 |  |
Astron. Astrophys. 335, 1003-1008 (1998)
3. Clumping in first approximation
3.1. Formulation
For a first-order approach to clumped stellar winds, we make the
following simplifying assumptions:
-
The wind consists of clumps with density ,
where is the density stratification of the
homogeneous model with the same mass-loss rate. The factor
thus gives the density enhancement, and is
assumed to be constant all over the atmosphere.
-
The interclump space is void. Thus the volume filling factor of the
clumps is .
-
The clumps are assumed to have small size, compared to the photon
free path. Thus the radiative transfer can be calculated with
"effective" emissivities and opacities averaging between the clump and
interclump medium.
Under these assumptions, clumping can be accounted for by limited
modifications in existing model codes. The statistical equations have
to be solved for the enhanced density . The
population numbers, which add up to the enhanced particle density of
the clump medium, are applied as usual for the calculation of the
non-LTE emissivity and opacity. However, the latter two are scaled
down by the volume filling factor before they
enter the radiative transfer calculation.
In our code we obtain the consistent solution of the co-moving
frame radiative transfer equation and the equations of statistical
equilibrium by an iterative scheme using approximate lambda operators.
The latter are set up with the same, modified opacities which are used
in the "exact" radiative transfer. The described modifications of
emissivity and opacity also apply in the Formal Integral which is
finally performed in the observer's frame once the population numbers
are established.
3.2. Scaling properties
In the described formulation, the density enhancement D
would cancel out in the emissivities and opacities, if they were
linear in the density . However, Wolf-Rayet
spectra are known to be dominated by processes which scale with the
square of the density. This can be concluded from the scaling
property of Wolf-Rayet models, which has been discovered first by
Schmutz et al. (1989). They defined a so-called transformed radius
as
![[EQUATION]](img20.gif)
and found that models with same exhibit the
same emission line equivalent widths, irrespective of different
combinations of , and
(while, of course, ,
composition etc. are fixed). This invariance was validated by various
numerical experiments with reasonable accuracy. In a stricter sense,
one might compare only models with same terminal velocity
. Then even the line profiles and the total shape
of the emergent spectra are invariant for models with same
, except of a scaling of the absolute flux with
. This property greatly facilitates any spectral
analyses, as only two essential parameters ( ,
) must be adapted.
The described invariance can be understood by adopting that the
relevant emission processes scale with the square of the density. This
can be seen as follows. If the emissivity (at any considered
wavelength) scales with , then the flux emitted
from a volume V of that density scales with
. Keeping constant
implies (Eq. 1), while we have
from the continuity equation. Combining both
proportionalities yields . Any emitting volume
scales with , and thus the emitted flux scales
like , just as empirically established. The
relative spectral shape remains unchanged.
The likely physical explanation is that most continuum photons are
created by free-free emission or photo-recombination, while the line
photons are emitted in recombination cascades. The number of created
line photons thus depends only on the corresponding recombination
rate, even when they are trapped for some time in optically thick
scattering lines before they escape. Both, free-free emission and
radiative recombination, are -processes.
The dominance of emission processes explains
the invariance of the radiation field, when comparing models with same
but different combinations of
and , as long as the model
structure (stratification of population numbers) is the same. This,
however, is not to be expected, as the density structure is different
(namely scaling with , see above) and the
density never can cancel out in the ratio between any ionization and
recombination process. Indeed, a detailed comparison between models
with same reveals the expected differences in
the ionization stratification. However, these differences do not, in
most cases, lead to significantly different spectra. We suggest that
this is due to the relatively weak dependence of
on , and on the fact that
the main emission in a specific line comes from those radial zones
where the relevant ion (i.e. the next higher stage) is the dominating
one.
The concept of the "transformed radius" now can be generalized for
clumped models. In order to cancel out in quadratic processes, the
clump density enhancement D must be compensated by diminishing
the mass-loss rate by a factor . Thus we
define
![[EQUATION]](img31.gif)
and expect that models with same exhibit the
same line equivalent widths, irrespective of different combinations of
D, , and
. For constant , the
absolute spectra should only differ by a scaling with
.
Note that this scaling invariance holds only for the
processes, i.e. for the main spectral features.
The electron scattering opacity, however, scales linearly with
density. Thus, in inhomogeneous models the enhanced clump density is
already fully compensated by the volume filling factor; scaling down
the mass-loss rate in order to keep the same
decreases the effective Thomson opacity. Hence, for a series of models
with same the extended line wings caused by
frequency redistribution of electron-scattered line photons should
become weaker with increasing D, while the main spectral
feature remain unchanged. This is the reason why the too strong
electron scattering wings predicted by the standard, non-clumped
models are considered as evidence for inhomogeneities.
Among the manifold combinations of , D
and which give the samed transformed radius
, one can restrict the subspace for which the
processes linear in are simultaneously
invariant in the above sense, i.e. for which the electron scattering
wings are expected to have the same strength. The condition that
also give fluxes that scale with
yields . In other words,
if going to bigger stars with same transformed radius, one might
increase the clump density enhancement , and
(despite of the constant factor ) the whole
spectrum should remain invariant, the main line features as well as
the electron scattering wings. Vice versa, this connection has an
interesting consequence. If the degree of clumping (i.e. the parameter
D) would turn out to be a universal or otherwise predictable
property of WR type stellar winds, one could, in principal, estimate
the stellar luminosity (and thus the distance etc.) from the spectrum
alone. At least, one expects that less luminous stars have weaker
electron-scattering wings than more luminous counterparts with
otherwise similar spectra. By this one might, e.g., distinguish
post-AGB stars with WR type spectra from Pop. I Wolf-Rayet stars.
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1998
Online publication: June 26, 1998
helpdesk.link@springer.de  |