New grids of ATLAS9 atmospheres I: Influence of convection treatments on model structure and on observable quantities

By U. Heiter, F. Kupka, C. V. Veer-Menneret, C. Barban, W. W. Weiss, M. Goupil, W. Schmidt, D. Katz, R. Garrido. 2002

141 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Received ; accepted Abstract. We present several new sets of grids of model stellar atmospheres computed with modified versions of the ATLAS9 code. Each individual set consists of several grids of models with different metallicities ranging from (M/H) = 2.0 to +1.0 dex. The grids range from 4000 to 10000 K in Teff and from 2.0 to 5.0 dex in log g. The individual sets differ from each other and from previous ones essentially in the physics used for the treatment of the convective energy transport, in the higher vertical resolution of the atmospheres and in a finer grid in the (Teff, log g) plane. These improvements enable the computation of derivatives of color indices accurate enough for pulsation mode identification. In addition, we show that the chosen vertical resolution is necessary and sufficient for the purpose of stellar interior modelling.To explain the physical differences between the model grids we provide a description of the currently available modifications of ATLAS9 according to their treatment of convection. Our critical analysis of the dependence of the atmospheric structure and observable quantities on convection treatment, vertical resolution and metallicity reveals that spectroscopic and photometric observations are best represented when using an inefficient convection treatment. This conclusion holds whatever convection formulation investigated here is used, i.e. MLT(� = 0.5), CM and CGM are equivalent. We also find that changing the convection treatment can lead to a change in the effective temperature estimated from Stromgren color indices from 200 to 400 K.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Atmospheric Science, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/02252bbd37fc2a0281c3e9f2aca06acb4f4d6f16

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

1. L. Hillenbrand
2. Russel J. White
3. C. Soubiran
4. U. Heiter
5. Paulina Jofré
6. T. Cantat-Gaudin
7. K. Luhman
8. D. Montes

In Atmospheric Science

1. Paulina Jofré
2. C. Soubiran
3. K. Lind
4. L. Hillenbrand
5. M. Bergemann
6. U. Heiter
7. K. Luhman

In Instrumentation

1. L. Hillenbrand
2. C. Soubiran
3. Paulina Jofré
4. T. Cantat-Gaudin
5. K. Lind
6. V. Hill
7. T. Masseron
8. M. Bergemann

Citations in the corpus

• An Assessment of Dynamical Mass Constraints on Pre-Main-Sequence Evolutionary Tracks (2003, methodology): “As this article went to press we became aware of the Montalbán et al. (2004) calculations, which explore both MLT and FST convection and now use the nongray Hauschildt, Allard, & Baron (1999) or the Heiter et al. (2002), aka Kurucz, atmospheres.”
• Line-by-line opacity stellar model atmospheres (2004, methodology): “The CM convection model has been implemented in our code in the same manner as it was done for 9 by Heiter et al. (2002).”
• Gaia FGK benchmark stars: Metallicity (2013, background): “Additionally, the efficiency of convective energy transport and its effect on line-formation reaches its maximum at Teff∼ 4000 K (Heiter et al. 2002).”