A&A 374, 682-690 (2001)
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:20010737
S. Ehlerová 1 - J. Palous 1 - W. K. Huchtmeier 2
1 - Astronomical Institute,
Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic,
Bocní II 1401, 141 31 Prague 4,
Czech Republic
2 -
MPIfR, Auf dem Hügel 69, 53121 Bonn, Germany
Received 27 February 2001/ Accepted 18 May 2001
Abstract
We describe H I observations of a
field
in the Milky Way centered on
,
made by the
Effelsberg radiotelescope. The field contains one previously identified
H I supershell, GS061+00+51 (Heiles 1979); apart from it we find several
new structures. We also study the H I distribution in the vicinity of
four H II regions, S86, S87, S88 and S89.
We confirm the existence of the shell GS061+00+51, and we find
that it has two smaller neighbours, spherical shells with
.
We identify at least one more
regular shell at
;
and
one blown-out shell at
.
In two cases we are
able to connect H II regions with features in the H I distribution
(S86 and S87), in two other cases no connection is found. Apart from
quite regular H I shells we see a number of non-coherent objects,
which are probably a result of the turbulence in the interstellar
medium.
Key words: ISM: bubbles - ISM: supernova remnants - ISM: H II regions - radio lines: ISM
Turbulence creates in the interstellar medium (ISM) many structures, typically dense sheets, clumps and low-density holes. The majority of these structures are transient. Many of them have an irregular, patchy appearance; however, some may look like ordinary, regular objects.
Another type of structures found in the ISM are H I shells and holes. We agree with Walter & Brinks (1999) that there is a difference between turbulent structures and H I shells, at least in the sense that most turbulent structures show very little consistency if any in the position-velocity (or position-position) space, while H I shells do. This, of course, does not mean that the turbulent medium does not influence the shape and evolution of H I shells. It does, and as a first guess we may estimate that shapes of shells in a turbulent medium will be more irregular than in a smooth medium.
We observed a field in the galactic plane which contains the supershell GS061+00+51 (Heiles 1979). Our observations have four times higher resolution than the survey of Weaver & Williams (1973) used for the previous identification. Apart from the shell GS061+00+51 and its surroundings we study the rest of the datacube and try to identify new shells and shell-like structures.
In the observed field four optical H II regions are known (S86, S87, S88 and S89; Sharpless 1959), at least one of them (S86) is connected to an OB association (Vul OB1). The angular dimensions of the mentioned H II regions are greater than or comparable to the resolution of our observations, and therefore we should be able to see their imprint in the H I distribution.
In 1997 (March-June) we observed a
field in the Milky Way centered on
,
with the 100 m radiotelescope in Effelsberg at the frequency
1.4 GHz (21 cm) of the neutral hydrogen line. The frequency
switching mode was used.
The bandwidth 1.56 MHz was split into 512 channels with widths
of
3 kHz, or 0.64
.
The primary beamwidth of the Effelsberg radiotelescope at 21 cm is
9.4 arcmin, observations were made with a spacing of 4 arcmin
(the pixel size). Each spectrum was integrated for 15 s. The data
were calibrated using the standard S7 procedure (Kalberla et al.
1982) and a linear baseline was subtracted. Observations were made in
6 runs, each dataset was calibrated separately.
Data were not corrected for stray radiation, because we observed
a small field and were mostly interested in the differential effect
of the observed emission against the background. Radio frequency
interference may be present in the observational data.
To check our observations we compared them with data
from the Leiden-Dwingeloo H I survey (Hartmann & Burton 1997),
which had a resolution of
.
To match the Dwingeloo beam
we averaged spectra from 81 pixels, i.e. (36 arcmin)2.
A comparison between our data and the Dwingeloo survey is shown in
Fig. 1, where good agreement between the two
datasets is visible.
