Meeting Update 0626

I have ran the low res version of the poloidal contained cases as discussed to determine the beta to be used in the "strong" cases. From the 4 simulations (lower res only the first 0.5 crushing times) of beta = 0.25, 0.5 aligned and perpendicular setups, it seems the beta = 0.25 is viable although you can observe obvious distortions happening at the beginning. Since we are more interested in the behavior after 1 crushing time, the initial distortion of beta = 0.25 should be no big deal. I then went on to run the cases needed for the paper on bluegene, with beta = 0.25 toroidal perpendicular, beta = 1 toroidal perpendicular, beta = 0.25 poloidal aligned and perpendicular. The first one is done (see result below), the second one is at 20%, the last two should be finished by Friday.
​http://www.pas.rochester.edu/~shuleli/paperpics_clump1/Artical_File.pdf

I restructured the discussion part of the paper to have subsections with different beta. It seems too much with more than 10 3D figures and the coding is a bit confusing:

I still have queued runs of 3D clumps with more progressive beta values:
beta = 0.4, beta = 0.5, beta = 0.6.
Although we may not use these runs in the current paper, they maybe useful if we want to investigate the role of beta more thoroughly in the future (another paper probably): for the toroidal case, there seems to be a "threshold" beta around 0.6 that determines whether the clump collapse or open up, even in the perpendicular cases.

I've picked up the resistive clump runs from earlier this year. One problem we saw is that there are artificial effect at the head of the clump where the field is piling up in the B_y case. Currently looking into whether the subcycling is working correctly or not by comparing the result with a non-subcycled version.

Comments

No comments.