Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Q U I N N R. P A S S E Y AND H. J. M E L O S H z
Division of Geological and Planetary Sciences, California Institute of Technology,
Pasadena, California 91125
Received October 5, 1979; revised F e b r u a r y 18, 1980
This paper investigates the p h y s i c s o f meteoroid breakup in the a t m o s p h e r e and its implications
for the o b s e r v e d features o f strewn fields. There are several effects which cause dispersion of the
meteoroid fragments: gravity, differential lift o f the fragments, bow s h o c k interaction j u s t after
breakup, centripetal separation by a rotating meteroid, and possibly a dynamical transverse
separation resulting from the crushing deceleration in the a t m o s p h e r e . Of these, we s h o w that
gravity alone can p r o d u c e the c o m m o n pattern in which the largest crater o c c u r s at the d o w n r a n g e
end of the scatter ellipse. The average lift-to-drag ratio o f the tumbling fragments m u s t be less t h a n
about 10-3, otherwise small fragments would produce small craters d o w n r a n g e o f the main crater,
and this is not generally observed. The cross-range dispersion is probably due to the c o m b i n e d
effects o f bow shock interaction, crushing deceleration, and possibly spinning o f the meteoroid. A
n u m b e r o f terrestrial s t r e w n fields are d i s c u s s e d in the light o f t h e s e ideas, which are formulated
quantitatively for a range o f meteoroid velocities, entry angles, and crushing strengths. It is found
that w h e n the crater size e x c e e d s about 1 km, the separation between the fragments upon landing is
a fraction of their o w n diameter, so that the crater formed by s u c h a fragmented meteoroid is almost
indistinguishable from that f o r m e d by a solid body o f the s a m e total m a s s and velocity.
MAP AREA N
I0 7
0
12 ~0 I/
@
150 09
16
o 04. 0 o 15
8
0 300 METERS
L - - ~
HENBURY
however, the craters are the products of a proximately 700 m north of the rim of the
fragmented meteoroid, the trajectory ap- main crater (center-to-center distance
pears to have been from the N E to SW about 1300 m) (Fredriksson et al., 1973).
(refer to Fig. 2 and Table III). The origin of L o n a r Lake was considered
to be volcanic by some authors (Nandy and
Kaalijarv Deo, 1961; Heide, 1963), while later investi-
On the Baltic island o f Oesel, Estonia
(58°24'N, 22°40'E) lies a group of nine T A B L E III
craters which are known as the Kaalijarv HERAULT a
craters. The largest crater (Gut Sail) is
located at one end of the field and the Crater number b Crater diameter e Distance from
(m) largest crater d
inferred trajectory is from SSW to N N E
(kin)
(refer to Fig. 3 and Table IV) (Kraus et al.,
1928; Heide, 1963; Krinov, 1966). 1 200 --
Small fragments of meteoritic iron (oc- 2 72 5.4
tahedrite class) have been found associated 3 57 5.6
4 55 e 6.8 s
with the craters (Krinov, 1961; Baldwin,
5 48 6.8
1963). 6 15 7.1
.6
5
o.~i FAUGERES
2
4
CABREROLLES
/
0
0 I 2 ,3 4 5 ~
• I [ I I J
HERA UL T
FIG. 2. Schematic map of the Herault, France, crater field. Note: the locations of the craters are only
approximate because they were plotted from written descriptions with respect to the towns of
Cabrerolles and Faugbres (Gi~ze and Cailleux, 1950; Janssen, 1951; Hoffleit, 1952).
6
o
3
0
8
0 o
5 7
o
2
O
4
o
9
t J J K,4ALIJZIRV
~ @
MAR AREA N
®
o o
@
®
®
MORASKO
F1G. 4. Schematic map of the Morasko crater field (modified from Korpikiewics, 1978).
CRATER FIELD FORMATION 217
~ A N
"3
ODESS~
FIG. 5. Schematic map of the Odessa crater field, Texas (after Evans, 1961).
218 PASSEY AND M E L O S H
WA 8A R
PAREA
P H Y S I C A L T H E O R Y OF M E T E O R S Equations
Introduction The simplest model for a t m o s p h e r i c en-
try and trajectory of a meteoroid assumes
The fall of a meteorite begins when it
that the E a r t h is flat (refer to Fig. 7). F o r
enters the u p p e r a t m o s p h e r e . Its initial geo-
this case the equations governing the mo-
centric velocity can range from l l.2 to
tion and ablation of the meteoroid are as
about 70 km sec -1 assuming the meteoroid
follows ( F e s e n k o v , 1951; T h o m a s and
to be in a heliocentric orbit. Its entry angle
Whipple, 1951; Allen and Eggers, 1958;
can also range from near zero to 90 ° with
Baldwin and Sheaffer, 1971; Renard and
respect to the local horizontal with 45 °
Cassidy, 1971):
being the most likely entry angle (Gilbert,
1893). dV CDpaA V ~
As the meteoroid collides with a t o m s in dt - M + g sin 0 (1)
the air, some of its kinetic energy is dissi-
pated. Some of this energy is used in ablat- dMdt _ ½ CHPaA~ V2 ( 'V2 ~ VCR2")' (2)
ing the b o d y b y melting a n d / o r vaporizing
the e x p o s e d surface. S o m e o f its m o m e n - dO Mg COS 0 -- ½CLPaAV2
tum is also transferred to the air and the dt = MV , (3)
220 PASSEY AND MELOSH
dt MV RE + Z '
(8)
and
dX V cos 0
dt - 1 + Z / R E ' (9)
vy" M'6 where RE is the radius of the Earth.
CRATER DIAMETERS
dt
and following energy-diameter scaling equa-
tions are used (Gault, 1974):
dX
--= Vcos0, (5) D = 0.0015 pml/rpt-ltZ(Ek)°'3r(sin (p)2/3, (10)
dt
where D = 0.025 pmt/rpt-l12(Ek)°'Z9(sin ~)1/3, (11)
P~ = P0 e x p ( - Z / H ) (6) D = 0.027 pm'lrpt-1/2(Ek)°'28(sin ~o)u3, (12)
and (Jacchia, 1958; Jacchia et al., 1967) where Pt is the density of the target material
and ~ois the impact angle with respect to the
A = Sv(M/pm) z/3. (7) horizontal.
