On 24 May 2011, at 17:50, Erik Schnetter wrote:
On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 2:11 AM, Ian Hinder ian.hinder@aei.mpg.de wrote:
On 23 May 2011, at 23:49, Bruno Coutinho Mundim wrote:
- Bruno still has troubles with RotatingSymmetry180 when using the
development version of ET for the BBH example (parfile is in subversion)
- will try running without RotatingSymmetry180
Just got the results: no problem without RotatingSymmetry180.
OK good, so we know where the problem is.
- convergence in norms is bad, somewhat better in 1D data for a short
time after simulation startup
A closer look into the initial data revealed that both the l2-norm of the hamiltonian constraint and its value along the x-axis converge to the expected order, 4th order. This convergence is not observed anymore in the very next coarse step when the comparison is done again.
The time prolongation is only 3rd order accurate so I wouldn't expect convergence at 4th order.
Time prolongation is second order accurate.
As I understand it, the three-point interpolation (from the three timelevels) is locally 3rd order accurate, but when you add up T/dt of them to get to a fixed time, you reduce the order to 2. I tend to get confused about this, but do we agree on this?