A Well-Posed Kelvin-Helmholtz Instability Test and Comparison
Colin P. McNally, Wladimir Lyra, Jean-Claude Passy

TL;DR
This paper establishes a rigorous, well-posed test for the initial growth of Kelvin-Helmholtz instability across various simulation codes, highlighting differences in performance and the impact of numerical methods.
Contribution
It provides a strict methodology for verifying computational codes on Kelvin-Helmholtz instability and discusses how different numerical schemes affect the instability's growth.
Findings
Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics shows poor performance on the test.
Methods with low numerical diffusion tend to produce secondary billows.
Extra diffusion operators can dampen grid noise-induced instabilities.
Abstract
Recently, there has been a significant level of discussion of the correct treatment of Kelvin-Helmholtz instability in the astrophysical community. This discussion relies largely on how the KHI test is posed and analyzed. We pose a stringent test of the initial growth of the instability. The goal is to provide a rigorous methodology for verifying a code on two dimensional Kelvin-Helmholtz instability. We ran the problem in the Pencil Code, Athena, Enzo, NDSPHMHD, and Phurbas. A strict comparison, judgment, or ranking, between codes is beyond the scope of this work, though this work provides the mathematical framework needed for such a study. Nonetheless, how the test is posed circumvents the issues raised by tests starting from a sharp contact discontinuity yet it still shows the poor performance of Smoothed Particle Hydrodynamics. We then comment on the connection between this behavior…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