The first equation (10) is for impacts
In the above equations, A is the effective against massive rock with resultant craters
cross-sectional area of the meteoroid, M is up to 10 m in diameter. There is a gradual
the mass, Sv is the shape factor, Pm is the transition to the second equation (11) which
density of the meteoroid, and g is the heat is valid up to 100-m diameter craters. The
of ablation for the meteoroidal material. third equation is valid for craters of kilome-
The coefficients for lift and drag are re- ter dimensions, with a gradual transition
spectively CL and CD and the heat transfer between the last two equations between
coefficient is CH. The angle 0 is with respect 100- and 1000-m diameter craters.
to the local horizontal, the meteoroid veloc-
SPECIFICATIONS FOR N U M E R I C A L
ity is V and the critical velocity is Vcn. Time
MODELING
is t, acceleration o f gravity is g, and
downrange distance is X. Meteor theory contains several unknown
The local air density pa is a function of parameters which include: shape, heat
the sea-level density P0, the altitude Z, and transfer coefficient, drag coefficient, and
the scale height H. lift-to-drag ratio. These parameters, there-
For a spherical planet, Eqs. (3) and (5) fore, have to be estimated for numerical
must be modified to include terms for the modeling.
curvature of the planet. The modified equa- F o r simplicity, the calculations assume
tions are (Gazley, 1961): that the meteoroid is spherical and this is
CRATER FIELD FORMATION 221
a p p r o x i m a t e l y correct if a nonspherical me- The scale height (H) for the E a r t h ' s at-
teoroid is spinning rapidly as it descends. m o s p h e r e varies from 6.4 k m at high alti-
The shape factor (SF) for a spherical b o d y is tudes to 8.4 k m at sea level. We a s s u m e a
a dimensionless quantity and a value o f 1.21 constant average value o f 7.2 k m (Renard
is used (McKinley, 1961, p. 173). The lift- and Cassidy, 1971). The numerical calcula-
to-drag ratio is a s s u m e d to be zero (CL = tions begin at an altitude o f 70 km. A b o v e
0.0), h o w e v e r , several calculations were this, there is no significant ablation o f rhete-
m a d e to determine the m a x i m u m value that oroids whose m a s s e s are greater than about
the lift coefficient could have and still pro- 104 kg.
duce the distribution o f craters found in
BREAKUP
k n o w n crater fields (this is discussed later).
The value o f the heat transfer coefficient The fragmentation process o f a meteor-
(Cr0, has b e e n suggested to be in the range oid is not fully understood. The presence o f
of 0.6 to 0.1 or less (McKinley, 1961, p. preexisting defects or planes o f w e a k n e s s in
174). Values o f the order 10 -2 have also the meteoroid can strongly influence its
been considered. This coefficient is a strong breakup. S o m e o f the m e c h a n i s m s pro-
function of speed, altitude, and body size p o s e d to cause fracturing include thermo-
(Allen et al., 1963; Seiff and T a u b e r , 1966) mechanical stresses (Lang, 1977) and aero-
but for the calculations presented here, a dynamic pressures (Baldwin and Sheaffer,
constant value o f 0.02 is used. The choice 1971). The latter is treated in this p a p e r
for the value o f this p a r a m e t e r is not as because the a e r o d y n a m i c model for
important for m a s s e s larger than 106 kg, as fragmentation dominates the t h e r m o m e -
are o f interest in this paper, as it is for chanical model at altitudes less than 80 kin.
meteoroid masses 104 kg or less (Renard The actual mechanics of fragmentation is
and Cassidy, 1971). a process unique to each meteoroid and the
The heat o f ablation ( 0 for an iron mete- n u m b e r of fragments produced can range
oroid is a combination o f the heat o f fusion from two to large numbers.
(~f -- 1.89 x 106 J kg -~) and the heat o f Buddhue (1942) sampled iron meteorites
vaporization (~v = 8.01 x 106 J kg -1) from nine separate falls and found that their
(Baldwin and Sheaffer, 1971). The c o m - crushing strengths varied from 6 x 106 to 4
bined value used in this p a p e r is 5.0 × l06 J x l0 s N m -2. Values o f 2 x l05 (Opik, 1958)
kg -1. and 5 x 108 N m -z (Baldwin and Sheaffer,
There exists a velocity below which no 1971) have also been proposed. It should be
appreciable ablation occurs for a given den- noted that B u d d h u e ' s values were derived
sity o f air. This is k n o w n as the critical from meteorites which not only survived
velocity (Vca) for which we use a value o f a t m o s p h e r i c stresses but also remained in-
3.0 k m sec -~. This is the experimentally tact after impact with the surface. These
determined velocity below which steel pel- values, therefore, should be considered as
lets do not glow at sea-level air densities m a x i m u m crushing strengths for the origi-
(Allen et al., 1952). nal nonfragmented meteoroids.
The drag coefficient (CD) for a spherical The altitude at which b r e a k u p occurs is a
meteoroid is a p p r o x i m a t e l y 0.5, and this function o f the strength and velocity o f the
value is a s s u m e d in the calculations pre- meteoroid as well as of the local air density
sented in this p a p e r (Hawkins, 1964, pp. (refer to Fig. 8). The stagnation pressure,
17-18). P, behind the b o w shock is:
Iron meteoroids with a density (Pm) o f 7.8
P = paV z. (13)
X 103 kg m -3 are a s s u m e d to impact a target
with a density (Pt) of 3.0 x l0 a kg m -3 for the This pressure is exerted on the leading edge
calculation o f crater diameters. o f the meteoroid. The pressure in the mete-
222 PASSEY AND MELOSH
5O
a b o v e 70 km), 1 × 107 , 1.2 × l0 s , and 5 ×
l0 s N m -z were used.
