Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparison of key model changes between Illustris and IllustrisTNG. For full details and a more comprehensive comparison including numerical parameter differences, see Table 1 of Pillepich et al. (2018b) and the two TNG methods papers in general

From: The IllustrisTNG simulations: public data release

Simulation Aspect

Illustris

TNG (50/100/300)

Magnetic Fields

no

ideal MHD (Pakmor et al. 2011)

BH Low-State Feedback

‘Radio’ Bubbles

BH-driven wind (kinetic kick)

BH Accretion

Boosted Bondi-Hoyle (α = 100)

Un-boosted Bondi-Hoyle

BH Seed mass

105 M⊙/h

8 × 105 M⊙/h

Winds (Directionality)

bi-polar (\(\vec{v}_{\mathrm{gas}} \times\nabla \phi _{\mathrm{grav}}\))

isotropic

Winds (Thermal Content)

cold

warm (10%)

Winds (Velocity)

\(\propto\sigma_{\mathrm{DM}}\)

+ scaling with H(z), and \(v_{\min}\)

Winds (Energy)

constant per unit SFR

+ metallicity dependence in η

Stellar Evolution

Illustris Yields

TNG Yields

Metals Tagging

–

SNIa, SNII, AGB, NSNS, FeSNIa, FeSNII

Shock Finder

no

yes (Schaal and Springel 2015)