On magnetic boundary conditions for non-spectral dynamo simulations

Geophysical and Astrophysical Fluid Dynamics

Volumn 99, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 481-492

  Iskakov, Alexey ^a   Dormy, Emmanuel ^a,b  

^a INSTITUT DE PHYSIQUE DU GLOBE DE PARIS   (France)

^b CNRS   (France)

Author keywords

Boundary conditions; Dynamo modeling; Numerical simulation

Indexed keywords

BOUNDARY CONDITIONS; BOUNDARY ELEMENT METHOD; COMPUTATIONAL GEOMETRY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FINITE VOLUME METHOD; INTEGRODIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; NUMERICAL METHODS;

DYNAMO MODELING; MAGNETIC BOUNDARY CONDITIONS;

MAGNETOHYDRODYNAMICS;

BOUNDARY CONDITIONS; BOUNDARY ELEMENT METHOD; COMPUTATIONAL GEOMETRY; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FINITE VOLUME METHOD; INTEGRODIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS; MAGNETOHYDRODYNAMICS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; NUMERICAL METHODS;

GEODYNAMO; MAGNETOHYDRODYNAMICS; NUMERICAL MODEL;

EID: 30844466161     PISSN: 03091929     EISSN: 10290419     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03091920500337145     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Alouges, F. (2001) Computation of demagnetizing field in micromagnetics with the infinite elements method ESAIM Control Optim. Calc. Var., 6, pp. 629 - 647.
2. Brun, AS and Miesch, MS and Toomre, J. (2004) Global-scale turbulent convection and dynamo action in the solar envelope Astroph. J., 614, pp. 1073 - 1098.
3. Bonnet, M.(1995) Equations Intégrales et Éléments de Frontière. Editions Eyrolles: CNRS Editions.
4. 2 dynamo using a finite element method Phys. Earth and Planet. Int., 128, pp. 35 - 50.
5. Cheng, H and Greengard, L and Rokhlin, V. (1999) A fast adaptive multipole algorithm in three dimensions J. Comp. Phys., 155, pp. 468 - 498.
6. Christensen, UR and Aubert, J and Cardin, P and Dormy, E and Gibbons, S and Glatzmaier, GA and Grote, E and Honkura, Y and Jones, C and Kono, M and Matsushima, M and Sakuruba, A and Takahashi, F and Tilgner, A and Wicht, J and Zhang, K. (2001) A numerical dynamo benchmark Phys. Earth and Planet. Int., 128(1-4), pp. 25 - 34.
7. Christensen, U and Olson, P and Glatzmaier, GA. (1999) Numerical modeling of the geodynamo: A systematic parameter study Geophys. J. Int., 138, pp. 393 - 409.
8. Glatzmaier, GA and Roberts, PH. (1995) A three-dimensional self-consistent computer simulation of a geomagnetic reversal Nature, 377, pp. 203 - 209.
9. Greengard, L and Rokhlin, V. (1997) A fast algorithm for particle simulations J. Comp. Phys., 135, pp. 280 - 292.
10. Guermond, JL and Léorat, J and Nore, C. (2003) A new finite element method for magneto-dynamical problems: Two-dimensional results Eur. Jour. Mech. B/ Fluids, 22, pp. 555 - 579.
11. Hejda, P. (1982) boundary conditions in the hydromagnetic dynamo problem Studia Geoph. et Geod., 26, pp. 361 - 372.
12. Iskakov, AB and Descombes, S and Dormy, E. (2004) An integro-differential formulation for magnetic induction in bounded domains: Boundary element - finite volume method Journal of Computational Physics, 197, pp. 540 - 554.
13. Ivanova, TS. (1976) A method for solving hydromagnetic dynamo problem Journal of Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics, 16(4), pp. 956 - 968. (in Russian)
14. Jackson, JD.(1975) Classical Electrodynamics, 2nd Edn. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
15. Jepps, SA. (1975) Numerical models of hydromagnetic dynamos J. Fluid. Mech., 67(4), pp. 625 - 646.
16. Matsui, H and Okuda, H. (2005) MHD dynamo simulation using the GeoFEM platform - verification by the dynamo benchmark test International Journal of Computational Fluid Dynamics, 19, pp. 1.
17. Reinhard, H.(1989) Equations Différentielles. Paris: Dunod.
18. Roberts, PH.(1967) An Introduction to Magnetohydrodynamics. New York: Elsevier.
19. Rokhlin, V. (1985) Rapid solution of integral equations of classical potential theory J. Comp. Phys., 60, pp. 187 - 207.
20. Stefani, F and Gerbeth, G and Rädler, K-H. (2000) Steady dynamos in finite domains: An integral equation approach Astron. Nachr., 321, pp. 65 - 73.
21. Xu, M and Stefani, F and Gerbeth, G. (2004) The integral equation method for a steady kinematic dynamo problem Journal of Computational Physics, 196, pp. 102 - 125.