LLJ 40 ~2 Also, since the k n o w n crater fields dis-
play a range in crater sizes, the c o m p u t e r
model meteoroid was " b r o k e n d o w n " into
different sized fragments; e a c h fragment
being one-half the mass of the next larger
fragment. The individual trajectories of the
fragments were then calculated b y numeri-
cally integrating Eqs. 1-9 using a Runge-
~ 0 K u t t a routine. The c o m p u t a t i o n was termi-
/o zo .~o 4o 50 60 zo
nated when the last fragment struck the
INITIAL VELOCITY ~J {KM-SSC-')
ground and the separations b e t w e e n the
FIG. 8. Diagram showing how the breakup altitude meteorite impacts were calculated as well
varies for different yield strengths and velocities. This
figure covers meteoroids whose masses range from I0r as the diameters of the craters formed.
to 10° kg and the effects of atmospheric drag are
included. It should be noted that the incoming bodies CROSS-RANGEDISPERSION
being considered are large enough that maximum
deceleration is not reached before breakup (or impact) All o f the k n o w n crater fields exhibit a
occurs. cross-range spread as well as a downrange
spread (refer to Table VIII). To explain this
cross-range spread, there must exist a
oroid wake is nearly zero. This difference in transverse horizontal velocity c o m p o n e n t
pressure b e t w e e n the front and b a c k o f the associated with the trajectory o f the mete-
meteoroid is responsible for both decelerat- oroid fragments.
ing and crushing it. This model for breakup Several m e c h a n i s m s for supplying a
is essentially the same as was p r o p o s e d b y t r a n s v e r s e velocity c o m p o n e n t to the mete-
Baldwin and Sheaffer (1971). K r i n o v (1966) oroid fragments include: the effect of trans-
considers the fragmentation zone for most verse lift, centripetal separation from a
meteoroids to be b e t w e e n 12 and 30 k m rotating meteoroid, dynamical transverse
altitude. separation resulting f r o m the crushing
A p p r o x i m a t e b r e a k u p strengths can also b r e a k u p of the meteoroid, and the interac-
be calculated using the velocities and alti- tion of two or more bow shocks of the
tudes for the b r e a k u p of o b s e r v e d meteor- fragments just after breakup. E a c h of these
oids. The Sikhote-Alin meteoroid is said to are discussed in the text that follows.
have fragmented at an altitude of approxi-
mately 6 k m with a velocity of about 14 km
sec -~ ( F e s e n k o v , 1951; Krinov, 1966). This Effect of Lift
gives a b r e a k u p strength of about l0 s N The simplifying assumption of a spherical
m -~. The Paragould meteorite (Nelson, or tumbling meteoroid with zero lift m a y
1953) b r o k e up at about 16 k m altitude with not be entirely correct and a lift perpendic-
a velocity of 15 km sec -~ which gives a ular to the line of flight may play a role in
yield strength o f 3 × l07 N m -2. Other the final distribution of craters.
values considerably less than these are also T h e r e is a m a x i m u m value that the lift
possibilities, as would be e x p e c t e d in the coefficient (CL) can have for which the
case of " d u s t balls" or highly fractured largest crater in a given strewn field is
meteoroids. located at the downrange end. Values of CL
F o r the numerical modeling o f the larger than this m a x i m u m value would
breakup o f a meteoroid, yield strengths o f result in a strewn field where the smallest
near zero (corresponding to a b r e a k u p fragments are found scattered around (and,
CRATER FIELD FORMATION 223
T A B L E VIII
a Not applicable for crater fields with only two or three craters.
in particular, downrange from) the largest 107 and 109 kg, and trajectory angles (0)
fragments, a pattern which is not generally between 15 and 45° with respect to the
found in the known crater fields. horizontal, values for CL, by this method,
One method for determining an approxi- range from 10 -3 to 10 -z.
mate value for CL is to determine the value Numerical modeling was also used to
for which the upward forces on the meteor- determine the maximum value for CL. It
oid during entry equal the downward forces was found that a lift coefficient (CL) greater
(refer to Fig. 7 and Eq. 3). In this case, the than about 10 -3 would produce a crater field
trajectories show no steepening in their where some o f the smaller fragments im-
angle with respect to the horizontal as the pact downrange from the larger fragments
meteoroid is decelerated by drag, and all (assuming the lift to be directed trans-
o f the fragments impact at the same versely upward to the trajectory). There-
downrange distance (i.e., no separate cra- fore, a maximum value for the lift
ters are produced). By this method it was coefficient is o f order 10 -3 .
found that CL ~ 10 -3 and that lift cannot Applying this value (CL = 10 -3) to try and
play an important role in the formation o f explain the cross-range spread observed in
terrestrial crater fields. P r o o f o f the negligi- crater fields, we see
bility of lift follows.
F 1 CLPaAV 2
Since more than 90% of the effective lift a = ~ = 2 M ' (16)
occurs below 20 km altitude, the average
atmospheric density (tSa) for this zone is where a is acceleration and F is force and
~ra = 0.35 P0 (14) :1 = 1 CLOaAV~t 2 (17)
Y z ~t2 4 M '
then, setting dO/dt = 0 and solving for CL
(from (Eq. (3)) we see that where Y is ½ the cross-range separation and
t is the time of flight after breakup occurs at
CL ~ 2 M e cos O/~aAV ~. (15)
altitude Z.
F o r meteoroid masses (M) ranging between Substituting Eq. (7) for A (assuming an
224 PASSEY AND MELOSH
R t Pa 1/~
At = , (21)
CRATER FIELD FORMATION 225
and since the remaining flight time (t) is around the main crater would be expected
for the case o f vertical entry. For entry
t = Z/V2 sin O, (25) angles less than approximately 30° , how-
where V2 is resultant velocity along the ever, the separation between fragments is
modified trajectory, and assuming V2 ~ Vi, dominated by drag and gravity forces and
the separation distance (Y) is essentially all of the smaller meteoroid frag-
ments fall short of the largest fragment. The
Y = V,rt = (3R1Cpa)l'2 Z (26) interaction of bow shocks is, therefore,
2R2pm sin 0
primarily responsible for the cross-range
The maximum separation (Ymax) is spread observed, in the case o f shallow
achieved when breakup occurs at an alti- angle trajectories, rather than the gravity
tude o f two scale heights (about 15 km). By dominated downrange spread. Lift is prob-
studying the cross-range spread of craters ably insignificant in explaining cross-range
in known crater fields, it is possible to spread except in the case of fragments
determine an approximate value of the con- whose masses are less than 102 kg. The bow
stant C in Eq. (20). Using the information in shock interaction may also be related to the
Table VIII, the range in cross-range explosive effect that observers describe
spreads is from 0.1 to about 2.0 km. From when a meteoroid fragments (Krinov,
Eq. (26), the constant C is calculated to be 1966).
