### Added cautionary tale about non-ideal equations of state and weighted SPH schemes

parent 418f31a2
 ... @@ -255,8 +255,36 @@ where, as above, the last two updated quantities are obtained using ... @@ -255,8 +255,36 @@ where, as above, the last two updated quantities are obtained using the pre-defined equation of state. Note that the entropic function $A_i$ the pre-defined equation of state. Note that the entropic function $A_i$ itself is \emph{not} updated. itself is \emph{not} updated. \subsection{Weighted-Pressure SPH Validity} A new class of Lagrangian SPH methods were introduced to the astrophysical community by \citet{Hopkins2013} and \citet{Saitoh2013}. Two of these methods, Pressure-Entropy (used in the original ANARCHY implementation in EAGLE) and Pressure-Energy, are implemented for use in \swift{}. Before considering the use of these methods, though, it is important to pause for a moment and consider where it is valid to use them in a cosmological context. These methods (as implemented in \swift{}) are only valid for cases that use an \emph{ideal gas equation of state}, i.e. one in which \begin{equation} P = (\gamma - 1) u \rho \propto \rho. \nonumber \end{equation} Implementations that differ from this, such as the original ANARCHY scheme in EAGLE, may have some problems with energy conservation \cite[see][]{Hosono2013} and other properties as at their core they assume that pressure is proportional to the local energy density, i.e. $P \propto \rho u$. This is most easily shown in Pressure-Energy SPH where the weighted pressure $\bar{P}$ is written as \begin{equation} \bar{P} = \sum_j \frac{P_j}{\rho_j} W_{ij} = \sum_j m_j (\gamma - 1) u_j W_{ij}, \end{equation} and the right-hand side is what is actually calculated using the scheme. It is clear that this does not give a valid weighted pressure for any scheme using a non-ideal equation of state. Fortunately, there is a general prescription for including non-ideal equations of state in the P-X formalisms, but this is yet to be implemented in \swift{} and requires an extra density loop. Attempting to use these weighted schemes with a non-ideal equation of state will lead to an incorrect calculation of both the pressure and the equation fo motion. How incorrect this estimate is, however, remains to be seen. %####################################################################################################### %##################################################################################################### \subsection{Pressure-Entropy SPH} \subsection{Pressure-Entropy SPH} \label{sec:sph:pe} \label{sec:sph:pe} ... @@ -430,15 +458,43 @@ evolved. Following \cite{Hopkins2013}, this is calculated as ... @@ -430,15 +458,43 @@ evolved. Following \cite{Hopkins2013}, this is calculated as \nabla_i W_{ij}(h_i)~. \nabla_i W_{ij}(h_i)~. \label{eq:sph:pu:dudt} \label{eq:sph:pu:dudt} \end{align} \end{align} The sound-speed in P-U requires some consideration. To see what the `correct' sound-speed is, it is worth looking at the equation of motion (Equation \ref{eq:sph:pu:eom}) in contrast with that of the EoM for Density-Energy SPH (Equation \ref{eq:sph:minimal:dv_dt}) to see what terms are applicable. For Density-Energy SPH, we see that \begin{align} \frac{\mathrm{d}\mathbf{v}_i}{\mathrm{d} t} \sim \frac{c_{s, i}}{\rho_i} \nabla_i W_{ij}, \nonumber \end{align} and for Pressure-Energy SPH \begin{align} \frac{\mathrm{d}\mathbf{v}_i}{\mathrm{d} t} \sim (\gamma - 1)^2 \frac{u_i u_j}{\bar{P}_i} \nabla_i W_{ij}. \nonumber \end{align} From this it is reasonable to assume that the sound-speed, i.e. the speed at which information propagates in the system through pressure waves, is given by the expression \begin{align} c_{s, i} = (\gamma - 1) u_i \sqrt{\gamma \frac{\rho_i}{\bar{P_i}}}. \label{eq:sph:pu:soundspeed} \end{align} This expression is dimensionally consistent with a sound-speed, and includes the gas density information (through $\rho$), traditionally used for sound-speeds, \emph{and} the information from the equation of motion (through $\bar{P}$). This sound-speed is used in the artificial viscosity scheme and in the calculation of the signal velocity, as was shown in the section for \MinimalSPH. \subsubsection{Time integration} \subsubsection{Time integration} Time integration follows exactly the same scheme as \MinimalSPH. Time integration follows exactly the same scheme as \MinimalSPH. \subsubsection{Particle properties prediction} \subsubsection{Particle properties prediction} The prediciton of particle properties follows exactly the same scheme as The prediciton of particle properties follows exactly the same scheme as \MinimalSPH. \MinimalSPH. \TODO: P-U also includes some efforts to drift the smoothed pressure. It is unclear at the moment what form that should take. ... ...
