Poster Blitz #5

1. Pinilla, P.2. Pinte, C.3. Podio, L.4. Ros, K.5. Stamatellos, D.

6. Thi, W.-F. (3 posters)7. van der Marel, N.8. Ardila, D.9. Bonsor, A.

Trapping Dust Particles in Protoplanetary Disks

!!"#$%"#!&

C. Pinte

Combining dust & gas diagnostics

IRAS 04158+2805Cavity seen in the dust phase (850μm)

CO J=2-1 coming from the cavity

MCFOST + ProDiMo modelling

C. Pinte, F. Ménard, WF. Thi, G. Duchêne for the GASPS team

−4−2 0 2 4

−4−2 0 2 4

−4 −2 0 2 40.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

−4 −2 0 2 4

Obs Mod

Posit

ion

x (a

rcse

c)v (km.s−1)

Flux

(Jy)

v (km.s−1)

−5

0

5

−5

0

5

−4 −2 0 2 4

0

5

10

15

−4 −2 0 2 4

Obs Mod

Posit

ion

x (a

rcse

c)

v (km.s−1)

Flux

(Jy)

v (km.s−1)

Fig. 5. Comparison between model and observations. Note the large residue along the JET axis (North-South). It is the emisison from the out-flow??? Note also that the models produce too much flux, slightly, outside.

4

1 10 100 1000r [AU]

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

z / r

AV

=1

AV=1

AV=1

AV

=10

4 6 8 10 12 14log n

<H> [cm-3]

1 10 100 1000r [AU]

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

z / r

log !/n=-3.5

Tdust=20K

-12 -10 -8 -6 -4log " (CO)

Fig. 3. Plot of the density & CO abundance as a function of altitude with respect to the equatorial plane and radius in the disk (ProDimo modelwith depletion by factor 10 of the inner 200 AU.)

50 100

50

100

50 100

50

100

Fig. 4. CO 880µm map, comparison obs and model. The model is symetric and no noise was added to the model yet. Proper comparison will bemade in the UV plane.

3

1 10 100 1000r [AU]

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

z / r

AV

=1

AV=1

AV

=1

AV

=10

4 6 8 10 12 14log n

<H> [cm-3]

1 10 100 1000r [AU]

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

z / r

log !/n=-3.5

Tdust=20K

-12 -10 -8 -6 -4log " (CO)

Fig. 3. Plot of the density & CO abundance as a function of altitude with respect to the equatorial plane and radius in the disk (ProDimo modelwith depletion by factor 10 of the inner 200 AU.)

50 100

50

100

50 100

50

100

Fig. 4. CO 880µm map, comparison obs and model. The model is symetric and no noise was added to the model yet. Proper comparison will bemade in the UV plane.

3

Obs Model

−4−2 0 2 4

−4−2 0 2 4

−4 −2 0 2 40.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

−4 −2 0 2 4

Obs Mod

Posit

ion

x (a

rcse

c)v (km.s−1)

Flux

(Jy)

v (km.s−1)

−5

0

5

−5

0

5

−4 −2 0 2 4

0

5

10

15

−4 −2 0 2 4

Obs Mod

Posit

ion

x (a

rcse

c)

v (km.s−1)

Flux

(Jy)

v (km.s−1)

Fig. 5. Comparison between model and observations. Note the large residue along the JET axis (North-South). It is the emisison from the out-flow??? Note also that the models produce too much flux, slightly, outside.

4

−4−2 0 2 4

−4−2 0 2 4

−4 −2 0 2 40.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

−4 −2 0 2 4

Obs Mod

Posit

ion

x (a

rcse

c)v (km.s−1)

Flux

(Jy)

v (km.s−1)

−5

0

5

−5

0

5

−4 −2 0 2 4

0

5

10

15

−4 −2 0 2 4

Obs Mod

Posit

ion

x (a

rcse

c)

v (km.s−1)

Flux

(Jy)

v (km.s−1)

Fig. 5. Comparison between model and observations. Note the large residue along the JET axis (North-South). It is the emisison from the out-flow??? Note also that the models produce too much flux, slightly, outside.

4

Herschel/PACS observations of young sources in Taurus:the FIR counterpart of optical jets

L. Podio & the GASPS team (PI: B. Dent)

Class I/II jet-sources in Taurus

atomic lines [OI]63 μm, [CII]158 μm

extended along optical jet - J-shock

molecular lines H2O, high-J CO, OH

compact (<9”) - C-shock

FIR cooling ~ 10-3 – 10-4 L8

Mjet

~ 10-7 – 10-8 M8

/ yr

evolutionary trend from Class 0 to Class I/II

RED LOBE

BLUE LOBE

optical jet - T~1e4 FIR emission - T~200 K

T Tau: atomic + molecular FIR lines

Ice condensation as a planet formation mechanismKatrin Ros and Anders Johansen - Lund Observatory

‣growth to cm - dm‣time scale ~1000 yr

�0.6 �0.4 �0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6r [H]

�2

�1

0

1

2

z [H]

Can$giant$planets$form$by$gravita3onal$$fragmenta3on$of$protostellar$discs?$

!Dimitris$Stamatellos,$Cardiff$University$!

M★=1M!Mdisc=0.1M!Mp=1MJ!Rp=20!AU,!50!AU!

Rp=20$AU$ Rp=50$AU$

13$MJ$

CO ro-vibrational emission in protoplanetary disks: effects of UV and IR pumping

Wing-Fai Thi, IPAG

51Oph & HD 141569A: modelling 2 transition disks from the Herschel-GASPS sample

• Disk structure compatible with images• Fit to the photometry and PAH features

PACS

free-free

HD141569A51Oph

• Compact low-mass dust disk

What are the disk solid and gas masses?

51Oph & HD 141569A: Fine-structure line detections with Herschel-PACS

We modelled the gas lines to constrain the disc gas mass

51Oph HD141569A

d=130 pc d=108 pc

� �

���������������� ������������������������������������

����������������� ��������������

� ����������������������� ������������������������������ !�������� !

"���������""#

$��%�&��'"�

$��%�()((&��'"�

���������

Warm%debris%disks%in%transi.ng%planetary%systems:%

David%Ardila%(NHSC),%Bruno%Merín%(HSC),%Alvaro%Ribas%

(HSC),%Hervé%Bouy%(CAB)%

•  WISE+Kepler+Transits:%546%

matches.%

•  WISE:%3.4,%4.6,%12,%and%22%mic%

•  13%Objects%with%warm%excesses%

(>150%K).%Big%excesses%for%their%age!%

•  Accepted%paper%in%astro[ph:%Ribas%

et%al.%2012.%

EXOZODI

Can observations of exozodical dust at R<1AU be

explained by a link with outer planetesimal belts?

Amy Bonsor, IPAG, CNRS

Outer planetesimal

belt

Hypothesis : As yet undetected planets that orbit inside of the outer belt scatter comet-like bodies inwardsTest : N-body simulationsConclusions : Come and see my poster !

Exozodi Planets and scattering ?

Is sufficient material scattered inwards as an aftermath of planet formation or are such observations

only possible in the direct aftermath of a dynamical instability ?

Thank you!