Paper detail

SED analysis of class I and class II FU Orionis stars

FU Orionis stars (FUORS) are eruptive pre-main sequence objects thought to represent quasi-periodic or recurring stages of enhanced accretion during the low-mass star-forming process. We characterize the sample of known and candidate FUORS in an homogeneous and consistent way, deriving stellar and circumstellar parameters for each object. We emphasize the analysis in those parameters that are supposed to vary during the FUORS stage. We modeled the SEDs of 24 of the 26 currently known FUORS, using the radiative transfer code of Whitney et al (2003b). We compare our models with those obtained by Robitaille et al. (2007) for Taurus class II and I sources in quiescence periods, by calculating the cumulative distribution of the different parameters. FUORS have more massive disks: we find that $\sim80\%$ of the disks in FUORS are more massive than any Taurus class II and I sources in the sample. Median values for the disk mass accretion rates are ~ 1.e-7 Msun/yr vs ~ 1.e-5 Msun/yr for standard YSOs (young stellar objects) and FUORS, respectively. While the distributions of envelope mass accretion rates for class I FUORS and for standard class I objects are similar, FUORS, on average, have higher envelope mass accretion rates than standard class II and class I sources. Most FUORS (~ 70%) have envelope mass accretion rates above 1.e-7 Msun/yr. In contrast, 60% of the classical YSO sample have accretion rates below this value. Our results support the current scenario in which changes experimented by the circumstellar disk explain the observed properties of these stars. However, the increase in the disk mass accretion rate is smaller than theoretically predicte (Frank et al. 1992; Hartmann & Kenyon 1996), though in good agreement with previous determinations.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.