[mesa-users] Problems with Rochelobe overflow

Hannah Brinkman brinkmanhe at gmail.com
Mon Jun 13 06:10:20 EDT 2016

I checked the limitation on the timestep for the binary system, but it
gives me simply max increase, which has no counterpart in the control
files. This leaves me clueless on what to increase to get a bigger timestep
in the final phases of the evolution. Any ideas how to proceed?
The timesteps for the single star go down slowly from about a year to 10^-5
years at the very end of the evolution. This seems indeed to be the
post-carbon burning state. It reaches this point in only 2000 timesteps and
uses the other 8000 to get barely any further in the evolution. The
limiting factor for the single star is dX_nuc_drop. But since these stars
don't have Roche-lobe overflow that changes the mass drastically, I think I
will be able to predict the final state of the star based on the core just
after carbon-burning.
With kind regards,

2016-06-10 17:22 GMT+02:00 Hannah Brinkman <brinkmanhe at gmail.com>:

> Thanks for giving me some advice! At the moment I have no acces to my
> data, so I will look at these suggestions on Monday.
> With kind regards,
> Hannah
> 2016-06-10 16:33 GMT+02:00 Robert Farmer <rjfarmer at asu.edu>:
>> What happens to the timestep if you run your primary star inlist as a
>> single star? Post carbon burning can be difficult without the added
>> complications of mass transfer.
>> Also in your terminal output what's limiting the timestep? This will give
>> you a clue as to what to change to get bigger timestep. Your looking for
>> dt_limit in the output. Then search the binary and single star
>> control.defaults file to match that limit to a inlist parameter.
>> Rob
>> Dear all,
>> for my masterthesis I am using MESA to evolve binary systems in search
>> for electron capture supernovae in binary systems. However, I am
>> experiencing some troubles with the Rochelobe overflow, especially later in
>> the evolution. This limits my ability to predict if a star will become a
>> supernova or not since this depends a lot on the final mass of the star. If
>> there is a phase of Rochelobe overflow at the end of the run and this
>> removes enough mass, the supernova can be prohibited.
>> The problem is that at the end of the simulation run, after
>> carbon-burning, the timesteps become very small, as in seconds, and it
>> seems that the code is a bit stuck. When checking the radius and radius of
>> the Rochelobe, this seems to be the same moment as a second phase of
>> Rochelobe overflow begins.
>> Is there a way to get the binary system through this second Rochelobe
>> overflow more smoothly?
>> I have attached the inlist-files I am using. I use MESA-version 8118.
>> With kind regards,
>> Hannah Brinkman
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> What NetFlow Analyzer can do for you? Monitors network bandwidth and
>> traffic
>> patterns at an interface-level. Reveals which users, apps, and protocols
>> are
>> consuming the most bandwidth. Provides multi-vendor support for NetFlow,
>> J-Flow, sFlow and other flows. Make informed decisions using capacity
>> planning reports.
>> https://ad.doubleclick.net/ddm/clk/305295220;132659582;e
>> _______________________________________________
>> mesa-users mailing list
>> mesa-users at lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mesa-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.mesastar.org/pipermail/mesa-users/attachments/20160613/d4fc9f5d/attachment.html>

More information about the Mesa-users mailing list