between 0.02 and 1.52 (assuming that the
ratio of crater sizes is linearly proportional Effect o f a Spinning Meteoroid
to the diameters o f the corresponding im- If one assumes that a large meteoroid is
pacting meteorites, and assuming a 15° an- spinning at the time breakup occurs, frag-
gle with a breakup at 15 km altitude). Since ments may separate from the parent body
the crater fields used in this calculation are with tangential velocities sufficient to ex-
not necessarily the result o f a breakup at 15 plain the cross-range separation observed
km, it should be noted that the higher value in terrestrial crater fields. This, however,
of 1.52 is more likely the true value (i.e., assumes that the spin axis o f the body is
since breakup was assumed to o c c u r at 15 oriented such that the tangential velocities
km altitude, where the maximum separa- o f the fragments are horizontally transverse
tion for this mechanism occurs, an actual to the original initial trajectory.
breakup at either higher or lower than 15 Assuming that a large meteoroid enters
km altitude would result in a calculation o f the atmosphere at 10 km sec -~ with an entry
C that is lower than the true value). F o r this angle o f 15° with respect to the horizontal
reason a value o f unity is assigned to C and and that breakup occurs at 15 km altitude, a
is probably correct to within a factor o f 2. transverse velocity of about 200 m sec -~ is
Assuming a ratio of meteoroid radii o f required to explain the cross-range spread
1 : 6 (corresponding to the ratio of observed observed. It can be easily shown that for a
crater diameters in several crater fields) and spherical meteoroid whose mass is 106 kg,
using a 15° angle trajectory with a breakup I0 rps is required to supply this tangential
at 15 km altitude, the expected cross-range velocity. F o r a 101°-kg body, about 0.5 rps
spread (Y) is about 1 km (refer to Eq. (26)). is required. The required angular velocity
This value is comparable to the cross-range varies inversely with altitude of breakup
spreads in Table VIII and is independent of and linearly with the initial velocity.
the masses of the meteoroid fragments.
The interaction o f bow shocks can result
in a crater field where smaller craters are Separation Due to Crushing
scattered completely around the main cra- Calculation of the transverse accelera-
ter. A symmetric distribution of fragments tions experienced by fragments as the ini-
226 PASSEY AND MELOSH
tial body is being crushed, show that the shallow angle entry to b e c o m e locked into a
resulting transverse velocities for large decaying geocentric orbit (assuming that
fragments may be sufficient to explain the impact did not occur on the first encoun-
cross-range dispersions observed in crater ter). This event is unlikely unless the initial
fields. geocentric velocity is between 11.2 and 20
The separations resulting from this mech- km see -1 so that upon passage through the
anism are roughly the same order o f magni- atmosphere, the meteoroid's velocity drops
tude as the separations from bow shock below the escape velocity.
interactions but are about three orders of Shallow angle entry allows for a much
magnitude greater than the separation due greater gravitational separation than nor-
entirely to lift. mally occurs at steeper angles. Figure 10
shows the maximum separation by gravita-
SHALLOW ANGLE TRAJECTORIES tional and drag forces that can occur be-
The most probable angle o f meteorite tween two meteoroids with masses o f 109
impact with a nongravitating body is 45 ° and 108 kg for various entry angles and
(Gilbert, 1893). Shoemaker (1962) extended velocities. These two masses were chosen
this calculation to a gravitating body and because at angles less than 30° a crater o f
derived the same angle, assuming no atmo- order 10~-m diameter and one about half
spheric deceleration. The probability for that size would result, which correspond to
impact at angles less than 30° with respect the diameters encountered in terrestrial
to the horizontal is one of every four crater fields. It is interesting to note that for
events. T h r e e o f every 100 events occur at velocities greater than about 20 km see -1,
angles less than 10° (Gault and Wedekind, the maximum separation between these
1978). bodies due to gravity and drag is less than
This paper is concerned with shallow 20 km, and would be less for larger objects.
angle entries less than about 30° because for This, therefore, gives an upper limit for the
angles steeper than 30° , there is no length o f a probable crater field, for similar-
significant gravity separation o f different sized bodies with velocities greater than 20
mass fragments, and the separation o f cra- km sec -1. For initial velocities between
ters for a 45 ° angle trajectory would be less 11.2 and 20 km sec -1 the separation can be
than 300 m if it is entirely due to the very large (greater than 100 km) assuming
interaction of bow shocks for a ratio of the entry angle was less than 5° (see Fig.
meteoroid radii o f I : 6. For an initial mass 10). Other effects o f shallow entry include
of 109 kg at a 45 ° angle, a single crater the elongation o f craters, characteristic
would be formed even if breakup occurs ejecta patterns and richochetting (Gault and
because the separation of the fragments Wedekind, 1978; Fudali and Chapman,
would be insufficient to produce multiple 1975).
craters. Sometimes the trajectory o f an
COMPARISON OF MODEL WITH KNOWN
incoming meteoroid is too shallow to hit the CRATER FIELDS
surface. The daytime fireball of August 10,
1972 (Sky & Tel. 1972; Rawcliffet al., 1974; DISCUSSION
Jacchia, 1974) was an example of one such A model for meteoroid breakup and for
meteoroid. The mass of this body has been the formation o f crater fields has been pre-
estimated to have been l0 s kg and its veloc- sented. Figures II, 12, and 13 show the
ity was about 15 km sec -1. Its entry angle regions of expected crater field formation
was approximately 4 ° and the lowest point for various initial masses, velocities, entry
in its trajectory was at an altitude o f 60 km. angles, and strengths o f meteoroids.
There is also the possibility that a m e t e - Single craters are produced when either
oroid can lose enough m o m e n t u m in a breakup has not occurred or where the
CRATER FIELD FORMATION 227
1 I I I
30 ° ..... I0 KM/SEC
\, ...... 20
.......... 70
\
~J 2 0 °
~J
u •
• °a "'s
u u ',
.......;°2.,
oc
"(q'9\ TRAJECTORY TOO SHALLOW FOR IMPACT
I0 °
t~
0 I I I l I I I
I 2 3 4 5 6 7
LOGIo SEPARATION (M)
FIG. 10. Graph showing the m a x i m u m separation b e t w e e n two meteoroids with m a s s e s o f 10~ and
l08 kg, respectively, as a function o f velocity and entry angle. Separation was a s s u m e d to have
occurred above 70 k m altitude. The separation presented here is only due to the effect o f gravity on the
differentially decelerated meteoroids.
