4.7 Article

A GENERAL HYBRID RADIATION TRANSPORT SCHEME FOR STAR FORMATION SIMULATIONS ON AN ADAPTIVE GRID

期刊

ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL
卷 797, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637X/797/1/4

关键词

hydrodynamics; methods: numerical; radiative transfer

资金

  1. National Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada
  2. Max Planck Research Group Star Formation throughout the Milky Way Galaxy at the Max Planck Institute for Astronomy
  3. NSERC Discovery Grant
  4. Forschungskredit of the University of Zurich [FK-13-112]
  5. Shared Hierarchical Academic Research Computing Network
  6. Compute/Calcul Canada
  7. KITP
  8. Santa Barbara
  9. National Science Foundation [NSF PHY11-25915]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Radiation feedback plays a crucial role in the process of star formation. In order to simulate the thermodynamic evolution of disks, filaments, and the molecular gas surrounding clusters of young stars, we require an efficient and accurate method for solving the radiation transfer problem. We describe the implementation of a hybrid radiation transport scheme in the adaptive grid-based flash general magnetohydrodyanmics code. The hybrid scheme splits the radiative transport problem into a raytracing step and a diffusion step. The raytracer captures the first absorption event, as stars irradiate their environments, while the evolution of the diffuse component of the radiation field is handled by a flux-limited diffusion solver. We demonstrate the accuracy of our method through a variety of benchmark tests including the irradiation of a static disk, subcritical and supercritical radiative shocks, and thermal energy equilibration. We also demonstrate the capability of our method for casting shadows and calculating gas and dust temperatures in the presence of multiple stellar sources. Our method enables radiation-hydrodynamic studies of young stellar objects, protostellar disks, and clustered star formation in magnetized, filamentary environments.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据