Paper detail

Influence of grain growth on the thermal structure of protoplanetary discs

The thermal structure of a protoplanetary disc is regulated by the opacity that dust grains provide. However, previous works have often considered simplified prescriptions for the dust opacity in hydrodynamical disc simulations, e.g. by considering only a single particle size. In the present work we perform 2D hydrodynamical simulations of protoplanetary discs where the opacity is self-consistently calculated for the dust population, taking into account the particle size, composition and abundance. We first compare simulations using single grain sizes to two different multi-grain size distributions at different levels of turbulence strengths, parameterized through the $α$-viscosity, and different gas surface densities. Assuming a single dust size leads to inaccurate calculations of the thermal structure of discs, because the grain size dominating the opacity increases with orbital radius. Overall the two grain size distributions, one limited by fragmentation only and the other determined from a more complete fragmentation-coagulation equilibrium, give similar results for the thermal structure. We find that both grain size distributions give less steep opacity gradients that result in less steep aspect ratio gradients, in comparison to discs with only micrometer sized dust. Moreover, in the discs with a grain size distribution, the innermost outward migration region is removed and planets embedded is such discs experience lower migration rates. We also investigate the dependency of the water iceline position on the alpha-viscosity, the initial gas surface density at 1 AU and the dust-to-gas ratio and find $r_{ice} \propto α^{0.61} Σ_{g,0}^{0.8} f_{DG}^{0.37}$ independently of the distribution used. The inclusion of the feedback loop between grain growth, opacities and disc thermodynamics allows for more self-consistent simulations of accretion discs and planet formation.

preprint2020arXivOpen 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.