A Lower Limit on the Thickness of Europa's Ice Shell from Numerical Simulations of Impact Cratering

If Europa has an ice-covered, liquid water ocean, the thickness of the ice shell can be tested by analyzing the impact crater morphologies revealed by Galileo images. Several of Europa's 28 primary impact structures have morphologies typical of complex impact craters on other planetary bodies: terraced rims, flat floors, and central peaks [1]. To constrain the minimum ice thickness necessary to reproduce the observed complex crater morphologies, we have performed numerical simulations, using the modified SALE-2D code [2], of the formation of impact craters in ice layers with thicknesses ranging from 5 to 11 km overlying liquid water. The target ice has ice strength properties from published laboratory data [3] with a gradual decrease towards the base of the ice as the temperature approaches the melting point. The projectile parameters were chosen to produce a 10 km diameter crater in thick ice. We find that ice layers less than 7 km thick are not sufficient to prevent an outburst of liquid water during collapse of the transient cavity. At thicknesses of 8 and 9 km we observe a boundary regime: crater collapse produces a flat or upward-domed floor, however the water under the crater center does not reach the surface. In ice greater than 10 km thick a normal transient cavity forms. These results indicate that the ice thickness, at the times and locations of complex crater formation, must have been comparable to the diameters of the transient craters, the largest of which was between 11.9 and 18.5 km [1]. Implementation of additional mechanisms such as acoustic fluidization and creep may affect the shape of the final crater produced in our simulations: acoustic fluidization can produce central peak and peak-ring craters [4], and creep may result in a flattened crater. We are currently investigating the influence of these processes on the final crater morphology. References: [1] Moore et al., Icarus 151, 2001. [2] Ivanov et al., GSA Spec. Pap., in press. [3] Beeman et al., JGR 93, 1988. [4] Melosh and Ivanov, Ann. Rev. Earth Plan. Sci. 27, 1999.