Jet

Determining mass-accretion and jet mass-loss rates in post-AGB binary systems

​Bollen+2020

In this work, Bollen et al. modeled two observed post-AGB binary systems with jet associated with the companion (MS). They determined the jet mass-loss rate in the order of 1e-7 to 1e-6 Msun/yr, and the mass accretion rate onto the companion disk is between 1e-6 to 1e-4 Msun/yr. They found that re-accretion from the circumbinary disk should be the major source supplying the accretion disk and the jet.

Ranch

Have access to 2TB of storage on ranch, but the 5 production runs of the jet simulations take a total of 27.4TB. How much quota do we have? Should I backup every other frame instead of all?

Radiation Transfer Test

I tried to run the RadTransferTest module. Got run time error with the photon-ionizing line transfer, which writes 'dt is NaN'. I ran the module with line transfer turned off (iLineTransfter=0).

Frontera

Have the planet problem compiling, but running into runtime errors that appear to be related to the new Intel Fortran runtime library version. Specifically,

forrtl: severe (257): formatted I/O to unit open for unformatted transfers, unit 76, file /work/05515/adebrech/frontera/ChargeExchange_high/global.data
Image              PC                Routine            Line        Source             
libHYPRE-2.18.2.s  00002B3589B43B86  for__io_return        Unknown  Unknown
astrobear          00000000019B4FBE  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown
astrobear          00000000019704BE  amrcontrol_mp_rea         218  amr_control.cpp.f90
astrobear          0000000001960424  amrcontrol_mp_amr          72  amr_control.cpp.f90
astrobear          00000000019837E8  scrambler_IP_astr          63  scrambler.cpp.f90
astrobear          00000000019835A6  MAIN__                     51  scrambler.cpp.f90
astrobear          000000000040E592  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown
libc-2.17.so       00002B358BF26555  __libc_start_main     Unknown  Unknown
astrobear          000000000040E4A9  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown

Relevant code:

! Open data file (quit if not successful).
OPEN(UNIT=GLOBAL_DATA_HANDLE,FILE=GLOBAL_DATA_FILE,FORM='formatted') ! I added the FORM specifier to see if that would fix it

! Read in global data values.
READ(GLOBAL_DATA_HANDLE,NML=GlobalData)

Haven't gotten past this one yet, but I suspect something similar will happen with future read attempts.

When I attempt to INQUIRE about GLOBAL_DATA_HANDLE I get an even stranger message:

inquire(UNIT=GLOBAL_DATA_HANDLE, access=acc, name=filename, form=formatType, exist=exists)

forrtl: severe (257): formatted I/O to unit open for unformatted transfers, unit -1, file /proc/265613/fd/1
Image              PC                Routine            Line        Source             
libHYPRE-2.18.2.s  00002B69A5BBBB86  for__io_return        Unknown  Unknown
astrobear          00000000019C6A58  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown
astrobear          000000000196FF02  amrcontrol_mp_rea         219  amr_control.cpp.f90
astrobear          0000000001960424  amrcontrol_mp_amr          72  amr_control.cpp.f90
astrobear          0000000001983AD0  scrambler_IP_astr          63  scrambler.cpp.f90
astrobear          000000000198388E  MAIN__                     51  scrambler.cpp.f90
astrobear          000000000040E592  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown
libc-2.17.so       00002B69A7F9E555  __libc_start_main     Unknown  Unknown
astrobear          000000000040E4A9  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown

More investigation leads me to conclude that there's something wrong with I/O in general. I've tried re-chowning and re-chmoding all of the .data files, but no change.

print *, 'open status is ', iErr

forrtl: severe (257): formatted I/O to unit open for unformatted transfers, unit -1, file /proc/271281/fd/1
Image              PC                Routine            Line        Source             
libHYPRE-2.18.2.s  00002AD3EA073B86  for__io_return        Unknown  Unknown
astrobear          00000000019C6828  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown
astrobear          000000000196FE81  amrcontrol_mp_rea         218  amr_control.cpp.f90
astrobear          0000000001960424  amrcontrol_mp_amr          72  amr_control.cpp.f90
astrobear          00000000019838A4  scrambler_IP_astr          63  scrambler.cpp.f90
astrobear          0000000001983662  MAIN__                     51  scrambler.cpp.f90
astrobear          000000000040E592  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown
libc-2.17.so       00002AD3EC456555  __libc_start_main     Unknown  Unknown
astrobear          000000000040E4A9  Unknown               Unknown  Unknown

If no one else has thoughts, I'll shoot TACC support another message.

Charge Exchange

Used up the allocated 20% on Stampede2. Gotten 27 frames so far; don't think we're at steady state, but haven't been able to check yet. Have 5000 SUs on Frontera now to get to somewhere around 35-40, hopefully.

Very short update this week:

Objectives

• Debugging

Progress:

Gas Drag: I check the error sources I had identified and fixed some bugs (mainly typos with some constants) and both Spitzer1941 and Fry2020 grain charges now produce realistic charges. The simulations do look different but I'm very convinced now that there's something wrong still (​weird finger-like structures)

Sputtering and Grain-Grain Collisions: Got some benchmarking simulations set up for comparison to check whether the rates of destruction are reasonable or not.

