Techniques d'observation spectroscopique d'astéroïdes
Techniques d'observation spectroscopique d'astéroïdes Techniques d'observation spectroscopique d'astéroïdes
84 CHAPTER 5. M4AST - MODELING OF ASTEROIDS SPECTRA 1.2 1.15 1.15 Relative Reflectance (a) 1.1 1.05 1 0.95 0.9 0.85 0.8 0.75 0.7 Apophis Sq S Sr 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 Wavelength [um] Relative Reflectance (b) 1.1 1.05 1 0.95 0.9 0.85 0.8 0.75 1996 FG3 Ch Cg Xc 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 Wavelength [um] Figure 5.6: Classification in Bus-DeMeo taxonomical system for: a)) (99942) Apophis, and b) (175706) 1996 FG3. All the spectra are normalized to 1.25 µm. tel-00785991, version 1 - 7 Feb 2013 5.2.3 Updating the database Permanent spectra can be added into the database via a dedicated interface - update database (Fig. 5.2) - that requires administrative rights. The information needed to add a new permanent file with spectral data are asteroid designations (an additional utility is provided to check the designations), information about the observation (date, investigator, and IAU code of the observatory), and information about the uploaded file containing the measurements. Each record submitted to the database can be removed only from this interface. 5.3 Testing of M4AST The functionality of M4AST is exemplified here by the analysis of two spectra available in the database that were previously discussed by Binzel et al. [2009], and de León et al. [2011a]. Our selection here covers a wide variety of spectra, (99942) Apophis is an Sq type asteroid with moderate features, and (175706) 1996 FG3 is a primitive type with featureless spectra. My choice for these objects is not trivial. (99942) Apophis is a NEA which came very close to the Earth. The next approach will occur in 2029 and its Minimum Orbital Intersection Distance (MOID) is less than 40,000 km from the Earth surface. 1996 FG3 is the main target of the future mission Marco-Polo-R. Ground based science is highly required for this object if the mission will take place. The discussion of the taxonomic type of each object is made with reference to both Fig. 5.6 for Bus-DeMeo taxonomy and Fig. 5.7 for G-mode taxonomies. Table 5.1 summarizes the comparison of asteroid spectra with spectra from the Relab database. The corresponding plots are given in Fig. 5.8.
CHAPTER 5. M4AST - MODELING OF ASTEROIDS SPECTRA 85 Table 5.1: Summary of the results obtained by matching the asteroids spectra with spectra from the Relab database. For each asteroid, I show the best two matches, obtained by measuring the standard deviation (std. dev.) and the correlation coefficient (corr. coef.). Spectrum std. dev. corr. coef. Meteorite/Sample Sample ID Type Texture (99942) 0.01756 0.98013 Simulant CM-CMP-001-B Soil/Lunar Particulate 0.01970 0.98224 Hamlet OC-TXH-002-C OC-LL4 Particulate (99942) 0.01539 0.96245 Cherokee Springs TB-TJM-090 OC-LL6 Particulate de-reddened 0.01609 0.97272 Cat Mountain MB-DTB-035-A OC-L5 Particulate (175706) 0.01219 0.90546 Sete Lagoas MH-JFB-021 OC-H4 Slab 0.01504 0.85366 Murchison heated 1000 ◦ C MB-TXH-064-G CC-CM2 Particulate 5.3.1 Results tel-00785991, version 1 - 7 Feb 2013 The first spectrum considered to exemplify the M4AST routines is that of the potential hazardous asteroid (99942) Apophis [Binzel et al., 2009]. On the basis of this spectrum this asteroid was found to be an Sq type, and has a composition that closely resemble those of LL ordinary chondrite meteorites. M4AST classifies this spectrum in the Bus-DeMeo taxonomy as an Sq-type (Fig. 5.6a). The next two types, S and Sr, are relatively good matches, but have larger errors. Applying the G13 taxonomy, M4AST classifies this asteroid as being in class 2 (Fig. 5.7a). Two other classes (namely 6 and 7) are relatively close in terms of g factor (Fig 5.7a). Class 2 has the representative members (7) Iris and (11) Parthenope, which are S