[yt-users] Trouble with SFR plots of enzo data

[Geoffrey So]

Jumping in with my 2c,

If there's something wrong with the creation time, the discrepancies would
be in the x (time) dimension.  It seems that the features of the two curves
are well matched in the x, it's the y (Msol/yr) axis that seems to be
discrepant.

So I would also check into value of y along with the creation time problem.

From
G.S.

On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Munier Azzam Salem <
msalem at astro.columbia.edu> wrote:

> Hey Guys,
>
>      Matt -- It seems particle type is being printed by enzo for these
> runs, (and it is consistently set to 2 or "NormalStar"). My guess is the
> SFR routines aren't using this.
>
>      Christine -- I think you may be right about the corruption of the
> particle time, since the two curves that go back to the start of the run
> diverge over time. I'll report back if any developments happen.
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Christine Simpson <
> csimpson at astro.columbia.edu> wrote:
>
>> Hi Munier,
>>
>> Could it also be that the creation times of particles are somehow being
>> corrupted?  The star analysis module relies on the creation times to do its
>> summing etc.  So is it possible that the same star particle could have
>> different creation times in different outputs.  As long as those times are
>> greater than 0, the kind of simple sum that Stephen (and I earlier) showed
>> you would pick them up, but the kind of time-binned analysis that the star
>> analysis module does would show discrepancies.
>>
>> Christine
>>
>> On Mar 5, 2013, at 3:36 PM, Munier Azzam Salem wrote:
>>
>> Alright, I'll take a look.
>>
>> But, I should emphasize that when I open each individual data file, sum
>> the particle masses, and plot, the total mass increases monotonically over
>> time, and agrees well with the decrease in gas mass. It's only when I
>> analyze via the star formation module that I see the jump.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Stephen Skory <s at skory.us> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Munier,
>>>
>>> >      Here is the cumulative mass, plotted from the same three data
>>> files.
>>> > It's clear particles are being lost ...
>>>
>>> Aha! That is kind of what I was suspecting! So this looks like it
>>> might be an Enzo problem. I'd recommend trying to figure out what
>>> happened there. Perhaps there was an error during a restart or somehow
>>> two different simulations got mixed up? Good luck!
>>>
>>> --
>>> Stephen Skory
>>> s at skory.us
>>> http://stephenskory.com/
>>> 510.621.3687 (google voice)
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> yt-users mailing list
>>> yt-users at lists.spacepope.org
>>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-users-spacepope.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Munier A. Salem // 845.489.6450
>> _______________________________________________
>> yt-users mailing list
>> yt-users at lists.spacepope.org
>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-users-spacepope.org
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> yt-users mailing list
>> yt-users at lists.spacepope.org
>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-users-spacepope.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Munier A. Salem // 845.489.6450
>
> _______________________________________________
> yt-users mailing list
> yt-users at lists.spacepope.org
> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-users-spacepope.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.spacepope.org/pipermail/yt-users-spacepope.org/attachments/20130305/867e7fb6/attachment.html>