2011
DOI: 10.1088/0004-637x/732/2/73
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Effects of Grain Size and Grain Growth on the Chemical Evolution of Cold Dense Clouds

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
56
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(59 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
3
56
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Wickramasinghe 1965). More complicated modelling supports this in the sense that the smallest grains grow relatively faster than large grains (Acharyya et al 2011). The effect would therefore be modest in terms of relative growth for micron-sized grains and is inefficient in itself to build the largest grains from 0.1 µm or smaller grains that can be created through coagulation.…”
Section: Grain Growth and Water-ice Abundancementioning
confidence: 87%
“…Wickramasinghe 1965). More complicated modelling supports this in the sense that the smallest grains grow relatively faster than large grains (Acharyya et al 2011). The effect would therefore be modest in terms of relative growth for micron-sized grains and is inefficient in itself to build the largest grains from 0.1 µm or smaller grains that can be created through coagulation.…”
Section: Grain Growth and Water-ice Abundancementioning
confidence: 87%
“…The adsorption rate of gaseous species onto grain surfaces and grain-surface reaction rates (e.g., if the rate is limited by the accretion of gaseous particles) depend on the size distribution of grains. Ideally, the grain size distribution should be taken into account (Acharyya et al 2011). Most chemical models of disks and molecular clouds, however, assume a single size of 0.1 μm, for simplicity, which we follow in the present work.…”
Section: Chemical Model: Full Networkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Katz et al (1999) found this ratio to be ∼0.8 for hydrogen by fitting laboratory data. Due to the lack of laboratory data for other species, several values are used in the literature: 0.3 (Hasegawa et al 1992), 0.5 (Garrod & Herbst 2006;Garrod et al 2008;Acharyya et al 2011), and a timedependent value (Garrod & Pauly 2011). Our adopted diffusion-to-binding energy ratio for this calculation is 0.5.…”
Section: Chemical Network and Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%