--- title: "Magnetohydrodynamics" sort_title: "Magnetohydrodynamics" date: 2021-10-21 categories: - Physics - Plasma physics - Electromagnetism layout: "concept" --- **Magnetohydrodynamics** (MHD) describes the dynamics of fluids that are electrically conductive. Notably, it is often suitable to describe plasmas, and can be regarded as a special case of the [two-fluid model](/know/concept/two-fluid-equations/); we will derive it as such, but the results are not specific to plasmas. In the two-fluid model, we described the plasma as two separate fluids, but in MHD we treat it as a single conductive fluid. The macroscopic pressure $$p$$ and electric current density $$\vb{J}$$ are: $$\begin{aligned} p = p_i + p_e \qquad \quad \vb{J} = q_i n_i \vb{u}_i + q_e n_e \vb{u}_e \end{aligned}$$ Meanwhile, the macroscopic mass density $$\rho$$ and center-of-mass flow velocity $$\vb{u}$$ are as follows, although the ions dominate due to their large mass: $$\begin{aligned} \rho = m_i n_i + m_e n_e \approx m_i n_i \qquad \quad \vb{u} = \frac{1}{\rho} \Big( m_i n_i \vb{u}_i + m_e n_e \vb{u}_e \Big) \approx \vb{u}_i \end{aligned}$$ With these quantities in mind, we add up the two-fluid continuity equations, multiplied by their respective particles' masses: $$\begin{aligned} 0 &= m_i \pdv{n_i}{t} + m_e \pdv{n_e}{t} + m_i \nabla \cdot (n_i \vb{u}_i) + m_e \nabla \cdot (n_e \vb{u}_e) \end{aligned}$$ After some straightforward rearranging, we arrive at the single-fluid continuity relation: $$\begin{aligned} \boxed{ \pdv{\rho}{t} + \nabla \cdot (\rho \vb{u}) = 0 } \end{aligned}$$ Next, consider the two-fluid momentum equations for the ions and electrons, respectively: $$\begin{aligned} m_i n_i \frac{\mathrm{D} \vb{u}_i}{\mathrm{D} t} &= q_i n_i (\vb{E} + \vb{u}_i \cross \vb{B}) - \nabla p_i - f_{ie} m_i n_i (\vb{u}_i - \vb{u}_e) \\ m_e n_e \frac{\mathrm{D} \vb{u}_e}{\mathrm{D} t} &= q_e n_e (\vb{E} + \vb{u}_e \cross \vb{B}) - \nabla p_e - f_{ei} m_e n_e (\vb{u}_e - \vb{u}_i) \end{aligned}$$ We will assume that electrons' inertia is negligible compared to the [Lorentz force](/know/concept/lorentz-force/). Let $$\tau_\mathrm{char}$$ be the characteristic timescale of the plasma's dynamics, i.e. nothing noticable happens in times shorter than $$\tau_\mathrm{char}$$, then this assumption can be written as: $$\begin{aligned} 1 \gg \frac{\big| m_e n_e \mathrm{D} \vb{u}_e / \mathrm{D} t \big|}{\big| q_e n_e \vb{u}_e \cross \vb{B} \big|} \sim \frac{m_e n_e |\vb{u}_e| / \tau_\mathrm{char}}{q_e n_e |\vb{u}_e| |\vb{B}|} = \frac{m_e}{q_e |\vb{B}| \tau_\mathrm{char}} = \frac{1}{\omega_{ce} \tau_\mathrm{char}} \ll 1 \end{aligned}$$ Where we have recognized the cyclotron frequency $$\omega_c$$ (see Lorentz force article). In other words, our assumption is equivalent to the electron gyration period $$2 \pi / \omega_{ce}$$ being small compared to the macroscopic dynamics' timescale $$\tau_\mathrm{char}$$. By construction, we can thus ignore the left-hand side of the electron momentum equation, leaving: $$\begin{aligned} m_i n_i \frac{\mathrm{D} \vb{u}_i}{\mathrm{D} t} &= q_i n_i (\vb{E} + \vb{u}_i \cross \vb{B}) - \nabla p_i - f_{ie} m_i n_i (\vb{u}_i - \vb{u}_e) \\ 0 &= q_e n_e (\vb{E} + \vb{u}_e \cross \vb{B}) - \nabla p_e - f_{ei} m_e n_e (\vb{u}_e - \vb{u}_i) \end{aligned}$$ We add up these momentum equations, recognizing the pressure $$p$$ and current $$\vb{J}$$: $$\begin{aligned} m_i n_i \frac{\mathrm{D} \vb{u}_i}{\mathrm{D} t} &= (q_i n_i + q_e n_e) \vb{E} + \vb{J} \cross \vb{B} - \nabla p - f_{ie} m_i n_i (\vb{u}_i \!-\! \vb{u}_e) - f_{ei} m_e n_e (\vb{u}_e \!-\! \vb{u}_i) \\ &= (q_i n_i + q_e n_e) \vb{E} + \vb{J} \cross \vb{B} - \nabla p \end{aligned}$$ Where we have used $$f_{ie} m_i n_i = f_{ei} m_e n_e$$ because momentum is conserved by the underlying [Rutherford scattering](/know/concept/rutherford-scattering/) process, which is [elastic](/know/concept/elastic-collision/). In other words, the momentum given by ions to electrons is equal to the momentum received by electrons from ions. Since the two-fluid model assumes that the [Debye length](/know/concept/debye-length/) $$\lambda_D$$ is small compared to a "blob" $$\dd{V}$$ of the fluid, we can invoke quasi-neutrality $$q_i n_i + q_e n_e = 0$$. Using that $$\rho \approx m_i n_i$$ and $$\vb{u} \approx \vb{u}_i$$, we thus arrive at the **momentum equation**: $$\begin{aligned} \boxed{ \rho \frac{\mathrm{D} \vb{u}}{\mathrm{D} t} = \vb{J} \cross \vb{B} - \nabla p } \end{aligned}$$ However, we found this by combining two equations into one, so some information was implicitly lost; we need a second momentum equation. Therefore, we return to the electrons' momentum equation, after a bit of rearranging: $$\begin{aligned} \vb{E} + \vb{u}_e \cross \vb{B} - \frac{\nabla p_e}{q_e n_e} = \frac{f_{ei} m_e}{q_e} (\vb{u}_e - \vb{u}_i) \end{aligned}$$ Again using quasi-neutrality $$q_i n_i = - q_e n_e$$, the current density $$\vb{J} = q_e n_e (\vb{u}_e \!-\! \vb{u}_i)$$, so: $$\begin{aligned} \vb{E} + \vb{u}_e \cross \vb{B} - \frac{\nabla p_e}{q_e n_e} = \eta \vb{J} \qquad \quad \eta \equiv \frac{f_{ei} m_e}{n_e q_e^2} \end{aligned}$$ Where $$\eta$$ is the electrical resistivity of the plasma, see [Spitzer resistivity](/know/concept/spitzer-resistivity/) for more information, and a rough estimate of this quantity for a plasma. Now, using that $$\vb{u} \approx \vb{u}_i$$, we add $$(\vb{u} \!-\! \vb{u}_i) \cross \vb{B} \approx 0$$ to the equation, and insert $$\vb{J}$$ again: $$\begin{aligned} \eta \vb{J} &= \vb{E} + \vb{u} \cross \vb{B} + (\vb{u}_e - \vb{u}_i) \cross \vb{B} - \frac{\nabla p_e}{q_e n_e} \\ &= \vb{E} + \vb{u} \cross \vb{B} + \frac{\vb{J} \cross \vb{B}}{q_e n_e} - \frac{\nabla p_e}{q_e n_e} \end{aligned}$$ Next, we want to get rid of the pressure term. To do so, we take the curl of the equation: $$\begin{aligned} \nabla \cross (\eta \vb{J}) = - \pdv{\vb{B}}{t} + \nabla \cross (\vb{u} \cross \vb{B}) + \nabla \cross \frac{\vb{J} \cross \vb{B}}{q_e n_e} - \nabla \cross \frac{\nabla p_e}{q_e n_e} \end{aligned}$$ Where we have used Faraday's law. This is the **induction equation**, and is used to compute $$\vb{B}$$. The pressure term can be rewritten using the ideal gas law $$p_e = k_B T_e n_e$$: $$\begin{aligned} \nabla \cross \frac{\nabla p_e}{q_e n_e} = \frac{k_B}{q_e} \nabla \cross \frac{\nabla (n_e T_e)}{n_e} = \frac{k_B}{q_e} \nabla \cross \Big( \nabla T_e + T_e \frac{\nabla n_e}{n_e} \Big) \end{aligned}$$ The curl of a gradient is always zero, and we notice that $$\nabla n_e / n_e = \nabla\! \ln(n_e)$$. Then we use the vector identity $$\nabla \cross (f \nabla g) = \nabla f \cross \nabla g$$, leading to: $$\begin{aligned} \nabla \cross \frac{\nabla p_e}{q_e n_e} = \frac{k_B}{q_e} \nabla \cross \big( T_e \: \nabla\! \ln(n_e) \big) = \frac{k_B}{q_e} \big( \nabla T_e \cross \nabla\! \ln(n_e) \big) = \frac{k_B}{q_e n_e} \big( \nabla T_e \cross \nabla n_e \big) \end{aligned}$$ It is reasonable to assume that $$\nabla T_e$$ and $$\nabla n_e$$ point in roughly the same direction, in which case the pressure term can be neglected. Consequently, $$p_e$$ has no effect on the dynamics of $$\vb{B}$$, so we argue that it can be dropped from the original (non-curled) equation too, leaving: $$\begin{aligned} \boxed{ \vb{E} + \vb{u} \cross \vb{B} + \frac{\vb{J} \cross \vb{B}}{q_e n_e} = \eta \vb{J} } \end{aligned}$$ This is known as the **generalized Ohm's law**, since it contains the relation $$\vb{E} = \eta \vb{J}$$. Next, consider [Ampère's law](/know/concept/maxwells-equations/), where we would like to neglect the last term: $$\begin{aligned} \nabla \cross \vb{B} = \mu_0 \vb{J} + \frac{1}{c^2} \pdv{\vb{E}}{t} \end{aligned}$$ From Faraday's law, we can obtain a scale estimate for $$\vb{E}$$. Recall that $$\tau_\mathrm{char}$$ is the characteristic timescale of the plasma, and let $$\lambda_\mathrm{char} \gg \lambda_D$$ be its characteristic lengthscale: $$\begin{aligned} \nabla \cross \vb{E} = - \pdv{\vb{B}}{t} \quad \implies \quad |\vb{E}| \sim \frac{\lambda_\mathrm{char}}{\tau_\mathrm{char}} |\vb{B}| \end{aligned}$$ From this, we find when we can neglect the last term in Ampère's law: the characteristic velocity $$v_\mathrm{char}$$ must be tiny compared to $$c$$, i.e. the plasma must be non-relativistic: $$\begin{aligned} 1 \gg \frac{\big| (\ipdv{\vb{E}}{t}) / c^2 \big|}{\big| \nabla \cross \vb{B} \big|} \sim \frac{|\vb{E}| / \tau_\mathrm{char}}{|\vb{B}| c^2 / \lambda_\mathrm{char}} \sim \frac{|\vb{B}| \lambda_\mathrm{char}^2 / \tau_\mathrm{char}^2}{|\vb{B}| c^2} = \frac{v_\mathrm{char}^2}{c^2} \ll 1 \end{aligned}$$ We thus have the following reduced form of Ampère's law, in addition to Faraday's law: $$\begin{aligned} \boxed{ \nabla \cross \vb{B} = \mu_0 \vb{J} } \qquad \quad \boxed{ \nabla \cross \vb{E} = - \pdv{\vb{B}}{t} } \end{aligned}$$ Finally, we revisit the thermodynamic equation of state, for a single fluid this time. Using the product rule of differentiation yields: $$\begin{aligned} 0 &= \frac{\mathrm{D}}{\mathrm{D} t} \Big( \frac{p}{\rho^\gamma} \Big) = \frac{\mathrm{D} p}{\mathrm{D} t} \rho^{-\gamma} - p \gamma \rho^{-\gamma - 1} \frac{\mathrm{D} \rho}{\mathrm{D} t} \end{aligned}$$ The continuity equation allows us to rewrite the [material derivative](/know/concept/material-derivative/) $$\mathrm{D} \rho / \mathrm{D} t$$ as follows: $$\begin{aligned} \pdv{\rho}{t} + \nabla \cdot (\rho \vb{u}) = \pdv{\rho}{t} + \rho \nabla \cdot \vb{u} + \vb{u} \cdot \nabla \rho = \rho \nabla \cdot \vb{u} + \frac{\mathrm{D} \rho}{\mathrm{D} t} = 0 \end{aligned}$$ Inserting this into the equation of state leads us to a