Stellar and wind parameters of Galactic O-stars - The influence of line-blocking/blanketing

By T. Repolust, J. Puls, A. Herrero. 2004

285 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, Instrumentation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/802159b758611c190571156734471b8155ef9e1b

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

In Instrumentation

Citations in the corpus

The Discordance of Mass-Loss Estimates for Galactic O-Type Stars (2005, methodology): “The primary sample also contains objects analyzed by Markova et al. (2004) with a more simplified approach, which relies in part on calibrations of fundamental parameters derived from the work of Repolust et al. (2004).”
Stellar and wind properties of massive stars in the central parsec of the Galaxy (2006, background): “Comparison data from Crowther et al. (1995b), Crowther et al. (1995c), Morris et al. (2000) for WN stars and Repolust et al. (2004), Bouret et al. (2005) for O supergiants are shown by open symbols.”
A census of the Carina Nebula — I. Cumulative energy input from massive stars (2006, methodology): “The valueoflog LB ol= 6.17 isadopted from Repolust et al. (2004), and the value for Q H was calculated from the lum inosity using the revised Teff calibration scale of M artinsetal.”
Mass Loss: Its Effect on the Evolution and Fate of High-Mass Stars (2014, background): “Based on unifying Hα meaurements with the theoretical mind momentum 8 Smith relation, both Repolust et al. (2004) and Markova et al. (2004) found fcl=5, or a mass-loss raduction by 2.3.1 Puls et al. (2006, 2008) and others have discussed that the larger mass-loss rate reduction of 10 found by…”
Formation of Double Neutron Star Systems (2017, background): “The observational and theoretical estimated values depend on the modelling of the terminal wind velocity, clumping effects, metallicity and absorption properties in the local environment (Kudritzki & Puls 2000; Vink et al. 2001; Repolust et al. 2004; Crowther et al. Notes —”
Fourier method of determining the rotational velocities in OB stars (2007, methodology): “To place the stars in the HRD we have taken results from various authors that used state-of-the-art nlte, line-blanketed, unified model atmospheres (Herrero et al. 2002; Repolust et al. 2004; Urbaneja 2004; Simón-Díaz 2005; Simón-Díaz et al. 2006; Crowther et al. 2006).”
The empirical metallicity dependence of the mass-loss rate of O- and early B-type stars (2007, methodology): “A reduction of this amount was proposed by Repolust et al. (2004) to correct for the fact that these stars have a systematically higher wind momentum compared to O dwarfs and theoretical predictions (see also Puls et al. 2003; Markova et al. 2004).”
Physical parameters and wind properties of galactic early B supergiants (2005, methodology): “5 Ia) from Repolust et al. (2004).”
A new calibration of stellar parameters of Galactic O stars (2005, methodology): “…the results of Bianchi & Garcia (2002) and Garcia & Bianchi (2004) in our comparisons since they are based on UV analysis, whereas both the present modelling and the observational results of Repolust et al. (2004), Herrero et al. (2002) and Martins et al. (2005) rely on optical diagnostics.”
Bright OB stars in the Galaxy. III. Constraints on the radial stratification of the clumping factor (2006, methodology): “Interestingly, a perfect fit for ζ Pup requires β = 0.7, contrasted with β = 0.9 from unclumped diagnostics (Repolust et al. 2004).”
WHAT DRIVES THE EXPANSION OF GIANT H ii REGIONS?: A STUDY OF STELLAR FEEDBACK IN 30 DORADUS (2010, methodology): “We can calculate the trapped-wind value using the wind-luminosity relation (Kudritzki et al. 1999; Repolust et al. 2004), which indicates that the momentum flux carried by winds from a star cluster is about half that carried by the radiation field if the cluster samples the entire IMF.”
DOUBLE COMPACT OBJECTS. I. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE COMMON ENVELOPE ON MERGER RATES (2012, background): “The two most prominent are the “weak wind problem” (e.g., Chlebowski & Garmany (1991); Kudritzki et al. (1991); Herrero et al. (2002)) and “wind clumping” (e.g., Osterbrock & Flather (1959); Markova et al. (2004); Repolust et al. (2004); Lépine & Moffat (2008)).”
Lower mass loss rates in O-type stars: Spectral signatures of dense clumps in the wind of two Galactic O4 stars (2004, methodology): “Our results cast doubt on Repolust et al. (2004) and Markova et al. (2004) tentative suggestion to lower supergiant mass loss rates inorder to reunify the empirical WLRs with the theoretical one.”
On the Role of Continuum-driven Eruptions in the Evolution of Very Massive Stars and Population III Stars (2006, background): “The most extreme O2 If* supergiant HD93129A has a mass-loss rate derived assuming a homogeneous wind of roughly 2×10−5 M⊙ yr −1 (Repolust et al. 2004).”
A possible black hole in the γ-ray microquasar LS 5039 (2005, methodology): “With these values, the modified wind momentum of the upper state coincides with the values quoted by Repolust et al. (2004), being a factor of two lower for the low state, but still within their uncertainties.”
Mass loss from hot massive stars (2008, background): “Notable exceptions are O-supergiants with rather dense winds, where the “observed” wind-momenta appear as “too large” (see Markova et al 2004, Repolust et al 2004), which has been attributed to wind-clumping, see Sect.”
O stars with weak winds: the Galactic case (2005, methodology): “First, let us recall that the mass loss rates gathered in Table 3 are estimated from either pure Hα analysis (Leitherer 1988, Lamers & Leitherer 1993, Puls et al. 1996, Repolust et al. 2004, Markova et al. 2004) or from pure UV analysis (Howarth & Prinja 1989, Chlebowski & Garmany 1991).”