Open mikekryjak opened 1 year ago
Does the calculation your sheath boundary condition for energy flux use the definition of 'conduction'? It might need changing to be consistent with your new conduction model?
Hi @johnomotani, the conduction model prevents any heat flux through the boundary as this is done through a sink created in sheath_boundary
. As far as I can tell, simple_conduction
has the same bits in it as the model in evolve_pressure
...
To your point though, it's probably a good idea to see what happens to sheath heat flux when I change the model, maybe there are more clues hiding there.
I think this PR makes simple_conduction
redundant
https://github.com/bendudson/hermes-3/pull/195
SOLEDGE2D has a simple conduction model where only ee and ii collisions are used for the electron and ion conductivity, respectively. Hermes-3 includes all of the collisions of a given species by default when the
thermal_conduction
flag is enabled inevolve_pressure
. This includes charge exchange as well as any collisions enabled in thecollisions
component (by default, it has ee, ii, ie, nn, en and in enabled, so all of them).I have disabled the flag
thermal_conduction
and added a new species-level componentsimple_conduction
for both the ions and the electrons. This outright crashed my full and low res cases (CVODE -4 flag, meaning solver failure).I tested it in 1D-recycling, and I did get it to run. However, I am seeing a slowdown of ~200x. I've only got three timesteps so far, and each one has taken longer than the previous one. The results appear to move in the right direction, i.e. improve conduction due to a reduction in collisions considered, both in the ions and the electrons:
However, upon inspecting the target I found a serious anomaly in the electron pressure:
This is also visible in the same way in the ion pressure as well as ion momentum and points to something being wrong in the boundary.
Here is the input file I used (just 1D-recycling with the above changes): input_file.zip