1996
DOI: 10.1006/icar.1996.0170
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Steady-State Size Distribution for the Self-Similar Collision Cascade

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

8
193
0
1

Year Published

1996
1996
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 204 publications
(202 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
8
193
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Since Q * D is independent of M proj , the differential number density is proportional to M −11/6 with M being grain mass . This mass dependence is the same as the classical theory of collisional cascade (Dohnanyi 1969;Tanaka et al 1996). For protoplanetary disks, u col is not determined as simply as that for debris disks.…”
Section: Total Ejecta Massmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…Since Q * D is independent of M proj , the differential number density is proportional to M −11/6 with M being grain mass . This mass dependence is the same as the classical theory of collisional cascade (Dohnanyi 1969;Tanaka et al 1996). For protoplanetary disks, u col is not determined as simply as that for debris disks.…”
Section: Total Ejecta Massmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…(43). A collisional cascade yields a size distribution characterized by q ∼ 7/2 (Tanaka et al 1996). (This corresponds to a mass distribution dN/dM p ∝ M −11/6 p .)…”
Section: Planetesimal Size Distribution and Filtering Massmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Written in this form, it was assumed that the disc contains a Dohnanyi size distribution of bodies (Dohnanyi 1969), with a power index of 7 2 (Tanaka et al 1996) between the smallest size body that is not blown out of the system by radiation pressure and the significantly larger maximum size for bodies in the disc, D max . The mass is dominated by the largest bodies.…”
Section: The Survival Timescale Of Massive Outer Beltsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although model dependant, detailed numerical modelling (e.g. Thébault et al 2003;Thébault & Augereau 2007;Krivov et al 2006;Löhne et al 2008) finds that the ratio of the total mass of the disc to the observed dust mass calculated using realistic size distributions does not differ significantly from simplistic estimates made using the size distribution from a steady state collisional cascade (n(D)dD ∝ D 7/2 dD, Dohnanyi 1969, with a power index of 7 2 , Tanaka et al 1996). Thus, the calculated values for the mass should not vary too dramatically.…”
Section: Uncertaintiesmentioning
confidence: 99%