User Tools

Site Tools


tests:collision:gc1_archive

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
tests:collision:gc1_archive [2014/10/22 15:42]
v.henault-brunet
tests:collision:gc1_archive [2015/09/01 10:33] (current)
v.henault-brunet
Line 1: Line 1:
-====== ​Archived from GC1 workshop ​======+====== ​GC I ======
  
-==== Challenge 1: Equal mass clusters in a tidal field =====+===== Challenge 1: Equal mass clusters in a tidal field =====
  
 ^ ^ ^  All Stars ^^^^ 1000 stars^^^^ ^ ^ ^  All Stars ^^^^ 1000 stars^^^^
Line 24: Line 24:
 |  | Anisotropic Michie King   | {{:​data:​t1c2.png?​250}} |  ​ |  | Anisotropic Michie King   | {{:​data:​t1c2.png?​250}} |  ​
 |3 | Isotropic King vs $f_\nu$ |   ​{{:​data:​collisional_Ch1_3.png?​250}}| ​ |3 | Isotropic King vs $f_\nu$ |   ​{{:​data:​collisional_Ch1_3.png?​250}}| ​
-|  | Anisotropic Michie King   | {{:​data:​t1c3.png?​250}} |   +|  | Anisotropic Michie King   | {{:​data:​t1c3.png?​250}} |     
-   +
-   +
-   +
-   +
-  ​+
   ​   ​
 ===== Challenge 2: Isolated models with stellar evolution ===== ===== Challenge 2: Isolated models with stellar evolution =====
Line 86: Line 82:
 |  | Parametric Jeans          |   ​| ​          ​| ​   |           ​| ​ |  | Parametric Jeans          |   ​| ​          ​| ​   |           ​| ​
 |  | Discrete Jeans            |   ​| ​          ​| ​   |           ​| ​ |  | Discrete Jeans            |   ​| ​          ​| ​   |           ​| ​
 +
 +
 +
 +===== Challenge 3: Clusters in tidal fields with stellar evolution =====
 +(Simulations ran and kindly made available by Holger Baumgardt)\\
 +
 +Here we consider 2 clusters which are slightly more realistic:
 +
 +  - IC: King (1966) W_0 = 5 model, N = 131072, Kroupa (2001) mass function between 0.1-15 Msun (no black-holes).
 +  - No primordial binaries, no central black hole, circular orbit in logarithmic halo with V = 220 km/s.
 +  - Z = 0.001
 +  - Stellar evolution and mass-loss according to Hurley et al. (2000, 2002)
 +  - Two Galactocentric radii: 8.5 kpc and 15 kpc.
 +
 +
 +Below are 2 snapshots at an age of roughly 10 Myr, 100 Myr, 1Gyr and 12 Gyr. The columns are the same as in Challenge 2.
 +
 +  - {{:​data:​W05_N131K_RG8.5_FEH-0.0_T10.gz}} UPDATED! Thursday August 22
 +  - {{:​data:​W05_N131K_RG8.5_FEH-0.0_T100.gz}} UPDATED! Thursday August 22
 +  - {{:​data:​W05_N131K_RG8.5_FEH-0.0_T1000.gz}} UPDATED! Thursday August 22
 +  - {{:​W05_N131K_RG8.5_FEH-0.0_T12000.gz}}
 +  - {{:​data:​W05-N131K_RG15_FEH-0.0.T10.gz}} NEW! Tuesday August 20
 +  - {{:​data:​W05-N131K_RG15_FEH-0.0.T100.gz}} NEW! Tuesday August 20
 +  - {{:​data:​W05-N131K_RG15_FEH-0.0.T1000.gz}} NEW! Tuesday August 20
 +  - {{:​W05_N131K_RG15_FEH-0.0_T12000.gz}}
 +
 +Questions are the same as in Challenge 2, and in addition:
 +  - Is the presence of the tidal field affecting the velocity anisotropy in the outer parts?
 +  - Can the mass segregation be reproduced by multi-mass King models? ​
 +
 + ​Example of the velocity dispersion difference of different mass components:
 +{{:​data:​sig2ratio.png?​250}}
 +
 +Different models to fit:
 +  - $f_\nu$
 +  - Multi-mass King
 +  - Discrete "Jeans like" modelling
 +  - DF fitting (Mark W?)
 +
 +==== Results: ====
 +Using all stars:
 +^ ^ ^ ^  All Stars ^^^^ 1000 stars^^^^
 +^ Cluster ^ Snapshot ^ Method ​            ​^$M$^$r_{\rm c}$^$r_{\rm h}$^$r_{\rm J}$ ^ $M$^$r_{\rm c}$^$r_{\rm h}$^$r_{\rm J}$^
 +|1 | 1 | Isotropic King   ​| ​ |         | |           ​| ​
 +|  | 1 | Multimass Michie King      |         | |   ​| ​          ​|  ​
