Paper detail

Survival and Structure of Dusty Vortices in Protoplanetary Discs

We have studied the impact of dust feedback on the survival and structure of vortices in protoplanetary discs using 2-D shearing box simulations with Lagrangian dust particles. We consider dust with a variety of sizes (stopping time $t_s = 10^{-2}Ω^{-1} - 10^{2}Ω^{-1}$, from fully coupled with the gas to the decoupling limit. We find that a vortex is destroyed by dust feedback when the total dust-to-gas mass ratio within the vortex is larger than 30-50%, independent of the dust size. The dust distribution can still be asymmetric in some cases after the vortex has been destroyed. With smaller amounts of dust, a vortex can survive for at least 100 orbits, and the maximum dust surface density within the vortex can be more than 100 times larger than the gas surface density, potentially facilitating planetesimal formation. On the other hand, in these stable vortices, small ($t_s < Ω^{-1}$) and large ($t_s > Ω^{-1}$) dust grains concentrate differently and affect the gas dynamics in different ways. The distribution of large dust is more elongated than that of small dust. Large dust ($t_s > Ω^{-1}$) concentrates in the centre of the vortex and feedback leads to turn-over in vorticity towards the centre, forming a quiescent region within an anticyclonic vortex. Such a turn-over is absent if the vortex is loaded with small grains. We demonstrate that, in protoplanetary discs where both large and small dust grains are present and under the right condition, the concentration of large dust towards the vortex centre can lead to a quiescent centre, repelling the small dust and forming a small dust ring around the vortex centre. Such anticorrelations between small and large dust within vortices may explain the discrepancy between ALMA and near-IR scattered light observations in the asymmetric region of transitional discs.

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.