2001
DOI: 10.1086/323546
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of Stellar Angular Diameters from the NPOI, the Mark III Optical Interferometer, and the Infrared Flux Method

Abstract: The Navy Prototype Optical Interferometer (NPOI) has been used to measure the angular diameters of 41 late-type giant and supergiant stars previously observed with the Mark III optical interferometer. Sixteen of these stars have published angular diameters based on model atmospheres (infrared Ñux method, IRFM). Comparison of these angular diameters shows that there are no systematic o †sets between any pair of data sets. Furthermore, the reported uncertainties in the angular diameters measured using both inter… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

12
71
0

Year Published

2002
2002
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 86 publications
(83 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
12
71
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Still, the spectrophotometric observations could be affected by the significant magnetic activity exhibited by ζ And. The LD diameter of μ Peg obtained here is consistent with the earlier interferometric measurements of θ LD = 2.53 ± 0.09 mas obtained with the NPOI and θ LD = 2.49 ± 0.04 mas obtained with the Mark III interferometers (Nordgren et al 2001;and Mozurkewich et al 2003), increasing the confidence in the results presented here.…”
Section: Analysis Of Interferometric Datasupporting
confidence: 92%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Still, the spectrophotometric observations could be affected by the significant magnetic activity exhibited by ζ And. The LD diameter of μ Peg obtained here is consistent with the earlier interferometric measurements of θ LD = 2.53 ± 0.09 mas obtained with the NPOI and θ LD = 2.49 ± 0.04 mas obtained with the Mark III interferometers (Nordgren et al 2001;and Mozurkewich et al 2003), increasing the confidence in the results presented here.…”
Section: Analysis Of Interferometric Datasupporting
confidence: 92%
“…For all the observations, AMBER was used in the low-resolution mode at J, H, and K passbands, giving a resolving power (λ/Δλ) of ∼35 and recording data between In addition to ζ And, a circular check star was observed every night. For this μ Peg was chosen because it is at a similar position on the sky as ζ And and it is expected to have a similar angular diameter (Θ LD = 2.50 ± 0.04 mas; Nordgren et al 2001;Mozurkewich et al 2003). Observations of ζ And and μ Peg were interleaved with observations of the interferometric calibration stars θ Psc (K1 III, K = 1.86, Θ LD = 2.00 ± 0.02 mas), 41 Psc (K3 III, K = 2.43, Θ LD = 1.81 ± 0.02 mas), HD 7087 (G9 III, K = 2.48, Θ LD = 1.59 ± 0.02 mas), and HD 15694 (K3 III, K = 2.48, Θ LD = 1.77 ± 0.02 mas).…”
Section: Optical Interferometrymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mass Age (2003) 7.95±0.09 Nordgren et al (2001) 7.97±0.11 Nordgren et al (2001) 8.035±0.08 Mozurkewich et al (1991) 9.26±0.15 Shao et al (1988) 7.90±0.31 di Benedetto & Rabbia (1987) (2016) 3.722±0.071 Mozurkewich et al (2003) 3.34±0.07 Nordgren et al (2001) 3.68±0.05 Nordgren et al (2001) 148856 3.472±0.008 3.462±0.035 Mozurkewich et al (2003) 3.53±0.08 Nordgren et al (2001) 3.51±0.05 Nordgren et al (2001) 150997 2.493±0.018 2.624±0.034 Mozurkewich et al (2003) 2.50±0.08 Nordgren et al (2001) 2.64±0.04 Nordgren et al (2001) 2.42±0.07 Nordgren et al (1999) 156283 5.519±0.011 5.275±0.067 Mozurkewich et al (2003) 5.26±0.06 Nordgren et al (2001) 5.27±0.07 Nordgren et al (2001) 5.20±0.03 Nordgren et al (1999) (2016) 2.12±0.02 Ligi et al (2012) 2.041±0.043 Baines et al (2010) 172167 3.280±0.016 2.930±0.007 Monnier et al (2012) 3.08±0.03 * Mourard et al (2009) 3.202±0.005 * Absil et al (2006) 3.329±0.006 Aufdenberg et al (2006) 3.225±0.032 Mozurkewich et al (2003) 3.28±0.01 Ciardi et al (2001) Mozurkewich et al (2003) 3.11±0.04 Nordgren et al (2001) 3.20±0.05 Nordgren et al (2001) 3.08±0.03 Nordgren et al (1999) Note- * No LD diameter was provided, therefore we list the UD diameter here. Figure 4 shows a graphical representation of this table.…”
Section: Targetmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, the direct application of the SBC relation to Cepheids was done by Fouque & Gieren (1997) and Di Benedetto (1998). Later, 27 stars were measured by NPOI and Mark III optical interferometers and the derived high precision angular diameters were published by Nordgren et al (2001) and Mozurkewich et al (2003), respectively. Finally, using a compilation of 29 dwarfs and subgiant (including the sun) in the 0.0 ≤ (V − K) 0 ≤ 6.0 color range, Kervella et al (2004) calibrated for the first time a linear SBC relation with an intrinsic dispersion of 0.02 mag or 1% in terms of angular diameter.…”
Section: A Revised Sbc Relation For Late-and Early-type Starsmentioning
confidence: 99%