 |  |
Astron. Astrophys. 345, 485-498 (1999)
3. The color-magnitude diagrams
The CMDs derived from the photometry discussed in the previous section
are presented in Figs. 1, 2, and 3. The upper part of the CMDs comes
from the ground-based data, while the lower part is from the three WF
cameras of the WFPC2. In the case of M22, the CMD for magnitudes
fainter than V=19.8 comes from the WF2 only: the differential
reddening of this cluster (Peterson & Cudworth 1994) makes the
sequence much broader than expected from the photometric errors. The
MS of M22 from the three WF cameras is shown in Fig. 4. In
Table 2 the dispersion (defined
as the sigma of the best fitting gaussian) of the MS (after the
removal of the field star contamination as described in Sect. 4) is
compared with the expected photometric error
. The latter have been estimated from
the artificial star tests (cf. Sect. 2.3), in one magnitude bins, in
the interval . The resulting average
differential reddening in the 3 WF fields is
magnitudes. This value must be
considered as an upper limit for the differential reddening in this
region.
![[FIGURE]](img13.gif) |
Fig. 1. Composite CMD for 6986 stars in M10. The ground-based data are from the JKT telescope.
|
![[FIGURE]](img15.gif) |
Fig. 2. Composite CMD of 5385 stars in M22. The ground-based data are from the ESO-Dutch telescope. For the HST data only the stars in the WF2 field are shown.
|
![[FIGURE]](img17.gif) |
Fig. 3. Composite CMD of 8121 stars in M55. The ground-based data are from the ESO-Danish telescope.
|
![[FIGURE]](img26.gif) |
Fig. 4. CMD of 13359 stars from the three WF fields of M22. The large dispersion of the MS is interpreted in terms of a differential reddening of magnitudes in .
|
![[TABLE]](img19.gif)
Table 2.
The ground-based and the HST fields are partially overlapping, with
the ground-based images always covering a larger portion of the
cluster. A detailed discussion of these CMDs will appear elsewhere.
Here it suffice to note that we measured stars from the tip of the
giant brach to a limiting magnitude .
A white dwarf cooling sequence is clearly seen in all diagrams (but it
will be discussed elsewhere). For the first time, we have a complete
picture of a simple stellar population about 15 Gyr after its birth,
from close to the hydrogen-burning limit to the final stages of its
evolution along the white dwarf sequence. These diagrams can be used
for a fine tuning of the stellar evolution and population synthesis
models (Brocato et al. 1996).
Contamination by foreground/background stars is small for M10, as
expected from its galactic latitute
( ), though a few background stars
(likely from the outskirts of the Galactic bulge) are present. Despite
the fact that M55 has the same latitude as M10, a significantly larger
fraction of field stars is visible in the CMD of Fig. 3. Some of these
stars are likely bulge members, but the prominent sequence blueward of
the MS of M55 must be associated with the MS and TO of the stars in
the Sagittarius dwarf spheroidal galaxy (Mateo et al. 1996, Fahlman et
al. 1996). M22 is the most contaminated cluster. Both Galactic disk
and Galactic bulge stars are clearly seen in the CMDs of Figs. 2 and
4.
Deep CMDs also contain information on the low-mass content of the
clusters. This information can be extracted from our data only after
we have a reliable transformation from luminosities to masses.
Unfortunately, such a transformation remains uncertain for
low-metallicity, low-mass stars. Almost nothing is known from the
empirical point of view, and different calculations of stellar models
yield different masses, particularly for the lowest-mass stars (King
et al. 1998), and different overall trends (slopes) for the
mass-luminosity relations (MLRs).
As already found for NGC 6397 (King et al. 1998) and the other
three metal-poor clusters studied by PCK (cf. their Fig. 3), among the
existing models we find that those by the group in Lyon (Baraffe et
al. 1997) and by the group in Teramo (Cassisi et al. 1998, in
preparation) best reproduce the observed sequences of M10, M22, and
M55. [Note that Cassisi et al.'s (1998) models below
( )
are the same models as in Alexander et al. (1997).] The level of
agreement between the models and the observed data can be fully
appreciated in Figs. 5, 6, and 7. In these figures the open circles
represent the MS ridgeline, obtained by using a mode-finding algorithm
and a kappa-sigma iteration in order to minimize the field star
contamination. The dotted line represents the V magnitude limit
of the LFs presented in the following Sect. 4; the data below this
magnitude limit are not used in the present paper. The dashed line
shows the isochrone corresponding to the metallicity which best
matches the Zinn & West (1984) [Fe/H] (iron) content, scaled to
the appropriate metallicity [M/H] assuming [O/Fe]=0.35 (Ryan &
Norris 1991), and using the relation by Salaris et al. (1993).
According to Table 3, we used the models for [M/H]
for M22 and M55, and the models for
[M/H] for M10. For comparison
reasons, in Figs. 5, 6, and 7 we show also the isochrones which best
match the Zinn & West (1984) metallicity assuming a solar ratio
for the alpha elements (solid line). The distance modulus and
reddening have been left as free parameters. The resulting values of
are in very good agreement with the
values in the literature (cf. Djorgovski 1993). This is also true for
the resulting from the fit of the
Lyon group models. The models from the Teramo group result
systematically redder by about 0.06 magnitudes in
than the isochrones from Baraffe et
al. (1997), and the resulting reddening is marginally consistent with
the reddening in the literature. In the LF comparison discussed in
Sect. 4, we have adopted the distance moduli and reddenings used in
the fit of the Baraffe et al. models and listed in Table 3.
![[FIGURE]](img38.gif) |
Fig. 5. Comparison between the observed CMD of M10 and the models by the Lyon group (left panel ), and the Teramo group (right panel ) for [M/H] (solid line ) and [M/H] (dashed line ). The open circles represent the MS ridgeline.
|
![[FIGURE]](img44.gif) |
Fig. 6. Comparison between the observed CMD of M22 and the models by the Lyon group (left panel ), and the Teramo group (right panel ) for [M/H] (dashed line ) and [M/H] (solid line ). The open circles represent the MS ridgeline.
|
![[FIGURE]](img50.gif) |
Fig. 7. Comparison between the observed CMD of M55 and the models by the Lyon group (left panel ), and the Teramo group (right panel ) for [M/H] (dashed line ) and [M/H] (solid line ). The open circles represent the MS ridgeline.
|
![[TABLE]](img52.gif)
Table 3. Adopted parameters
We want to briefly comment on the comparisons in Figs. 5, 6, and 7,
leaving a more complete discussion to a future paper specific to the
CMDs. There is an overall agreement between the models and the
observed sequences. With the adopted distance moduli, both sets of
models reproduce the characteristic bends of the MS, and at the
correct magnitudes. The MSs of M22 and M55 seem to be better
reproduced by the models, while the discrepancies seems to be more
significant for M10. The deviations close to the TO might be due to
the age of the adopted isochrones (the only ones available to us),
which is 10 Gyr for the Lyon models and 14 Gyr for the Teramo ones.
The isochrones seem to deviate more and more in color in the lowest
part of the CMD. We can exclude that this is due to any internal
errors in our photometry. The artificial-star experiments show that
the average deviation in color due to photometric errors is less than
0.03 magnitudes at the faintest limit of the photometry. The residual
differences might arise both from errors in the calibration from the
HST to the standard system and to
errors in the transformation from the theoretical to observational
plane, very uncertain for these cool stars (Alexander et al.
1997).
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 1999
Online publication: April 19, 1999
helpdesk.link@springer.de  |