A&A 452, 933-939 (2006)
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:20054483
A. Olech1 - K. Mularczyk2 -
P. Kedzierski2 - K. Z
oczewski2 -
M. Wisniewski1 - K. Szaruga2
1 - Nicolaus Copernicus Astronomical Center, ul. Bartycka 18,
00-716 Warszawa, Poland
2 -
Warsaw University Observatory, Al. Ujazdowskie 4, 00-478 Warszawa, Poland
Received 7 November 2005 / Accepted 18 January 2006
Abstract
We report on extensive photometry of the dwarf nova SS Ursae
Minoris throughout nine months of 2004. In total, we recorded two
superoutbursts and 11 normal outbursts of the star. SS UMi has been known to
show frequent superoutbursts with a mean interval of 84.7
days. Our data suggest that the interval between successive
superoutbursts lengthened to 197 days, indicating that SS UMi entered a
period of untypical behavior manifested by a growth in the quiescent
magnitude of the star and a series of frequent, low-amplitude, normal
outbursts observed from July to September 2004.
The mean superhump period derived for the April 2004 superoutburst of SS
UMi is
days (
min).
Combining this value with an earlier orbital period determination, we
were able to derive the period excess, which is equal to
%,
and estimate the mass ratio of the binary system as equal to
.
During the entire superoutburst, the period decreased at a rate of
.
However, detailed analysis of
the timings of superhump maxima seem to suggest a more complex period
change, with a decrease in the period during the first and last stages
of the superoutburst but an increase in the middle interval.
Key words: stars: binaries: close - stars: variables: general - stars: dwarf novae
SS Ursae Minoris (PG 1551 +719) was identified as a cataclysmic variable candidate in the Palomar Green Survey (Green et al. 1982) and, almost at the same time was discovered, as an X-ray source E1551 +718 (Mason et al. 1982).
The quiescent spectra of the star taken by Mason et al. (1982) showed broad and strong hydrogen and helium emission lines typical of dwarf novae. The HeII 4686 emission line was weak and the object had no detectable polarization (Green et al. 1982), which suggested that the star has no strong magnetic field and thus is a typical nonmagnetic dwarf nova. The broad emission lines have double peaked structure, indicating high inclination and thus the possible presence of an orbital wave in the light curve from quiescence.
The photometric behavior of SS UMi was investigated by Andronov (1986), who observed the object photographically on 77 plates. In total, eight possible eruptions were detected. The photographic photometry of SS UMi was analyzed further by Richter (1989). He found that the height of the maxima varies between 13.2 and 14.3 mag and that the star shows two types of eruptions: long and short. The fact that faint maxima were sometimes longer than bright ones suggested that SS UMi belongs to U Gem class rather than SU UMa type variables.
The first CCD photometry of SS UMi was reported by Udalski (1990), who found clear light modulations in the quiescence but no eclipses. The two possible periods were 6.8 and 9.5 h suggesting that one of them might be an orbital period of the binary system and thus SS UMi is in fact a U Gem type star. Photometric measurements of SS UMi were also obtained by Chen et al. (1991) who observed two outbursts of the star. Detection of the superhumps, i.e. 0.3 mag amplitude characteristic tooth-shape light modulations during eruptions from March and September 1989 clearly showed that SS UMi belongs to the SU UMa class of dwarf novae. Chen et al. (1991) estimated the period of the superhumps to be around 101 min.
Time-resolved specroscopy of SS UMi and six other SU UMa stars was
obtained by Thorstensen et al. (1996). The variations in the positions
of H
emission lines allowed determination of the orbital period of
the binary, which is equal to
days (
min).
Another superoutburst of SS UMi was observed by Kato et al. (1998). They
observed the star on four nights of April 1998 eruption. During two
nights the star showed clear superhumps with a mean period of
days (
min).
Kato et al. (2000) analyzed 375 visual and CCD observations of SS UMi taken from February 18, 1999 to June 17, 2000 and reported by VSNET observers. Inspection of the global light curve allowed them to find that the intervals between successive superoutbursts are in the range of 82-86 days with a mean value of 84.7 days. They also noticed that there are five normal outbursts bewteen two successive superoutbursts, meaning that the mean cycle length is around 11 days.
The first members of the ER UMa class objects were discovered in the mid
1990s (ER UMa, RZ LMi, V1159 Ori, and DI UMa). These are systems
characterized by an extremely short supercycle (20-60 days), a short
interval between normal outbursts (3-4 days), and small amplitude
(
3 mag) of superoutbursts (Kato & Kunjaya 1995; Robertson et al.
1995; Patterson et al. 1995). Subsequently, one more object with similar
characteristics was discovered (IX Dra - Ishioka et al. 2001; Olech et
al. 2004a).
