Silicate cosmic dust grain collisions in the interstellar medium: A molecular dynamics study

arXiv:2605.22225 · astro-ph.GA, cond-mat.mes-hall · Submitted 2026-05-21 · Read on arXiv

Listen

Transcript

Introduction to the show: ident: Astrophysics Radio. Generated commentary on the latest astrophysics papers.

Vera: Hi, I'm Vera.

Jocelyn: And I'm Jocelyn, here with Subrahmanyan.

Vera: We're looking at the paper: "Silicate cosmic dust grain collisions in the interstellar medium".

Jocelyn: Here's the gist of the paper. The gist: Molecular dynamics simulations reveal that grain shattering thresholds for silicate materials are approximately 6 km/s, which is about twice the canonical value of 2.7 km/s from Jones et al.

Vera: (1996) >pg5.

Jocelyn: Simulation Methodology The study employs classical molecular dynamics (MD) simulations to explore the outcomes of collisions between silicate grains of radii a ∈

5, 50: Å at velocities expected for these grains in the interstellar medium, 0.1 − 20 km/s The researchers run simulations of grains with two materials: amorphous SiO2 and an amorphous silicate of composition Mg1.3Fe0.3Si1O3.6, suggested by observations constrained with the “astrodust” model of Draine & Hensley (2021) Chemical bond formation and breaking are modeled with the reactive force fields (ReaxFF) and the Geometry, Frequency, Noncovalent, extended Tight-Binding (GFN1-xTB) methods ReaxFF describes bond rearrangements through an empirical bond-order formalism while GFN1-xTB provides an approximate quantum-mechanical description of the electronic structure Grain Preparation and Modeling The focus is on silicate dust grains, exploring two representative chemical compositions: pure amorphous silica SiO2 grains and “astrodust” grains with the silicate composition Mg1.3Fe0.3Si1O3.6 inferred from the model of Draine & Hensley (2021) For SiO2 grains, initial spherical grains are extracted from a cubic silicate bulk in the AMS molecular builder ReaxFF MD simulations are employed to minimize energy at elevated temperatures up to 2000 K Stepwise energy relaxation down to 10 K results in an amorphous structure which is selected for collision modeling The estimated radii of these grains are approximately 6.5, 16.5, 35, and 50 Å For ADSil grains, structures were constructed using the multi-component artificial force-induced reaction (MC-AFIR) method Sameera et al.

Vera: (2016) The estimated radii of A1 and A2 are 5 and 7.5 Å, respectively Collision Outcomes as a Function of Velocity The mass fractions of three separate components of the collision products for collisions between same-size SiO2 clusters are shown as a function of impact velocity Broadly, Figure 3 shows that SiO2 grains coagulate for all collision velocities lower than ≈ 5 km/s – we do not observe any “bouncing” behavior in our simulations There is then a rapid transition between 5 and 7 km/s in which the combined shattered and vaporized fractions increase to approximately 90% For increasingly higher velocities, most of the colliding grains are disrupted In all cases, any reasonable choice for a threshold shattering velocity for either composition and any grain size would be greater than the canonical value of 2.7 km/s from Jones et al.

Title and authors: Vera: So, we're looking at this paper now, "Silicate cosmic dust grain collisions in the interstellar medium: A molecular dynamics study." It seems like they’re using molecular dynamics simulations to figure out what happens when these silicate grains bump into each other in the interstellar medium.

Jocelyn: Right, it’s about those collisions—coagulation, shattering, vaporization—which are key processes that actually change how the dust population evolves over time and space. It’s a simulation study exploring those outcomes for different silicate materials.

Subrahmanyan: From my side, this is interesting because we need better physical models for grain population evolution to connect observations of dust with the larger structure formation of galaxies and cosmology. Understanding these collision outcomes directly impacts how we model that evolution >

Vera: Exactly, and what they're focusing on here are the most important parameters: the threshold velocity above which grains shatter, the threshold for vaporization, and then what happens to those resulting grain sizes. They are trying to predict those outcomes for models used on astrophysical scales.

