Abstract
This work presents a new implementation of compressible magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) models in the context of the generalised Lagrange multiplier (GLM), combined with source term techniques to retain entropy stability, necessary for thermodynamic consistency. The GLM techniques introduce a scalar field, that is evolved along the MHD quantities, in order to aid in an error control of \(\nabla \cdot {\textbf {B}}\). Our implementation employs second-order HLL-type schemes in finite-volume form and an explicit time discretisation in a parallel framework. We furthermore revise and develop different GLM–MHD and source term approaches as sit-on-top solvers, that can be added to existing MHD applications. It is shown that Galilean invariance is a major factor determining the capacity of these solvers to control \(\nabla \cdot {\textbf {B}}\), as achieved in GLM–MHD systems with Powell source terms. Moreover, it also influences the physical robustness of the solver, in particular its ability to maintain positive pressure during the simulation. In addition, we show that our new and easily reproducible implementation is entropy consistent.
Similar content being viewed by others
Availability of data and materials
Not applied.
References
Assous F, Degond P, Heintze E et al (1993) On a finite-element method for solving the three-dimensional Maxwell equations. J Comput Phys 109(2):222–237. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcph.1993.1214
Boris JP et al (1970) Relativistic plasma simulation-optimization of a hybrid code. In: Proceedings of the conference on the numerical simulation of plasmas, pp 3–67
Brackbill JU, Barnes DC (1980) The effect of nonzero \(\nabla \cdot {\textbf{B} }\) on the numerical solution of the magnetohydrodynamic equations. J Comput Phys 35(3):426–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9991(80)90079-0
Chandrashekar P, Klingenberg C (2016) Entropy stable finite volume scheme for ideal compressible MHD on 2-D Cartesian meshes. SIAM J Numer Anal 54(2):1313–1340. https://doi.org/10.1137/15M1013626
Childs H, Brugger E, Whitlock B et al (2012) VisIt: an end-user tool for visualizing and analyzing very large data. https://doi.org/10.1201/b12985. https://visit.llnl.gov
Dedner A, Kemm F, Kröner D et al (2002) Hyperbolic divergence cleaning for the MHD equations. J Comput Phys 175(2):645–673. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcph.2001.6961
Deiterding R (2003) Parallel adaptive simulation of multi-dimensional detonation structures. PhD thesis, Brandenburgische Technische Universität Cottbus
Deiterding R (2011) Block-structured adaptive mesh refinement—theory, implementation and application. ESAIM Proc 34:97–150. https://doi.org/10.1051/proc/201134002
Dellar PJ (2001) A note on magnetic monopoles and the one-dimensional MHD Riemann problem. J Comput Phys 172(1):392–398. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcph.2001.6815
Derigs D, Winters AR, Gassner GJ et al (2018) Ideal GLM–MHD: about the entropy consistent nine-wave magnetic field divergence diminishing ideal magnetohydrodynamics equations. J Comput Phys 364:420–467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2018.03.002
Domingues MO, Deiterding R, Moreira Lopes M et al (2019) Wavelet-based parallel dynamic mesh adaptation for magnetohydrodynamics in the AMROC framework. Comput Fluids 190:374–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compfluid.2019.06.025
Feng X (2019) Magnetohydrodynamic modeling of the solar corona and heliosphere. Springer Singapore, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-9081-4
Godunov SK (1972) Symmetric form of the equations of magnetohydrodynamics. Numer Methods Mech Contin Medium 1:26–34
Gomes AKF, Domingues MO, Schneider K et al (2015) An adaptive multiresolution method for ideal magnetohydrodynamics using divergence cleaning with parabolic–hyperbolic correction. Appl Numer Math 95:199–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnum.2015.01.007
Harten A (1983) On the symmetric form of systems of conservation laws with entropy. J Comput Phys. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9991(83)90118-3
Harten A, Lax PD, van Leer B (1983) On upstream differencing and Godunov-type schemes for hyperbolic conservation laws. SIAM Rev 25(1):35–61. https://doi.org/10.1137/1025002
Janhunen P (2000) A positive conservative method for magnetohydrodynamics based on HLL and Roe methods. J Comput Phys 160(2):649–661. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcph.2000.6479
LeVeque RJ (2002) Finite volume methods for hyperbolic problems. Cambridge University, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791253
