Hello Frank, Thank you for suggestions.
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Frank Loeffler knarf@cct.lsu.edu wrote:
Hi Petr,
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 02:42:07PM -0400, Petr Tsatsin wrote:
- I just tried to run some of my "old" parameter files using the new ET
release and I got some strange results. The parameter files which work completely fine for previous releases do not work anymore in a sense that for example for the binary neutron star simulations starting from LORENE initial data hamiltonian constraint blows up and central density become
nan
shortly after the beginning. Thus, I have a question are there any essential changes I need to incorporate in my par files due to the new release or the old par files should in principle work and give same
results
as before?
With these symptoms I would first look at the initial data setup itself. Are all past timelevels setup correctly?
What is the best way to check if past time levels are initialized properly? I use the following parameters for the initial data: InitBase::initial_data_setup_method = "init_some_levels"
ActiveThorns = "Meudon_Bin_NS"
ADMBase::initial_data = "Meudon_Bin_NS" ADMBase::initial_lapse = "Meudon_Bin_NS" ADMBase::initial_shift = "Meudon_Bin_NS" ADMBase::initial_dtlapse = "Meudon_Bin_NS" ADMBase::initial_dtshift = "Meudon_Bin_NS"
Hydrobase::initial_hydro = "Meudon_Bin_NS"
Meudon_Bin_NS::filename = "path/to/file"
In principle, the Lorene thorns should do that, but I could imagine tests not covering this. How does the data differ between an evolution using the old and the new release?
I'm attaching the figure with minimum lapse evolution. it can be seen that lapse drops below 0.2 very quickly (several time steps).
- I'm trying to use ML_CCZ4 for the spacetime evolution and I found the
example par file for BBH evolution in McLachlan/par/CCZ4/bbh_ccz4.par
which
does not work. I figured that this file was for the old implementation of the ccz4 inside ML_BSSN thorn and if I replace ML_BSSN with ML_CCZ4 and comment some of the parameters it works. However, I was wondering if you could provide a working example of such a file with ML_CCZ4?
I am sorry, I cannot directly help with this. I opened a ticket, which might help others do it: https://trac.einsteintoolkit.org/ticket/1387
Thank you. It would be very helpful to have working examples.
Frank
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 12:01:24PM -0400, Petr Tsatsin wrote:
What is the best way to check if past time levels are initialized properly?
The absolute best way is to output them and to look at the data. One way to do that is to use output_all_timelevels.
I'm attaching the figure with minimum lapse evolution. it can be seen that lapse drops below 0.2 very quickly (several time steps).
Yes, something really strange is going on right from the start.
Frank
users@lists.einsteintoolkit.org