Jocelyn: And they’re testing this with two different materials: pure amorphous silica, SiO2, and an amorphous silicate composition Mg1 point 3Fe0 point 3Si1O3 point 6, which is suggested by some observations linked to the astrodust model of Draine and Hensley > <ref:2605.22225#pg1>

Subrahmanyan: That material choice is smart because it tests how different chemical compositions react to these collisional environments, which is crucial for understanding the diversity of dust in space >

Vera: The methodology they use involves classical molecular dynamics simulations, running collisions between grains with radii ranging from five Å up to fifty Å at velocities expected in the interstellar medium, which is a range of zero point one to twenty km/s >

Jocelyn: They’re modeling the chemical bond formation and breaking using reactive force fields called ReaxFF and also employing a semi-empirical quantum mechanical method called GFN1-xTB for the electronic structure part >

Subrahmanyan: Using ReaxFF to model those bond rearrangements is important because it lets them see how the material properties of these grains actually dictate what happens during the collision, which is where the physics gets complex >

Vera: They’ve prepared two sets of grains: for silica, they extract spherical grains from a cubic silicate bulk and relax them down to ten K to get an amorphous structure with estimated radii like six point five Å, sixteen point five Å, thirty-five Å, and fifty Å >

Jocelyn: And for the astrodust grains, they built structures using a method called the multi-component artificial force-induced reaction or MC-AFIR method to get estimated radii of five and seven point five Å >

Title and authors: Subrahmanyan: The size distributions they’re generating here are what matter because we often use power laws to describe these populations, but the paper suggests those distributions aren't well described by a single power law; instead, there's a complicated dependence on collision velocity >

Vera: That’s a big hint for us. They found that for SiO2 grains, they coagulate for all impact velocities lower than about five km/s and then there’s this rapid transition between five and seven km/s where the combined shattered and vaporized fractions jump to approximately ninety percent >

Jocelyn: So, if you're looking at a collision, below that five km/s mark, everything just sticks together; above that, it gets violent with shattering or vaporization depending on the speed >

Subrahmanyan: That rapid transition is what’s really telling us about the resilience of silicate dust. They found that any reasonable choice for a threshold shattering velocity for either composition and any grain size would be greater than the canonical value of two point seven km/s from Jones et al. (one thousand nine hundred ninety-six) by a factor of approximately two > <ref:2605.22225#pg1>

Vera: That comparison to the canonical value is significant because it suggests interstellar dust composed of silicate material is actually more resilient to shattering and vaporization than we previously assumed >

Jocelyn: They also looked at how the size distributions change, noting that at low velocities, the resulting coagulated grain has a geometric size of about ninety Å, which is slightly less than the diameter of each colliding grain > <ref:2605.22225#pg1>

Subrahmanyan: That geometric description suggests that at low velocities, grains stick together in a way that largely retains their original shape but with some overlap, forming what they call a prolate grain >

Vera: Then higher collision velocities produce smaller grains because it means the constituent grains are sticking together with a larger overlap >

Jocelyn: The paper also touched on how the shapes of these grains—how much they deviate from being perfectly spherical—affect their optical and dynamical properties, which is an important detail for modeling what we actually see in observations >

Subrahmanyan: They also compared their results to the corrected Tielens et al. (one thousand nine hundred ninety-four) expression, which predicts a velocity threshold of seven point nine km/s for silicate materials, and they found that their results show moderately better agreement with that when looking at the velocity where half the grain is disrupted >

Vera: However, they also noted that the model from Hirashita and Kobayashi (two thousand thirteen) for those quantities doesn't match their simulations even when modified to get closer to the correct threshold velocity > <ref:2605.22225#pg1>

Title and authors: Jocelyn: So, it seems like their new higher velocity thresholds suggest we should adopt a different prescription for calculating these outcomes, specifically they recommend adopting Eq. five for the shattering threshold because the step function in disrupted mass fraction as a function of velocity is justified by what they show in figures eleven and twelve >

Subrahmanyan: That move toward Eq. five makes sense because it captures that rapid transition we saw in their simulations, and it gives us a way to update our models for the dust population evolution on astrophysical scales >

Vera: And they also found that shattering and vaporization only need to be considered for collisions between grains with mass ratios less than ten which is a useful simplification because collisions between grains with larger mass ratios don't significantly disrupt the larger grain > <ref:2605.22225#pg2>

Jocelyn: So, to wrap up this study on silicate cosmic dust grain collisions in the interstellar medium: A molecular dynamics study, they find that the shattering threshold for these materials is about six km/s, which is about twice the canonical value of two point seven km/s from Jones et al. (one thousand nine hundred ninety-six) > <ref:2605.22225#pg1>

Subrahmanyan: This discrepancy can be explained in part by correcting an error in the expression for the velocity thresholds defined by grain material properties derived in Tielens et al. (one thousand nine hundred ninety-four) and used for the numerical values quoted in Jones et al <ref:2605.22225#pg1>. (one thousand nine hundred ninety-six) > <ref:2605.22225#pg1>

Vera: They provide updated shattering velocity thresholds for materials considered in Table two which is useful for future models of the dust population evolution on astrophysical scales > <ref:2605.22225#pg1,population evolution on astrophysical scales>

Jocelyn: So, they found that silicate grain shattering thresholds are about six km/s, a factor of approximately two higher than the canonical value of two point seven km/s from Jones et al. (one thousand nine hundred ninety-six) > <ref:2605.22225#pg1>

Subrahmanyan: The key thing here is that the prescription from Tielens et al. (one thousand nine hundred ninety-four) for the fraction of grain mass shocked to a given pressure as a function of collision velocity fails to predict the fraction of shattered or vaporized material observed in our numerical simulations > <ref:2605.22225#pg1>

Vera: They suggest that shattering and vaporization only need to be considered for collisions between grains with mass ratios less than ten which is a useful simplification because collisions between grains with larger mass ratios do not significantly disrupt the larger grain > <ref:2605.22225#pg2>

Jocelyn: So, we’re leaving this paper here. It gives us updated thresholds and a clearer picture of how these collisions work for silicate dust in the interstellar medium >

Subrahmanyan: This is really useful input for our models on how dust populations evolve, and I think adopting Eq. five for the shattering threshold is the way forward >

The paper's summary: Vera: So, to recap, this paper uses molecular dynamics simulations to look at what happens when silicate dust grains bump into each other in space, finding that we need a higher threshold velocity for shattering than we thought.

Jocelyn: Right. It’s about those collisions—coagulation and shattering—and they’re using reactive force fields called ReaxFF and GFN1-xTB to model the actual chemistry happening during the crash >

Subrahmanyan: From a theoretical standpoint, this is important because it directly challenges the standard values we use for grain physics in models of galaxy evolution and structure formation >

Vera: They tested two types of silicate dust: pure amorphous silica, SiO2, and a more complex mix called astrodust with the composition Mg1 point 3Fe0 point 3Si1O3 point six >

Jocelyn: And the main finding is that they found grain shattering thresholds for these materials are about six kilometers per second, which is twice the canonical value of two point seven kilometers per second from Jones et al in one thousand nine hundred ninety-six >

Subrahmanyan: That factor of two difference is what makes it significant; it suggests interstellar dust composed of silicate material is actually more resilient to shattering and vaporization than previously assumed in our models >

Vera: They also showed that the size distributions of the resulting shattered products don't follow a single power law like we often expect, but instead they have this complicated dependence on collision velocity >

Jocelyn: And they found that at lower impact velocities, everything just sticks together—coagulation happens for all velocities under about five kilometers per second >

Subrahmanyan: But then there’s a rapid transition between five and seven kilometers per second where the shattered or vaporized fractions jump up to about ninety percent >

Vera: That transition is key, it shows that you hit a tipping point where the collision switches from just sticking together to actually breaking things apart violently >

Jocelyn: They also looked at the shape of these grains, how much they deviate from being perfectly spherical, and found that at low velocities they form a grain with a geometric size of about ninety Angstroms >

Subrahmanyan: That geometry implies that at those slow speeds, the grains are sticking together in a way that largely keeps their original shape but with some overlap, forming what they call a prolate grain >

Vera: But higher velocities mean smaller resulting grains because it means the constituent grains are sticking together with a larger overlap >

Jocelyn: So, this study points to an updated prescription for how we calculate those shattering thresholds, suggesting we should adopt Eq. five for the shattering threshold because that step function behavior they see is justified by their simulations >

Subrahmanyan: This shift in the mathematical prescription means we need to update our models for dust population evolution on astrophysical scales, especially when thinking about larger grains that aren't modeled with just simple collision dynamics >

Vera: And one more thing they found, shattering and vaporization only need to be considered for collisions between grains with mass ratios less than ten >

Jocelyn: Which is a useful simplification because it means collisions between really big grains don't significantly disrupt the larger grain at all, so we can focus our computational power where it matters most >

Subrahmanyan: This provides a way forward for setting up the next generation of simulations that bridge the gap between these small-scale collision physics and those large-scale continuum dynamics we need to understand >

The paper's improvements: Tom: So, we're looking at how they’ve improved their original study on silicate grain collisions in space >

Vera: They’ve looked at how those new velocity thresholds affect the way we actually model dust evolution on astrophysical scales >

