A comparison of two-fluid and one-fluid dust solvers for dusty, supersonic turbulence

Dust is an important observational tracer of gas in molecular clouds and different dust solvers have led to conflicting conclusions about dust distributions. For this reason, We model 3 and 10 μm dust grains in supersonic, turbulent molecular cloud conditions to compare two different numerical methods solving dust coupled to gas through a drag term. One method models dust and gas as two separate species (two-fluid) and the other the combination of dust and gas as a single mixture (onefluid). Simulations are performed in a 3D periodic box using the Phantom code. The gas probability distributions are consistent with a log-normal distribution for both methods and grain sizes. The dust distributions are different in the two methods, showing discrepancies especially in low densities. The most significant difference between the two methods is in the dust-to-gas ratio distributions. Both methods peak at the mean dust-to-gas ratio of 0.01, but the two-fluid method has wider distributions than the one-fluid method suggesting excess dust concentration in dense filaments. Filaments are where the one-fluid method results are most accurate, but the narrowing of the distribution is also caused by the one-fluid limiter used to maintain the terminal velocity approximation. This artificially makes the mixture more coupled in lowdensity regions. Our overall conclusion is that both methods are viable for the study of dust in molecular clouds, but that the correct method should be chosen based on the Stokes number regime of the calculation to avoid numerical artefacts.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Memorial University Research Repository (Memorial University)
Published
2025-02-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.48336/mxf1-5q86
Primary Topic
Subterranean biodiversity and taxonomy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A comparison of two-fluid and one-fluid dust solvers for dusty, supersonic turbulence

Memorial University Research Repository (Memorial University)
Subterranean biodiversity and taxonomy
article

A comparison of two-fluid and one-fluid dust solvers for dusty, supersonic turbulence

article en

Abstract

Dust is an important observational tracer of gas in molecular clouds and different dust solvers have led to conflicting conclusions about dust distributions. For this reason, We model 3 and 10 μm dust grains in supersonic, turbulent molecular cloud conditions to compare two different numerical methods solving dust coupled to gas through a drag term. One method models dust and gas as two separate species (two-fluid) and the other the combination of dust and gas as a single mixture (onefluid). Simulations are performed in a 3D periodic box using the Phantom code. The gas probability distributions are consistent with a log-normal distribution for both methods and grain sizes. The dust distributions are different in the two methods, showing discrepancies especially in low densities. The most significant difference between the two methods is in the dust-to-gas ratio distributions. Both methods peak at the mean dust-to-gas ratio of 0.01, but the two-fluid method has wider distributions than the one-fluid method suggesting excess dust concentration in dense filaments. Filaments are where the one-fluid method results are most accurate, but the narrowing of the distribution is also caused by the one-fluid limiter used to maintain the terminal velocity approximation. This artificially makes the mixture more coupled in lowdensity regions. Our overall conclusion is that both methods are viable for the study of dust in molecular clouds, but that the correct method should be chosen based on the Stokes number regime of the calculation to avoid numerical artefacts.

Memorial University Research Repository (Memorial University)
Memorial University of Newfoundland (CA)
Life below water
Openalex Percentile: Top 59%
Subterranean biodiversity and taxonomy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.