Mass loss rates of a sample of irregular and semiregular M-type AGB-variables

Abstract

Abstract.We have determined mass loss rates and gas expansion velocities for a sample of 69 M-type irregular (IRV; 22 objects) and semiregular (SRV; 47 objects) AGB-variables using a radiative transfer code to model their circumstellar CO radio line emission. We believe that this sample is representative for the mass losing stars of this type. The (molecular hydrogen) mass loss rate distribution has a median value of 2.0 × 10 −7 M yr −1 , and a minimum of 2.0 × 10 −8 M yr −1 and a maximum of 8 × 10 −7 M yr −1 . M-type IRVs and SRVs with a mass loss rate in excess of 5 × 10 −7 M yr −1 must be very rare, and among these mass losing stars the number of sources with mass loss rates below a few 10 −8 M yr −1 must be small. We find no significant difference between the IRVs and the SRVs in terms of their mass loss characteristics. Among the SRVs the mass loss rate shows no dependence on the period. Likewise the mass loss rate shows no correlation with the stellar temperature. The gas expansion velocity distribution has a median of 7.0 km s −1 , and a minimum of 2.2 km s −1 and a maximum of 14.4 km s −1 . No doubt, these objects sample the low gas expansion velocity end of AGB winds. The fraction of objects with low gas expansion velocities is very high, about 30% have velocities lower than 5 km s −1 , and there are objects with velocities lower than 3 km s −1 : V584 Aql, T Ari, BI Car, RX Lac, and L 2 Pup. The mass loss rate and the gas expansion velocity correlate well, a result in line with theoretical predictions for an optically thin, dust-driven wind. In general, the model produces line profiles which acceptably fit the observed ones. An exceptional case is R Dor, where the high-quality, observed line profiles are essentially flat-topped, while the model ones are sharply double-peaked. The sample contains four sources with distinctly double-component CO line profiles, i.e., a narrow feature centered on a broader feature: EP Aqr, RV Boo, X Her, and SV Psc. We have modelled the two components separately for each star and derive mass loss rates and gas expansion velocities. We have compared the results of this M-star sample with a similar C-star sample analysed in the same way. The mass loss rate characteristics are very similar for the two samples. On the contrary, the gas expansion velocity distributions are clearly different. In particular, the number of low-velocity sources is much higher in the M-star sample. We found no example of the sharply double-peaked CO line profile, which is evidence of a large, detached CO-shell, among the M-stars. About 10% of the C-stars show this phenomenon.

W Hya through the eye of Odin

“…This result has a rather low uncertainty provided that the adopted circumstellar model and CO abundance (2 × 10 −4 ) are correct. Our result is also consistent with those of Wannier & Sahai (1986), Young (1995), and Olofsson et al (2002). Once these values are scaled to the same distance, velocity, and CO abundance, the range of the mass-loss rates is (5-20) × 10 −8 M yr −1 .…”

Dusty wind of W Hydrae

“…That is because, first, the opacity of Ca 2 Mg 0.5 Al 2 Si 1.5 O 7 at 70 μm is higher than that of other silicates, so more mass of other silicate species at the same temperature would be required to produce the same emission at these wavelengths. And, second, the expansion velocity tends to increase with increasing mass-loss rate (see, e.g., Olofsson et al 2002), which means that the present value of 7.5 km s −1 would probably be lower than the expansion velocity during a phase with higher mass-loss rate.…”

A HIFI view on circumstellar H2O in M-type AGB stars: radiative transfer, velocity profiles, and H2O line cooling

“…Although detailed modelling of these parameters for individual sources may result in different values, the uncertainties in these individual models would complicate the comparative study that is the goal of this work. This basic modelling strategy has been thoroughly tested and used previously (e.g., Schöier & Olofsson 2001;Olofsson et al 2002;Ramstedt et al 2008;Maercker et al 2008Maercker et al , 2009Schöier et al 2011;Danilovich et al 2014).…”

“…The radius of the CO envelope is determined by models of photodissociation of CO (Mamon et al 1988). The code and modelling method has been used extensively to model the emission lines from various molecules, including CO (e.g., Olofsson et al 2002), SiO (Ramstedt et al 2009), and HCN (Schöier et al 2013).…”