Paper detail

Convergence of SPH simulations of self-gravitating accretion discs: Sensitivity to the implementation of radiative cooling

Recent simulations of self-gravitating accretion discs, carried out using a three-dimensional Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics (SPH) code by Meru and Bate, have been interpreted as implying that three-dimensional global discs fragment much more easily than would be expected from a two-dimensional local model. Subsequently, global and local two-dimensional models have been shown to display similar fragmentation properties, leaving it unclear whether the three-dimensional results reflect a physical effect or a numerical problem associated with the treatment of cooling or artificial viscosity in SPH. Here, we study how fragmentation of self-gravitating disc flows in SPH depends upon the implementation of cooling. We run disc simulations that compare a simple cooling scheme, in which each particle loses energy based upon its internal energy per unit mass, with a method in which the cooling is derived from a smoothed internal energy density field. For the simple per particle cooling scheme, we find a significant increase in the minimum cooling time scale for fragmentation with increasing resolution, matching previous results. Switching to smoothed cooling, however, results in lower critical cooling time scales, and tentative evidence for convergence at the highest spatial resolution tested. We conclude that precision studies of fragmentation using SPH require careful consideration of how cooling (and, probably, artificial viscosity) is implemented, and that the apparent non-convergence of the fragmentation boundary seen in prior simulations is likely a numerical effect. In real discs, where cooling is physically smoothed by radiative transfer effects, the fragmentation boundary is probably displaced from the two-dimensional value by a factor that is only of the order of unity.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.