Kinetic Plasma Simulations

Kinetic Plasma Simulations
(Part I)
Francesco Valentini
Dipartimento di Fisica, Università della Calabria
francesco.valentini@unical.it
Complexity and Turbulence in Space Plasmas - L'Aquila, September 18-23, 2017

Outline
Karimabadi+, PoP, 2013
➢ Numerical approach to the solution of the kinetic

equations for collision-free plasmas: PIC (Lagrangian)
and VLASOV (Eulerian) algorithms
➢ Focus on the Eulerian approach: numerical solution of

advection equations
➢ Time and space discretization; derivatives on a grid
➢ Phase error, (Von Neumann) stability and consistency of

a numerical algorithm
➢ Few examples of explicit and implicit algorithms
➢ Splitting scheme to couple advance in physical and

velocity space
➢ Take-home messages from Part I

Observational evidences – The Plasma Universe
➢ It is estimated that more than 99.9 % of matter in the

Universe exists in the form of plasma;
➢ A plasma is an ionized gas where charged particles

interact via electromagnetic forces (electric and
magnetic fields);
➢ This plasma is mostly collisionless
➢ Examples include stars, nebulae, galaxies, supernovae,

interstellar/galactic medium, jets, accretion disks, etc..
➢ Our knowledge limited by what we can actually observe

(emitting plasma)

Some important open problems in space physics
How are plasmas heated and

particle accelerated?
Kasper+, PRL, 2008

Richardson+, GRL, 1995
How is the dissipated energy

partitioned between heating and
acceleration of electrons,
protons and heavier ions?
Most of the plasma energization (plasma heating and particle acceleration)

occurring in turbulent collisionless plasmas, such as those permeating the
Solar System and many astrophysical environments, is expected to occur at
kinetic scales, that is, at scales comparable to particle gyroradii and below
Kinetic equations for a collisionless plasma
The Vlasov-Maxwell system

Kinetic equations for a collisionless plasma
The Vlasov-Maxwell system
6D + time !!!
How to model numerically?
Lagrangian approach (PIC): consists in solving numerically the equations of

motion of a large number of (macro) particles; moments (density and current)
needed to solve Maxwell equations are evaluated on a grid, through interpolation
procedures
LESS COMPUTATIONAL DEMANDING
AFFECTED BY STATISTICAL NOISE
Eulerian approach (VLASOV): consists in solving numerically the Vlasov

equation for the particle distribution function on a grid in phase space; moments
(density and current) needed to solve Maxwell equations are evaluated by direct
integration of the distribution function
MORE COMPUTATIONAL DEMANDING
ZERO NOISE

How to model numerically?
Lagrangian approach (PIC): consists in solving numerically the equations of

motion of a large number of (macro) particles; moments (density and current)
needed to solve Maxwell equations are evaluated on a grid, through interpolation
procedures ---
LESS COMPUTATIONAL DEMANDING
AFFECTED BY STATISTICAL NOISE
Eulerian approach (VLASOV): consists in solving numerically the Vlasov

equation for the particle distribution function on a grid in phase space; moments
(density and current) needed to solve Maxwell equations are evaluated by direct
integration of the distribution function
MORE COMPUTATIONAL DEMANDING
ZERO NOISE
We say few words on the PIC methods and

we will focus later on the Eulerian approach

Hints on PIC methods (1)
If one moves along a particle trajectory:
Characteristics
Therefore:
Vlasov equation can be solved by integrating numerically the

particle equations of motion (Runge-Kutta, Adams-Bashforth, Boris,
etc.); the distribution function can be reconstructed by taking into
account that it remains constant along particle trajectories

How to evaluate moments on a grid from particle trajectories?

Example of 2D interpolation for density
At time t
(i,j+1) (i+1,j+1)
(i,j) (i+1,j)

How to evaluate moments on a grid from particle trajectories?

