<html>#2272: GRHydro C2P inconsistency with and without magnetic field evolution
<table style='border-spacing: 1ex 0pt; '>
<tr><td style='text-align:right'> Reporter:</td><td>Lorenzo Sala</td></tr>
<tr><td style='text-align:right'> Status:</td><td>new</td></tr>
<tr><td style='text-align:right'>Milestone:</td><td></td></tr>
<tr><td style='text-align:right'> Version:</td><td>ET_2018_09</td></tr>
<tr><td style='text-align:right'> Type:</td><td>bug</td></tr>
<tr><td style='text-align:right'> Priority:</td><td>major</td></tr>
<tr><td style='text-align:right'>Component:</td><td>EinsteinToolkit thorn</td></tr>
</table>
<p>Comment (by Lorenzo Sala):</p>
<p>Thank you very much for suggesting the paper by Siegel and Moesta, I’m already using it for some code I’m writing, I wanted to point out this issue in GRHydro. Unfortunately, using the non-MHD-C2P instead of the MHD-C2P (modifying schedule.ccl) leads to "EOS Problem in C2P hot!!!" (Con2PrimHot.F90, line 255). I have attached a 3d checkpoint taken after the initial set-up, that can be used with the two parfiles I had already attached.<br />
Thank you for your attention</p>
<p>--<br/>
Ticket URL: <a href='https://bitbucket.org/einsteintoolkit/tickets/issues/2272/grhydro-c2p-inconsistency-with-and-without'>https://bitbucket.org/einsteintoolkit/tickets/issues/2272/grhydro-c2p-inconsistency-with-and-without</a></p>
</html>