Paper detail

Age and helium content of the open cluster NGC 6791 from multiple eclipsing binary members. II. age dependencies and new insights

Models of stellar structure and evolution can be constrained by measuring accurate parameters of detached eclipsing binaries in open clusters. Multiple binary stars provide the means to determine helium abundances in these old stellar systems, and in turn, to improve estimates of their age. In the first paper of this series, we demonstrated how measurements of multiple eclipsing binaries in the old open cluster NGC6791 sets tighter constraints on the properties of stellar models than has previously been possible, thereby potentially improving both the accuracy and precision of the cluster age. Here we add additional constraints and perform an extensive model comparison to determine the best estimates of the cluster age and helium content, employing as many observational constraints as possible. We improve our photometry and correct empirically for differential reddening effects. We then perform an extensive comparison of the CMDs and eclipsing binary measurements to Victoria and DSEP isochrones to estimate cluster parameters. We also reanalyse a spectrum of the star 2-17 to improve [Fe/H] constraints. We find a best estimate of the age of ~8.3 Gyr while demonstrating that remaining age uncertainty is dominated by uncertainties in the CNO abundances. The helium mass fraction is well constrained at Y = 0.30 \pm 0.01 resulting in dY/dZ ~ 1.4 assuming that such a relation exists. During the analysis we firmly identify blue straggler stars, including the star 2-17, and find indications for the presence of their evolved counterparts. Our analysis supports the RGB mass-loss found from asteroseismology and we determine precisely the absolute mass of stars on the lower RGB, 1.15\pm0.02Msun. This will be an important consistency check for the detailed asteroseismology of cluster stars.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access14 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.