 +|  | 1 | $f_\nu$ ​             |  |           | |           ​| ​
 +|  | 1 | Discrete modelling ​       |   ​| ​          ​| ​          ​| ​          ​| ​
 +|1 | 2 | Isotropic King   ​| ​ |         | |           ​| ​
 +|  | 2 | Multimass Michie King      |         | |   ​| ​          ​|  ​
 +|  | 2 | $f_\nu$ ​             |  |           | |           ​| ​
 +|  | 2 | Discrete modelling ​       |   ​| ​          ​| ​          ​| ​          ​| ​
 +|1 | 3 | Isotropic King   ​| ​ |         | |           ​| ​
 +|  | 3 | Multimass Michie King      |         | |   ​| ​          ​|  ​
 +|  | 3 | $f_\nu$ ​             |  |           | |           ​| ​
 +|  | 3 | Discrete modelling ​       |   ​| ​          ​| ​          ​| ​          ​| ​
 +|1 | 4 | Isotropic King   ​| ​ |         | |           ​| ​
 +|  | 4 | Multimass Michie King | $2.118$ |  | $11.353$ |  |  ​
 +|  | 4 | $f_\nu$ ​             |  |           | |           ​| ​
 +|  | 4 | Discrete modelling ​       |   ​| ​          ​| ​          ​| ​          ​| ​
 +|2 | 1 | Isotropic King   ​| ​ |         | |           ​| ​
 +|  | 1 | Multimass Michie King      |         | |   ​| ​          ​|  ​
 +|  | 1 | $f_\nu$ ​             |  |           | |           ​| ​
 +|  | 1 | Discrete modelling ​       |   ​| ​          ​| ​          ​| ​          ​| ​
 +|2 | 2 | Isotropic King   ​| ​ |         | |           ​| ​
 +|  | 2 | Multimass Michie King      |         | |   ​| ​          ​|  ​
 +|  | 2 | $f_\nu$ ​             |  |           | |           ​| ​
 +|  | 2 | Discrete modelling ​       |   ​| ​          ​| ​          ​| ​          ​| ​
 +|2 | 3 | Isotropic King   ​| ​ |         | |           ​| ​
 +|  | 3 | Multimass Michie King      |         | |   ​| ​          ​|  ​
 +|  | 3 | $f_\nu$ ​             |  |           | |           ​| ​
 +|  | 3 | Discrete modelling ​       |   ​| ​          ​| ​          ​| ​          ​| ​
 +|2 | 4 | Isotropic King   ​| ​ |         | |           ​| ​
 +|  | 4 | Multimass Michie King      |         | |   ​| ​          ​|  ​
 +|  | 4 | $f_\nu$ ​             |  |           | |           ​| ​
 +|  | 4 | Discrete modelling ​       |   ​| ​          ​| ​          ​| ​          ​| ​
 +
 +Plots
 +^ Cluster ​ ^ Plots ^
 +|1 | 1 | Isotropic King vs $f_\nu$ | |
 +|  | 1 | Multimass Michie King   | |  ​
 +|  | 1 | Discrete modelling ​       | | 
 +|1 | 2 | Isotropic King vs $f_\nu$ | |
 +|  | 2 | Multimass Michie King   | |  ​
 +|  | 2 | Discrete modelling ​       | | 
 +|1 | 3 | Isotropic King vs $f_\nu$ | |
 +|  | 3 | Multimass Michie King   | |  ​
 +|  | 3 | Discrete modelling ​       | | 
 +|1 | 4 | Isotropic King vs $f_\nu$ | |
 +|  | 4 | Multimass Michie King   ​|{{:​data:​t3c1.png?​250}} |  ​
 +|  | 4 | Discrete modelling ​       | | 
 +|2 | 1 | Isotropic King vs $f_\nu$ | |
 +|  | 1 | Multimass Michie King   | |  ​
 +|  | 1 | Discrete modelling ​       | | 
 +|2 | 2 | Isotropic King vs $f_\nu$ | |
 +|  | 2 | Multimass Michie King   | |  ​
 +|  | 2 | Discrete modelling ​       | | 
 +|2 | 3 | Isotropic King vs $f_\nu$ | |
 +|  | 3 | Multimass Michie King   | |  ​
 +|  | 3 | Discrete modelling ​       | | 
 +|2 | 4 | Isotropic King vs $f_\nu$ | |
 +|  | 4 | Multimass Michie King   | |  ​
 +|  | 4 | Discrete modelling ​       | | 
 +
 +==== Results: ====
 +Velocity dispersion for different mass species: the multi-mass King models assume that the product $m\sigma_K^2$= constant. The parameters $\sigma_K$ is not exactly the velocity dispersion. ​
 +
tests/collision/gc1_archive.1413992533.txt.gz · Last modified: 2014/10/22 15:42 (external edit)