Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T01:29:24.270Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Photometric and Spectroscopic Study of R CMa*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2016

K. R. Radhakrishnan ,
M. B. K. Sarma  and
K. D. Abhyankar
K. R. Radhakrishnan
Affiliation:
Centre of Advances Study in Astronomy, Osmania University, Hyderabad, India
M. B. K. Sarma
Affiliation:
Centre of Advances Study in Astronomy, Osmania University, Hyderabad, India
K. D. Abhyankar
Affiliation:
Centre of Advances Study in Astronomy, Osmania University, Hyderabad, India

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

UVB Flight curves and spectrograms of R CMa obtained with the 48-inch telescope of Japal-Rangapur Observatory during 1980-82 have been used for deriving the eclipse and orbital elements as well as the absolute dimensions of the components. The primary is found to be a Main-Sequence F2V star of mass 1.52 M⊙ and the secondary a subgiant star of spectral type G8 and mass 0.20 M⊙ which fills its Roche lobe, in agreement with Kopal and Shapley (1956) results, Kopal (1959), or Sahade's (1963) results. From a consideration of the possible evolution of this system it is concluded that a large fraction of the original mass of the secondary is lost from the system. A study of the period changes indicates the possible presence of a third component of mass of about 0.5 M⊙ which is most likely to be an M dwarf.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Astronomical Union Colloquium , Volume 80: Double Stars, Physical Properties and Generic Relations , 1984 , pp. 229 - 236
Copyright
Copyright © Reidel 1984

Footnotes

*

Paper presented at the Lembang-Bamberg IAU Colloquium No. 80 on ‘Double Stars: Physical Properties and Generic Relations', held at Bandung, Indonesia, 3-7 June, 1983.

References

Dugan, R. S.: 1924, Contr. Princeton Univ. Obs. 6, 49.Google Scholar
Dugan, R. S. and Wright, F. W.: 1939, Contr. Princeton Univ. Obs. 19, 34.Google Scholar
Guiñan, E. F.: 1977, Astron. J. 82, 51.Google Scholar
Guiñan, E. F. and Ianna, P. A.: 1983, Astron. J. 88, 126.Google Scholar
Irwin, J. B.: 1952, Astrophys. J. 116, 211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, F. C.: 1916, Alleghany Pubi. 3, 49.Google Scholar
Kitamura, M. and Takahashi, C.: 1962, Pubi Astron. Soc. Japan 14, 44.Google Scholar
Koch, R. H.: 1960, Astron. J. 65, 326.Google Scholar
Kopal, Z.: 1959, in Close Binary Systems, Chapman-Hall and John Wiley, London and New York; Chapter VII.Google Scholar
Kopal, Z. and Shapley, M. B.: 1956, Jodreil Bank Annals 1, 143.Google Scholar
Merril, J. E.: 1970, in Vistas Astron. 12, 43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Needham, J. D., Phillips, J. P., Selby, M. J., and Magro, C. S.: 1980, Astron. Astrophys. 83, 370.Google Scholar
Neo, S., Miyatti, S., Nomoto, K., and Sugimoto, D.: 1977, Pubi. Astron. Soc. Japan 29, 249.Google Scholar
Pickering, E. C.: 1904, Harvard Annals 46, 184.Google Scholar
Plavec, M.: 1973, in Batten, A. H. (ed.), Extended Atmospheres and Circumstellar Matter in Spectroscopic Binary Systems, D. Reidei Pubi. Co., Dordrecht, Holland, p. 216.Google Scholar
Radhakrishnan, K. R. and Sarma, M. B. K.: 1982, Nizamiah and Japal-Rangapur Obs. Contr., No. 16.Google Scholar
Refsdal, S. and Weigert, A.: 1969, Astron. Astrophys. 1, 167.Google Scholar
Russell, H. N.: 1902, Astrophys. J. 15, 252.Google Scholar
Sahade, J.: 1963, Ann. Astrophys. 26, 80.Google Scholar
Sato, K.: 1971, Pubi. Astron. Soc. Japan 23, 335.Google Scholar
Sitterly, B. W.: 1940, Astron. J. 48, 190.Google Scholar
Sterne, T. E.: 1941, Proc. U.S. Nat. Acad. Sci. 27, 108.Google Scholar
Struve, O. and Smith, B.: 1950, Astrophys-. J. 111, 27.Google Scholar
Wendell, O. C.: 1909, Harvard Annals 69, 66.Google Scholar
Wolfe, R. H., Horák, H. G., and Storer, N. W.: 1967, in M. Hack (ed.), Modem Astrophysics, Gauthier-Villars, Paris, p. 251.Google Scholar
Wood, F. B.: 1946, Contr. Princeton Univ. Obs. 21, 31.Google Scholar