Research

Open threads, including the dead ends

What we are working on, including what has not worked. A research page listing only successes is a brochure.


Thread 01

In preparation

Where you evaluate a shock sensor matters more than which flux you use

Can a shock-capturing scheme behave like a shock-fitted one, simply by confining its artificial dissipation to the faces that actually span the shock?

In a Godunov scheme the dissipation and the upwinding are one mechanism. In a kinetic scheme they separate, so the dissipative part can be switched on only at the two or three faces straddling the shock — leaving the acoustic feedback path that drives most detonation instabilities essentially inviscid. Its support then shrinks with mesh spacing, and on an unsteady wave this recovers structure normally reported as needing an order of magnitude more resolution.

Where it stands / what is wrong with it

We first attributed this to the flux and were wrong: a standard approximate-Riemann flux, everything else identical, reproduced it. The gain is sensor locality. The recovered structure is also displaced by a small, nearly constant offset deep in the regime examined.

Thread 02

Validated

What the kinetic flux is actually for

If the accuracy gain is not the flux, why keep a kinetic flux at all?

Because sparse gating needs a non-dissipative branch that does not blow up. With the stabilising term disabled, the kinetic construction stayed stable over long integrations; the conventional analogue failed almost immediately. It earns its place by being shock-stable with dissipation switched off — and is carbuncle-free on unfavourable aspect ratios.

Where it stands / what is wrong with it

Scope-limited: ours is one particular non-dissipative construction, and a well-chosen low-dissipation Riemann branch might do the same job. We have not ruled that out.

Thread 03

Production

Adaptive refinement with the host out of the loop

Can the entire refine–coarsen–balance–remap chain be expressed in data-parallel primitives, with no serial tree traversal?

Reference codes still orchestrate regridding and load balancing substantially on the CPU — a round-trip right where the mesh changes fastest. Integer-lattice Morton keys turn the tree into a sorted array, so the whole chain reduces to sorts, scans and scatters with deterministic connectivity. Getting it right on a surface-snapped mesh took three fixes no all-hexahedral test suite can expose.

Where it stands / what is wrong with it

The next step is a linear-octree representation. Coarsening on mixed-element meshes is still hexahedral-only, and periodic boundaries do not currently survive an adapt — both known, both on the list.

Thread 04

Production

Coupling stiff chemistry without the constant-volume artefact

How do you integrate a stiff reaction source alongside the hydrodynamics without a global implicit solve, and without the splitting artefact that manufactures overpressure at a reacting front?

Operator splitting burns each cell at constant volume, so heat release appears as pressure rather than work — at a reacting front, compounding into a detonation the physics never contained. We use a local coupled update in the spirit of spectral deferred correction: the cell sees its transport contribution while it burns, so it vents. Explicit, local, one correction iteration.

Where it stands / what is wrong with it

At fine resolution we still see energy concentration at strong thermal contacts. Chemistry, refinement, remap, reconstruction, coupling and conduction are each excluded; whether the remainder is numerical or real compression is open.

Thread 05

Validated

A refinement criterion that is already paid for

Can a robust shock indicator be built from quantities the solver has already computed, with no extra stencil work?

Sensors are either cheap and noisy, or robust and expensive — and the expensive ones introduce stencil-wide reductions into a pass that otherwise maps onto scans. We use the residual between the fluxes assembled on a cell’s faces and the flux its centre state predicts. Every term is already in memory, and it separates discontinuities from smooth flow by several orders of magnitude.

Thread 06

Open problem

Running the same source on hardware the vendors have abandoned

Can a stiff reactive PDE solver run unmodified across GPU vendors and generations, and can the idle matrix throughput on those devices be turned into solver speed?

Every mainstream portability layer compiles through a vendor toolchain supporting current accelerators only, excluding the hardware most researchers own. Vulkan with SPIR-V reaches old silicon and is used almost exclusively for machine-learning inference. The solver already runs on GPU through standard C++, chemistry included, bit-identical to the CPU path; the vendor-neutral path is the open work.

Where it stands / what is wrong with it

A research programme, not a shipping feature. We will publish the negative results too — including, if it comes to it, that double precision on the vendor-neutral path is not worth its cost.

activation energysteadyperiod 24816chaos

Fig. 01The period-doubling route to chaos in a pulsating detonation. A schematic of the structure, not our data — the measured bifurcation values are in the manuscript.

triple-point trajectoriesdetonation front

Fig. 02Cellular structure traced by triple points on a detonation front — the multidimensional configuration the one-dimensional work is building toward.

Record

Peer-reviewed publications

Work from this lab is written up for peer review and published open access. Entries appear here once they are through review — not before.

Reserved

Peer-reviewed publications will be listed here, with DOIs and open-access links, as they appear.

In preparation

  • Placement of artificial dissipation in kinetic flux schemes for unsteady compressible flowManuscript in preparation.
  • Host-free dynamic adaptive refinement for compressible reactive flow on unstructured meshesIn preparation.

Sponsorship

Fund a thread, and see it as it happens

Every thread here is open to sponsorship: results as they are produced, negative ones included, influence over what is attacked next, and the capability applied to your configurations while it is being built — rather than a citation in two years.