[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ESPResSo-users] Espressomd-users Digest, Vol 35, Issue 3
From: |
Ulf Schiller |
Subject: |
Re: [ESPResSo-users] Espressomd-users Digest, Vol 35, Issue 3 |
Date: |
Thu, 12 Sep 2013 10:01:35 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2 |
On 09/12/2013 08:35 AM, Stefan Kesselheim wrote:
Dear Uday,
I tried your script with less particles and without electrostatics, and reduced
the number of steps (on my poor small laptop). The output is below, and looks
perfect.
You behaviour looks as if your time-step was too large: We usually apply t=0.01
for temperature 1 and mass 1. Your thermal velocity is larger by a factor of
2.493, and hence I'd try a time step of 0.01/2.493, which is around 0.004.
Just a small addition, without having checked in detail: It may be
sufficient to scale with the square-root of the temperature (same
scaling as the speed of sound) to keep the Courant number small enough.
Best wishes,
Ulf
--
Dr. Ulf D. Schiller Building 04.16, Room 3006
Institute of Complex Systems (ICS-2) Phone: +49 2461 61-6144
Forschungszentrum Jülich, Germany Fax: +49 2461 61-3180
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature