Is the late buckling stage inevitable in the bar life?. (arXiv:1902.08485v1 [astro-ph.GA])
<a href="http://arxiv.org/find/astro-ph/1/au:+Smirnov_A/0/1/0/all/0/1">Anton A. Smirnov</a>, <a href="http://arxiv.org/find/astro-ph/1/au:+Sotnikova_N/0/1/0/all/0/1">Natalia Ya. Sotnikova</a>
By means of self-consistent numerical simulations we investigated the
dynamical impact of classical bulges on the growth of the secondary buckling of
a bar. Overall we considered 14 models with different disc and bulge
parameters. We obtained that a bulge with a quite modest mass $B/D=0.1$ leads
to completely symmetrical evolution of the bar almost independently of the
initial stellar disc parameters and even can damp the first bending. At the
same time, the bars in all our bulgeless models suffer from the short primary
and prolonged secondary buckling. Given the smallness of the mass suppressing
secondary buckling, we conclude that a classical bulge along with the gas
central concentration may be the main culprits for the rarity of bars with
ongoing buckling in the local Universe.
By means of self-consistent numerical simulations we investigated the
dynamical impact of classical bulges on the growth of the secondary buckling of
a bar. Overall we considered 14 models with different disc and bulge
parameters. We obtained that a bulge with a quite modest mass $B/D=0.1$ leads
to completely symmetrical evolution of the bar almost independently of the
initial stellar disc parameters and even can damp the first bending. At the
same time, the bars in all our bulgeless models suffer from the short primary
and prolonged secondary buckling. Given the smallness of the mass suppressing
secondary buckling, we conclude that a classical bulge along with the gas
central concentration may be the main culprits for the rarity of bars with
ongoing buckling in the local Universe.
http://arxiv.org/icons/sfx.gif
