Paper detail

Most super-Earths formed by dry pebble accretion are less massive than 5 Earth masses

We study the formation of rocky planets by dry pebble accretion from self-consistent dust-growth models. In particular, we aim at computing the maximum core mass of a rocky planet that can sustain a thin H-He atmosphere to account for the second peak of the Kepler's size distribution. We simulate planetary growth by pebble accretion inside the ice line. The pebble flux is computed self-consistently from dust growth by solving the advection-diffusion equation for a representative dust size. Dust coagulation, drift, fragmentation and sublimation at the water iceline are included. The disc evolution is computed for $α$-discs with photoevaporation from the central star. The planets grow from a moon-mass embryo by silicate pebble accretion and gas accretion. We analyse the effect of a different initial disc mass, $α$-viscosity, disc metallicity and embryo location. Finally, we compute atmospheric mass-loss due to evaporation. We find that inside the ice line, the fragmentation barrier determines the size of pebbles, which leads to different planetary growth patterns for different disc viscosities. Within the iceline the pebble isolation mass typically decays to values below 5 M$_{\oplus}$ within the first million years of disc evolution, limiting the core masses to that value. After computing atmospheric-mass loss, we find that planets with cores below $\sim$4 M$_{\oplus}$ get their atmospheres completely stripped, and a few 4-5 M$_{\oplus}$ cores retain a thin atmosphere that places them in the gap/second peak of the Kepler size distribution. Overall, we find that rocky planets form only in low-viscosity discs ($α\lesssim 10^{-4}$). When $α\geq 10^{-3}$, rocky objects do not grow beyond Mars-mass. The most typical outcome of dry pebble accretion is terrestrial planets with masses spanning from Mars to $\sim$4 M$_{\oplus}$.

preprint2020arXivOpen 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.