Testing of different configurations vs. impact parameters:
| hobson01_primary__10000 | hobson02_widebinary__10000 | hobson03_closebinary__10000 | hobson04_4_0.2_5_60, i.e. D, d, v, φ, oblique... | hobson05_6_0.7_5_60 | hobson06_6_1.0_5_60 | hobson07_8_1.3_5_60 | hobson09_8_1.5_5_60 | hobson11_8_2.0_5_60 | hobson13_10_1.7_5_60 | hobson14_10_2.0_5_60 | hobson08_8_1.3_5_30, head-on... | hobson10_10_1.5_5_30 | hobson12_10_2.0_5_30 | |
| animation | ||||||||||||||
| SFD | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| both LR, LF small | LF too small, secondary only damaged by s. craterings | LF small, secondary reaccreted | only cratering... | LR big, LF small | still not enough fragments | intermediate-size fragments, almost like the pair! | LR, LF exact, but not enough fragments | A match of the whole SFD, wo. the pair. A pre-existing binary is thus needed. | A match of the whole SFD, incl. the pair/binary! No pre-existing binary is needed. The reason might be we use Merge (v, ω) limits, while previous works Perfect merging? Or target rotation (20 h)? | |||||
| IC's | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| fragmentation (1000 s), SPH w. self-gravity, von Mises rheology | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| reaccumulation (10^5 s), N-body, merge (v, ω) limit = (4, 1) | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| here, symbol size/colour is ~ diameter D; above it was ~ smoothing-length h! | nice reaccretion! :-) | a bound binary! (see zoom-in) | again, a binary! (see zoom-in) |
