This meeting's update

I ran the following fixed grid tests on the sinks to learn more about why the formed particle is wandering:

  1. Fixed grid, same set up as before — to see if this problem happens when AMR is shut off.
    • Originally, my simulation was a 203 grid with 2 levels of AMR (this formed a sink). I ran a fixed grid then with 803 and this did NOT form a sink. The system was reported as not bound, which I saw before was fixed by increasing the resolution of the grid. I ran an 853 simul., and this DID form a sink. Further, this sink did NOT move out of its 'parent' cell. See the page here - ​http://www.pas.rochester.edu/~erica/collapse9192011.html. I wondered if this was a result of fixed grid alone, or the higher effective resolution. When I tried to run an AMR simulation with ~ 853 eff. cells — using 213 + 2 levels, no sink was formed. Given this is a higher res. run than the first I quoted here, this is curious. The differences between the simulation as far as I can see are 1) the refinement criteria in the first called for the inner most region of the sphere ONLY to be resolved, 2) global cell numbers was off — in the first mxGlobal ran to 25 instead of 20. It doesn't seem like this should make a difference, as long as the effective resolution is ≥ the old simulations — a sink should form..

I am wondering if I should still do this test, since a sink formed in fixed grid, even number of cells? — Fixed grid, odd number of cells — since a sink is formed in the center of a cell, see if restricting the cell to the true center of the grid resolves the issue.

Enlarging the accretion radius from 4 to 8 and 16. This may help with smoothing out the potential.

Checking if increasing the resolution stops the particle from having a kick will also be useful.

Additionally, I added my radial velocity plots to the BE page under the results section and compared to the Foster and Chevalier results in the discussion section. I think this page is more organized and nice since the last edits.

—Also, I noticed a sink formed in the fixed grid simulation earlier — frame 13, as opposed to frame 29 as in the AMR simulation. I am running a simulation now that has the same geometric refinement criteria I originally formed a sink with.. to see if this helps in forming a sink in the 21+2 levels case above.

—Question - I see coordinates in my sink file, but there is no values in the bottom array… What does this mean? The cell at the position violated the True Love criteria (density threshold), but did not officially form?

Comments

No comments.