Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 587

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The outcome of protoplanetary dust growth: pebbles, boulders, or planetesimals?: II. Introducing the bouncing barrier

Open access
Zsom, A., Ormel, C. W., Güttler, C., Blum, J., Dullemond, C. P.·2010·Astronomy and Astrophysics

Abstract

Context. The sticking of micron-sized dust particles caused by surface forces within circumstellar disks is the first stage in the production of asteroids and planets. The key components describing this process are the relative velocity between the dust particles in this environment and the complex physics of dust aggregate collisions.Aims. We present the results of a collision model based on laboratory experiments of these aggregates. We investigate the maximum aggregate size and mass that can be reached by coagulation in protoplanetary disks.Methods. We use the results of laboratory experiments to establish the collision model previously published by Güttler et al. The collision model is based on the assumptions that we model the aggregates as spheres with compact and porous “phases” and that there is a continuous transition between these two. We apply this collision model to the Monte Carlo method developed previously by Zsom & Dullemond and include Brownian motion, radial drift, and turbulence as contributors of relative velocity between dust particles.Results. We model the growth of dust aggregates at 1 AU in the midplane for three different gas densities. We find that the evolution of the dust does not follow the previously assumed growth-fragmentation cycles. Catastrophic fragmentation hardly occurs in the three disk models. Furthermore, we see long-lived, quasi-steady states in the distribution function of the aggregates caused by bouncing. We explore how the mass and the porosity depend on both the turbulence parameter and the critical mass ratio of dust particles. Upon varying the turbulence parameter, the system behaves in a non-linear way, and we find that the critical mass ratio has a strong effect on the particle sizes and masses. Particles reach Stokes numbers of roughly 10-4 during the simulations.Conclusions. The particle growth is stopped by bouncing rather than fragmentation in these models. The final Stokes number of the aggregates is rather insensitive to the variations in the gas density and the strength of turbulence. The maximum mass of the particles is limited to ≈1 g (chondrule-sized particles). Planetesimal formation can proceed by the means of the turbulent concentration of these aerodynamically size-sorted, chondrule-sized particles.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1051/0004-6361/200912976

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 35 references

Cited by

See all 587

Metadata

Authors
Zsom, A., Ormel, C. W., Güttler, C., Blum, J., & Dullemond, C. P.
Venue
Astronomy and Astrophysics
Publisher
EDP Sciences
Published
2010-04
Volume
513
Pages
A57
ISSN
  • 0004-6361 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-0746
OpenAlex
W2164235908
Cited by
587
References
35
FWCI
21.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The outcome of protoplanetary dust growth: pebbles, boulders, or planetesimals?: II. Introducing the bouncing barrier. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1051/0004-6361/200912976
The paper
Zsom, A., Ormel, C. W., Güttler, C., Blum, J., & Dullemond, C. P. (2010). The outcome of protoplanetary dust growth: pebbles, boulders, or planetesimals?: II. Introducing the bouncing barrier. Astronomy and Astrophysics. https://doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361/200912976

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.