Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
156 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Advancing parabolic operators in thermodynamic MHD models II: Evaluating a Practical Time Step Limit for Unconditionally Stable Methods (2403.01004v1)

Published 1 Mar 2024 in cs.CE, astro-ph.GA, astro-ph.SR, cs.NA, math.NA, and physics.comp-ph

Abstract: Unconditionally stable time stepping schemes are useful and often practically necessary for advancing parabolic operators in multi-scale systems. However, serious accuracy problems may emerge when taking time steps that far exceed the explicit stability limits. In our previous work, we compared the accuracy and performance of advancing parabolic operators in a thermodynamic MHD model using an implicit method and an explicit super time-stepping (STS) method. We found that while the STS method outperformed the implicit one with overall good results, it was not able to damp oscillatory behavior in the solution efficiently, hindering its practical use. In this follow-up work, we evaluate an easy-to-implement method for selecting a practical time step limit (PTL) for unconditionally stable schemes. This time step is used to `cycle' the operator-split thermal conduction and viscosity parabolic operators. We test the new time step with both an implicit and STS scheme for accuracy, performance, and scaling. We find that, for our test cases here, the PTL dramatically improves the STS solution, matching or improving the solution of the original implicit scheme, while retaining most of its performance and scaling advantages. The PTL shows promise to allow more accurate use of unconditionally stable schemes for parabolic operators and reliable use of STS methods.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (12)
  1. Bui T 1979 Journal of the ACM (JACM) 26 483–493
  2. Meyer C D, Balsara D S and Aslam T D 2014 Journal of Computational Physics 257 594–626
  3. Dawes A 2021 Computers and Fluids 214 104762 ISSN 0045-7930
  4. Simpson M J and Landman K A 2008 Mathematics and Computers in Simulation 77 9–21
  5. Priest E 2014 Magnetohydrodynamics of the Sun (Cambridge University Press)
  6. Galligani E 2012 Advances in Difference Equations 2012 1–21
  7. Johnston C D, Daldoff L K S and Caplan R M 2024 In Preparation
  8. Dufrechou E and Ezzatti P 2018 2018 26th Euromicro International Conference on Parallel, Distributed and Network-based Processing (PDP) pp 196–203
  9. Ma W and Cai X C 2021 The International Journal of High Performance Computing Applications 35 121–135
  10. Meyer C D, Balsara D S and Aslam T D 2012 Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 422 2102–2115
  11. O’Sullivan S 2019 Journal of Computational Physics 388 209–223
  12. Caplan R M, Stulajter M M and Linker J A 2023 2023 IEEE International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium Workshops (IPDPSW) pp 582–590

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.