Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 207

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Feedback from winds and supernovae in massive stellar clusters – I. Hydrodynamics

Open access
Rogers, H., Pittard, J. M.·2013·Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society

Abstract

We use 3D hydrodynamical models to investigate the effects of massive star feedback from winds and supernovae on inhomogeneous molecular material left over from the formation of a massive stellar cluster. We simulate the interaction of the mechanical energy input from a cluster with three O-stars into a giant molecular cloud (GMC) clump containing 3240 M⊙ of molecular material within a 4 pc radius. The cluster wind blows out of the molecular clump along low-density channels, into which denser clump material is entrained. We find that the densest molecular regions are surprisingly resistant to ablation by the cluster wind, in part due to shielding by other dense regions closer to the cluster. Nonetheless, molecular material is gradually removed by the cluster wind during which mass-loading factors in excess of several 100 are obtained. Because the clump is very porous, 60–75 per cent of the injected wind energy escapes the simulation domain, with the difference being radiated. After 4.4 Myr, the massive stars in our simulation begin to explode as supernovae. The highly structured environment into which the SN energy is released allows even weaker coupling to the remaining dense material and practically all of the SN energy reaches the wider environment. The molecular material is almost completely dispersed and destroyed after 6 Myr. The escape fraction of ionizing radiation is estimated to be about 50 per cent during the first 4 Myr of the cluster’s life. A similar model with a larger and more massive GMC clump reveals the same general picture, though more time is needed for it to be destroyed.

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 · 10.1093/mnras/stt255

Cites

1 of 1 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

  • Interstellar bubbles. II - Structure and evolution

    Weaver, R., McCray, R., Castor, J., Shapiro, P., & Moore, R. (1977) · The Astrophysical Journal · doi:10.1086/155692 · Cited by 1,736 · cited 2×

    “22 of Weaver et al. (1977) gives Pbub = 1.6 × 10−10 dyn cm−2 assuming an ambient density of 9× 10−22 g cm−3 (roughly the average density of our GMC clump), and Pbub = 1.4× 10−12 dyn cm−2 assuming an ambient density of 3.33×10−25 g cm−3 (the density of the medium outside of our GMC clump).”
    BackgroundInfluential

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 207

Metadata

Authors
Rogers, H., & Pittard, J. M.
Venue
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Published
2013-03-06
Volume
431
Issue
2
Pages
1337-1351
ISSN
  • 0035-8711 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2966
OpenAlex
W2040742258
Cited by
207
References
1
FWCI
12.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Feedback from winds and supernovae in massive stellar clusters – I. Hydrodynamics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/mnras/stt255
The paper
Rogers, H., & Pittard, J. M. (2013). Feedback from winds and supernovae in massive stellar clusters – I. Hydrodynamics. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stt255

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.