largest crater in a given field has a diameter case, total overlap of craters occurs w h e n
larger than the separations achieved b y the the largest crater in the field is approxi-
fragments. The region o f " t o t a l o v e r l a p " is mately 400 m in diameter. The dotted lines
where the separation between the largest represent the d i a m e t e r (in meters) of a
fragments is of the same order of magnitude crater produced b y a fragment with an
as the diameters of the fragments them- initial m a s s of one-half the mass of the
selves. The region o f " s o m e o v e r l a p " is meteoroid at the time of breakup. This,
where the largest fragments produce cra- then, can only be used as a guide for the
ters with diameters larger than their respec- a p p r o x i m a t e diameter o f the largest crater
tive separations, but where the smallest in a given crater field. Baldwin and Sheaf-
craters produced are not overlapping. In fer (1971) conclude from their investigation
the region o f " n o o v e r l a p , " the diameters that objects o f mass less than l08 kg with
of the craters produced are m u c h smaller initial velocities o f 70 k m sec -1 will not
than the separations b e t w e e n fragments. survive ablation. The m u c h smaller surviv-
There also exists a region for which the ing m a s s e s indicated on this figure m a y be
meteoroid does not survive a t m o s p h e r i c due to the choice o f CH, the effects of
ablation. b r e a k u p , or to the lower entry angle used
The regions shown are derived from nu- here.
merical modeling o f the b r e a k u p and trajec- Figure 12 shows the zones for an entry
tory o f a meteoroid. Gravity, drag, and bow angle o f 15° and a b r e a k u p strength o f 5 ×
shock interaction forces are included in the 108 N m -~. H e r e , due to the longer atmo-
computations. The effect due to a spinning spheric ablation time, the crater diameters
parent b o d y is roughly c o m p a r a b l e to that are smaller than shown on Fig. l l for
due to b o w shock interaction. meteoroids of the same initial masses and
Figure 11 shows these zones for an entry velocities. The effect o f shallower impact
angle o f 30 ° and a b r e a k u p strength o f 5 × angles is also taken into account for the
108 N m -2 (refer to Fig. 8 for the altitude of crater diameters shown.
b r e a k u p for the various velocities). F o r this Figure 13 shows the predicted zones for
228 PASSEY A N D M E L O S H
8, : 30 ° X : 5X 10 8 NT-M -2 p o s s i b l e to a p p r o x i m a t e l y d e r i v e t h e s e p a -
I0 "'eOoo."'"..,.. ......
" ~Ooo..... r a m e t e r s f r o m t h e t e r r e s t r i a l c r a t e r fields
(refer to Table VIII).
""100o... 5INGLE CRATER F i g u r e 14 s h o w s a d i s t a n c e v s l o g d i a m e -
"'...., ......................................................
""~°o.. (TOTAL OV[RLAP)
ter plot for terrestrial and computer-gener-
8 . . . . a t e d c r a t e r fields. T h e lines for t h e t e r r e s -
trial c r a t e r fields (Fig. 14A) r e p r e s e n t a
. .. - .
l e a s t - s q u a r e s fit o f t h e l o g d i a m e t e r v s t h e
CRATER FIEL.O- .
\ CsOMEOVE~L4P) / center-to-center distance from the largest
• ioo . ........ •.. . •• . c r a t e r in t h a t c r a t e r field.
In the following estimates of entry angle
a n d a l t i t u d e o f b r e a k u p for t h e k n o w n cra-
t e r fields, t h e initial v e l o c i t i e s w e r e as-
s u m e d to b e b e t w e e n 11.2 a n d 30 k m s e c - L
' Io ....... "" / BURNUP INTERPRETATION OF TERRESTRIAL
CRATER FIELD
2 i A ii L J i i J
I0 20 ,30 40 50 60 70 Campo del Cielo
INITIAL VELOCITY Vi (KM-SEC") T h e e x t r e m e r e l a t i v e d i m e n s i o n s o f this
FIG. 11. Diagram showing the zones of crater field c r a t e r field o f 20 x 4 k m s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e
formation or burnup for meteoroids with a yield e n t r y a n g l e w a s i n i t i a l l y l e s s t h a n 10° a n d
strength (k) of 5 × 108 N m -2 and an entry angle (00 of t h a t b r e a k u p o c c u r r e d at l e a s t as high as 15
30° with respect to the horizontal. The dotted contours k m a l t i t u d e . R e n a r d a n d C a s s i d y (1971)
indicate the diameter (in meters) of a crater produced
by a fragment with an initial mass of one-half the mass h a v e s u g g e s t e d t h a t b r e a k u p o c c u r r e d at 46
of the meteoroid at the time of breakup. This should k m . T h i s p o s s i b i l i t y r e q u i r e s t h a t t h e initial
only be used as a guide for the approximate diameter e n t r y a n g l e w a s l e s s t h a n a b o u t 6 ° to p r o -
of the largest crater in a given crater field.
~,= t5 ° ~,:SX 10 8 N T - M -2
a n e n t r y angle o f 15 ° a n d a b r e a k u p s t r e n g t h
o f 1 x 107 N m -2. A l t h o u g h Fig. 8 s h o w s
t h a t for this s t r e n g t h , b r e a k u p w o u l d o c c u r
•..eo ° . . .~. . ......
. . . . . . . . . . !
f o r a n y initial v e l o c i t y b e t w e e n l0 a n d 70
k m s e c -~, t h e s m a l l z o n e o f n o b r e a k u p 8 \CRATER FIELD ..~
(102-10 ~ k g a n d 10-20 k m s e c - 0 o c c u r s
because these relatively small masses are
\ (SOME OVERLAP)
..........."
,..'""
• •
" ,'oo . . . . . . . ~ ~ A T E R ~ F I E ~ Q I
decelerated below the velocity needed for
b r e a k u p to o c c u r at l o w e r a l t i t u d e s . ~,~ SINGLE CRATER X .."(N~OV~-RL'4PY
T h e l a r g e s t c r a t e r in a s t r e w n field is
p r e d i c t e d to h a v e a d i a m e t e r b e t w e e n 100 /
a n d I000 m a n d this is c o m p a r a b l e w i t h t h e
l a r g e s t c r a t e r s in t e r r e s t r i a l c r a t e r fields.
