Paper detail

Debris disk size distributions: steady state collisional evolution with P-R drag and other loss processes

We present a new scheme for determining the shape of the size distribution, and its evolution, for collisional cascades of planetesimals undergoing destructive collisions and loss processes like Poynting-Robertson drag. The scheme treats the steady state portion of the cascade by equating mass loss and gain in each size bin; the smallest particles are expected to reach steady state on their collision timescale, while larger particles retain their primordial distribution. For collision-dominated disks, steady state means that mass loss rates in logarithmic size bins are independent of size. This prescription reproduces the expected two phase size distribution, with ripples above the blow-out size, and above the transition to gravity-dominated planetesimal strength. The scheme also reproduces the expected evolution of disk mass, and of dust mass, but is computationally much faster than evolving distributions forward in time. For low-mass disks, P-R drag causes a turnover at small sizes to a size distribution that is set by the redistribution function (the mass distribution of fragments produced in collisions). Thus information about the redistribution function may be recovered by measuring the size distribution of particles undergoing loss by P-R drag, such as that traced by particles accreted onto Earth. Although cross-sectional area drops with 1/age^2 in the PR-dominated regime, dust mass falls as 1/age^2.8, underlining the importance of understanding which particle sizes contribute to an observation when considering how disk detectability evolves. Other loss processes are readily incorporated; we also discuss generalised power law loss rates, dynamical depletion, realistic radiation forces and stellar wind drag.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.