Activity distribution of comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko from combined measurements of non-gravitational forces and torques

¹ Institut für Geophysik und extraterrestrische Physik, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Mendelssohnstr. 3, 38106 Braunschweig, Germany
e-mail: n.attree@tu-braunschweig.de
² Aix Marseille Univ., CNRS, CNES, Laboratoire d’Astrophysique de Marseille, 13388 Marseille, France
³ Alma Mater Studiorum – Università di Bologna, Dipartimento di Ingegneria Industriale, Via Fontanelle 40, 47121 Forlì, Italy
⁴ Alma Mater Studiorum – Università di Bologna, Centro Interdipartimentale di Ricerca Industriale Aerospaziale, via Baldassarre Carnaccini 12, 47121, Forlì, Italy
⁵ CNRS, Laboratoire J.-L. Lagrange, Observatoire de la Côte d’Azur, Boulevard de l’Observatoire, CS 34229, 06304 NICE Cedex 4, France

Received: 17 October 2022
Accepted: 19 December 2022

Abstract

Aims. Understanding the activity is vital for deciphering the structure, formation, and evolution of comets. We investigate models of cometary activity by comparing them to the dynamics of 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko.

Methods. We matched simple thermal models of water activity to the combined Rosetta datasets by fitting to the total outgassing rate and four components of the outgassing induced non-gravitational force and torque, with a final manual adjustment of the model parameters to additionally match the other two torque components. We parametrised the thermal model in terms of a distribution of relative activity over the surface of the comet, and attempted to link this to different terrain types. We also tested a more advanced thermal model based on a pebble structure.

Results. We confirm a hemispherical dichotomy and non-linear water outgassing response to insolation. The southern hemisphere of the comet and consolidated terrain show enhanced activity relative to the northern hemisphere and dust-covered, unconsolidated terrain types, especially at perihelion. We further find that the non-gravitational torque is especially sensitive to the activity distribution, and to fit the pole-axis orientation in particular, activity must be concentrated (in excess of the already high activity in the southern hemisphere and consolidated terrain) around the south pole and on the body and neck of the comet over its head. This is the case for both the simple thermal model and the pebble-based model. Overall, our results show that water activity cannot be matched by a simple model of sublimating surface ice driven by the insolation alone, regardless of the surface distribution, and that both local spatial and temporal variations are needed to fit the data.

Conclusions. Fully reconciling the Rosetta outgassing, torque, and acceleration data requires a thermal model that includes both diurnal and seasonal effects and also structure with depth (dust layers or ice within pebbles). This shows that cometary activity is complex. Nonetheless, non-gravitational dynamics provides a useful tool for distinguishing between different thermophysical models and aids our understanding.