Paper detail

Effects of Mesh Topology on MHD Solution Features in Coronal Simulations

Magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) simulations of the solar corona have become more popular with the increased availability of computational power. Modern computational plasma codes, relying upon Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) methods, allow for resolving the coronal features using solar surface magnetograms as inputs. These computations are carried out in a full 3D domain and thus selection of the right mesh configuration is essential to save computational resources and enable/speed up convergence. In addition, it has been observed that for MHD simulations close to the hydrostatic equilibrium, spurious numerical artefacts might appear in the solution following the mesh structure, which makes the selection of the grid also a concern for accuracy. The purpose of this paper is to discuss and trade off two main mesh topologies when applied to global solar corona simulations using the unstructured ideal MHD solver from the COOLFluiD platform. The first topology is based on the geodesic polyhedron and the second on UV mapping. Focus will be placed on aspects such as mesh adaptability, resolution distribution, resulting spurious numerical fluxes and convergence performance. For this purpose, firstly a rotating dipole case is investigated, followed by two simulations using real magnetograms from the solar minima (1995) and solar maxima (1999). It is concluded that the most appropriate mesh topology for the simulation depends on several factors, such as the accuracy requirements, the presence of features near the polar regions and/or strong features in the flow field in general. If convergence is of concern and the simulation contains strong dynamics, then grids which are based on the geodesic polyhedron are recommended compared to more conventionally used UV-mapped meshes.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.