Hi, I made a parfile for the test just by modifying static_tov.par to induce collpase. Please find the attached files. The figure shows manifest difference between ppm+v vs. ppm+Wv reconstruction. For the case of WENO+Ideal gas EOS, the two test lines show nice agreement.
Cheers, Hee Il 2014-12-05 21:59 GMT+09:00 Roland Haas <[email protected]>: > Hello Hee Il, > > > Yes, the routines of PPM for "poly" are highly suspicious. I can't make > > comparisons for the different numbers but the star didn't rotate very > fast. > > The evolution pattern (e.g. rho.max) was different, resulting in a black > > hole with an wrong mass, contrary to the case with the velocity > > reconstruction. I'm sorry I can't continue the test at the moment but > > MP5+Ideal EOS was also good without showing any difference. > Ok. Would it be at all possible that you attach the actual parameter > file that you used? it would be fine to remove analysis etc thorns but > very nice if we had a parameter file that demonstrated the issue, so > that test runs are possible. > > Yours, > Roland > > -- > My email is as private as my paper mail. I therefore support encrypting > and signing email messages. Get my PGP key from http://keys.gnupg.net. > >
tov_test.par
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.einsteintoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/users