Jocelyn: They basically recommend adopting Equation five for the shattering threshold because that step function behavior they found is justified by what they saw in figures eleven and twelve >

Subrahmanyan: That move toward Equation five makes sense because it captures that rapid transition we saw, and it gives us a way to update our models for the dust population evolution on astrophysical scales >

Vera: They also suggested that shattering and vaporization only need to be considered for collisions between grains with mass ratios less than ten >

Jocelyn: That’s a useful simplification because it means collisions between really big grains don't significantly disrupt the larger grain at all, so we can focus our computational power where it matters most >

Vera: They also mentioned that they still need to do more work, though, because they have to simulate a much larger range of grain sizes and collision parameters >

Jocelyn: Yeah, they said further simulations are needed with a bigger range of grain sizes and material properties before we can fully transition these results into the continuum dynamics models >

Subrahmanyan: That’s the necessary next step; we need to see how these outcomes transition to those Tielens et al. results for grains large enough to be modeled with continuum dynamics, which is a big jump in complexity >

Conclusion: Vera: So to wrap up, this paper on silicate cosmic dust grain collisions in the interstellar medium shows that we need a higher velocity threshold of about six kilometers per second for shattering compared to our previous assumption >

Jocelyn: Yeah, and it really highlights how these grains react differently based on their chemical composition, especially when you compare pure silica to those more complex astrodust mixtures >

Subrahmanyan: From a structure formation view, this means we have to adjust the initial conditions in simulations of dust evolution because the way grains break apart dictates the overall mass budget of interstellar matter >

Vera: They also pointed out that for practical modeling, we only need to worry about shattering and vaporization when grains have a mass ratio less than ten >

Jocelyn: That’s a good simplification; it keeps the computational load manageable because those massive grain collisions just stick together without much disruption >

Subrahmanyan: The authors also noted that while their new thresholds are better, they still have to do more work, specifically simulating a larger range of grain sizes and collision parameters >

Vera: Exactly. They need to see how these outcomes transition into the continuum dynamics models for grains that are much larger than what they simulated >

Jocelyn: It sounds like the next phase involves linking these molecular dynamics results with those larger scale simulations, which is a big piece of the puzzle >

Department of Physics and Astronomy, Chalmers University of Technology · University of Gothenburg · SINTEF

astro-ph.GA, cond-mat.mes-hall

Submitted: 2026-05-21

Updated: 2026-10-20

Comments: Under review at A&A. This version withdraws our claim of an error in the threshold expression of Tielens et al. (1994); the expression is correct. The alternative threshold values we derived from that claim have been removed and the discussion updated accordingly. Simulated thresholds are unchanged

License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Importance score: 78/100

The gist: The gist: Molecular dynamics simulations reveal that grain shattering thresholds for silicate materials are approximately 6 km/s, which is about twice the canonical value of 2.7 km/s from Jones et al.

Key concepts

Molecular Dynamics (MD) Simulations: These are computer simulations that model the movement and interactions of atoms in materials like silicate grains. By simulating collisions at different speeds, researchers can observe how these grains break apart or stick together, allowing them to test physical outcomes under interstellar conditions.
Shattering Threshold Velocity: This is the minimum impact speed required for a grain to shatter into smaller pieces during a collision. The study found this threshold for silicate materials is around 6 km/s, which differs from previous estimates, indicating that these grains are more resistant to shattering than standard models suggest.
Reactive Force Fields (ReaxFF): This is a computational tool used in the simulations to model chemical bond formation and breaking during collisions. ReaxFF describes how atoms rearrange their bonds based on empirical rules, providing a detailed look at the chemical changes that occur when grains impact each other.
Astrodust Composition ($ ext{Mg}_{1.3} ext{Fe}_{0.3} ext{Si}_{1} ext{O}_{3.6}$): This specific silicate composition is inferred from observations of interstellar dust and is modeled in the simulations to represent 'astrodust.' This composition helps researchers test how different types of silicate grains behave when they collide, providing a more realistic model for cosmic dust.

Summary

The gist: Molecular dynamics simulations reveal that grain shattering thresholds for silicate materials are approximately 6 km/s, which is about twice the canonical value of 2.7 km/s from Jones et al. (1996) >pg5.

