Conversation
…the treatment Temperature floor in CIE case.
Specifically, this commit converted the stellar-wind initializer so that it now uses the new parsing functions. Note, that I wasn't anywhere near as careful as I was while converting the supernova initializer. I literally just made sure the converted code compiled. For context, when I converted the supernova initializer, I took care to ensure that the results were bitwise identical.
…alues and it now makes use of DeviceVector.
While everything compiles just fine, I wasn't as careful as I was when factoring out the SNRateCalc class. For context, when I factored out the SNRateCalc class, I took care to ensure that there were no alterations to any of the outputs. In contrast, for the SWRateCalc class I didn't actually check any runs that employ stellar winds (although they definitely do compile correctly).
constructors for SNRateCalc and SWRateCalc.
…ly the scope kept creeping in this commit.
…olidated with Cluster_Feedback_Kernel
mabruzzo
force-pushed
the
s99_f-feedback
branch
from
087542c to
0c2abef
Compare
| container: | ||
| #- {name: "CUDA", link: "docker://chollahydro/cholla:cuda_github"} | ||
| - {name: "HIP", link: "docker://chollahydro/cholla:rocm_github"} | ||
| - {name: "HIP", link: "ghcr.io/cholla-hydro/cholla-rocm:sha-a08bd2c"} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this intentional? For some reason I thought this had been updated elsewhere.
| @@ -1 +1 @@ | |||
| MPI_GPU = -DMPI_GPU | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could you add a brief comment to the top line of this makefile (and the starblast) just stating the basic purpose (like in the hydro and mhd files)?
docs/sphinx/Physics/DiskModel.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| ### Primer on Radiative Cooling | ||
|
|
||
| At the time of writing, simulations must always be initialized with CIE cooling (cooling shuts off below 1e4 K) in order to prevent immediate of the gas disk. The current strategy for using other cooling mechanisms. After running the simulation long enough to start driving turbulence in the gas disk (commonly a few 10s of Myr), you can then restart the simulation with a different cooling recipe. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
typo: "immediate collapse of the..."
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also the following sentence is not complete.
docs/sphinx/Physics/DiskModel.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| ### Primer on Feedback and Star Formation: | ||
|
|
||
| In a simulation without particles, we feedback is implemented with a CGOLs like mechanism. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This option is not actually included in this version of cholla, right? My recollection is that the CGOLS feedback code has only ever existed in branches that have not been merged into this repo, in which case, maybe we should not mention it here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes. I think so. (It wasn't clear to me back when I first wrote these docs)
| ::: | ||
|
|
||
| At the time of writing, we always define {math}`\Phi_{\rm stars,old}(R,z)=\Phi_{\rm MN}(R,z; M_{\rm stars}, R_{\rm stars}, z_{\rm stars})`, where {math}`R` & {math}`z` are cylindrical coordinates, {math}`R_{\rm stars}` & {math}`z_{\rm stars}` are the scale radius/height, and {math}`M_{\rm stars}` is the mass of the disk. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would it be possible in this section to give a brief description of how these parameters are set? I.e. are they hardcoded in the disk model, are they runtime parameters...?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Its hardcoded (I added a description)
docs/sphinx/Physics/DiskModel.md
Outdated
| ::: | ||
|
|
||
| In the above equation | ||
| - Consequently, we define . At the time of writing, this **never** includes contributions from self-gravity. (this definition of self gravity means that we can **NEVER** achieve perfect ) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Couple missing phrases.
| ::: | ||
|
|
||
| At startup we sample this PDF to determine the {math}`r_{\rm cyl}` at which all particles are expected to form. We create star-particles at these radii and distribute the "turn-on times" from a time a little before we start the simulation until the time specified by the `tout` parameter. We use Poisson sampling to distribute these "turn-on times," to target a particular SFR. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Similar comment here about how the SFR is set. Is this a runtime parameter, or hardcoded somewhere?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Its hardcoded. I added a brief description
| The main alternative that we could revisit is implementing the method prescriptions as atomic operations. If we want to adopt this solution in the future, there are a number of important considerations that need to be addressed in the future. These details are highlighted under the collapsible tag | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| #### ASIDE: Important considerations for atomic "conflict-resolution" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this supposed to be collapsible?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good catch. The section was originally collapsible on the GitHub wiki.
With the switch to sphinx, we lost the ability to do that (so I just discuss things in the next subsection). We could probably find a sphinx extension to do that (but it may not be worth doing).
2 participants
This should be reviewed after #418 and #420 are merged
This overhauls stellar feedback and makes a few tweaks to the gravity solver to make it possible to run with particles so that the particles feel self-gravity and the fluid only feels a static potential.