Paper detail

Dust from AGBs: relevant factors and modelling uncertainties

The dust formation process in the winds of Asymptotic Giant Branch stars is discussed, based on full evolutionary models of stars with mass in the range $1$M$_{\odot} \leq$M$\leq 8$M$_{\odot}$, and metallicities $0.001 < Z <0.008$. Dust grains are assumed to form in an isotropically expanding wind, by growth of pre--existing seed nuclei. Convection, for what concerns the treatment of convective borders and the efficiency of the schematization adopted, turns out to be the physical ingredient used to calculate the evolutionary sequences with the highest impact on the results obtained. Low--mass stars with M$\leq 3$M$_{\odot}$ produce carbon type dust with also traces of silicon carbide. The mass of solid carbon formed, fairly independently of metallicity, ranges from a few $10^{-4}$M$_{\odot}$, for stars of initial mass $1-1.5$M$_{\odot}$, to $\sim 10^{-2}$M$_{\odot}$ for M$\sim 2-2.5$M$_{\odot}$; the size of dust particles is in the range $0.1 μ$m$\leq a_C \leq 0.2μ$m. On the contrary, the production of silicon carbide (SiC) depends on metallicity. For $10^{-3} \leq Z \leq 8\times 10^{-3}$ the size of SiC grains varies in the range $0.05 μ{\rm m} < {\rm a_{SiC}} < 0.1 μ$m, while the mass of SiC formed is $10^{-5}{\rm M}_{\odot} < {\rm M_{SiC}} < 10^{-3}{\rm M}_{\odot}$. Models of higher mass experience Hot Bottom Burning, which prevents the formation of carbon stars, and favours the formation of silicates and corundum. In this case the results scale with metallicity, owing to the larger silicon and aluminium contained in higher--Z models. At Z=$8\times 10^{-3}$ we find that the most massive stars produce dust masses $m_d \sim 0.01$M$_{\odot}$, whereas models of smaller mass produce a dust mass ten times smaller. The main component of dust are silicates, although corundum is also formed, in not negligible quantities ($\sim 10-20\%$).

preprint2014arXivOpen 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.