Example of 2D interpolation for density
At time t
S1 S2
(i,j+1) (i+1,j+1)
S3 S4
(i,j) (i+1,j)

Eulerian approach
Full Vlasov - Maxwell Nonlinear Integro-differential

equation in 6D phase space +
time for each species
Very hard and time demanding

to solve numerically!!!
To date, numerical solutions are

available for approximated
systems and in reduced phase
space geometry

Eulerian approach



space geometry
1D-1V Vlasov – Poisson

(fixed or movable protons)

Eulerian approach



space geometry
2D-3V and 3D-3V Hybrid Vlasov-Maxwell
1D-1V Vlasov – Poisson

(fixed or movable protons)

Numerical solution of the Vlasov equation
Vlasov equation is an advection equation in phase space
- Let us consider the 1D-1V case (we will discuss later the
generalization to multi-dimensional phase space)
- Let us focus on advection in x first (we will discuss later

how to couple to advection in v)
Three main steps:
1) Discretize (x,t) plane
2) Approximate derivatives in
For simplicity, periodic boundary conditions discretized plane (allowed operations
are +,-,x,/)
3) Create algorithm to solve the

equation
Numerical solution of advection equations
t (Xi,tn)
Δt
x
Δx
Approximation of derivatives (FINITE DIFFERENCES): Euler forward
Euler backward
Centered differences

Phase error for finite differences
Let’s consider the centered difference scheme:
Let’s take for example:
By applying centered-difference formula one gets:
When solving advection equations through finite

difference schemes:
REMEMBER TO KEEP PHASE ERROR UNDER CONTROL

Very easy!!! Let’s try to solve our equation
Euler forward Centered
Explicit finite difference FORWARD-CENTRAL scheme

Very easy!!! Let’s try to solve our equation
Euler forward Centered
Explicit finite difference scheme
Something weird is going on. Numerical solution is out of control

Von Neumann stability analysis (1)
➢Let us perform an analysis of the finite difference scheme by expressing

the solution as a Fourier series
➢Since the equation is linear, we only examine the behavior of a single mode.
Consider a trial solution of the form
➢This is a spatial Fourier expansion. Plugging in the difference formula:
➢Let us define the Amplificfation Factor as:
a method is well-behaved or stable when A ≤ 1

Von Neumann stability analysis (2)
➢For our FORWARD-CENTRAL scheme one gets Independently of the CFL number, all
Fourier modes increase in magnitude
as time advances
This method is unconditionally
unstable!!! We are in trouble!
Let us play a bit with our scheme
Replace by average
Lax–Wendroff method
CFL stability condition
CHECK STABILITY OF THE ALGORITHM BEFORE RUNNING A SIMULATION

Lax-Wendroff solution
What’s happening now?!?

A closer look to the Lax-Wendroff scheme
Rearranging the RHS
We have an additional
term. We are not solving
the advection equation
we started with
CHECK CONSISTENCY OF THE ALGORITHM BEFORE RUNNING A SIMULATION

Upwind schemes (first-order Godunov method)
V>0
i-1 i i+1 x
V<0
The stable discretization makes use of the grid point where information is coming from

Upwind schemes (first-order Godunov method)
i-1 i i+1 x
V<0

Van Leer scheme (higher order accuracy)
Widely adopted for integration of the Vlasov equation
Van Leer, JCP, 1974, 1977a, 1977b, 1979; Mangeney+, JCP, 2000
The unknowns are the spatial

averages of the function itself
Averaging and integrating advection equation in time gives:
CFL stability
condition
i-1 i i+1 x
i-1/2 i+1/2
The solution involves computing fluxes through the boundary of each cell
Implicit schemes
Explicit scheme

Implicit schemes (1)
Explicit scheme

Explicit scheme
LHS: Linear combination of unknowns:FULL IMPLICIT SCHEME

The solution for f at step n+1 is obtained

by solving this linear system, through
standard linear algebra routines
Example: Nx=6 and periodic boundary conditions
M is a tridiagonal matrix with full corners
Why should one complicate things if explicit

schemes are so much easier to implement?

The solution for f at step n+1 is obtained

by solving this linear system, through
standard linear algebra routines
Example: Nx=6 and periodic boundary conditions
M is a tridiagonal matrix with full corners
Why should one complicate things if explicit Since

