presumably as a result of the inverse energy cascade [@kraichnan]. Above $k_{\rm cross}$, the slope of the 3D model (red line) become more closer to $k^{-5/3}$ (blue line), while the spectrum slope of the 2D model drops much steeply with the wave number as $k^{-3}$ (gray line). These features are again in accord with the previous studies mentioned above (e.g., @hanke12 [@burrows12; @dolence12; @couch13; @fernandez13]).

As shown in the middle panel of Figure \[fig2\], model 3D-H-3 produces one-sided explosion towards the south pole during the simulation time. Reflecting the unipolarity, the average shock radius is smaller than for the other 3D models (compare dotted line (in red) with solid and dashed red (in red) in the right panel of Figure \[fig2\]). To quantify the vigor of the shock expansion , $t_{\mathrm{400}}$ is a useful quantity that was defined in [@hanke12] as the moment of time when the shock reaches an average radius of 400 km. In fact, as seen from Table 1, $t_{\mathrm{400}}$ of model 3D-H-3 ($t_{\mathrm{400}}
     \approx 270~\mathrm{ms}$) is delayed about 50 ms compared to those of models 3D-H-1 and 3D-H-2 ($t_{\mathrm{400}}
     \approx 220~\mathrm{ms}$).

The model average of $t_{400}$ (e.g., $t_{400,{\rm av}}$ in Table 1) clearly shows that models 