[FLASH-USERS] Implementing Jet via

[Alex Robinson - UKRI STFC]

Hello Guys,
     Thanks for this.  So since VELZ should correspond to the azimuthal velocity (v_phi as it were), I also need to ensure that the azimuthal velocity is zero (which will be true in my case) to ensure equivalence between ‘reflect’ and ‘axisymmetric’?

Thanks,
Alex

Dr. A.P.L. Robinson,
Plasma Physics Group Leader,
Central Laser Facility
STFC Rutherford-Appleton Laboratory
Tel. : 01235 77 8368


From: "Sean M. Couch" <couch at pa.msu.edu>
Date: Wednesday, 24 July 2019 at 16:33
To: "Robinson, Alex (STFC,RAL,CLF)" <alex.robinson at stfc.ac.uk>, Klaus Weide <klaus at flash.uchicago.edu>
Cc: flash-users <flash-users at flash.uchicago.edu>
Subject: Re: [FLASH-USERS] Implementing Jet via

Correct me if I’m wrong but I’m not sure that’s 100% correct, Klaus. Even without b-field variables (i.e., pure Hydro) AXISYMMETRIC boundary conditions will flip the sign of VELZ, treating as though it is the rotational velocity for a “2.5D” simulation.

Sean

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sean M. Couch, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Physics and Astronomy
Department of Computational Mathematics, Science, and Engineering
Facility for Rare Isotope Beams
Michigan State University
567 Wilson Rd, 3250 BPS
East Lansing, MI 48824
(517) 884-5035 --- couch at pa.msu.edu --- www.pa.msu.edu/~couch
On Jul 24, 2019, 11:22 AM -0400, Klaus Weide <klaus at flash.uchicago.edu>, wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jul 2019, Alex Robinson - UKRI STFC wrote:


*In a pure hydrodynamic simulation is there any real difference between
reflect and axisymmetric on xl? Can I do what I want to do (given there
are no b-fields) with ‘reflect’ alone?

I did not follow the details of the previous exchange, but want to confirm
that you are correct on this point: In the absense of magnetic field
variables, 'axisymmetic' and 'reflect(ing)' boundary conditions are meant
to be completely equivalent.

Klaus