Paper detail

Dependence of the Star Formation Efficiency on the Parameters of Molecular Cloud Formation Simulations

We investigate the response of the star formation efficiency (SFE) to the main parameters of simulations of molecular cloud formation by the collision of warm diffuse medium (WNM) cylindrical streams, neglecting stellar feedback and magnetic fields. The parameters we vary are the Mach number of the inflow velocity of the streams, Msinf, the rms Mach number of the initial background turbulence in the WNM, and the total mass contained in the colliding gas streams, Minf. Because the SFE is a function of time, we define two estimators for it, the "absolute" SFE, measured at t = 25 Myr into the simulation's evolution (sfeabs), and the "relative" SFE, measured 5 Myr after the onset of star formation in each simulation (sferel). The latter is close to the "star formation rate per free-fall time" for gas at n = 100 cm^-3. We find that both estimators decrease with increasing Minf, although by no more than a factor of 2 as Msinf increases from 1.25 to 3.5. Increasing levels of background turbulence similarly reduce the SFE, because the turbulence disrupts the coherence of the colliding streams, fragmenting the cloud, and producing small-scale clumps scattered through the numerical box, which have low SFEs. Finally, the SFE is very sensitive to the mass of the inflows, with sferel decreasing from ~0.4 to ~0.04 as the the virial parameter in the colliding streams increases from ~0.15 to ~1.5. This trend is in partial agreement with the prediction by Krumholz & McKee (2005), since the latter lies within the same range as the observed efficiencies, but with a significantly shallower slope. We conclude that the observed variability of the SFE is a highly sensitive function of the parameters of the cloud formation process, and may be the cause of significant scatter in observational determinations.

preprint2009arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 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.