differential equation for $$p$$: $$\begin{aligned} 0 = \frac{\mathrm{D} p}{\mathrm{D} t} + p \gamma \frac{1}{\rho} \rho \nabla \cdot \vb{u} \quad \implies \quad \boxed{ \frac{\mathrm{D} p}{\mathrm{D} t} = - p \gamma \nabla \cdot \vb{u} } \end{aligned}$$ This closes the set of 14 MHD equations for 14 unknowns. Originally, the two-fluid model had 16 of each, but we have merged $$n_i$$ and $$n_e$$ into $$\rho$$, and $$p_i$$ and $$p_i$$ into $$p$$. ## Ohm's law variants It is worth discussing the generalized Ohm's law in more detail. Its full form was: $$\begin{aligned} \vb{E} + \vb{u} \cross \vb{B} + \frac{\vb{J} \cross \vb{B}}{q_e n_e} = \eta \vb{J} \end{aligned}$$ However, most authors neglect some of its terms: this form is used for **Hall MHD**, where $$\vb{J} \cross \vb{B}$$ is called the *Hall term*. This term can be dropped in any of the following cases: $$\begin{gathered} 1 \gg \frac{\big| \vb{J} \cross \vb{B} / q_e n_e \big|}{\big| \vb{u} \cross \vb{B} \big|} \sim \frac{\rho v_\mathrm{char} / \tau_\mathrm{char}}{v_\mathrm{char} |\vb{B}| q_i n_i} \approx \frac{m_i n_i}{|\vb{B}| q_i n_i \tau_\mathrm{char}} = \frac{1}{\omega_{ci} \tau_\mathrm{char}} \ll 1 \\ 1 \gg \frac{\big| \vb{J} \cross \vb{B} / q_e n_e \big|}{\big| \eta \vb{J} \big|} \sim \frac{|\vb{J}| |\vb{B}| q_e^2 n_e}{f_{ei} m_e |\vb{J}| q_e n_e} = \frac{|\vb{B}| q_e}{f_{ei} m_e} = \frac{\omega_{ce}}{f_{ei}} \ll 1 \end{gathered}$$ Where we have used the MHD momentum equation with $$\nabla p \approx 0$$ to obtain the scale estimate $$\vb{J} \cross \vb{B} \sim \rho v_\mathrm{char} / \tau_\mathrm{char}$$. In other words, if the ion gyration period is short $$\tau_\mathrm{char} \gg \omega_{ci}$$, and/or if the electron gyration period is long compared to the electron-ion collision period $$\omega_{ce} \ll f_{ei}$$, then we are left with this form of Ohm's law, used in **resistive MHD**: $$\begin{aligned} \vb{E} + \vb{u} \cross \vb{B} = \eta \vb{J} \end{aligned}$$ Finally, we can neglect the resisitive term $$\eta \vb{J}$$ if the Lorentz force is much larger. We formalize this condition as follows, where we have used Ampère's law to find $$\vb{J} \sim \vb{B} / \mu_0 \lambda_\mathrm{char}$$: $$\begin{aligned} 1 \ll \frac{\big| \vb{u} \cross \vb{B} \big|}{\big| \eta \vb{J} \big|} \sim \frac{v_\mathrm{char} |\vb{B}|}{\eta \vb{J}} \sim \frac{v_\mathrm{char} |\vb{B}|}{\eta |\vb{B}| / \mu_0 \lambda_\mathrm{char}} = \mathrm{R_m} \gg 1 \end{aligned}$$ Where we have defined the **magnetic Reynolds number** $$\mathrm{R_m}$$ as follows, which is analogous to the fluid [Reynolds number](/know/concept/reynolds-number/) $$\mathrm{Re}$$: $$\begin{aligned} \boxed{ \mathrm{R_m} \equiv \frac{v_\mathrm{char} \lambda_\mathrm{char}}{\eta / \mu_0} } \end{aligned}$$ If $$\mathrm{R_m} \ll 1$$, the plasma is "electrically viscous", such that resistivity needs to be accounted for, whereas if $$\mathrm{R_m} \gg 1$$, the resistivity is negligible, in which case we have **ideal MHD**: $$\begin{aligned} \vb{E} + \vb{u} \cross \vb{B} = 0 \end{aligned}$$ ## References 1. P.M. Bellan, *Fundamentals of plasma physics*, 1st edition, Cambridge. 2. M. Salewski, A.H. Nielsen, *Plasma physics: lecture notes*, 2021, unpublished.