arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
北美退伍军人节(Veterans Day),12 日无更新
arXiv 0905.2920astro-ph.CO
收藏

宇宙学辐射转移比较计划II:辐射-流体动力学试验

Cosmological Radiative Transfer Comparison Project II: The Radiation-Hydrodynamic Tests

Ilian T. Iliev, Daniel Whalen, Garrelt Mellema, Kyungjin Ahn, Sunghye Baek, Nickolay Y. Gnedin, Andrey V. Kravtsov, Michael Norman, Milan Raicevic, Daniel R. Re… 展开作者

Ilian T. Iliev, Daniel Whalen, Garrelt Mellema, Kyungjin Ahn, Sunghye Baek, Nickolay Y. Gnedin, Andrey V. Kravtsov, Michael Norman, Milan Raicevic, Daniel R. Reynolds, Daisuke Sato, Paul R. Shapiro, Benoit Semelin, Joseph Smidt, Hajime Susa, Tom Theuns, Masayuki Umemura

摘要:

发展能够自洽地跟踪气体动力学和辐射转移的辐射流体动力学方法是解决数值天体物理中许多问题的关键。这样的流体流动是非常复杂的,甚至很少允许近似的分析解决方案,对数字代码可以测试。另一种验证程序是对常见问题的不同方法进行比较,以评估结果的稳健性并确定方法的有效性范围。以前,我们提出了这样一个比较的一组纯辐射转移测试(即固定的,非发展的密度场)。本文是“宇宙学辐射转移(RT)比较计划”的第二篇论文,我们对三个相对简单的天体物理流体力学问题:(5)均匀介质中H Ⅱ区的展开;(6)在1/r^2密度分布中的电离前沿(I-前沿),具有扁平的核心;(7)均匀致密团块的光蒸发。结果表明,不同的方法之间的广泛协议,没有大的失败,表明参与代码已经达到了一定的成熟度和可靠性水平。然而,许多细节仍然存在差异,实际上每一个代码都显示出一些缺陷,并在某个方面与大多数结果不一致。这强调了一个事实,即没有一种方法是通用的,所有方法都需要仔细测试与手头的具体问题最相关的特定功能。

英文摘要:

The development of radiation hydrodynamical methods that are able to follow gas dynamics and radiative transfer self-consistently is key to the solution of many problems in numerical astrophysics. Such fluid flows are highly complex, rarely allowing even for approximate analytical solutions against which numerical codes can be tested. An alternative validation procedure is to compare different methods against each other on common problems, in order to assess the robustness of the results and establish a range of validity for the methods. Previously, we presented such a comparison for a set of pure radiative transfer tests (i.e. for fixed, non-evolving density fields). This is the second paper of the Cosmological Radiative Transfer (RT) Comparison Project, in which we compare 9 independent RT codes directly coupled to gasdynamics on 3 relatively simple astrophysical hydrodynamics problems: (5) the expansion of an H II region in a uniform medium; (6) an ionization front (I-front) in a 1/r^2 density profile with a flat core, and (7), the photoevaporation of a uniform dense clump. Results show a broad agreement between the different methods and no big failures, indicating that the participating codes have reached a certain level of maturity and reliability. However, many details still do differ, and virtually every code has showed some shortcomings and has disagreed, in one respect or another, with the majority of the results. This underscores the fact that no method is universal and all require careful testing of the particular features which are most relevant to the specific problem at hand.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