Sincefull
fullimplicit
implicitschemes
schemes
schemes are so much easier to implement? are
areunconditionally
unconditionallySTABLE!
STABLE!
Cheng & Knorr splitting scheme
Let’s go back to our 1D-1V
Vlasov equation
Now we know how to solve advection equations. Let’s split

evolution in physical space and evolution in velocity space:
We know how to get numerical solutions
But, how to couple fx(x,t) and fv(x,t) to get a solution for f(x,v,t)?
v
SPLITTING SCHEME
Cheng & Knorr, JCP, 1976;
Generalized to 6D in Mangeney+, JCP, 2000
x
Take-home messages from Part I
➢ Numerical simulations are an extremely powerful tool to

investigate the kinetic dynamics of plasmas
➢ Data from numerical simulations are complementary to

observational data to understand the physical
mechanisms at kinetic scales. Understanding the reality
cannot rely on simulations or observations alone, full
comprehension is given by a right balance of the two.
➢ Numerical simulations are (relatively) easy to make, but

at the same time extremely dangerous. If something is
wrong in your algorithm, this is not always evident from
the results. One must make sure that algorithm is
correct, BEFORE running the simulation
“Calculators can only calculate -

they cannot do mathematics.”
J. A. Van de Walle
Rincon, Califano, Schekochihin, Valentini, PNAS, 2016


Kinetic Plasma Simulations

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Kinetic Plasma Simulations

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Kinetic Plasma Simulations

Complexity and Turbulence in Space Plasmas - L'Aquila, September 18-23, 2017

➢ Numerical approach to the solution of the kinetic

➢ Focus on the Eulerian approach: numerical solution of

➢ Time and space discretization; derivatives on a grid

➢ Phase error, (Von Neumann) stability and consistency of

➢ Few examples of explicit and implicit algorithms

➢ Splitting scheme to couple advance in physical and

➢ Take-home messages from Part I

Complexity and Turbulence in Space Plasmas - L'Aquila, September 18-23, 2017

➢ It is estimated that more than 99.9 % of matter in the

➢ A plasma is an ionized gas where charged particles

➢ This plasma is mostly collisionless

➢ Examples include stars, nebulae, galaxies, supernovae,

➢ Our knowledge limited by what we can actually observe

Complexity and Turbulence in Space Plasmas - L'Aquila, September 18-23, 2017

How are plasmas heated and

Kasper+, PRL, 2008

How is the dissipated energy

Most of the plasma energization (plasma heating and particle acceleration)

The Vlasov-Maxwell system

Complexity and Turbulence in Space Plasmas - L'Aquila, September 18-23, 2017

The Vlasov-Maxwell system

Lagrangian approach (PIC): consists in solving numerically the equations of

Eulerian approach (VLASOV): consists in solving numerically the Vlasov

Complexity and Turbulence in Space Plasmas - L'Aquila, September 18-23, 2017

Lagrangian approach (PIC): consists in solving numerically the equations of

Eulerian approach (VLASOV): consists in solving numerically the Vlasov

We say few words on the PIC methods and

Complexity and Turbulence in Space Plasmas - L'Aquila, September 18-23, 2017

If one moves along a particle trajectory:

Vlasov equation can be solved by integrating numerically the

Complexity and Turbulence in Space Plasmas - L'Aquila, September 18-23, 2017

How to evaluate moments on a grid from particle trajectories?

Complexity and Turbulence in Space Plasmas - L'Aquila, September 18-23, 2017

How to evaluate moments on a grid from particle trajectories?

Complexity and Turbulence in Space Plasmas - L'Aquila, September 18-23, 2017

Full Vlasov - Maxwell Nonlinear Integro-differential

Very hard and time demanding

To date, numerical solutions are

Complexity and Turbulence in Space Plasmas - L'Aquila, September 18-23, 2017

Full Vlasov - Maxwell Nonlinear Integro-differential

Very hard and time demanding

To date, numerical solutions are

1D-1V Vlasov – Poisson

Complexity and Turbulence in Space Plasmas - L'Aquila, September 18-23, 2017

Full Vlasov - Maxwell Nonlinear Integro-differential

Very hard and time demanding

To date, numerical solutions are

2D-3V and 3D-3V Hybrid Vlasov-Maxwell

1D-1V Vlasov – Poisson

Complexity and Turbulence in Space Plasmas - L'Aquila, September 18-23, 2017

Vlasov equation is an advection equation in phase space

- Let us focus on advection in x first (we will discuss later

Three main steps:

1) Discretize (x,t) plane

3) Create algorithm to solve the

Approximation of derivatives (FINITE DIFFERENCES): Euler forward

Complexity and Turbulence in Space Plasmas - L'Aquila, September 18-23, 2017

Let’s take for example:

By applying centered-difference formula one gets:

When solving advection equations through finite

REMEMBER TO KEEP PHASE ERROR UNDER CONTROL