The Physics of Protoplanetesimal Dust Agglomerates. I. Mechanical Properties and Relations to Primitive Bodies in the Solar System

By J. Blum, R. Schräpler, B. Davidsson, J. Trigo-Rodríguez. 2006

172 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/506528d2afd476b703851f3b4aeaa03376040482

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

Citations in the corpus

The primordial nucleus of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko (2015, background): “The 15–30 AU region was rich in µm-sized grains of ice, organics, silicates, sulfides, and metal that coagulated to form cm-sized porous pebbles (e.g., Blum et al. 2006; Ormel et al. 2007; Blum & Wurm 2008; Zsom et al. 2010).”
Numerical Simulation of Dust Aggregate Collisions. II. Compression and Disruption of Three-Dimensional Aggregates in Head-on Collisions (2008, background): “Blum et al. (2006) experimentally measured the compressive strength of aggregates produced by random ballistic deposition of SiO2 spheres of radius 0.76 m.”
The significance of meteorite density and porosity (2008, background): “, 1983); but ultimately, where did those rock fragments themselves come from? How did an accumulation of solar nebula dust, which models suggest should have been 80% or more porous (Blum et al., 2006), become ground mass with essentially zero porosity? Whatever lithified that dust succeeded in remov”
The Growth Mechanisms of Macroscopic Bodies in Protoplanetary Disks (2008, background): “The range of compressions chosen by Blum et al. (2006a) simulates impacts with velocities between 1 m s−1 and 50 m s−1, i.e., the range of velocities relevant for the preplanetesimal stage.”
The outcome of protoplanetary dust growth: pebbles, boulders or planetesimals? (2009, background): “On top of that, the maximum compaction that a dust aggregate can achieve in a collision depends on many parameters, such as, e.g., the size distribution of the monomer grains (Blum et al. 2006) and the ability of the granular material to creep sideways inside a dust aggregate (Güttler et al. 2009).”
Free collisions in a microgravity many-particle experiment. I. Dust aggregate sticking at low velocities (2011, methodology): “They give the stopping time as τF = 2r 2ρbφ 9µg : lg r (Stokes) rρbφ ρgvg : lg r (Epstein) (A.1) with ρb = 2600 kg m−3 (Blum et al., 2006, Table 1), ρg = 1.2 kg m−3 · (p/105 Pa), φ = 0.347, µg = 17.2 µPa s and vg = 655 m s−1 being the bulk density of the dust particles, the gas density, the filling”
Dust coagulation and fragmentation in molecular clouds. I. How collisions between dust aggregates alter the dust size distribution (2009, background): “Aggregates that are initially compact are di ﬃ cult to further compress, because for ﬁlling factors above a critical value of 33% the required pressures increase steeply (Blum et al. 2006; Paszun & Dominik 2008).”
Edwards Statistical Mechanics for Jammed Granular Matter (2016, methodology): “Numerical studies of adhesive granular systems have found a range of packing fractions as a function of particle sizes φ ≈ 0.1 − 0.6 (Blum et al., 2006; Head, 2007; Kadau and Herrmann, 2011; Martin and Bordia, 2008; Parteli et al., 2014; Valverde et al., 2004; Yang et al., 2000).”