 ... @@ -114,3 +114,43 @@ archivePrefix = "arXiv", ... @@ -114,3 +114,43 @@ archivePrefix = "arXiv", adsurl = {http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.425.1068D}, adsurl = {http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012MNRAS.425.1068D}, adsnote = {Provided by the SAO/NASA Astrophysics Data System} adsnote = {Provided by the SAO/NASA Astrophysics Data System} } } @article{Saitoh2013, abstract = {In the standard formulation of the smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH), it is assumed that the local density distribution is differentiable. This assumption is used to derive the spatial derivatives of other quantities. However, this assumption breaks down at the contact discontinuity, which appears often in simulations of astronomical objects. At the contact discontinuity, the density of the low-density side is overestimated while that of the high-density side is underestimated. As a result, the pressure of the low (high) density side is over (under) estimated. Thus, unphysical repulsive force appears at the contact discontinuity, resulting in the effective surface tension. This effective surface tension suppresses instabilities such as the Kelvin-Helmholtz and Rayleigh-Taylor instabilities. In this paper, we present a new formulation of SPH, which does not require the differentiability of density and thus can handle contact discontinuity without numerical problems. The results of standard tests such as the shock tube, Kelvin-Helmholtz and Rayleigh-Taylor instabilities, and the blob tests are all very favorable to our new formulation. We conclude that our new formulation solved practically all known difficulties of the standard SPH, without introducing additional numerical diffusion or breaking the exact force symmetry or energy conservation.}, archivePrefix = {arXiv}, arxivId = {1202.4277}, author = {Saitoh, Takayuki R. and Makino, Junichiro}, doi = {10.1088/0004-637X/768/1/44}, eprint = {1202.4277}, file = {:Users/josh/Downloads/Saitoh{\_}2013{\_}ApJ{\_}768{\_}44.pdf:pdf}, isbn = {0004-637X$\backslash$r1538-4357}, issn = {15384357}, journal = {Astrophysical Journal}, keywords = {galaxies: ISM,galaxies: evolution,methods: numerical}, number = {1}, title = {{A density-independent formulation of smoothed particle hydrodynamics}}, volume = {768}, year = {2013} } @article{Hosono2013, abstract = {The smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) method is a useful numerical tool for the study of a variety of astrophysical and planetlogical problems. However, it turned out that the standard SPH algorithm has problems in dealing with hydrodynamical instabilities. This problem is due to the assumption that the local density distribution is differentiable. In order to solve this problem, a new SPH formulation, which does not require the differentiability of the density, have been proposed. This new SPH method improved the treatment of hydrodynamical instabilities. This method, however, is applicable only to the equation of state (EOS) of the ideal gas. In this paper, we describe how to extend the new SPH method to non-ideal EOS. We present the results of various standard numerical tests for non-ideal EOS. Our new method works well for non-ideal EOS. We conclude that our new SPH can handle hydrodynamical instabilities for an arbitrary EOS and that it is an attractive alternative to the standard SPH.}, archivePrefix = {arXiv}, arxivId = {1307.0916}, author = {Hosono, Natsuki and Saitoh, Takayuki R. and Makino, Junichiro}, doi = {10.1093/pasj/65.5.108}, eprint = {1307.0916}, file = {:Users/josh/Downloads/pasj65-0108.pdf:pdf}, issn = {0004-6264}, keywords = {hydrodynamics,methods,numerical}, number = {May}, pages = {1--11}, title = {{Density Independent Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics for Non-Ideal Equation of State}}, url = {http://arxiv.org/abs/1307.0916{\%}0Ahttp://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pasj/65.5.108}, year = {2013} }
Supports Markdown
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment