Paper detail

Dust formation in the winds of AGBs: the contribution at low metallicities

We present new models for the evolution of stars with mass in the range 1Msun < M < 7.5Msun, followed from the pre-main-sequence through the asymptotic giant branch phase. The metallicity adopted is $Z=3*10^{-4} (which, with an alpha-enhancement of +0.4, corresponds to [Fe/H]=-2). Dust formation is described by following the growth of dust grains of various types as the wind expands from the stellar surface. Models with mass M>3Msun experience Hot Bottom Burning, thus maintaining the surface C/O below unity. Unlike higher Z models, the scarcity of silicon available in the envelope prevents the formation of silicates in meaningful quantities, sufficient to trigger the acceleration of the wind via radiation pressure on the dust grains formed. No silicate formation occurs below a threshold metallicity of Z=10^{-3}. Low--mass stars, with M< 2.5Msun become carbon stars, forming solid carbon dust in their surroundings. The total dust mass formed depends on the uncertain extent of the inwards penetration of the convective envelope during the Third Dredge--Up episodes following the Thermal Pulses. Carbon grains have sizes 0.08 micron < a_C < 0.12 micron and the total amount of dust formed (increasing with the mass of the star) is M_C=(2-6)*10^{-4}Msun. Our results imply that AGB stars with Z=3*10^{-4} can only contribute to carbon dust enrichment of the interstellar medium on relatively long timescales, > 300 Myr, comparable to the evolutionary time of a 3Msun star. At lower metallicities the scarcity of silicon available and the presence of Hot Bottom Burning even in M< 2Msun, prevents the formation of silicate and carbon grains. We extrapolate our conclusion to more metal--poor environments, and deduce that at Z < 10^{-4} dust enrichment is mostly due to metal condensation in supernova ejecta.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access9 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.