Paper detail

Orbital evolution of colliding star and pulsar winds in 2D and 3D; effects of: dimensionality, EoS, resolution, and grid size

(abridged)The structure formed by the shocked winds of a massive star and a non-accreting pulsar in a binary suffers periodic and random variations of orbital and non-linear dynamical origin. For the 1st time, we simulate in 3 D the interaction of isotropic stellar and relativistic pulsar winds along 1 full orbit, on scales well beyond the binary size. We also investigate the impact of grid resolution and size, and of different EoOs: a gamma-constant ideal gas, and an ideal gas with gamma dependent on temperature. We carry out, with the code PLUTO, relativistic HD simulations in 2 and 3 D of the interaction of a slow wind and a relativistic wind with Gamma=2 along 1 full orbit up to ~100 x the binary size. The different 2-D simulations are carried out with equal and larger grid resolution and size, and 1 of them is done with a more realistic equation of state, than in 3 D. The simulations in 3 D confirm previous results in 2 D. The shocked flows are subject to a faster instabilities growth in 3 D, which enhances the presence of shocks, mixing, and large-scale disruption. In 2 D, higher resolution simulations confirm lower resolution results, simulations with larger grid sizes strengthen the case for the loss of global coherence of the shocked-wind structure, and simulations with 2 different EoOs yield very similar results. In addition to the KHI, we find that the Richtmyer-Meshkov and the RTI are likely acting together in the shocked flow evolution. Simulations in 3 D confirm that the interaction of stellar and pulsar winds yields structures that evolve non-linearly and get strongly entangled. The evolution is accompanied by strong kinetic energy dissipation, rapid changes in flow orientation and speed, and turbulent motion. The results strengthen the case for the loss of global coherence of the shocked structure on large scales, although higher pulsar wind speed simulations are needed.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

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.