scales ofthe ‘mean field. Ultimately itis the mechanisms generating the fuid flow ‘that must select a consistent sense in which to break parity over these large scales. In a helical dynamo it is similarly required that there be a preference for fluid motions with one sign of helicity, over ; this may be achieved, for example, when the flow is driven by Coriolis and buoyancy forces (Moffatt, 1978). We have shown that helicity is not essential for alpha dynamo action and the weaker condition of lack of parity-invariance is sulficient. However we should qualify this by noting that non-helial dynamos are weaker than helical dynamos, and require a larger scale separation between the velocity field and the mean magnetic field. Acknowledgements We wish to thank S. Childress, J. iorat, H. K, Mofiat, T. Passot,1-P. Rivet, ZS She, A.M. Soward, PeL, Sulem and N, O, Weiss for valuable dscuaions and ommeats. We should particularly lke to thank Z.S. She and P.-L. Sulem for making their 4D NavierSiokes simulation avalable 10 us. The simulations were performed fon the CRAY? of the Centre de Calel Vectrit pout le Recherche, This Work was supported by a Buropean Community grant $T-2-0029-L-F. One of vs (ADG) i srateul for Gnancial support from the UK. Science and Enginering Reseach Council during his vst to the Observatoire de Nice.‘A NON-HELICAL DYNAMO 161 References Childress, S,"A class of solutions of the magnetohydrodynamic dynamo problem,” in “The Application of Modern Physice 10 the Earth and Planetary Interiors (S. K. Runcorn, ed), London: Wily-Intercience (1969), pp. 629-648. Frisch, U, She, ZS. and Solem, P-L, “Large seale low driven by the anisotropic Kinetic alpha fic," Physice 28D, 382-392 (1987. Kreichnan, R, Hy "Dillion of weak magnetic Belds by isotropic turbulence," J. Fuld “Mech 7S, 657-616 (1979, Moffat, H. Ks Magnetic Feld Generation in Elctrcally Conducting Fas, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK (1978) Parker, EN, “Hydromagnetic dynamo models,” Astrophys. J. 12, 293-314 (198). Robes, G. O, “Spatially periodic dynamos,” Philos, Trans. R. See. A266, 335-558 (1990), Robes, G. O, “Dynamo action of fluid mations with two-dimensional periodicity,” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. AZT, 411-854 (972) Steenbeck, M, Krause, F. and Radler, K-H,, “A calelation of the mean eeciro- ‘motive force in an electrically conducting Abidin turbulent motion, under the Jntuence of Coriolis forces” Z. Naturforsch. 21a, 369-376 (1966) See also the translation in Roberts and Stix, The Turbulent Dynamo..., Tech. Note 60, NCAR, Boulder, Colorado (1971). Zeléovich, Ya. By Ruzmaikin, A. A. and Sokotof, D. D, Magnetic Fields tn dAstrophysit, Gordon and Breach (1983),