4.7 Article

The orbital periods of subdwarf B binaries produced by the first stable Roche Lobe overflow channel

Journal

MONTHLY NOTICES OF THE ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 434, Issue 1, Pages 186-193

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stt992

Keywords

binaries: close; subdwarfs; white dwarfs

Funding

  1. NSFC [10973036, 11173055, 11033008, 11003003]
  2. CAS [KJCX2-YW-T24]
  3. CAS (Talent Project of Western Light)
  4. Talent Project of Young Researchers of Yunnan province [2012HB037]
  5. STFC [ST/H002456/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Long-orbital-period subdwarf B (sdB) stars with main-sequence companions are believed to be the product of stable Roche Lobe overflow (RLOF), a scenario challenged by recent observations. Here, we represent the results of a systematic study of the orbital-period distribution of sdB binaries in this channel using detailed binary evolution calculations. We show that the observed orbital-period distribution of long-period sdB binaries can be well explained by this scenario. Furthermore, we find that, if the progenitors of the sdB stars have initial masses below the helium flash mass, the sdB binaries produced from stable RLOF follow a unique mass-orbital period relation for a given metallicity Z; increasing the orbital period from similar to 400 to similar to 1100 d corresponds to increasing the mass of the sdB star from similar to 0.40 to similar to 0.49 M-circle dot for Z = 0.02. We suggest that the longest sdB binaries (with orbital period > 1100 d) could be the result of atmospheric RLOF. The mass-orbital period relation can be tested observationally if the mass of the sdB star can be determined precisely, e.g. from asteroseismology. Using this relation, we revise the orbital period distribution of sdB binaries produced by the first stable RLOF channel for the best-fitting model of Han et al (2003), and show that the orbital period has a peak around 830 d.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available