Paper detail

Self-Convergence of Radiatively Cooling Clumps

Numeric convergence studies demonstrate that the evolution of an adiabatic clump is well-captured by roughly 100 cells per clump radius. The presence of radiative cooling, however, imposes limits on the problem due to the removal of thermal energy. Numerical studies which include radiative cooling typically adopt the 100--200 cells per clump radius resolution. In this paper we present the results of a convergence study for radiatively cooling clumps undertaken over a broad range of resolutions, from 12 to 1,536 cells per clump radius, employing adaptive mesh refinement (AMR) in a 2D axisymmetric geometry ("2.5D"). We also provide a fully 3D simulation, at 192 cells per clump radius, which supports our 2.5D results. We find no appreciable self-convergence at ~100 cells per clump radius as small-scale differences owing to increasingly resolving the "cooling length" have global effects. We therefore conclude that self-convergence is an insufficient criterion to apply on its own when addressing the question of sufficient resolution for radiatively cooled shocked clump simulations. We suggest the adoption of alternate criteria to support a statement of sufficient resolution, such as the demonstration of adequate resolution of the cooling layers behind shocks. We discuss an associated refinement criteria for AMR codes.

preprint2009arXivOpen 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.