Simulation Methodology

The study employs classical molecular dynamics (MD) simulations to explore the outcomes of collisions between silicate grains of radii a ∈ [5, 50] Å at velocities expected for these grains in the interstellar medium, 0.1 − 20 km/s The researchers run simulations of grains with two materials: amorphous SiO2 and an amorphous silicate of composition Mg1.3Fe0.3Si1O3.6, suggested by observations constrained with the “astrodust” model of Draine & Hensley (2021) Chemical bond formation and breaking are modeled with the reactive force fields (ReaxFF) and the Geometry, Frequency, Noncovalent, extended Tight-Binding (GFN1-xTB) methods ReaxFF describes bond rearrangements through an empirical bond-order formalism while GFN1-xTB provides an approximate quantum-mechanical description of the electronic structure

Grain Preparation and Modeling

The focus is on silicate dust grains, exploring two representative chemical compositions: pure amorphous silica SiO2 grains and “astrodust” grains with the silicate composition Mg1.3Fe0.3Si1O3.6 inferred from the model of Draine & Hensley (2021) For SiO2 grains, initial spherical grains are extracted from a cubic silicate bulk in the AMS molecular builder ReaxFF MD simulations are employed to minimize energy at elevated temperatures up to 2000 K Stepwise energy relaxation down to 10 K results in an amorphous structure which is selected for collision modeling The estimated radii of these grains are approximately 6.5, 16.5, 35, and 50 Å For ADSil grains, structures were constructed using the multi-component artificial force-induced reaction (MC-AFIR) method Sameera et al. (2016) The estimated radii of A1 and A2 are 5 and 7.5 Å, respectively

Collision Outcomes as a Function of Velocity

The mass fractions of three separate components of the collision products for collisions between same-size SiO2 clusters are shown as a function of impact velocity Broadly, Figure 3 shows that SiO2 grains coagulate for all collision velocities lower than ≈ 5 km/s – we do not observe any “bouncing” behavior in our simulations There is then a rapid transition between 5 and 7 km/s in which the combined shattered and vaporized fractions increase to approximately 90% For increasingly higher velocities, most of the colliding grains are disrupted In all cases, any reasonable choice for a threshold shattering velocity for either composition and any grain size would be greater than the canonical value of 2.7 km/s from Jones et al. (1996) by a factor of approximately 2

Size Distributions and Product Shapes

The size distributions of shattering products are generally not well-described by a single power law, displaying a complicated dependence on collision velocity In general the distributions appear to become steeper with increased collision velocity, on average shallower than a power-law exponent α = 3.5 for velocities up to ∼7 km/s but steeper for higher velocities The shapes of grains – i.e. their deviations from sphericity – also affect their optical and dynamical properties At low velocities, the resulting coagulated grain has a geometrically defined size of ageo ≈ 90Å, which is slightly less than the diameter of each colliding grain, suggesting that the grain is composed of two spheres that largely retain their shape but stick together with some overlap, i.e. a prolate grain Higher collision velocities produce smaller grains, suggesting the constituent grains stick together with larger overlap

Theoretical Comparison and Implications

The corrected Tielens et al. (1994) expression predicts a velocity threshold of 7.9 km/s for silicate materials, which is in moderately better agreement with our findings for SiO2 if we compare to velocities at which half the grain is disrupted, v0.5 in Table 1 Our simulations therefore appear to validate the conceptual framework of Tielens et al. (1994) for calculating grain collision outcomes even for very small grains However, the model of Hirashita & Kobayashi (2013) for the same quantities fails to match the simulations even when modified to best match the correct threshold velocity The new, higher velocity thresholds we obtain suggest that interstellar dust composed of silicate material is more resilient to shattering and vaporization than previously assumed We recommend adopting Eq. 5 for the shattering threshold, for which a step function in the disrupted mass fraction as a function of velocity is justified by the rapid transition shown in Figures 11 and 12 Our results (Figures 4 and 6) also suggest that shattering and vaporization need only be considered for grains of comparable (i.e. within a factor of 10) mass, because collisions between grains with larger mass ratios do not significantly disrupt the larger grain Further simulations with a larger range of grain sizes and collision parameters, as well as grain material properties, will be needed to understand how grain collision outcomes transition to the Tielens et al. (1994) results for grains large enough to be modeled with continuum dynamics

