4.6 Article

Fundamental parameters of Galactic luminous OB stars - VI. Temperatures, masses and WLR of Cyg OB2 supergiants

期刊

ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS
卷 396, 期 3, 页码 949-966

出版社

E D P SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:20021432

关键词

stars : atmospheres; stars : early-types; stars : supergiants; stars : fundamental parameters; Galaxy : open clusters and associations : individual : Cyg OB2; ultraviolet : stars

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We have analyzed six OB supergiants and one giant covering spectral types from O3 to B1 in the Galactic OB association Cyg OB2 by means of an updated version of FASTWIND (Santolaya-Rey et al. 1997) that includes an approximate treatment of metal line blocking and blanketing. This large coverage in spectral type allows us to derive a new temperature scale for Galactic O supergiants that is lower than the one obtained by using pure H-He models, either plane-parallel and hydrostatic or spherical with mass-loss. The lower temperatures are thus a combined effect of line blanketing and the large mass-loss rates. In some cases, the newly derived effective temperature is reduced by up to 8000 K. Changes are larger for earlier stars with large mass-loss rates. As a consequence, luminosities are modified as well, which results in a lower number of emerging ionizing photons and reduces the mass discrepancy. Although there are still significant differences between spectroscopic and evolutionary masses, we do not find any obvious systematic pattern of those differences. We derive mass-loss rates and the corresponding wind momentum-luminosity relation for the analyzed stars. Although consistent with previous results by Puls et al. (1996) for Galactic stars, our relation is better defined due to a reduction of errors related to stellar distances and points to a possible separation between extreme Of stars (Of(+), Of*) and stars with more moderate morphologies. However this finding is only tentative, as the statistics are still scarce.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据