Abstract:Aims. Our goal is to propagate multiple eruptions –obtained through numerical simulations performed in a previous study– to 1 AU and to analyse the effects of different background solar winds on their dynamics and structure at Earth. We also aim to improve the understanding of why some consecutive eruptions do not result in the expected geoeffectiveness, and how a secondary coronal mass ejection (CME) can affect the configuration of the preceding one. Methods. Using the 2.5D magnetohydrodynamics package of the code MPI-AMRVAC, we numerically modelled consecutive CMEs inserted in two different solar winds by imposing shearing motions onto the inner boundary, which in our case represents the low corona. In one of the simulations, the secondary CME was a stealth ejecta resulting from the reconfiguration of the coronal field. The initial magnetic configuration depicts a triple arcade structure shifted southward, and embedded into a bimodal solar wind. We triggered eruptions by imposing shearing motions along the southernmost polarity inversion line, and the computational mesh tracks them via a refinement method that applies to current-carrying structures, and is continuously adapted throughout the simulations. We also compared the signatures of some of our eruptions with those of a multiple CME event that occurred in September 2009 using data from spacecraft around Mercury and Earth. Furthermore, we computed and analysed the Dst index for all the simulations performed. Results. The observed event fits well at 1 AU with two of our simulations, one with a stealth CME and the other without. This highlights the difficulty of attempting to use in situ observations to distinguish whether or not the second eruption was stealthy, because of the processes the flux ropes undergo during their propagation in the interplanetary space. We simulate the CMEs propagated in two different solar winds, one slow and another faster one. In the first case, plasma blobs arise in the trail of eruptions. The faster solar wind simulations create no plasma blobs in the aftermath of the eruptions, and therefore we interpret them as possible indicators of the initial magnetic configuration, which changes along with the background wind. Interestingly, the Dst computation results in a reduced geoeffectiveness in the case of consecutive CMEs when the flux ropes arrive with a leading positive B z . When the B z component is reversed, the geoeffectiveness increases, meaning that the magnetic reconnections with the trailing blobs and eruptions strongly affect the impact of the arriving interplanetary CME.

Solar Wind Properties and Geospace Impact of Coronal Mass Ejection‐Driven Sheath Regions: Variation and Driver Dependence

Study of the propagation, in situ signatures, and geoeffectiveness of shear-induced coronal mass ejections in different solar winds

Statistical Properties and Geoefficiency of Interplanetary Coronal Mass Ejections and Their Sheaths During Intense Geomagnetic Storms

Evolution of coronal mass ejections with and without sheaths from the inner to the outer heliosphere: Statistical investigation for 1975 to 2022

Evolution of coronal mass ejections with and without sheaths from the inner to the outer heliosphere -- statistical investigation for 1975-2022

Effects of background solar wind and drag force on the propagation of coronal mass ejection driven shock

Downstream Structure and Evolution of a Simulated CME-driven Sheath in the Solar Corona

Energy transfer during intense geomagnetic storms driven by interplanetary coronal mass ejections and their sheath regions

Multipoint study of successive coronal mass ejections driving moderate disturbances at 1 AU

The Effect of Fast Solar Wind on Ion Distribution Downstream of Earth's Bow Shock

Statistical Study of the Interplanetary Coronal Mass Ejections from 1995 to 2015

A Survey of Coronal Mass Ejections Measured In Situ by Parker Solar Probe during 2018–2022

Satistical Study of the Interplanetary Coronal Mass Ejections from 1996 to 2014

A Survey of Coronal Mass Ejections Measured In Situ by Parker Solar Probe During 2018-2022

Influence of the interplanetary driver type on the durations of main and recovery phases of magnetic storms

Turbulent cascade and energy transfer rate in a solar coronal mass ejection

Kinematic Differences between Gradual and Impulsive Coronal Mass Ejections: The Role of Flares

Sun-to-Earth Characteristics of the 2012 July 12 Coronal Mass Ejection and Associated Geo-effectiveness

The Delayed Time Response of Geomagnetic Activity to the Solar Wind

Parametric study of the kinematic evolution of coronal mass ejection shock waves and their relation to flaring activity

Classification of Enhanced Geoeffectiveness Resulting from High-Speed Solar Wind Streams Compressing Slower Interplanetary Coronal Mass Ejections