Discussion of “Setup and Relaxation in Glacial Sand” by Mark R. Svinkin

Svinkin, Mark R.

doi:10.1061/(asce)0733-9410(1996)122:4(319.2)

Cited by 36 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Upper limits on transient γ-ray emission from any counterpart to S190814bv close to the merger time were given by Molkov et al (2019) for INTEGRAL/SPI-ACS, Kocevski (2019) for Fermi/GBM, Pilia et al (2019) for AGILE/MCAL, Palmer et al (2019) for Swift/BAT, Cai et al (2019) for Insight-HXMT/HE, and Svinkin et al (2019) for Konus-Wind.…”

Section: γ-Ray Observationsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Limits on the electromagnetic counterpart to S190814bv

Watson

Butler

Lee

et al. 2020

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We derive limits on any electromagnetic counterpart to the compact binary merger S190814bv, whose parameters are consistent with the merger of a black hole and a neutron star. We present observations with the new wide-field optical imager DDOTI dand also consider Swift/BAT observations reported by Palmer et al. (2019). We show that Swift/BAT would have detected a counterpart with similar properties to a typical on-axis short GRB at the 98 per cent confidence level, whereas our DDOTI observations only rule out such a counterpart at the 27 per cent confidence level. Neither have sufficient sensitivity to rule out an off-axis counterpart like GW 170817. We compare the efficiency of Swift/BAT and DDOTI for future observations, and show that DDOTI is likely to be about twice as efficient as Swift/BAT for off-axis events up to about 100 Mpc.

show abstract

Section: γ-Ray Observationsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Limits on the electromagnetic counterpart to S190814bv

Watson

Butler

Lee

et al. 2020

Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(ii) Konus-Wind was observing the entire sky at the time of the GW trigger. Svinkin et al (2019b) reported a flux limit of 2.7 × 10 −7 erg s −1 cm −2 (20-1500 keV) for a SGRB-like spectrum. (iii) Martin-Carillo et al (2019) and Savchenko et al (2019) reported the presence of a possible excess of γ-ray emission with limited significance in INTEGRAL data acquired ∼ 6 s after the GW detection.…”

Section: Gamma-ray and X-ray Follow-upmentioning

confidence: 99%

Follow-up of the Neutron Star Bearing Gravitational-wave Candidate Events S190425z and S190426c with MMT and SOAR

Hosseinzadeh

Cowperthwaite

Gómez

et al. 2019

ApJL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On 2019 April 25.346 and 26.640 UT the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory and the Virgo gravitational-wave (GW) observatory announced the detection of the first candidate events in Observing Run 3 that contained at least one neutron star (NS). S190425z is a likely binary neutron star (BNS) merger at d L = 156 ± 41 Mpc, while S190426c is possibly the first NS-black hole (BH) merger ever detected, at d L = 377 ± 100 Mpc, although with marginal statistical significance. Here we report our optical follow-up observations for both events using the MMT 6.5 m telescope, as well as our spectroscopic follow-up of candidate counterparts (which turned out to be unrelated) with the 4.1 m SOAR telescope. We compare to publicly reported searches, explore the overall areal coverage and depth, and evaluate those in relation to the optical/near-infrared (NIR) kilonova emission from the BNS merger GW170817, to theoretical kilonova models, and to short gamma-ray burst (SGRB) afterglows. We find that for a GW170817-like kilonova, the partial volume covered spans up to about 40% for S190425z and 60% for S190426c. For an on-axis jet typical of SGRBs, the search effective volume is larger, but such a configuration is expected in at most a few percent of mergers. We further find that wide-field γ-ray and X-ray limits rule out luminous on-axis SGRBs, for a large fraction of the localization regions, although these searches are not sufficiently deep in the context of the γ-ray emission from GW170817 or off-axis SGRB afterglows. The results indicate that some optical follow-up searches are sufficiently deep for counterpart identification to about 300 Mpc, but that localizations better than 1000 deg 2 are likely essential.

show abstract

“…This is not true for predriving classical wave equation analysis. The damping coefficient in sandy soil is substantially less than the same in clayey soils, but the latter is close to the damping coefficient in saturated sandy soils (sands with high damping) (Svinkin 1995b(Svinkin , 1996a(Svinkin , 1997. For post-driving analysis, additional parameters like soil mass, gap, plug, radiation damping, etc.…”

mentioning

confidence: 60%

A possible physical meaning of Case damping in pile dynamics: Discussion

Svinkin¹

2002

Can. Geotech. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Discussion of “Setup and Relaxation in Glacial Sand” by Mark R. Svinkin

Cited by 36 publications

References 0 publications

Limits on the electromagnetic counterpart to S190814bv

Limits on the electromagnetic counterpart to S190814bv

Follow-up of the Neutron Star Bearing Gravitational-wave Candidate Events S190425z and S190426c with MMT and SOAR

A possible physical meaning of Case damping in pile dynamics: Discussion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About