1989
DOI: 10.1093/mnras/240.1.103
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Intensive photometry of southern Wolf-Rayet stars

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
20
1

Year Published

1991
1991
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
4
20
1
Order By: Relevance
“…in the WR catalog, is suspected as a binary because of "diluted emission lines" and because Isserstedt et al (1983) found a photometric and spectroscopic period of 7.69 d. Balona et al (1989) could confirm the photometric variability, but found large scatter from a periodicity. Marchenko et al (1998b) could not even see any variability.…”
Section: Comments On Individual Starsmentioning
confidence: 96%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…in the WR catalog, is suspected as a binary because of "diluted emission lines" and because Isserstedt et al (1983) found a photometric and spectroscopic period of 7.69 d. Balona et al (1989) could confirm the photometric variability, but found large scatter from a periodicity. Marchenko et al (1998b) could not even see any variability.…”
Section: Comments On Individual Starsmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…WR 16 shows substantial, but not periodic photometric variability (Balona et al 1989), and polarimetric evidence of a non-spherical outflow (Schulte-Ladbeck 1994). The thermal radio spectral index (Dougherty & Williams 2000) and the nondetection of X-rays (Oskinova 2005) speak against binarity.…”
Section: Comments On Individual Starsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4 Two other dust WC9d stars -WR69 & 103 -have also been suggested to be short period binaries on the basis of periodic photometric variability. For the former star Marchenko et al (1998) report a 2.29 day periodicity from Hipparcos data but are unable to determine its origin (binarity or NRP), although earlier observations by Balona et al (1989) failed to identify this. Conversely, both the latter authors and Moffat et al (1986) report a ∼1.75 day photometric period for WR 103 which was not found in the Hipparcos dataset.…”
Section: Dust Production In Close Binariesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, no trace of the companion was detected, except perhaps for very weak auxiliary absorption components suspected on a few spectrograms (Conti et al 1979; but mainly Niemela 1979). However, it finally became clear that the companion should be detectable with the discovery (Balona et al 1989;Gosset et al 1991) that WR 22 exhibits an eclipse corresponding to the WR being in front of its companion. Only one eclipse occurs: the secondary one.…”
Section: The Massive Binary Wr 22mentioning
confidence: 99%