and Sq type asteroids according to DeMeo et al. (2009). The classes 2, 6, and 7 are equivalent to the S profile. Being an Sq type, for this asteroid spectrum it can be applied the space weathering model proposed by Brunetto et al. [2006]. Thus, fitting the spectrum with an exponential continuum we found C s = -0.196 µm, corresponding to a moderate spectral reddening. The result obtained by Binzel et al. [2009] is C s = -0.17±0.01 µm. This difference could be caused by the different method that they used: their "best fit was performed as an integral part of the overall minimum RMS solution". The C s value gives the number of displacements per cm 2 , d = 0.74×10 19 displacements/cm 2 . Next, will be analyzed both the original spectrum and the de-reddened spectrum. Comparing the original spectrum of (99942) Apophis with all laboratory spectra from Relab, M4AST found matches with some ordinary chondrite meteorites (L and LL subtypes, and petrologic classes from 3 to 6) and some lunar soils (Figs. 5.8a and 5.8b). Referring to standard deviation and to correlation coefficient, the closest matches were those of particulate lunar soils and some spectra from Hamlet meteorite which is particulate with grain sizes smaller than 500 µm. The meteorite Hamlet is an ordinary chondrite, subtype LL4. In the case of the de-reddened spectrum, the majority of solutions correspond to ordinary chondrite meteorites, of subtype L and LL, with petrologic classes from 4 to 6. The best matches were those of the Cherokee Springs meteorite (an LL6 ordinary chondrite, Fig. 5.8c) and the Cat Mountain meteorite (an L5 ordinary chondrite, Fig. 5.8c). From spectral modeling
- Page 33 and 34: CHAPTER 1. WHY ASTEROIDS? 33 tel-00
- Page 35 and 36: CHAPTER 1. WHY ASTEROIDS? 35 tel-00
- Page 37 and 38: CHAPTER 1. WHY ASTEROIDS? 37 tel-00
- Page 39 and 40: CHAPTER 1. WHY ASTEROIDS? 39 the fi
- Page 41 and 42: tel-00785991, version 1 - 7 Feb 201
- Page 43 and 44: 2 Why spectroscopy? spectrum. By ca
- Page 45 and 46: CHAPTER 2. WHY SPECTROSCOPY? 45 0.4
- Page 47 and 48: CHAPTER 2. WHY SPECTROSCOPY? 47 The
- Page 49 and 50: CHAPTER 2. WHY SPECTROSCOPY? 49 0.6
- Page 51 and 52: CHAPTER 2. WHY SPECTROSCOPY? 51 −
- Page 53 and 54: CHAPTER 2. WHY SPECTROSCOPY? 53 tel
- Page 55 and 56: tel-00785991, version 1 - 7 Feb 201
- Page 57 and 58: 3 Observing techniques tel-00785991
- Page 59 and 60: CHAPTER 3. OBSERVING TECHNIQUES 59
- Page 61 and 62: CHAPTER 3. OBSERVING TECHNIQUES 61
- Page 63 and 64: CHAPTER 3. OBSERVING TECHNIQUES 63
- Page 65 and 66: 4 Spectral analysis techniques tel-
- Page 67 and 68: CHAPTER 4. SPECTRAL ANALYSIS TECHNI
- Page 69 and 70: CHAPTER 4. SPECTRAL ANALYSIS TECHNI
- Page 71 and 72: CHAPTER 4. SPECTRAL ANALYSIS TECHNI
- Page 73 and 74: CHAPTER 4. SPECTRAL ANALYSIS TECHNI
- Page 75 and 76: CHAPTER 4. SPECTRAL ANALYSIS TECHNI
- Page 77 and 78: 5 M4AST - Modeling of Asteroids Spe
- Page 79 and 80: CHAPTER 5. M4AST - MODELING OF ASTE
- Page 81 and 82: CHAPTER 5. M4AST - MODELING OF ASTE
- Page 83: CHAPTER 5. M4AST - MODELING OF ASTE
- Page 87 and 88: CHAPTER 5. M4AST - MODELING OF ASTE
- Page 89 and 90: CHAPTER 5. M4AST - MODELING OF ASTE
- Page 91 and 92: tel-00785991, version 1 - 7 Feb 201
- Page 93 and 94: 6 Spectral properties of near-Earth
- Page 95 and 96: CHAPTER 6. SPECTRAL PROPERTIES OF N
- Page 97 and 98: CHAPTER 6. SPECTRAL PROPERTIES OF N
- Page 99 and 100: CHAPTER 6. SPECTRAL PROPERTIES OF N
- Page 101 and 102: CHAPTER 6. SPECTRAL PROPERTIES OF N
- Page 103 and 104: CHAPTER 6. SPECTRAL PROPERTIES OF N
- Page 105 and 106: CHAPTER 6. SPECTRAL PROPERTIES OF N
- Page 107 and 108: CHAPTER 6. SPECTRAL PROPERTIES OF N
- Page 109 and 110: CHAPTER 6. SPECTRAL PROPERTIES OF N
- Page 111 and 112: CHAPTER 6. SPECTRAL PROPERTIES OF N
- Page 113 and 114: 7 Spectral properties of Main Belt
- Page 115 and 116: CHAPTER 7. SPECTRAL PROPERTIES OF M
- Page 117 and 118: CHAPTER 7. SPECTRAL PROPERTIES OF M
