Paper detail

Modelling the brightness increase signature due to asteroid collisions

We have developed a model to predict the post-collision brightness increase of sub-catastrophic collisions between asteroids and to evaluate the likelihood of a survey detecting these events. It is based on the cratering scaling laws of Holsapple and Housen (2007) and models the ejecta expansion following an impact as occurring in discrete shells each with their own velocity. We estimate the magnitude change between a series of target/impactor pairs, assuming it is given by the increase in reflecting surface area within a photometric aperture due to the resulting ejecta. As expected the photometric signal increases with impactor size, but we find also that the photometric signature decreases rapidly as the target asteroid diameter increases, due to gravitational fallback. We have used the model results to make an estimate of the impactor diameter for the (596) Scheila collision of D=49-65m depending on the impactor taxonomy, which is broadly consistent with previous estimates. We varied both the strength regime (highly porous and sand/cohesive soil) and the taxonomic type (S-, C- and D-type) to examine the effect on the magnitude change, finding that it is significant at early stages but has only a small effect on the overall lifetime of the photometric signal. Combining the results of this model with the collision frequency estimates of Bottke et al. (2005), we find that low-cadence surveys of approximately one visit per lunation will be insensitive to impacts on asteroids with D<20km if relying on photometric detections.

preprint2015arXivOpen 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.