Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T01:41:35.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

On Stellar Models with Blanketed Atmospheres as Boundary Conditions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2006

Don A. VandenBerg
Affiliation:
Dept. of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria, Victoria, B.C., V8W 3P6, Canada email: [email protected]
Bengt Edvardsson
Affiliation:
Uppsala Astronomical Observatory, Box 515, SE-751 20 Uppsala, Sweden email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Kjell Eriksson
Affiliation:
Uppsala Astronomical Observatory, Box 515, SE-751 20 Uppsala, Sweden email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Bengt Gustafsson
Affiliation:
Uppsala Astronomical Observatory, Box 515, SE-751 20 Uppsala, Sweden email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Jason W. Ferguson
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, Wichita State University, Wichita, Kansas 67260-0032, U.S.A. email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The impact on the predicted Teff scale of using the latest MARCS model atmospheres, instead of a fixed atmospheric structure (e.g., the gray T–τ relation) is examined. The former were fitted to stellar interior models at both the photosphere and at τ = 100 to determine the sensitivity of evolutionary tracks and isochrones for [Fe/H] = 0.0 and −2.0 to the chosen fitting point. In the case of solar abundances, the Teff of the giant branch varied by up to 100–150 K, depending on how the outer layers were treated. Much smaller variations were found for metal-poor giants (or main-sequence stars). Interestingly, models for the low solar Z favored by Asplund et al. (Z=0.0125) were unable to reproduce the gap near the turnoff in the C-M diagram of the old open cluster M 67, in contrast to models that assume Z=0.0188.

Type
Contributed Papers
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2007

References

Asplund, M., Grevesse, N., Sauval, A.J., AllendePrieto, C. Prieto, C., & Blomme, R. 2005, A&A, 431, 693Google Scholar
Brocato, E., Cassisi, S., & Castellani, V. 1998, MNRAS, 295, 711Google Scholar
Carretta, E., & Gratton, R.G. 1997, A&AS, 121, 95Google Scholar
Cassisi, S., Salaris, M., Castelli, F., & Pietrinferni, A. 2004, ApJ, 616, 498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grevesse, N., & Sauval, A.J. 1998, Space Sci. Rev., 85, 161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
KrishnaSwamy, K.S. Swamy, K.S. 1966, ApJ, 145, 174Google Scholar
Michaud, G., Richard, O., Richer, J., & VandenBerg, D.A. 2004, ApJ, 606, 452Google Scholar
Montgomery, K.A., Marschall, L.A., & Janes, K.A. 1993, AJ, 106, 181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pietrinferni, A., Cassisi, S., Salaris, M., & Castelli, F. 2004, ApJ, 612, 168Google Scholar
Tautvaisiene, G., Edvardsson, B., Tuominen, I., & Ilyin, I. 2000, A&A, 360, 499Google Scholar
VandenBerg, D.A. 1991, in: Janes, K. (ed.), The Formation and Evolution of Star Clusters ASP Conf. Ser., 13, 183Google Scholar
VandenBerg, D.A., Bergbusch, P.A., & Dowler, P.D. 2006, ApJ, 162, 375Google Scholar
Walker, A.R. 1994, AJ, 108, 555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yi, S.K., Demarque, P., Kim, Y.-C., Lee, Y.-W., Lejeune, T., & Barnes, S. 2001, ApJS, 136, 417Google Scholar