The vectors of the outer component relative motion (modulus and the angle
)
were computed as follows:
In a hierarchical multiple star, the outer companion orbits around the
center of mass of stars which constitute the inner hierarchical
levels. This means that the body "A'' (and/or "B'') in
Fig. 1 is in fact the gravity center of inner
sub-systems. Meanwhile, the measurements are made having as a
reference point either the photocenter or even one of the
companions of an inner subsystem (if it is resolved). This reference
point also shifts at the sky due to the orbital motion in the inner
subsystem. A correction of the position parameters is needed to
convert the observed parameters ,
into
,
,
latter referring already to the position of the
gravity center of the inner subsystem.
This correction was applied in case of the known orbital motion in the
inner subsystem. Otherwise, an estimate of the unknown
photocenter motion in inner sub-systems was incorporated into the
error assessment of the calculated .
This
procedure removed from the sample the systems in which an apparent
motion of the outer companion reflects mainly the orbital motion in
the inner subsystem.
The final values of the relative motion modulus
were checked to
be consistent with the expected orbital motion velocities. A few
appear unreally large and mostly result from uncertainty of a position
angle. Nevertheless, respective dynamical parallaxes
The values of the -angle corrected for motion in the inner subsystems
are given in Table 1. In total, 174 systems are presented
for which all the corrections still allow to determine
with a
precision better than
.
The note column provides the
information on the used sources of data and on the applied corrections for
the calculation of
.
The relative proper motions derived by us suffer to some extent
from round-off errors in WDS data for the first epoch positions. In
contrast to our approach, Brosche & Sinachopoulos (1988, 1989) used
original observational data to compute the relative motions instead of
somehow generalized values in WDS. Nevertheless, the fifteen objects which are
common to both studies show the good agreement of the derived angles
given our
-errors
:
Copyright ESO 2001