T h e l a r g e s t u n c e r t a i n t y in t h e n u m e r i c a l BURNUP
m o d e l i n g is in t h e a l t i t u d e o f b r e a k u p ,
w h i c h is r e l a t e d to t h e y i e l d s t r e n g t h o f t h e 2! ~ , .i j , L , ,
meteoroid. Since the cross-range width of a IO 20 60 40 50 60 70
g i v e n c r a t e r field d e p e n d s p r i m a r i l y u p o n INITIAL VELOCITY Vi (KM-SEC-')
the breakup altitude and the downrange FIG. 12. Same as Fig. 11 but foran entry angle (00
l e n g t h is r e l a t e d to t h e a n g l e o f e n t r y , it is of 15°.
CRATER FIELD FORMATION 229
Henbury
)o / oo
0 3_,'3~x,~F I I I
The dimensions o f this crater field of 0.6 o 500 iooo f5oo
O l 5 TANCE (M)
× 0.4 km suggest a possible breakup alti-
tude o f about 10 km with an entry angle of FIG. 14. (A) Graph showing a least-squares fit for log
from l0 to 20°, depending on the velocity. crater diameter vs center-to-center distance from the
largest crater in the respective terrestrial crater fields.
Many other possibilities exist and this is The line for Sikhote-Alin is the upper boundary line as
only an example. s h o w n in Fig. 16 and is not a least-squares fit for all of
the craters in that crater field. (B) Graph showing
Herault calculated distributions of craters for various initial
If these craters are o f impact origin, they velocities and entry angles. The meteoroids were
assumed to have a yield strength of I x l0 7 N m -~ and
could have resulted from a low angle entry
an initial unbroken mass o f 10a kg. The distances
(less than 10°) with a breakup at or above 15 shown are due to the effect of gravity on the differen-
km altitude. tially decelerated fragments.
230 PASSEY AND MELOSH
/ Morasko
k m w i t h an e n t r y a n g l e o f 15 a n d 30 ° w i t h t i o n o f b o w s h o c k s o f the i n d i v i d u a l m e t e -
r e s p e c t to the h o r i z o n t a l . oroid fragments after breakup but may also
b e d u e to a c o m b i n a t i o n o f c e n t r i p e t a l s e p a -
CONCLUSIONS AND SUMMARY
ration from a rotating meteoroid and a
Numerical modeling of the physics of a d y n a m i c a l t r a n s v e r s e s e p a r a t i o n o f frag-
m e t e o r o i d t r a j e c t o r y a n d b r e a k u p in t h e ments resulting from the crushing breakup
a t m o s p h e r e y i e l d s s e v e r a l n e w i n s i g h t s into o f the b o d y . T h e b o w s h o c k i n t e r a c t i o n
the parameters controlling these processes. a l l o w s for a m a x i m u m c r o s s - r a n g e s e p a r a -
It w a s f o u n d t h a t e n t r y a n g l e s l e s s t h a n 30 ° t i o n for a b r e a k u p at a p p r o x i m a t e l y 15 k m
a r e the m o s t e f f e c t i v e f o r t h e p r o d u c t i o n o f altitude.
c r a t e r fields. G e n e r a l l y , t h e l a r g e s t c r a t e r A l i f t - t o - d r a g r a t i o o f 10 -3 o r l e s s w a s
e x p e c t e d in a n y c r a t e r field s h o u l d be be- estimated on the basis of the observed
t w e e n 100 a n d 750 m in d i a m e t e r . F o r l a r g e r gravity-dominated separation of meteorite
c r a t e r s , t h e f r a g m e n t s fall so c l o s e t o g e t h e r f r a g m e n t s in s t r e w n fields. Lift is p r o b a -
t h a t t h e c r a t e r a p p e a r s to h a v e b e e n m a d e b l y o n l y i m p o r t a n t for m e t e o r o i d s w i t h
b y a single u n f r a g m e n t e d o b j e c t . m a s s e s less t h a n 102 kg, o r e x t r e m e l y
I r o n m e t e o r o i d s w i t h initial m a s s e s rang- s h a l l o w a n g l e s o f e n t r y (less t h a n 8°).
ing f r o m 10 ~ to 10 l° k g a r e t h e m o s t l i k e l y to T h e d o w n r a n g e s p r e a d o f c r a t e r s is c o n -
p r o d u c e c r a t e r fields. T h e t e r r e s t r i a l c r a t e r trolled primarily by drag and gravity forces
fields t h a t a r e d i s c u s s e d a r e p r o b a b l y the for e n t r y a n g l e s l e s s t h a n 30 ° . F o r s t e e p e r
r e s u l t o f t h e b r e a k u p o f large m e t e o r o i d s a n g l e s , t h e s e f o r c e s h a v e little effect a n d
w h o s e initial m a s s e s r a n g e d f r o m 10 r to 109 t h e s e p a r a t i o n is d u e to the b o w s h o c k
kg ( w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n o f C l e a r w a t e r interaction.
Lakes). T h e s e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s a l l o w us to d e r i v e
T h e c r o s s - r a n g e s p r e a d in k n o w n c r a t e r approximate values of the angle of entry
fields is p r o b a b l y p r o d u c e d b y t h e i n t e r a c - a n d b r e a k u p a l t i t u d e s f o r m the d i s t r i b u t i o n
o f c r a t e r s in t e r r e s t r i a l c r a t e r fields.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We would like to thank Dr. W. A. Cassidy for
"~ 5/KHOTE - AL/N unpublished information relating to the Campo del
Cielo crater field. Also, our appreciation is given to the
aZ anonymous reviewers for constructive comments on
o°O .~° ;.,. the original manuscript. This work was supported by
t~ ° o~O ,.. NASA Grant NSG-7316.
°8 ° ~ ~
~o ~,~oo o o
OoffO o''\
C5 ®g og oo
REFERENCES
® o* . ° ~%
ALLEN, H. J., AND BALDWIN, 13. S. (1967). Frothing
C3
as an explanation of the acceleration anomalies of
cometary meteors. J. Geophys. Res. 72, 3483-3496.
\ ALLEN, H. J., AND EGGERS,J. A., JR. 0958). A Study
of the Motion and Aerodynamic Heating of Ballistic
i Missiles Entering the Earth's Atmosphere at High
~o~oo 2000
Supersonic Speeds. NACA Report 1381.
DISTANCE i~i,
ALLEN, H. J., AND JAMES,N. A. (1964). Prospects for
FIG. 16. Log-linear plot of crater diameter vs center- Obtaining Aerodynamic Heating Results from Anal-
to-center distance from the largest crater in the ysis of Meteor Flight Data. NASA TN D-2069.