- Page 119 and 120: CHAPTER 7. SPECTRAL PROPERTIES OF M
- Page 121 and 122: CHAPTER 7. SPECTRAL PROPERTIES OF M
- Page 123 and 124: CHAPTER 7. SPECTRAL PROPERTIES OF M
- Page 125 and 126: CHAPTER 7. SPECTRAL PROPERTIES OF M
- Page 127 and 128: CHAPTER 7. SPECTRAL PROPERTIES OF M
- Page 129 and 130: CHAPTER 7. SPECTRAL PROPERTIES OF M
- Page 131 and 132: tel-00785991, version 1 - 7 Feb 201
- Page 133 and 134: 8 Conclusions and perspectives tel-
CHAPTER 5. M4AST - MODELING OF ASTEROIDS SPECTRA 85<br />
Table 5.1: Summary of the results obtained by matching the asteroids spectra with spectra from the Relab database.<br />
For each asteroid, I show the best two matches, obtained by measuring the standard deviation (std. dev.) and the<br />
correlation coefficient (corr. coef.).<br />
Spectrum std. dev. corr. coef. Meteorite/Sample Sample ID Type Texture<br />
(99942) 0.01756 0.98013 Simulant CM-CMP-001-B Soil/Lunar Particulate<br />
0.01970 0.98224 Hamlet OC-TXH-002-C OC-LL4 Particulate<br />
(99942) 0.01539 0.96245 Cherokee Springs TB-TJM-090 OC-LL6 Particulate<br />
de-reddened 0.01609 0.97272 Cat Mountain MB-DTB-035-A OC-L5 Particulate<br />
(175706) 0.01219 0.90546 Sete Lagoas MH-JFB-021 OC-H4 Slab<br />
0.01504 0.85366 Murchison heated 1000 ◦ C MB-TXH-064-G CC-CM2 Particulate<br />
5.3.1 Results<br />
tel-00785991, version 1 - 7 Feb 2013<br />
The first spectrum considered to exemplify the M4AST routines is that of the potential hazardous<br />
asteroid (99942) Apophis [Binzel et al., 2009]. On the basis of this spectrum this asteroid<br />
was found to be an Sq type, and has a composition that closely resemble those of LL<br />
ordinary chondrite meteorites.<br />
M4AST classifies this spectrum in the Bus-DeMeo taxonomy as an Sq-type (Fig. 5.6a). The<br />
next two types, S and Sr, are relatively good matches, but have larger errors. Applying the G13<br />
taxonomy, M4AST classifies this asteroid as being in class 2 (Fig. 5.7a). Two other classes<br />
(namely 6 and 7) are relatively close in terms of g factor (Fig 5.7a). Class 2 has the representative<br />
members (7) Iris and (11) Parthenope, which are S and Sq type asteroids according to<br />
DeMeo et al. (2009). The classes 2, 6, and 7 are equivalent to the S profile.<br />
Being an Sq type, for this asteroid spectrum it can be applied the space weathering model<br />
proposed by Brunetto et al. [2006]. Thus, fitting the spectrum with an exponential continuum<br />
we found C s = -0.196 µm, corresponding to a moderate spectral reddening. The result obtained<br />
by Binzel et al. [2009] is C s = -0.17±0.01 µm. This difference could be caused by the different<br />
method that they used: their "best fit was performed as an integral part of the overall minimum<br />
RMS solution". The C s value gives the number of displacements per cm 2 , d = 0.74×10 19<br />
displacements/cm 2 . Next, will be analyzed both the original spectrum and the de-reddened<br />
spectrum.<br />
Comparing the original spectrum of (99942) Apophis with all laboratory spectra from Relab,<br />
M4AST found matches with some ordinary chondrite meteorites (L and LL subtypes, and<br />
petrologic classes from 3 to 6) and some lunar soils (Figs. 5.8a and 5.8b). Referring to standard<br />
deviation and to correlation coefficient, the closest matches were those of particulate lunar soils<br />
and some spectra from Hamlet meteorite which is particulate with grain sizes smaller than 500<br />
µm. The meteorite Hamlet is an ordinary chondrite, subtype LL4.<br />
In the case of the de-reddened spectrum, the majority of solutions correspond to ordinary<br />
chondrite meteorites, of subtype L and LL, with petrologic classes from 4 to 6. The best<br />
matches were those of the Cherokee Springs meteorite (an LL6 ordinary chondrite, Fig. 5.8c)<br />
and the Cat Mountain meteorite (an L5 ordinary chondrite, Fig. 5.8c). From spectral modeling