Changes between Version 26 and Version 27 of 1DPulsedJets

Timestamp:

02/17/12 14:15:21 (13 years ago)

Author:

ehansen

Comment:

—

1DPulsedJets

@@ -84 +84 @@
 Wind:
 density = 10000 particles/cc
-velocity = 50 km/s (but with a sinusoidal perturbation)
+velocity = 50 km/s
 temperature = 1000 K
 By = 0 uG
@@ -90 +90 @@
 Global Data:
 Domain length = 30 AU
-Final time = 1.7 (computational units)
+Final time = 1.7 computational units (approx 7 cooling times)
 }}}
 Note that these runs feature a stationary ambient, and they do not include MHD or jet perturbations.  To get an idea of the form of the shock waves that are produced, here is a lineout of velocity:
@@ -140 +140 @@
 [[BR]]
 ==== Results ====
-Here we look at what post-shock temperature the simulation gives as a function of the effective resolution.  The effective resolution = (# cells) x 2^(# AMR levels)^.  For Tps I will use the highest temperature that I get from the simulation.  The highest temperature always occurs early on in the simulation and then the post-shock temperature slowly decreases over time, but stays relatively constant at some lower temperature.
+Here we look at what post-shock temperature the simulation gives as a function of the effective resolution.  The effective resolution = (# cells) x 2^(# AMR levels)^.  Each run used a base grid of 100 cells, so the only thing that changed from run to run was the number of AMR levels.  For some reason, I could not get it to run with more than 7 levels, so the 25600 run is actually a base grid of 200 cells with 7 levels.  For Tps I will use the highest temperature that I get from the simulation.  The highest temperature always occurs early on in the simulation and then the post-shock temperature slowly decreases over time, but stays relatively constant at some lower temperature.
 ||= Effective Resolution =||= cells/lcool =||= Tps (10^3^ K) =||= Relative Error (%) =||
 ||= 100 =||= 10.68 =||= 34.37 =||= 41.06 =||
@@ -148 +148 @@
 ||= 1600 =||= 170.85 =||= 46.66 =||= 19.98 =||
 ||= 3200 =||= 341.70 =||= 49.25 =||= 15.54 =||
+||= 6400 =||= 683.40 =||= 51.18 =||= 12.23 =||
+||= 12800 =||= 1366.81 =||= 53.20 =||= 8.77 =||
+||= 25600 =||= 2733.61 =||= =||= =||
 And in a graphical form, the table looks like this:
 
 [[Image(temp_res.png,width=400)]]
 
-So the big question is, why does it appear that we need way more resolution (about 100x more) than is predicted from the cooling length?
+So the big question is, why does it appear that we need way more resolution than is predicted from the cooling length? Perhaps it has to do with how the refinement is being triggered.  So I will try a resolution of 400, but with no AMR and see if it does any better than the 400 effective resolution which used 2 levels of AMR.  With this run I got Tps = 40.59 x 10^3^ K.  So there really was not a significant difference from AMR to no AMR.