One of the key issues associated with the understanding of large scale impacts is how the observable complex crater structural features (e.g., central peaks and pits, flat floors, ring shaped ridges and depressions, stratigraphic modifications, and faults) relate to the impactor's parameters (e.g., radius, velocity, and density) and the nonobservable transient crater measures (e.g., depth of penetration and diameter at maximum penetration). We have numerically modeled large-scale impacts on planets for a range of impactor parameters, gravity and planetary material strengths. From these we found that the collapse of the transient cavity results in the development of a tall, transient central peak that oscillates and drives surface waves that are arrested by the balance between gravitational forces and planetary strength to produce a wide range of the observed surface features. In addition, we found that the underlying stratigraphy is inverted outside of the transient cavity diameter (overturned flap region), but not inside. This change in stratigraphy is observable by remote sensing, drilling, seismic imaging and gravity mapping techniques. We used the above results to develop scaling laws and to make estimates of the impact parameters for the Chicxulub impact and also compared the calculated stratigraphic profile with the internal structure model developed by Hildebrand et. al. [1998], using gravity, seismic and other field data. For a stratigraphy rotation diameter of 90 km, the maximum depth of penetration is ∼43 km. The impactor diameter was also calculated. From the scaling relationships we get for a 2.7 g/cm^3 asteroid impacting at 20 km/s, or a 1.0 g/cm^3 comet impacting at 40 km/s, an impactor diameter of ∼13 km, and for a comet impacting at 60 km/s, an impactor diameter of ∼10 km.
[1]
Mark Pilkington,et al.
Gravity and magnetic field modeling and structure of the Chicxulub Crater, Mexico
,
1994
.
[2]
W. Dorn.
Tsunamis on the Moon?
,
1968,
Nature.
[3]
K. Holsapple,et al.
Point source solutions and coupling parameters in cratering mechanics
,
1987
.
[4]
K. A. Holsapple,et al.
On the Scaling of Crater Dimensions 2. Impact Processes
,
1982
.
[5]
P. Spudis,et al.
Chicxulub Multiring Impact Basin: Size and Other Characteristics Derived from Gravity Analysis
,
1993,
Science.
[6]
Boris A. Ivanov,et al.
IMPACT CRATER COLLAPSE
,
1999
.
[7]
J. C. Jaeger,et al.
Fundamentals of rock mechanics
,
1969
.
[8]
M. Pilkington,et al.
Size and morphology of the Chicxulub impact crater
,
1997,
Nature.
[9]
Thomas J. Ahrens,et al.
Cometary and meteorite swarm impact on planetary surfaces
,
1982
.
[10]
R Smith,et al.
Surface expression of the Chicxulub crater
,
1996,
Geology.
[11]
J. Head,et al.
The evolution of impact basins: Cooling, subsidence, and thermal stress
,
1985
.
[12]
W. McKinnon,et al.
Terrace Width Variations in Complex Mercurian Craters, and the Transient Strength of Cratered Mercurian and Lunar Crust
,
1991
.
[13]
J. M. McGlaun,et al.
CTH: A three-dimensional shock wave physics code
,
1990
.
[14]
J. Murray.
Oscillating peak model of basin and crater formation
,
1980
.
[15]
T. Ahrens,et al.
Planetary cratering mechanics
,
1993
.
[16]
B. Ivanov,et al.
Block Oscillation Model for Impact Crater Collapse
,
1997
.
[17]
Paul M. Schenk,et al.
Crater formation and modification on the icy satellites of Uranus and Saturn: Depth/diameter and central peak occurrence
,
1989
.