Performance of high-order Godunov-type methods in simulations of astrophysical low Mach number flows

Abstract

High-order Godunov methods for gas dynamics have become a standard tool for simulating different classes of astrophysical flows. Their accuracy is mostly determined by the spatial interpolant used to reconstruct the pair of Riemann states at cell interfaces and by the Riemann solver that computes the interface fluxes. In most Godunov-type methods, these two steps can be treated independently, so that many different schemes can in principle be built from the same numerical framework. Because astrophysical simulations often test out the limits of what is feasible with the computational resources available, it is essential to find the scheme that produces the numerical solution with the desired accuracy at the lowest computational cost. However, establishing the best combination of numerical options in a Godunov-type method to be used for simulating a complex hydrodynamic problem is a nontrivial task. In fact, formally more accurate schemes do not always outperform simpler and more diffusive methods, especially if sharp gradients are present in the flow. For this work, we used our fully compressible Seven-League Hydro (SLH) code to test the accuracy of six reconstruction methods and three approximate Riemann solvers on two- and three-dimensional (2D and 3D) problems involving subsonic flows only. We considered Mach numbers in the range from 10−3 to 10−1, which are characteristic of many stellar and geophysical flows. In particular, we considered a well-posed, 2D, Kelvin–Helmholtz instability problem and a 3D turbulent convection zone that excites internal gravity waves in an overlying stable layer. Although the different combinations of numerical methods converge to the same solution with increasing grid resolution for most of the quantities analyzed here, we find that (i) there is a spread of almost four orders of magnitude in computational cost per fixed accuracy between the methods tested in this study, with the most performant method being a combination of a low-dissipation Riemann solver and a sextic reconstruction scheme; (ii) the low-dissipation solver always outperforms conventional Riemann solvers on a fixed grid when the reconstruction scheme is kept the same; (iii) in simulations of turbulent flows, increasing the order of spatial reconstruction reduces the characteristic dissipation length scale achieved on a given grid even if the overall scheme is only second order accurate; (iv) reconstruction methods based on slope-limiting techniques tend to generate artificial, high-frequency acoustic waves during the evolution of the flow; and (v) unlimited reconstruction methods introduce oscillations in the thermal stratification near the convective boundary, where the entropy gradient is steep.