The ideas from the moving grid stuff (mentioned in the second article) from this sort of aeroeleastic simulation could be good for “grid adaption” in a plasma model. I haven’t looked at this literature in about five years (Farhat’s papers stood out to me then), but I recall the “spring analogy” being popular for getting a governing equation for the grid. You probably want something different for your plasma simulation, since it is solution accuracy you want to improve, rather than tracking moving boundaries (some sort of diffusion equation forced by an error or “monitor” function would make sense, here’s a simple example).

I *think* the problem Bussard was addressing is that this plasma spans the boundaries between suitable governing equations / solution methods. You probably need some sort of hybrid particle / fluid code, or different models for different zones of your device (which you could think of as a way towards “reduced order modeling” by decomposing the problem). If you are serious about doing a simulation, CLAWPACK would probably be a good place to start learning. It’s been successfully applied to lots of different equations sets (very general finite volume based approach).

]]>