![]() |
Figure 1: A comparison between the Leiden-Dwingeloo survey (thick line) and our observations (thin line). Our spectra are artificially offset by 10 K. |
| Open with DEXTER | |
To be ranked among H I shells, a structure must fulfill several criteria:
Due to the size of the field, many structures are only partly visible, and those we do not describe here (of the known H I shells GS064-0.1-97 (Heiles 1979) is seen in channel maps as a partial arc). Another previously known structure, the shell GS061+00+51, lies fully in the observed field.
| |
Figure 2:
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
The spectrum of an H I shell (in an ideal case) contains two peaks corresponding to the intersection of the line of sight with dense walls and a depression corresponding to the hole. These features are superimposed on the spectrum emitted by the surrounding ISM. To disentangle the two contributions, we subtract the background emission from the spectrum through the structure; the shell features should then appear. The column densities of the gas swept up into the wall can be - under some assumptions on the shape and dimensions of the shell - transformed into the mass of the shell and the initial volume density of the ISM.
However, to determine the background spectrum is difficult, first because of the unknowns in the velocity field and gas distribution which shape the spectrum, secondly because of the turbulent character of the ISM. The simplest way to define the background is to take the average of the emission from a region around the studied line of sight (in the case of studying the spectrum through the H I shell the region should contain the whole structure). This approach has its drawbacks, but at least it smears out the small scale inhomogeneities. When applied to artificial datacubes, we find, that often this method leads to a slight underestimation of the real values (lower column densities of the swept-up gas and lower masses). An important "spoiler'' is the non-zero velocity dispersion of the gas, both in the shell and in the ISM. How important this effect is, depends on the ratio between the velocity dispersion and the expansion velocity. The line widths of the walls correspond to the real velocity dispersion in the gas swept in the shell. The line width of the hole is not so easy to classify and so we abstain from any deductions.
It is also possible to estimate masses purely from the dimensions of the shell and an assumed (or estimated or fitted) density n0 of the ISM. This approach, due to the variability of n0 on many scales, does not lead to better or more reliable results.
To calculate kinematic distances of shells we use the rotation curve of Wouterloot et al. (1990).
The total energy
required to create the H I shell
is estimated using the Chevalier (1974) formula
| FWHM |
|
|
|
| (
|
(
|
( |
|
| hole | 7.1 |
|
|
| wall 1 | 3.2 |
|
|
| wall 2 | 2.6 |
|
|
![]() |
Figure 3:
The shell GS59.9-1.0+38 in a velocity channel
(
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
Quantities derived from the
graph (see Fig. 2)
are summarized in Table 1.
FWHM gives the width of the line (if the line profile is Gaussian,
the dispersion
FWHM);
is
the column density of H I swept up into the wall (or missing in the hole);
is the derived mass of H I swept up in walls (or missing
in the hole), assuming the radius of the shell to be 35 pc.
The velocity dispersion of the gas swept into the shell is quite small
(1.5-2.0
)
which is in agreement with the expected
high cooling rate in dense walls.
The masses derived from walls and a hole are not the same,
but this is not very surprising, given the method and uncertainties
in deriving the background (see the section "
graphs'').
As a reasonable estimate we adopt the value of the total mass
(
,
where 0.7 is the solar abundance of
hydrogen):
| (2) |
| (3) |
| (4) |
The shell GS59.9-1.0+38 is probably young, from the analytical
solution (Sedov 1959) we estimate its expansion age as
1.5 Myr.
| FWHM |
|
|
|
| (
|
(
|
( |
|
| hole | 8.4 |
|
|
| wall | 7.7 |
|
|
![]() |
Figure 4:
The shell GS59.7-0.4+44 in a velocity channel
(
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
GS59.7-0.4+44 (see Fig. 4) is another small spherical structure,
in fact it is nearly a twin of GS59.9-1.0+38.
Like GS59.9-1.0+38, GS59.7-0.4+44 lies close to the
tangential point. Its radius is 24 arcmin (30 pc), its expansion
velocity is 14
(for the explanation of the seemingly
lower expansion velocity in the bv diagram see the previous section).
Table 2 summarizes observed properties of the shell.
A reasonable mass estimate is
| (5) |
| (6) |
| (7) |
The age of the shell is small, only about 1 Myr.