Li C, Feng X, Wei F (2021) An entropy-stable ideal EC-GLM–MHD model for the simulation of the three-dimensional ambient solar wind. Astrophys J Suppl Ser 257(2):24. https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4365/ac16d5
Londrillo P, Del Zanna L (2000) High-order upwind schemes for multidimensional magnetohydrodynamics. Astrophys J 530(1):508. https://doi.org/10.1086/308344
Marder B (1987) A method for incorporating Gauss’ law into electromagnetic PIC codes. J Comput Phys 68(1):48–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9991(87)90043-X
Mignone A, Tzeferacos P (2010) A second-order unsplit Godunov scheme for cell-centered MHD: the CTU-GLM scheme. J Comput Phys 229(6):2117–2138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2009.11.026
Miyoshi T, Kusano K (2005) A multi-state HLL approximate Riemann solver for ideal magnetohydrodynamics. J Comput Phys 208(1):315–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2005.02.017
Moreira Lopes M (2019) Numerical methods applied to space magnetohydrodynamics for high performance computing. PhD thesis, Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais. http://urlib.net/sid.inpe.br/mtc-m21c/2019/04.02.23.51
Moreira Lopes M, Deiterding R, Gomes AKF et al (2018) An ideal compressible magnetohydrodynamic solver with parallel block-structured adaptive mesh refinement. Comput Fluids 173:293–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compfluid.2018.01.032
Moreira Lopes M, Domingues MO, Deiterding R et al (2021) Magnetohydrodynamics adaptive solvers in the AMROC framework for space plasma applications. In: Cartesian CFD Methods for complex applications. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 93–122. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-61761-5_5
Munz CD, Schneider R, Sonnendrücker E et al (1999) Maxwell’s equations when the charge conservation is not satisfied. Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences-Series I-Mathematics 328(5):431–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0764-4442(99)80185-2
Munz CD, Omnes P, Schneider R et al (2000) Divergence correction techniques for Maxwell Solvers based on a hyperbolic model. J Comput Phys 161(2):484–511. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcph.2000.6507
Orszag SA, Tang CM (1979) Small-scale structure of two-dimensional magnetohydrodynamic turbulence. J Fluid Mech 90(1):129–143. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002211207900210X
Powell KG, Roe PL, Linde TJ et al (1999) A solution-adaptive upwind scheme for ideal magnetohydrodynamics. J Comput Phys 154(2):284–309. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcph.1999.6299
Stone JM, Gardiner TA, Teuben P et al (2008) Athena: a new code for astrophysical MHD. Astrophys J Suppl Ser 178(1):137. https://doi.org/10.1086/588755
Tricco TS, Price DJ (2012) Constrained hyperbolic divergence cleaning for smoothed particle magnetohydrodynamics. J Comput Phys 231(21):7214–7236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2012.06.039
Tóth G, Sokolov IV, Gombosi TI et al (2005) Space weather modeling framework: a new tool for the space science community. J Geophys Res Space Phys. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005JA011126
Van Leer B (1997) Towards the ultimate conservative difference scheme. J Comput Phys 135(2):229–248. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcph.1997.5704
Acknowledgements
This work is supported by Grants from CNPq (306985/2021-7, 140563/2020-2, 13429/2022-7 and 400077/2022-1), and FAPESP (2020/13015-0), and takes part of the development of INPE-TAP-SEI 01340.003199/2021-72 and 01340.003098/2021-00. We are grateful to V. E. Menconni (PCI 313429/2022-7) for their helpful computational assistance. The authors thank all free(dom)-software including VisIt (Childs et al. 2012).
Funding
MML received from PNPD-CAP-INPE/CAPES a scholarship, and LSC from CNPq Grant 140563/2020-2, MOD from CNPq Grant 306985/2021-7, and MCTI/PCI-INPE/CNPq 140563/2020-2, 13429/2022-7, 400077/2022-1, and Fapesp 2020/13015-0.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
The authors cooperate equally in the work.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
There is no conflict or competing interests.
Ethics approval
The work followed better human and scientific practices.
Consent to participate
All the participants consent to the work.
Consent for publication
All the participants consent for publication.
Code availability
Contact the authors.
Editorial Policies for: Springer journals and proceedings
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Cassara, L.S., Moreira Lopes, M., Domingues, M.O. et al. On thermodynamic consistency of generalised Lagrange multiplier magnetohydrodynamic solvers. Comp. Appl. Math. 42, 223 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40314-023-02338-2
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40314-023-02338-2