Paper detail

Common-envelope evolution with an asymptotic giant branch star

Common-envelope phases are decisive for the evolution of many binary systems. Of particular interest are cases with asymptotic giant branch (AGB) primary stars, because they are thought to be progenitors of various astrophysical transients. In three-dimensional hydrodynamic simulations with the moving-mesh code AREPO, we study the common-envelope evolution of a $1.0\,M_{\odot}$ early-AGB star with companions of different masses. Although the stellar envelope of the AGB star is less tightly bound than that of a red giant, we find that the release of orbital energy of the core binary is insufficient to eject more than about twenty percent of the envelope mass. Ionization energy released in the expanding envelope, however, can lead to complete envelope ejection. Because recombination proceeds largely at high optical depths in our simulations, it is likely that this effect indeed plays a significant role in the considered systems. The efficiency of mass loss and the final orbital separation of the core binary system depend on the mass ratio between the companion and the primary star. Our results suggest a linear relation between the ratio of final to initial orbital separation and this parameter.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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.

Institutions

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 graph slice

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.