Fundamental differences between SPH and grid methods
Oscar Agertz, Ben Moore, Joachim Stadel, Doug Potter, Francesco Miniati, Justin Read, Lucio Mayer, Artur Gawryszczak, Andrey Kravtsov, Joe Monaghan, Ake Nordlund, Frazer Pearce, Vincent Quilis, Douglas Rudd, Volker Springel, James Stone, Elizabeth Tasker, Romain Teyssier, James Wadsley, Rolf Walder
Abstract
We have carried out a hydrodynamical code comparison study of interacting multiphase fluids. The two commonly used techniques of grid and smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) show striking differences in their ability to model processes that are fundamentally important across many areas of astrophysics. Whilst Eulerian grid based methods are able to resolve and treat important dynamical instabilities, such as Kelvin-Helmholtz or Rayleigh-Taylor, these processes are poorly or not at all resolved by existing SPH techniques. We show that the reason for this is that SPH, at least in its standard implementation, introduces spurious pressure forces on particles in regions where there are steep density gradients. This results in a boundary gap of the size of the SPH smoothing kernel over which information is not transferred.
Create a lesson
Related papers
On binary pulsars and the force of gravity
Davor Palle
Tidal torques. A critical review of some techniques
Michael Efroimsky, James G. Williams
Dynamics of a Spherical Accretion Shock with Neutrino Heating and Alpha-Particle Recombination
Rodrigo Fernández, Christopher Thompson
Asymptotically FRW black holes
J. T. Firouzjaee, Reza Mansouri
Reaction of Accretion Disks to Abrupt Mass Loss During Binary Black Hole Merger
Sean M. O'Neill, M. Coleman Miller, Tamara Bogdanovic et al.
A Gamma-Ray Burst/Pulsar for Cosmic-Ray Positrons with a Dark Matter-like Spectrum
Kunihito Ioka