![]() |
Figure 5:
The shell GS061+00+51 in a velocity channel
(
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
This is one of Heiles' expanding shells (Heiles 1979), the only complete shell in our field which was known before. Its first detection and description can be found in Katgert (1969). A receding part of the shell is not visible. The approaching hemisphere is seen clearly, and is quite interesting. It is not a classical elliptical shell, but, especially at lower velocities, it resembles a crescent (see Fig. 5). We can think of two possibilities to explain this shape:
The properties of the shell are:
The dimensions of the structure as given by Heiles (1979) are slightly
higher than our values, which is caused by 1) the fact, that the
resolution of the Effelsberg radiotelescope is higher than that of the survey
in which Heiles identified the shells: viz. the H I survey of
Weaver & Williams (1973) with a spatial resolution of
and a velocity resolution of 2
;
and 2) uncertainties in defining the precise boundaries of the shell -
while there is no doubt about the existence and position of the structure,
it is not completely clear, if all adjoining depressions belong to it.
Obviously (see Fig. 5), shells GS061+00+51, GS59.9-1.0+38
and GS59.7-0.4+44 are neighbours.
GS061+00+51 is older and bigger than the other two, but not old
enough to trigger secondary star formation in the walls, which could
result in the creation of new small shells on the rim of the
old structure. We may be witnessing propagating star formation in one cloud
(or a cloud complex) which started at higher galactic longitudes
and propagates toward the lower longitudes. The difference in ages
of GS061+00+51, GS59.9-1.0+38 and GS59.7-0.4+44 is about 3-4 Myr,
which suggests that the speed of the shock front compressing the gas
and triggering the star formation is around 40
(this is a lower limit since we do not take into account the
differences in radial distances). In a few million years the three bubbles
should merge.
| FWHM |
|
|
|
| (
|
(
|
( |
|
| hole | 10.3 |
|
|
| wall | 5.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
||
| n0 | 0.9
|
||
|
|
|
![]() |
Figure 6:
The shell GS62.1+0.2-18 in a velocity channel
(
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
This is a comparatively spherical shell in the outer Galaxy (see Fig. 6); it lies at a distance of 9.6 kpc.
Its radius is 40 arcmin, or
110 pc
(in the l direction it is 120 pc, 100 pc in the b direction).
The expansion velocity is 13
.
Only one wall is
seen reliably. Table 3 summarizes properties of the shell.
One or more probably several supernovae were needed to create the shell
GS62.1+0.2-18; its age is
5 Myr.
| l | b |
|
FWHM | |
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
hole |
|
8.3 |
| wall |
|
5.0 | ||
|
|
|
hole |
|
11.0 |
| wall 1 |
|
2.7 | ||
| wall 2 |
|
5.5 | ||
|
|
|
hole |
|
7.8 |
| wall |
|
8.2 |
![]() |
Figure 7:
The shell GS60.1-1.1-54 in a velocity channel
(
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
The shell GS60.0-1.1-54 is a highly non-spherical structure (Fig. 7).
It consists of a roughly spherical hole centered on (
),
connected with a cone which opens to the halo, closed by an arc.
The shell lies in the outer Galaxy, at a distance of 13.7 kpc.
Its dimensions are about
(500 pc) in the b-direction,
the maximum diameter in the l-direction is
(400 pc).
Though it is quite extended in the b-direction, it is not
an object in the Koo et al. (1992) catalog of galactic worm
candidates.
The H I shell GS60.0-1.1-54 is an irregular structure, however, it is probably not unique in the Milky Way. Its shape and dimensions are similar to the Aquila supershell (Maciejewski et al. 1996). For a possible scenario how to create such a structure compare the rightmost panel of Fig. 3 in Korpi et al. (1999) showing results of MHD simulations. The structure shown resembles the observations quite well, both in shape and dimensions.
The shell GS60.0-1.1-54 does not show the approaching hemisphere,
i.e. it is open at one side (or the wall is negligible). The
receding hemisphere is visible: the small "hole'' around
changes diameter as expected
from the expanding structure with an expansion velocity of
9
.
The spectrum through
also shows the expansion (17
).
The different expansion velocities are quite consistent with the idea
that the fastest deceleration of the shell takes place in the densest part of
the Galactic disk. The blown-out part at high
latitudes changes shape and dimensions with velocity, though
not in a very regular way. The best estimate of the expansion velocity
is 9
.
Table 4 gives the column densities in different positions inside
the shell.
The shell GS60.0-1.1-54 is very irregular and therefore we have not estimated its energy, as this is very unreliable.
