4.3 Article

Powering Ganymede's dynamo

Journal

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-PLANETS
Volume 117, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

AMER GEOPHYSICAL UNION
DOI: 10.1029/2012JE004052

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NASA [NNX09AB57G]
  2. NSF [AST-0909206]
  3. Division Of Astronomical Sciences
  4. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien [0909206] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  5. NASA [NNX09AB57G, 120902] Funding Source: Federal RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

It is generally believed that Ganymede's core is composed of an Fe-FeS alloy and that convective motions inside it are responsible for generating the satellite's magnetic field. Analysis of the melting behavior of Fe-FeS alloys at Ganymede's core pressures suggests that, besides the growth of a solid inner core, convection can be driven by two novel mechanisms: Fe snow and FeS flotation. To advance our understanding of magnetic field generation in Ganymede, we construct dynamo models in which deep inner core growth, Fe-snow and FeS flotation drive convection. Although a dynamo can be found in each of these cases, the dynamos have different characteristics. For example, some dynamos are dipole dominant and others are not. It is found that multipole-dominant magnetic fields are generated in all Fe-snow cases, while dipole dominant dynamos are found in FeS flotation cases and in inner core growth cases. Ganymede's present dipole-dominant magnetic field suggests that the Fe-snow process does not play a primary role in driving Ganymede's core convection. The reason that Fe-snow driven convection does not produce a dipole-dominant dynamo can be related to the buoyancy flux. In Fe-snow cases, the buoyancy source is located at the core-mantle boundary (CMB), and the buoyancy flux peaks there, while in the other two cases, the buoyancy source is located at the inner core boundary where the buoyancy flux peaks.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available