Paper detail

Intense Mass Loss from C-rich AGB Stars at low Metallicity?

We argue that the energy injection of pulsations may be of greater importance to the mass-loss rate of AGB stars than metallicity, and that the mass-loss trend with metallicity is not as simple as sometimes assumed. Using our detailed radiation hydrodynamical models that include dust formation, we illustrate the effects of pulsation energy on wind properties. We find that the mass-loss rate scales with the kinetic energy input by pulsations as long as a dust-saturated wind does not occur, and all other stellar parameters are kept constant. This includes the absolute abundance of condensible carbon (not bound in CO), which is more relevant than keeping the C/O-ratio constant when comparing stars of different metallicity. The pressure and temperature gradients in the atmospheres of stars, become steeper and flatter, respectively, when the metallicity is reduced, while the radius where the atmosphere becomes opaque is typically associated with a higher gas pressure. This effect can be compensated for by adjusting the velocity amplitude of the variable inner boundary (piston), which is used to simulate the effects of pulsation, to obtain models with comparable kinetic-energy input. Hence, it is more relevant to compare models with similar energy-injections than of similar velocity amplitude. Since there is no evidence for weaker pulsations in low-metallicity AGB stars, we conclude that it is unlikely that low-metallicity C-stars have a lower mass-loss rate, than their more metal-rich counterparts with similar stellar parameters, as long as they have a comparable amount of condensible carbon.

preprint2008arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 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.

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 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.