Local manifestations of cometary activity

Comets are made of volatile and refractory material and naturally experience various degrees of sublimation as they orbit around the Sun. This gas release, accompanied by dust, represents what is traditionally described as activity. Although the basic principles are well established, most details remain elusive, especially regarding the mechanisms by which dust is detached from the surface and subsequently accelerated by the gas flows surrounding the nucleus. During its 2 years rendez-vous with comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko, ESA's Rosetta has observed cometary activity with unprecedented details, in both the inbound and outbound legs of the comet's orbit. This trove of data provides a solid ground on which new models of activity can be built. In this chapter, we review how activity manifests at close distance from the surface, establish a nomenclature for the different types of observed features, discuss how activity is at the same time transforming and being shaped by the topography, and finally address several potential mechanisms.Comment: This paper is a review chapter in the upcoming book "Comets: Post 67P Perspectives" edited by ISSI and Space Science Reviews. Accepted on 08 April 201

Activity of comets: Gas Transport in the Near-Surface Porous Layers of a Cometary Nucleus

The gas transport through non-volatile random porous media is investigated numerically. We extend our previous research of the transport of molecules inside the uppermost layer of a cometary surface (Skorov and Rickmann, 1995; Skorov et al. 2001). We assess the validity of the simplified capillary model and its assumptions to simulate the gas flux trough the porous dust mantle as it has been applied in cometary physics. A new microphysical computational model for molecular transport in random porous media formed by packed spheres is presented. The main transport characteristics such as the mean free path distribution and the permeability are calculated for a wide range of model parameters and compared with those obtained by more idealized models. The focus in this comparison is on limitations inherent in the capillary model. Finally a practical way is suggested to adjust the algebraic Clausing formula taking into consideration the nonlinear dependence of permeability on layer porosity. The retrieved dependence allows us to accurately calculate the permeability of layers whose thickness and porosity vary in the range of values expected for the near-surface regions of a cometary nucleus.Comment: 25 pages, 9 figure

Free Collisions in a Microgravity Many-Particle Experiment. I. Dust Aggregate Sticking at Low Velocities

Over the past years the processes involved in the growth of planetesimals have extensively been studied in the laboratory. Based on these experiments, a dust-aggregate collision model was developed upon which computer simulations were based to evaluate how big protoplanetary dust aggregates can grow and to analyze which kinds of collisions are relevant in the solar nebula and are worth further studies in the laboratory. The sticking threshold velocity of millimeter-sized dust aggregates is such a critical value that had so far only theoretically been derived, as the relevant velocities could not be reached in the laboratory. We developed a microgravity experiment that allows us for the first time to study free collisions of mm-sized dust aggregates down to velocities of ~0.1 cm/s to assess this part of the protoplanetary dust evolution model. Here, we present the results of 125 free collisions between dust aggregates of 0.5 to 2 mm diameter. Seven collisions with velocities between 0.2 and 3 cm/s led to sticking, suggesting a transition from perfect sticking to perfect bouncing with a certain sticking probability instead of a sharp velocity threshold. We developed a model to explain the physical processes involved in dust-aggregate sticking, derived dynamic material properties of the dust aggregates from the results of the collisions, and deduced the velocity below which aggregates always stick. For millimeter-sized porous dust aggregates this velocity is 8e-5 m/s.Comment: accepted by Icaru

Cometary Comae-Surface Links:The Physics of Gas and Dust from the Surface to a Spacecraft

A comet is a highly dynamic object, undergoing a permanent state of change. These changes have to be carefully classified and considered according to their intrinsic temporal and spatial scales. The Rosetta mission has, through its contiguous in-situ and remote sensing coverage of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko (hereafter 67P) over the time span of August 2014 to September 2016, monitored the emergence, culmination, and winding down of the gas and dust comae. This provided an unprecedented data set and has spurred a large effort to connect in-situ and remote sensing measurements to the surface. In this review, we address our current understanding of cometary activity and the challenges involved when linking comae data to the surface. We give the current state of research by describing what we know about the physical processes involved from the surface to a few tens of kilometres above it with respect to the gas and dust emission from cometary nuclei. Further, we describe how complex multidimensional cometary gas and dust models have developed from the Halley encounter of 1986 to today. This includes the study of inhomogeneous outgassing and determination of the gas and dust production rates. Additionally, the different approaches used and results obtained to link coma data to the surface will be discussed. We discuss forward and inversion models and we describe the limitations of the respective approaches. The current literature suggests that there does not seem to be a single uniform process behind cometary activity. Rather, activity seems to be the consequence of a variety of erosion processes, including the sublimation of both water ice and more volatile material, but possibly also more exotic processes such as fracture and cliff erosion under thermal and mechanical stress, sub-surface heat storage, and a complex interplay of these processes. Seasons and the nucleus shape are key factors for the distribution and temporal evolution of activity and imply that the heliocentric evolution of activity can be highly individual for every comet, and generalisations can be misleading

Nongravitational Effects of Cometary Activity

International audienc

Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko: Non-Gravitational Forces Based on its Detailed Shape

International audienceNon-gravitational forces caused by sublimation on a cometary nucleus influence its orbital parameters and its rotational properties. Based on thermal models and rough estimates of the nucleus shape properties such as its mass and density can be derived [1, 2]. The uncertainty of the nucleus shape influences the quality of the results. Changes of the angular momentum of the nucleus rotation are more strongly influenced by details of the shape and surface. The long term observations of the nucleus of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko by OSIRIS [3] during the rendezvous with ESA’s Rosetta spacecraft result in a very detailed shape model [3]. We use a shape model with > 105 facets to simulate the distributed forces due to sublimation and to calculate their exerted torques. The determination of the overall activity and its spatial and timely distribution over the nucleus remains a major challenge. Early observations revealed that the rotation period had changed from its last perihelion passage in 2009 [4]. The detailed shape model along with thermal modeling makes it possible to calculate the diurnal activity of the facets [6, 7]. The net torque integrated over the whole surface causes a change in the angular momentum. We also calculate the forces acting on the motion of the nucleus. This can be monitored by determinations of the spacecraft positions during the Rosetta mission. We will compare our results with the traditional approach to calculate the non-gravitational forces [8].[1, 2] Davidsson, B. J. R. & Gutiérrez, P. J., Icarus, 168, 392, 2004, Icarus, 176, 453, 2005[3] H. U. Keller, C. Barbieri, P. Lamy, H. Rickman, R. Rodrigo, K.-P. Wenzel, H. Sierks, M. A’Hearn, F. Angrilli, M. Angulo, et al., SSR, 128 (1-4): 433-506, 2007.[4] Preusker, F., Scholten, F., Matz, K.-D., et al., Astronomy & Astrophysics, accepted, 2015[5] S. Mottola, S. Lowry, C. Snodgrass, P. Lamy, I. Toth, et al. A&A, 569: L2, Sept. 2014.[6] H. U. Keller, S. Mottola, B. Davidsson, S. Schröder, Y. Skorov, E. Kührt, et al.. A&A, in press[7] H. U. Keller, S. Mottola, Y. V. Skorov, and L. Jorda, Astronomy and Astrophysics Letter , 2015.[8] B. G. Marsden, Z. Sekanina, and D. K. Yeomans, Astronomical Journal, 78: 211, Mar. 1973