These objects seemed to be very unusual compared to normal SU UMa stars. Ten years ago, the ordinary SU UMa star with the shortest supercycle of 134 days was YZ Cnc (Patterson 1979; Shafter & Hessman 1988). Thus supercycles of ER UMa stars were about 3-4 times shorter. However, when describing the results of the CBA observational campaign for V1159 Ori, Patterson et al. (1995) claimed that there is no reason to introduce a new class of variable stars. Simply, the observable traits of ER UMa-type stars seem to be consistent with garden-variety SU UMa stars. They follow the Kukarkin-Parengo relation connecting the amplitude of the outburst with recurrence time between normal outbursts and the Bailey relation connecting decay times from the normal eruptions and orbital period of the binary. They simply appear to be normal SU UMa stars with greater activity and greater luminosity due to their higher-mass transfer rates (Osaki 1996).
However, careful inspection of the diagram with recurrence intervals for supermaxima vs. normal maxima showed a significant gap between normal SU UMa stars and ER UMa-type variables (see Fig. 18 of Paterson et al. 1995).
As we can see, SS UMi with a supercycle of 85 days lies in the transition area between extremely active dwarf novae and normal SU UMa stars. Investigating the behavior and characteristics of this star might help us to better understand this class of objects. This was the reason for including SS UMi into the primary targets observed within the CURVE (Olech et al. 2003a,b). In this work we report the results of a nine month observational campaign performed in 2004.
Observations of SS UMi reported in the present paper were obtained
during 88 nights between April 13, 2004 and December 8, 2004 at the
Ostrowik station of the Warsaw University Observatory. The data was
collected using the 60-cm Cassegrain telescope equipped with a
Tektronics TK512CB back-illuminated CCD camera. The scale of the camera
was 0.76''/pixel providing a
field of view. The full
description of the telescope and camera was given by Udalski and Pych
(1992). We monitored the star in "white light''. We did not use any
filters in order to shorten the exposures to minimize guiding errors,
due to the temporary lack of an autoguiding system, after a recent
telescope renovation. The exposure times were from 100 to 150 s
during the bright state and from 180 to 300 s at minimum light.
A full journal of our CCD observations of SS UMi is given in Table 1. In
total, we monitored the star during 105.374 h and obtained 2021
exposures. All the data reductions were performed using a standard
procedure based on the IRAF
package and the profile
photometry was derived using the DAOphotII package (Stetson 1987).
Relative, unfiltered magnitudes of SS UMi were determined as the
difference between the magnitude of the variable and the intensity
averaged magnitude of the two comparison stars: C1 (
,
Dec =
,
V=12.553, B-V=0.883)
and C2 (
,
Dec =
,
V=13.226, B-V=1.052). The comparison stars and the variable are
marked in the chart displayed in Fig. 1. The basic properties of
comparison stars are taken from the catalog of Henden & Honeycutt
(1997).
![]() |
Figure 1:
Finding chart for SS UMi covering a region of
|
The typical accuracy of our measurements varied between 0.006 and 0.024 mag in the bright state and between 0.009 and 0.2 mag in the minimum light. The median value of the photometry errors was 0.009 and 0.045 mag, respectively.
Almost all our observations were made in "white light'' in order to obtain precise photometry of the star in quiescence. However, on the night of April 22/23, 2004 we also made V, R, and I photometry of the variable and comparison stars. Using the magnitude data from Henden & Honeycutt (1995), we were able to transform our instrumental magnitudes to the standard V system.
Such a transformed global light curve of SS UMi spanning eight months of observations is shown in Fig. 2, which shows both our own CCD observations and those in the visual made by American Association of Variable Stars Observers (AAVSO), including their CCD magnitude estimates and also the upper magnitude limits in case of non detection of the variable. It is clear that the brightness of SS UMi varies from around 17.2 mag at quiescence to around 13.7 mag at the maximum of superoutburst. During the brightest normal outbursts the star can be found at a magnitude of around 14.4.
The vertical arrows point to the maximum brightness of the two superoutbursts clearly visible in the light curve. They are separated by 197 days, which is much longer than the mean supercycle length of 84.7 days determined by Kato et al. (2000).
As we can see, the lack of our CCD observations during June nights, HJD from 2 453 161 to 2 453 187, may suggest that another superoutburst occurred in that time. This is, however, unlikely for two reasons. First, it would suggest that the supercycle of SS UMi shortened to about 50 days, and second, the observations of AAVSO clearly indicate that during June nights the star was fainter than 14.2-14.6 mag and thus was able to show only ordinary outbursts but no superoutburst. The big filled triangles in Fig. 2 denote the expected moments of maxium brightness of the missing superoutbursts assuming a 84.7-day supercycle of SS UMi.