Sikhote-Alin crater field. The scatter in the points ALLEN, H. J., SEIFF, A., AND WINOVICH, W. (1963).
indicates that several stages of breakup occurred. The Aerodynamic Heating of Conical Entry Vehicles at
broken line marks an approximate upper boundary for Speeds in Excess of Earth Parabolic Speed. NASA
the craters and probably relates to the first stage of TR R-185.
breakup. ALLEN, W. A., RINEHART,J. S., AND WHITE, W. C.
232 PASSEY AND MELOSH
(1952). Phenomena associated with the flight of pact and Explosion Cratering (D. J. Ruddy, R. O.
uRra-speed pellets, Part I. Ballistics. J. Appl. Phys. Pepin, and R. B. Merrill, Eds.), pp. 247-275.
23, 132-137. Pergamon, Oxford.
BALDWIN, B. S., AND ALLEN, H. J. (1968). A Method EVANS, G. L. (1961). Investigations at the Odessa
for Computing Luminous E~ciencies from Meteor meteor craters. In Proc. Geophysical
Data. NASA TN D-4808. Lab./Lawrence Radiation Lab. Cratering Sympo-
BALDWIN, B., AND SHEAFFER, Y. (1971). Ablation sium, Washington, D.C., March 28-29, 1961.
and breakup of large meteoroids during atmospheric Univ. California, Livermore, Lawrence Radiation
entry. J. Geophys Res. 76, 4653-4668. Lab. Rept. UCRL-6438, Pt. 1, Paper D.
BALDWIN, R. B. (1963). The Measure o f the Moon. FESENKOV, V. G. (1951). On the motion of the sikhote-
Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago. Alin meteorite. Meteoritika 9, No. 3. [in Russian]
BARRINGER, B. (1967). Historical notes on the Odessa FREDRIKSSON, K., MILTON, D. J., DUBE, A., AND
meteorite crater. Meteoritics 3, 161-168. BALASUNDARAM, M. S. (1973). The Lunar meteor-
BARRINGER, R. W. (1967). World's meteorite craters ite crater, India (abst.). Meteoritics 8, 35.
("Astroblemes"). Meteoritics 3, 151-157. FUDALI, R. F., AND CASSIDY, W. A. (1972). Gravity
BARTRUM, C. O. (1932). Meteorite craters in Arabia reconnaissance at three Mauritanian craters of ex-
and Ashanti. Brit. Astron. Assoc. J. 42, 398-399. plosive origin. Meteoritics 7, 51-70.
BEALS, C. S. (1964). A re-examination of the craters in FUDALI, R. e., AND CHAPMAN, D. R. (1975). Impact
the Faug'eres-Cabrerolles region of southern France. survival conditions for very large meteorites, with
Meteoritics 2, 85-91. special reference to the legendary Chinguetti mete-
BEALS, C. S., FERGUSON, G. M., AND LANDAU, A. orite. Smithson. Contrib. Earth Sci. 14, 55-62.
(1956). A search for analogies between lunar and FUDALI, R. F., AND CRESSY, P. J. (1976). Investiga-
terrestrial topography on photographs of the Cana- tion of a new stony meteorite from Mauritania with
dian Shield, Part II. Roy. Astron. Soc. Can. J. 1, some additional data on its find site: AoueUoul
250-261. crater. Earth Planet. Sci. Lett. 30, 262-268.
BEALS, C. S., INNES, M. J. S., AND ROTTENBERG, J. GAULT, D. E. (1974). Impact Cratering. IDA Primer in
A. (1960). The search for fossil meteorite craters. Lunar Geology (R. Greeley and P. Schlitz, Eds.),
Curr. Sci. 6, 205-262. NASA Ames Research Center. pp. 137-175.
BINZEL, R. P., AND VAN FLANDERN, T. C. (1979). GAULT, D. E., AND WEOEKIND, J. A. (1973). Diame-
Minor planets: The discovery of minor satellites. ter, depth, displaced mass, and effects of oblique
Science 203, 903-905. trajectories for impact craters formed in crystalline
BRONSHTEN, V. A. (1964). Problems o f the Movement rocks (abst.). Meteoritics 8, 37.
o f Large Meteoric Bodies in the Atmosphere. GAULT, D. E., AND WEDEKIND, J. A. (1978). Experi-
NASA TT F-247. mental studies of oblique impact. In Proc. Lunar
BUDDHUE, J. D. (1942). Compressive strength of Sci. Conf. 9th, pp. 3843-3875. Pergamon, Oxford.
meteorites. Pop. Astron. 50, 390-391. GAZLEY, C. (1961). Atmospheric entry. In Handbook
CASSIDY, W. A. (1970). Discovery of a new multiton o f Astronautical Engineering, Chap. 10. McGraw-
meteorite at Campo del Cielo (abst.). Meteoritics 5, Hill, New York.
187. GiZZE, B., AND CAILLEUX, A. (1950). Existence proba-
CASSIDY, W. A. (1971). A small meteorite crater: ble de crat~res m~t~oriques h caberolles et
Structural details. J. Geophys. Res. 76, 3896-3912. Faugeres (Herault). C.R. Acad. Sci. 230, 1534-
CASSIDY, W. A., AND RENARD, i . E. (1970). On the 1536.
problem of the entry trajectory of the Campo del GILBERT, G. K. (1893). The Moon's face: A study of
Cielo meteorite (abst.). Meteoritics 5, 187. the origin of its features. Bull. Phil. Soc. Washing-
CASSIDY, W. A., VILLAR, L. M., BUNCH, T. E., ton 12, 241-292.
KOHMAN, T. P., AND MILTON, D. J. (1965). Meteor- HAWKINS, G. S. (1964). The meteor process. In The
ites and craters of Campo del Cielo, Argentina. Physics and Astronomy o f Meteors, Comets, and
Science 149, 1055-1064. Meteorites. McGraw-Hill, New York.
CHAPMAN, D. R. (1958). An Approximate Analytical HEIDE, V. (1963). Meteorites. Univ. of Chicago Press,
Method for Studying Entry into Planetary Atmo- Chicago.
spheres. NACA TN 4276. HODGE, P. W. (1965). The Henbury meteorite craters.