![]() |
Figure 8:
H II regions in the observed field. The pixel map is the H I
column density between
|
| Open with DEXTER | |
There are four optical H II regions in the observed field; S86,
S87, S88 and S89 (Sharpless 1959). We examine the distribution
of the neutral hydrogen in their vicinity. Table 5 gives
the properties of the four regions taken from Blitz & Fich (1982).
| name | l | b |
|
d (arcmin) |
| S86 |
|
|
26.8 | 40 |
| S87 |
|
|
22.7 | 10 |
| S88 |
|
|
22.9 | 25 |
| S89 |
|
|
25.6 | 5 |
This H II region is associated with the Vul OB1 association
(NGC 6823). At the position of S86 there is a clear hole in
the H I distribution, visible between
.
The H II region lies inside the hole, its dimensions are comparable
to dimensions of the hole (see Fig. 8). The hole is
stationary.
The coincidence of the H I hole and the H II region is consistent with
the idea, that most gas in the vicinity of the OB association is
ionized and therefore not observed in 21
emission.
The hole does
not expand, which may mean that no SN has exploded so far in the
cluster (which is consistent with age estimates of NGC 6823: 2-7 Myr;
Massey et al. 1995).
S87 is a source observed in optical, infrared, radio recombination lines (RRL) and molecular line emission (Barsony 1989; Onello et al. 1991). It has a compact core surrounded by an extended structure oriented south-east (i.e. perpendicular to the galactic plane). It interacts with a molecular cloud.
The H II region S87 lies inside the hole in the H I distribution, visible
between
.
Again, this hole
is stationary.
S88 is also observed in RRLs, molecular line emission, infrared and optical (Wood & Churchwell 1989; Onello et al. 1991). The region has an ultracompact core with a complex, multi-peaked structure.
S88 probably lies at the boundary between a dense sheet of gas and a more
rarefied medium. At the position and the radial velocity of the region
there is a small hole visible in a few velocity channels around
,
but definitely not as
pronounced as in the case of S86 or S87. This hole is a part of the bigger
empty region (see Fig. 8).
S89 lies in a dense region (see Fig. 8). It is not
situated inside any hole, at least not in the predicted velocity range,
but it lies just on the edge of a small hole, visible between
.
The physical association of these
two structures, an H II region and an H I hole, is unclear, but cannot
be excluded.
In two out of four cases (S86, S87) we find a clear trace of the Strömgren sphere in the H I distribution, i.e. a stationary hole. In one case (S88) the connection H II region - H I hole is not very obvious - there are depressions at the position of the region, but nothing really convincing. Maybe simply the gas distribution in the vicinity of S88 is so chaotic, that the nice Strömgren sphere does not exist. The region S89 does not lie inside a hole, but on the edge of one.
The chance coincidence of unrelated H II regions and H I holes cannot be excluded, because of the distance ambiguity, but at least for S86 and S87 the probability of this coincidence is small, as not only the positions and radial velocities, but also the dimensions of H II regions and H I holes agree.
The area where all these H II regions lie, i.e.
,
is a very turbulent region, full of structures on many
scales (in Ehlerová 2000, it was described as a strange kind of
a complex, multicomponent H I shell
GS60.1-0.3+15). This is partly the reason why none of the
H I holes mentioned was identified as an independent H I shell.
The
field contains a rich variety
of structures. Due to its limited size, selection effects play heavily
against any statistical or general considerations and we can only
describe individual structures.
Summing up, it seems that there are two types of "shell-like'' structures found in the H I distribution. The first, formed by consistent structures that are coherent in the position-velocity space, is less abundant than the second type, which contains non-coherent objects. We believe that these second type structures are created mainly due to the turbulence in the ISM. We identify the first group of objects with structures known as H I shells, as they fulfill the usual criteria put on shells. This is good news concerning the existence of H I shells. The bad news is the fact that there is no well-defined boundary between the two types of structures.
Acknowledgements
Authors gratefully acknowledge financial support by the Grant Agency of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic under the grant No. A3003705/1997 and support by the grant project of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic No. K1048102. SE would like to thank MPIfR for the hospitality during her stay in Bonn.