Paper detail

The influence of frequency-dependent radiative transfer on the structures of radiative shocks

Radiative shocks are shocks in a gas where the radiative energy and flux coming from the very hot post-shock material are non-negligible in the shock's total energy budget, and are often large enough to heat the material ahead of the shock. Many simulations of radiative shocks, both in the contexts of astrophysics and laboratory experiments, use a grey treatment of radiative transfer coupled to the hydrodynamics. However, the opacities of the gas show large variations as a function of frequency and this needs to be taken into account if one wishes to reproduce the relevant physics. We have performed radiation hydrodynamics simulations of radiative shocks in Ar using multigroup (frequency dependent) radiative transfer with the HERACLES code. The opacities were taken from the ODALISC database. We show the influence of the number of frequency groups used on the dynamics and morphologies of subcritical and supercritical radiative shocks in Ar gas, and in particular on the extent of the radiative precursor. We find that simulations with even a low number of groups show significant differences compared to single-group (grey) simulations, and that in order to correctly model such shocks, a minimum number of groups is required. Results appear to eventually converge as the number of groups increases above 50. We were also able to resolve in our simulations of supercritical shocks the adaptation zones which connect the cooling layer to the final post-shock state and the precursor. Inside these adaptation zones, we find that the radiative flux just ahead of the shock in one or several high-opacity groups can heat the gas to a temperature higher than the post-shock temperature. Through the use of Hugoniot curves, we have checked the consistency of our radiation hydrodynamics scheme by showing that conservation of mass, momentum and energy (including radiative flux) holds. ABRIDGED.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 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.