Paper detail

Stripped-Envelope Stars in Different Metallicity Environments I. Evolutionary Phases, Classification and Populations

Massive stars that become stripped of their hydrogen envelope through binary interaction or winds can be observed either as Wolf-Rayet stars, if they have optically thick winds, or as transparent-wind stripped-envelope stars. We approximate their evolution through evolutionary models of single helium stars, and compute detailed model grids in the initial mass range 1.5 to 70 M$_{\odot}$ for metallicities between 0.01 and 0.04, from core helium ignition until core collapse. Throughout their lifetime, some stellar models expose the ashes of helium burning. We propose that models that have nitrogen-rich envelopes are candidate WN stars, while models with a carbon-rich surface are candidate WC stars during core helium burning, and WO stars afterwards. We measure metallicity dependance of the total lifetime of our models and the duration of their evolutionary phases. We propose an analytic estimate of the wind optical depth to distinguish models of Wolf-Rayet stars from transparent-wind stripped-envelope stars, and find that the luminosity ranges at which WN, WC and WO type stars can exist is a strong function of metallicity. We find that all carbon-rich models produced in our grids have optically thick winds and match the luminosity distribution of observed populations. We construct population models and predict the numbers of transparent-wind stripped-envelope stars and Wolf-Rayet stars, and derive their number ratios at different metallicities. We find that as metallicity increases, the number of transparent-wind stripped-envelope stars decreases and the number of Wolf-Rayet stars increases. At high metallicities WC and WO type stars become more common. We apply our population models to nearby galaxies, and find that populations are more sensitive to the transition luminosity between Wolf-Rayet stars and transparent-wind helium stars than to the metallicity dependent mass loss rates.

preprint2022arXivOpen 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.

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.