Conclusion

We find that grain shattering thresholds for the silicate materials we simulate are ∼ 6 km/s, a factor of approximately 2 higher than the canonical value of 2.7 km/s from Jones et al. (1996) This discrepancy can be explained in part by correcting an error in the expression for the velocity thresholds defined by grain material properties derived in Tielens et al. (1994) and used for the numerical values quoted in Jones et al. (1996) The prescription from Tielens et al. (1994) for the fraction of grain mass shocked to a given pressure (Eq. 7) as a function of collision velocity fails to predict the fraction of shattered or vaporized material observed in the numerical simulations We provide updated shattering velocity thresholds for the most likely candidate grain materials Table 2 for use in future models of the dust population evolution on astrophysical scales Shattering and vaporization only need to be considered for collisions between grains with mass ratios less than 10 Further simulations with a larger range of grain sizes and collision parameters, as well as grain material properties, will be needed to understand how grain collision outcomes transition to the Tielens et al. (1994) results for grains large enough to be modeled with continuum dynamics

Table 2: Threshold shattering velocities for materials considered in Table 1 of Jones et al. (1996)

Grain Type vshatter (km/s) Pcr (10 10 dyn cm−2) ρ0 (g cm−3) c0 (km/s) s

|:---: |:---: |:---: |:---: |:---: |:---: |

| Silicate 7.89 2.74 3.3 5.0 1.2

| Graphite/amorphous Carbon 2.58 4 2.2 1.8 1.9

| SiC | 18.7 | 70 | - | - | -

| Ice | 3.86 | - | - | -

| Iron | 2.45 5.5 7.9 4.1 1.5

| Diamond | 25.4 | - | - | -

| Olivine | 6.30 | - | - | -

Appendix A: Corrections to Jones et al. (1996) and Tielens et al. (1994) Threshold Velocities Calculation

The corrected expression for the threshold shattering velocity is given by Equation A.7 The ratio of the corrected shock Mach number obtained from Eq. A.12 to the value derived from the published expression in Tielens et al. (1994) as a function of ϕ for characteristic values of s is shown in Figure A.1 The agreement with experimental data presented in their Figures 4, 5, 8, and 9 is therefore at first glance surprising The scaling with Mr (i.e.

Improvements for AI systems

The AI system can accurately predict grain shattering thresholds for silicate materials by using updated shattering velocity thresholds derived from molecular dynamics simulations, which are ∼ 6 km/s for both amorphous SiO2 and astrodust material, correcting the canonical value of 2.7 km/s.
The system can differentiate between physical outcomes in grain-grain collisions by analyzing the mass fractions as a function of impact velocity, noting that at velocities lower than approximately 5 km/s, SiO2 grains coagulate for all collision velocities, and above this, most of the colliding grains are disrupted.
The AI system can refine predictions for grain size distributions by identifying that the size distributions of shattered products are generally not well-described by power law distributions as predicted by Jones et al. (1996), instead showing a complicated dependence on collision velocity and multimodal behavior for the largest grain collisions.
The system can evaluate the predictive power of analytical models, noting that "the prescription from Tielens et al. (1994) for the fraction of grain mass shocked to a given pressure (Eq. 7) as a function of collision velocity fails to predict the fraction of shattered or vaporized material observed in our numerical simulations."
The AI system can provide an updated prescription for dust models by recommending adopting Eq. 5 for the shattering threshold, noting that this is justified by the rapid transition shown in Figures 11 and 12.

Abstract

(abridged) We aim to predict the most important parameters for grain-grain collision outcomes in models of interstellar grain population evolution: the threshold velocities for shattering and vaporization, and the resulting distributions of grain sizes. We use molecular dynamics simulations which evolve the dynamics of each atom in a dust grain to explore the outcomes of collisions between silicate grains of radii a in [5,50] Å at velocities 0.1-20 km/s. We run simulations of grains with two materials: amorphous SiO 2 and an amorphous silicate of composition suggested by Draine & Hensley (2021). With these simulations, we quantify the collision velocity dependence of shattered and vaporized mass fractions, and the resulting size distributions of shattering products. We find grain shattering thresholds are about 6 km/s for both materials, a factor of about 2 higher than the canonical value for silicates of 2.7 km/s from Tielens et al. (1994) and Jones et al. (1996). The size distributions of shattered products are generally not consistent with the power law distributions predicted by Jones et al. (1996), but the physical reasons for these discrepancies remain uncertain. The Tielens et al. (1994) expressions fail to predict the fraction of shattered or vaporized material observed in our numerical simulations, over-predicting the shattered fraction and under-predicting the vaporized fraction, except for the most massive grains we simulate, where the predicted vaporized fraction agrees reasonably well. The model of Hirashita & Kobayashi (2013) similarly fails to match the simulations. We provide updated shattering velocity thresholds for nanoscale silicate grains, which suggest that the smallest astrophysical dust grains composed of silicate materials may be more robust to shattering in the interstellar medium than previously assumed.