CHEN, K. K. (1975). Study o f the Ablative Effects on Smithson. Contrib. Astrophys. 8, 199-213.
Tekite. Final Report AVCO Corp., Wilmington, HOFFLEIT, D. (1952). More meteor craters. Sky & Tel.
Mass. 11, No. 6, 134.
CLASSEN, J. (1978). The meteorite craters of Morasko HOLM, D. A. (1962). New meteorite localities in the
in Poland. Meteorites 13, 245-255. Rub' AI Khali, Saudi Arabia. Amer. J. Sci. 260,
DENCE, M. R., GRIEVE, R. A. F., AND ROBERTSON, P. 303-309.
B. (1977). Terrestrial impact structures: Principal IRWIN, J. B. (1963). Two more ancient Canadian
characteristics and energy considerations. In lm- meteorite craters. Sky & Tel. 26, No. 4, 198-199.
CRATER FIELD FORMATION 233
JACCHIA, L. G. (1958). On two parameters used in the MILTON, D. J. (1968). Structural Geology, Henbury
physical theory of meteors. Smithson. Contrib. As- Meteorite Craters, Northern Territory, Australia.
trophys. 2, 180-187. U.S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Paper 599C.
JACCHIA, L. G. (1974). A meteorite that missed the MILTON, D. J., AND DUBE, A. (1977). Ejecta at Lonar
Earth. Sky & Tel. 48, No. 1, 4-9. Crater, India. Meteoritics 12, 311 (Abstract).
JACCHIA, L. G., VERNIANI, F., AND BRIGGS, R. E, MOORE, H. J. (1976). Missile Impact Craters, N e w
(1967). An analysis of the atmospheric trajectories Mexico, and Applications to Lunar Research. U.S.
of 413 precisely reduced photographic meteors. Geol. Surv. Prof. Paper 812-B.
Smithson. Contrib. Astrophys. 10, No. 1. NANDY, N. C., AND DEO, V. B. (1961). Origin of the
JANSSEN, C. L. (1951). The meteor craters in Herault, Lonar Lake and its alkalinity. TISCO, 144-155,
France. J. Roy. Astron. Sac. Can. 45, 190-198. July.
KORPIKIEWlCZ, H. (1978). Meteoritic shower NELSON, H. E. (1953). The Resistance o f the Air to
Morasko. Meteoritics 13, 311-326. Stone-Dropping Meteors. Ph.D dissertation, Augus-
KaANCK, S. H., AND SINCLAm, G. W., Clearwater tana Library Publ. No. 24, Augustana College, Rock
Lake (1963). New Quebec. Geol. Surv. Can. Bull. Island, Ill.
100, 1-25. OPIK, E. J. (1958). Physics o f Meteor Flight in the
KRAUSS, E., MEYER, R., AND WEGENER, A. (1928). Atmosphere. Interscience, New York.
Untersuchungen tiber den Krater von Sail auf Osel. PHILBY, H. (1933). Rub' al Khali. Georg. J. 81, 1-
Gerlands Beitr. Geophys. 20, 312-378. 26.
KRINOV, E. L. (1960). Principles o f Meteoritics (I. RAWCLIFFE, R. D., BARTKY, C. D., LI, F., GORDON,
Vidziunas, Transl.). Pergamon, New York. E., AND AND CARTA, D. (1974), Meteor of August
KRINOV, E. L. (1961). The Kaalij~Lrv meteorite craters 10, 1972. Nature 247, 449-450.
on Saarema Island, Estonian SR. Amer. J. Sci. 259, RENARO, M. L., AND CASSID¢, W. A. (1971). Entry
430-440. trajectory and orbital calculations for the crater 9
KRINOV, E. L. (1966). Giant Meteorites, (J. S. Ro- meteorite, Campo del Cielo, Argentina. J. Geophys.
mankiewicz, Transl.) Pergamon, New York. Res. 76, 7916-7923.
KRINOV, E. L. (1974). Fragmentation of the Sikhote- ROMANA,A., AND CASSIDY,W. A. (1973). The Campo
Alin meteoritic body. Meteoritics 9, 255-262. dei Cielo, Argentina meteorite crater field (abst.).
LAFOND, E. C., AND DIETZ, R. S. (1964). Lonar Meteoritics 8, 430-431.
crater, India, a meteorite crater? Meteoritics 2, 111- SEIFF, A., AND TAUBER, M. E. (1966). Minimization
117. o f the Total Heat Input for Manned vehicles Enter-
LANG, B. (1977). Thermomechanical fracturing of ing the Earth's Atmosphere at Hyperbolic Speeds.
meteorites during atmospheric passage. In Comets, NASA TR R-236.
Asteroids and Meteorites (A. H. Delsemme, Ed.), SHOEMAKER, E. M. (1962). Interpretation of Lunar
pp. 153-157, University of Toledo, Toledo, Ohio. craters. In Physics and Astronomy o f the Moon (Z.
McCRosKY, R. E, (1970). Fireballs and the physical Kopal, Ed.), pp. 283-359. Academic Press, New
theory of meteors. Astron. Inst. Czech. Bull. 21, York.
No. 5,271-296. Sky & Tel. (1972). A great daylight fireball over the
McKINLEY, D. W. R. (1961). Physical theory of Northwest. Sky & Tel. 44, No. 4, 269-272.
meteors. In Meteor Science and Engineering. Mc-
Graw-HiU, New York. Sky & Tel. (1979). Morasko Meteorite craters, Sky &
MARTIN, J. J. (1966). Kinematic motion in the atmo- Tel. 57, No. 4, 335.
sphere. In Atmospheric Reentry, Chap. 3. Prentice- TEDESCO, E. F. (1979). Binary asteroids: Evidence for
Hall, Englewood, N.J. their existence from light-curves. Science 203, 905-
MILLMAN, P. M. (1971). The space scars of Earth. 907.
Nature 232, 161-164. THOMAS, R. N., AND WHIPPLE, F. L. (1951). The
MILTON, D. J. (1963). The Campo del Cielo meteorite physical theory of meteors. II. Astroballistic heat
crater field, Argentina. U.S. Geol. Surv. Astrogeol. transfer. Astrophys. J. 114, No. 3,448-465.
Stud. Annu. Progr. Rep., Pt. B, 91-97 (open file VERIANi, F. (1969). Structure and fragmentation of
report). meteoroids. Space Sci. Rev. 10, 230-261.