![]() | ![]() |
Astron. Astrophys. 329, 613-623 (1998) 5. ResultsOur analysis procedure was as follows: we have determined effective temperatures and gravities for each supergiant for our two model helium abundances. These are listed in Table 1 - the number of significant figures provided are to illustrate the dependence of these quantities on the helium fraction and are not representative of the likely errors. For both stars, increasing the helium abundance reduces our estimate of the gravity which in turn reduces that for the effective temperature. As was implied by the synthetic profiles, our temperature and gravity estimates were effectively independent of the value adopted for the microturbulent velocity. Table 1. Dependence of derived atmospheric parameters of our target stars on assumed helium fraction. The He I lines have been calculated using the
appropriate values of the atmospheric parameters for each value of
y. In Table 2 we show the estimates of helium fraction, while
in Figs. 3 and 4 we present our spectral line fits. The extrapolated
values were obtained by linearly extrapolating the helium line
profiles beyond the limits of our grid. In some cases (marked with a
dagger) the extrapolation was relatively small and the estimates
should be useful; in other cases (marked by colons), such an approach
is clearly over-simplistic and the values are only intended to be
illustrative. Estimates of the helium fraction from the line at
5015Å in both stars and from the line at 4713Å for
Table 2. Helium fractions, y, implied by different He I lines. For each target, we give two estimates for y ; viz. that determined from an analysis performed with
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() © European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1998 Online publication: December 8, 1997 ![]() |