[Mesa-users] Binaries and wide orbital separation

[Amedeo Romagnolo]

But is there a way beyond the "./re x..." to make it automatic within all
the inlists? For instance, if I wanted to pass from inlist_to_si_burn to
inlist_to_cc using photos, what should I do? Write something in the inlists?

Amedei

On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 at 05:03, Francis Timmes <fxt44 at mac.com> wrote:

> if one sticks with runs from .mod files, one can set the history file name
> for each inlist:
> http://mesa.sourceforge.net/controls_defaults.html#star_history_name
>
> alternatively, if one restarts from photos, then the history file is a
> single file containing all data points. this is my preferred workflow.
>
> fxt
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 4, 2020, at 11:33 AM, Amedeo Romagnolo <amedeoromagnolo at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks, it was actually helpful.
> > Probably my initial setup was too "vanilla" to go beyond the giant phase.
> >
> > I used the default "high-mass" and "black-hole" scenarios and it
> actually went further.
> >
> > My (hopefully) last question here is the related to the "black hole"
> default setting:
> >
> > In the final history.data file I get only the output from the
> "inlist_to_cc" setting, which I believe is the one that leads to the final
> collapse, while the whole part relative to pre-ZAMS and the whole main
> sequence is lost because overwritten in history.data . How can I set things
> up with the multiple inlists in a way that I'm not losing the whole history
> and I can analyse the whole evolution from star_age = 0 yr?
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Amedeo
> >
> > On Mon, 2 Nov 2020, 16:03 Francis Timmes, <fxt44 at mac.com> wrote:
> > i suggest running a single star model, the more massive one,
> > to make sure that works before attempting a binary.
> >
> > fxt
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Nov 2, 2020, at 2:18 AM, Amedeo Romagnolo via Mesa-users <
> mesa-users at lists.mesastar.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello Rob,
> > >
> > > I did as you recommended me, and apparently the code stops because the
> star is going into the giant phase.
> > > I tried to keep my code pretty vanilla, but I am obviously missing
> something pretty important here that I cannot understand yet.
> > >
> > > Do you have any suggestion in this regard?
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Amedeo
> > >
> > > On Mon, 26 Oct 2020 at 21:35, Rob Farmer <r.j.farmer at uva.nl> wrote:
> > > Okay so it's not RLOF that's causing the issue, though the envelope is
> starting to expand.
> > >
> > > Next step, look at the core. Try making a kippenhan diagram. Look at
> what the surface is doing, so try a HR diagram.
> > >
> > > Rob
> > >
> > > On Mon, 26 Oct 2020 at 15:33, Amedeo Romagnolo <
> amedeoromagnolo at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi Rob, you are right, sorry for not showing plots.
> > > I believe it happens during the red giant phase , but I don't get
> which kind of problems it might have encountered...
> > > Here attached the inlists. I tried to keep them as simple as possible.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Amedeo
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, 26 Oct 2020 at 09:48, Rob Farmer <r.j.farmer at uva.nl> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > It's hard to say what is happening without seeing both your inlists
> and any plots you have made to show what is going on.
> > >
> > > When do you reach the min timestep limit? What is your star doing at
> this time? Is it at the very start of RLOF? Or is it because your star has
> encountered problems in the core? Or somewhere else? We can't tell unless
> you make some plots to explore what is going on.
> > >
> > > Rob
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, 26 Oct 2020 at 08:24, Amedeo Romagnolo via Mesa-users <
> mesa-users at lists.mesastar.org> wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I have a problem when simulating the evolution of a binary system.
> > > My goal would be to make the more massive star to go into RLOF, which
> is easily doable when I'm not setting a wide orbital separation (like a
> period in the order of 10^5 yr). In this case, instead, whatever I do, it
> seems that the code stops because a too small timestep has been reached,
> and therefore the star's radius has no time to grow enough to go beyond its
> Roche Lobe radius.
> > >
> > > Do you have any recommendations in this regard?
> > >
> > > Additionally, just another small question: is there an output in MESA
> that shows at the end of the simulation the final total metallicity of the
> simulated star?
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance,
> > >
> > > Amedeo
> > >
> > >       Virus-free. www.avast.com
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > mesa-users at lists.mesastar.org
> > > https://lists.mesastar.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-users
> > >
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.mesastar.org/pipermail/mesa-users/attachments/20201105/22f4bb52/attachment.htm>