Hydrodynamical Simulations of Jet - and Wind - driven Protostellar Outflows

We present two-dimensional hydrodynamical simulations of both jet-and wind-driven models for protostellar outflows in order to make detailed comparisons to the kinematics of observed molecular outflows. The simulations are performed with the ZEUS-2D hydrodynamical code using a simplified equation of state, simplified cooling and no external heating, and no self-gravity. In simulations of steady jets, swept-up ambient gas forms a thin shell that can be identified as a molecular outflow. We find a simple ballistic bow-shock model is able to reproduce the structure and transverse velocity of the shell. Position-velocity (PV) diagrams for the shell cut along the outflow axis show a convex spur structure with the highest velocity at the bow tip, and low-velocity red and blue components at any viewing angle. The power-law index of the mass-velocity relationship ranges from 1.5 to 3.5, depending strongly on the inclination. If the jet is time-variable, the PV diagrams show multiple convex spur structures and the power-law index becomes smaller than the steady jet simulation. In simulations of isothermal steady wide-angle winds, swept-up ambient gas forms a thin shell which at early stages has a similar shape to the shell in the jet-driven model; it becomes broader at later times. We find the structure and kinematics of the shell is well described by a momentum-conserving model similar to that of Shu et al. (1991). In contrast to the results from jet simulations, the PV diagrams for the shell cut along the outflow axis show a lobe structure tilted with source inclination, with components that are primarily either red or blue unless the inclination is nearly in the plane of sky. The power-law index of the mass-velocity relationship ranges from 1.3 to 1.8. If the wind is time-variable, the PV diagrams also show multiple structures, and the power-law index becomes smaller than the steady wind simulation. Comparing the different simulations with observations, we find that some outflows, e.g., HH 212, show features consistent with the jet-driven model, while others, e.g., VLA 05487, are consistent with the wind-driven model.