The April 2004 superoutburst started on Apr. 20/21 with a normal outburst, the so-called precursor. After an initial rise in brightness, the magnitude of the star decreased slightly and then the tidal instability triggered the superoutburst manifested by the appearance of the superhumps and an increase in the brightness. Starting with the night of Apr. 23/24, SS UMi entered the plateau phase. During this period clear superhumps were present and the brightness of the star was decreasing at a rate of 0.12 mag/day. Around May 1st, the magnitude started to decrease much faster, indicating termination of the superoutburst. On May 4/5 the star was again at its quiescent magnitude.
The light curves from individual nights of the April 2004 superoutburst of SS UMi are shown in Fig. 3. Clear superhumps were present in the light curve of the star from Apr. 22/23 to Apr. 30/01. During the first night, before reaching maximum brightness, the amplitude of the superhumps was only 0.13 mag. A night later, the superhumps were fully developed with their characteristic tooth-shape and an amplitude of 0.33 mag. On Apr. 24/25 the shape of the superhumps did not change, but the amplitude decreased to 0.15-0.20 mag depending on the hump. The next night the amplitude stayed at the same level, but clear secondary humps became visible. In the interval Apr. 26/27-Apr. 28/29, the amplitude of the light variations was around 0.15 mag and secondary humps became more pronounced. On Apr. 30/01 the superhumps had a smaller amplitude than 0.1 mag and after that night the plateau phase ended.
From each light curve of SS UMi in superoutburst, we removed the first or
second order polynomial and analyzed them using ANOVA statistics
with two harmonic Fourier series (Schwarzenberg-Czerny 1996). The
resulting periodogram is shown in Fig. 4. The most prominent peak is
found at a frequency of
c/d, which corresponds to the
period of
days (
min). The harmonic
peak at 28.5 c/d is real and leads to the presence of secondary
humps in the light curve.
From each light curve of the superoutburst we removed variablility corresponding to the superhump period. Such a prewhitened light curve was again analyzed by ANOVA statistics. No significant peak was recorded in the computed power spectrum.
To check the stability of the superhump period and to determine its value, we constructed an O-C diagram. We decided to use the timings of primary maxima, because they were almost always high and clearly detectable in the light curve of the variable. In the end, we were able to determine 17 moments of maxima, which are listed in Table 2 together with their errors, cycle numbers E, and O-C values.
![]() |
Figure 5: The O-C diagram for the superhump maxima of SS UMi during its April 2004 superoutburst. The solid line corresponds to the fit resulting from the ephemeris (2). |
| Cycle E | HDJ - 2 453 000 | Error | O-C |
| 0 | 118.5230 | 0.0020 | -0.0912 |
| 13 | 119.4418 | 0.0025 | +0.0070 |
| 40 | 121.3358 | 0.0030 | +0.0074 |
| 41 | 121.4054 | 0.0035 | -0.0004 |
| 42 | 121.4745 | 0.0022 | -0.0153 |
| 43 | 121.5451 | 0.0025 | -0.0088 |
| 55 | 122.3935 | 0.0020 | +0.0857 |
| 56 | 122.4619 | 0.0025 | +0.0608 |
| 57 | 122.5326 | 0.0020 | +0.0687 |
| 69 | 123.3720 | 0.0035 | +0.0350 |
| 70 | 123.4432 | 0.0030 | +0.0500 |
| 83 | 124.3518 | 0.0025 | +0.0028 |
| 84 | 124.4198 | 0.0023 | -0.0278 |
| 98 | 125.4026 | 0.0015 | -0.0172 |
| 99 | 125.4723 | 0.0018 | -0.0236 |
| 112 | 126.3829 | 0.0030 | -0.0422 |
| 113 | 126.4542 | 0.0020 | -0.0258 |
The least-square linear fit to the data from Table 2 gives the
following ephemeris for the maxima:
| (1) |
| (2) |
Knowing the exact value of the superhump period and orbital period of
the binary system determined by Thorstensen et al. (1996), we can
compute the period excess defined as
.
In the case of SS UMi it is equal to
%. The relatively large error comes mainly from the 1.5 min
error in the Thorsensen et al. (1996) determination of the orbital
period. The obtained value is typical for the SU UMa stars with orbital
periods of around 98 min, indicating that SS UMi follows the Stolz
& Schoembs (1984) relation between the period excess and orbital
period of the binary.
Superhumps occur at a period slightly longer than the orbital period of the binary system. They are most probably the result of accretion disc precession caused by the gravitational perturbations from the secondary. These perturbations are most effective when the disc particles moving on eccentric orbits enter the 3:1 resonance. Then the superhump period is simply the beat period between orbital and precession rate periods (Osaki 1996).
