2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.pss.2017.06.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Morphometric studies of the Copernicus and Tycho secondary craters on the moon: Dependence of crater degradation rate on crater size

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…On the Moon few secondary craters have been directly measured, but one early study of secondary craters ranging from 200 m to 40 km in diameter found an average depth‐to‐diameter ( H/D) of 0.11 for those with simple morphologies (Pike & Wilhelms, 1978). Measurements for 23 small craters (~250 to 950 m in diameter) identified as secondaries yielded d/D values of ~0.02–0.2 for degraded Copernicus secondaries (with most values clustered around 0.05), and ~0.07–0.14 for somewhat fresher Tycho secondaries (Basilevsky et al, 2018). Additional measurements are available for a few other worlds.…”
Section: Ejecta Fragment Maximum Size‐velocity Distributions (Msvds)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the Moon few secondary craters have been directly measured, but one early study of secondary craters ranging from 200 m to 40 km in diameter found an average depth‐to‐diameter ( H/D) of 0.11 for those with simple morphologies (Pike & Wilhelms, 1978). Measurements for 23 small craters (~250 to 950 m in diameter) identified as secondaries yielded d/D values of ~0.02–0.2 for degraded Copernicus secondaries (with most values clustered around 0.05), and ~0.07–0.14 for somewhat fresher Tycho secondaries (Basilevsky et al, 2018). Additional measurements are available for a few other worlds.…”
Section: Ejecta Fragment Maximum Size‐velocity Distributions (Msvds)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additionally, at the spatial resolution of the LDRM, our roughness measurements are likely sampling more of the sloping crater walls for the relatively smaller ice‐bearing craters than for the different‐aged craters from the LPI crater database, and crater walls are relatively smoother than other impact crater units (Wang et al, 2019; Zuber et al, 2012). Furthermore, smaller impact craters may degrade and become smoother more quickly than larger craters of the same formation age (Bart & Melosh, 2010a, 2010b; Basilevsky et al, 2018; Mahanti et al, 2018). Due to these multiple variations between the small, ice‐bearing craters and the larger craters analyzed, the roughness values that we find for the interiors of ice‐bearing craters are likely to be lower than the roughness values of similarly aged craters that lack ice.…”
Section: Methods and Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, in high energy impact, the morphologic features of secondary craters and primary craters are similar. Therefore, it is difficult to completely distinguish secondary craters from primary craters based on their morphology, leading to great uncertainty [12,13]. Werner et al [14] estimated that counting all secondary craters would increase the CSFD model age by a factor of two at most.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%