Next steps:

• Continue debugging hopefully shifting focus to sputtering soon

• update on EoS CE simulations
• update on WD planet project

Here are some preliminary ​notes for white dwarf planet project.

• ​Xsede startup proposal

• ​experiement test runs

Upcoming Conferences

​Exoplanet Demographics, free?, 11/9-12

​AAS 237, $150, 1/11-15

​Numerical Modeling in MHD + Plasma, $100, now

Charge Exchange

4 more frames. Second most recent frame:

MHD

line_transfer branch is up to date for both the PlanetaryOutflow (radiation-driven) and OutflowWind (Parker-ish wind) modules, though not everything implemented in the first is implemented in the second (various non-radiation rampings and field-related things).

To-Do

• Test B field in OutflowWind with no planet
• Implement and test embedded line transfer
• Implement and test planet import

Misc

• Metastable HeII line
• Profile line transfer on stampede
• GJ 436b

Need more computing time for those last two

Conferences coming up

1. APN8-Asymmetrical Post-Main-Sequence Nebulae 8, the Shaping of the Circumstellar Matter

​http://apn8.iaa.csic.es/

October 4-8, 2021, Granada, Spain.

2. IAU Symposium 366-The Origin of Outflows in Evolved Stars

​https://iaus366.be

November 1-5, 2021, Leuven, Belgium

This one is postponed from 2020. I will check if they still accept abstracts.

Jet simulations

1. How does the morphology of the jet (outside the launch region) evolve?

• Density slice in orbital plane ​movies-face-on

TBD: parallel to the orbital plane; Add contours to show percent of jet material.

• Comparison of fiducial and superset runs to see the difference directly

​movies-edge-on

• Slice through the secondary that is perpendicular to the orbital plane (view from P1), superjet run ​superjet-movie (adding velocity vector somehow messed up the particle contours)

2. How sensitive are the properties to the parameters: jet Mdot, secondary mass?

• Compare superjet and normal jet orbital evolution and explain the differences using the other analysis.

• How important are real jets (how realistic is the superjet?).

• Effect of smaller mass companion.

3. How does the presence of the jet affect the orbital evolution, and why?

• Two competing effects: jet blow off effect at the beginning and increasing drag later?

• If necessary, plot force density and drag-force vs time as in the force paper (Luke's paper 3).

4. How does the jet affect the envelope unbinding?

• In-progress: time evolution of bound and unbound ENVELOPE mass

(but also look at jet material to see whether it stays unbound or becomes bound).

• TBD: spatial map of unbound vs bound mass.

Plan for this week besides analyzing the jet runs:

• Do a few runs with the radiation module.

• Gather references for the jet paper.

Objectives

• Debugging

Progress:

I'm gonna try and do one dust physics process per week now so I'll be done by the end of October, this week it's the gas drag routine.

Gas Drag: I have found the following issues so far and am currently working to fix them:

• My grain charge is (as expected) wrong by quite a substantial amount. As grain charge affects all dust processes except collisional drag, this is a major bug that probably messes up a lot.
• ​One bin is a bit strange with a lot of dust seemingly unaffected by the drag until ​much later in the simulation. Not sure if this is a bug or not… need to check if this behaviour continues once the grain charge is fixed/when I change the distribution.

Sputtering: Some corrections/updates regarding my last blog post:

• It looks like the destruction rate, in general, is somewhat ok contradicting what I said last time. With my current initial grain size distribution, no dust is expected to survive beyond 20 years. Here are the updated plots with a new x axis: Total mass over time ​m(t) and change in mass over time ​dm/dt (note: the y-axis is in code units which doesn't fit the x-axis. Will fix this soon but for now you can clearly see different dust-gas interaction phases which are not easy to identify in the other plot).
• However, I have found that I am leaking dust mass somewhere so that might be an issue with my grain sorting routine.

Next steps:

• Gas Drag this week, then sputtering, etc.

Finished 3D Parameter Sweeps (Distance, Temperature, and dT)

Three Regions of our Parameter Space

1. gamma < 6.1
2. 6.1 < gamma < 25.9
3. gamma > 25.9

Here are density animations for the 3D runs. Again ranging from beta=-1 to beta=3

Charge Exchange

Making better progress. Still not quite at steady state after 20 frames.

3D runs are finished, hopefully they will be analysed this week.

For the one dimensional runs, I have now plotted location of the shock front using three different methods: the highest temperature (red), the highest velocity gradient (green), and the highest density gradient (blue). I found however that density gradient tends to be highest behind the shock front where the cold slab builds up, rather than at the initial density jump that occurs at the shock. These plots are from Beta=-1 to Beta=3.5 in half integer increments

Lastly I have built a reading list for the next few weeks from various papers which cite Strickland+Blondin (1995) and appear relevant based on their abstracts.