Assuming the known disk size at 3:1 resonance, it is easy to correlate
the mass ratio of the system
with the
period excess
:
![]() |
(3) |
Until the mid 1990's, all members of the SU UMa group seemed to show
only negative superhump period derivatives (Warner 1995). This was
interpreted as a result of disk shrinkage during the superoutburst, thus
lengthening its precession rate (Lubow 1992). This picture became more
complicated when the first stars with
were discovered.
Positive period derivatives were observed only in stars with short
superhump periods close to the minimum orbital period for hydrogen rich
secondary (e.g. SW UMa - Semeniuk et al. 1997; WX Cet - Kato et al.
2001a; HV Vir - Kato et al. 2001b) or for stars below this boundary
(e.g. V485 Cen - Olech 1997; 1RXS J232953.9+062814 - Uemura et al. 2002).
Two years ago, Olech et al. (2003a) investigated the O-C diagrams for KS UMa, ER UMa, V1159 Ori, CY UMa, V1028 Cyg, RZ Sge, and SX LMi and claimed
that most (probably almost all) SU UMa stars show decreasing superhump
periods at the beginning and the end of superoutburst but increasing
period in the middle phase. This hypothesis was quickly confirmed by
observations of the June 2004 superoutburst of TT Boo, which showed the
following period derivatives
,
and
,
from
the beginning to end of the superoutburst, respectively (Olech et al.
2004b).
Careful inspection of Fig. 5 suggests that in the case of SS UMi, we
encounter the same situation as in TT Boo. The O-C residuals may be
fitted with simple parabola, as in Fig. 5, but it is clear that
this fit is only a rough estimation of global behavior. In fact, it is
safer to say that in the case of the April 2004 superoutburst of SS UMi,
the timings of superhump maxima seem to suggest more complex period
change, with a decrease in the period during the first and last stages
of the superoutburst, but an increase in the middle interval. The fitting
of parabolas to the to the cycle intervals 0-43, 13-57, and
40-113 gives the period derivatives of
,
,
and
,
respectively. As we can see, these values are quite similar to the
preiod derivatives determined for corresponding phases of the superoutburst
of TT Boo (Olech et al. 2004b).
Very recently, Uemura et al. (2005) have suggested that superhump period change might be connected with a presence of the precursor in the light curve of the superoutburst. In the case of a superoutburst without the precursor, superhump period derivatives tend to be larger than those in precursor-type eruptions. The precursor-type April 2004 superoutburst of SS UMi, characterized by large period changes similar to these observed in TT Boo, seems not to fit the scenario proposed by Uemura et al. (2005).
In normal SU UMa stars, the dependence of the supercycle length
on the mass transfer rate
is an U-shaped curve with a broad
minimum at 80-85 days (Osaki 1995a,b). In fact, the supercycle
length
consists of two parts:
,
which is the duration of
the superoutburst, and
,
which corresponds to the time
between the end of the superoutburst and begining of the succesive
superoutburst. In ordinary SU UMa stars,
is typically around
one hundred days and
is between 10 and 15 days.
With increasing mass transfer (
but still below the critical value above which the star
becomes a permanent superhumper), the supercycle starts to lengthen again.
However, this time it is not due to the long
but to the
long duration of the superoutburst
.
This is caused by the
quasi-steady state of the accretion disk, because mass-transfer rate
approaches very near to the mass accretion rate from the disk
to the primary.
The standard thermal-tidal instability model is unable to produce stars with supercycles shorter than 80 days. Thus for explaining the behavior of ER UMa stars, with supercycles between 20 and 60 days, Osaki (1995a,b) assumed that the tidal torques are weaker in such systems. This results in a shorter duration of the superoutburst and larger disk radius at its termination as an effect of less angular momentum removed during such a short superoutburst. The angular momentum reservoir of the disk could then be refilled in a shorter time and another superoutburst might start more quickly.
![]() |
Figure 6: The dependences between supercycle length and mass transfer in normal SU UMa stars and ER UMa variables. |
Figure 6 shows the U-shaped dependence between
and
for
normal SU UMa dwarf novae and ER UMa stars taken from Osaki (1995a,b).
The filled circles denoted with numbers "1'' and "2'' correspond to the
two possible positions of SS UMi for a supercycle of 84.7 days. The open
circles marked by numbers "3'' and "4'' denote the possible positions of
SS UMi after lengthening of the supercycle to 197 days.
The possible scenarios for SS UMi correspond to the transitions
,
,
and
.
The first two are consistent with a mass-transfer rate increasing
very close to the critical limit above which a star becomes a permanent
superhump object. In this case, the lengthening of the supercycle length
should be caused by the long duration of the superoutbursts. This contradicts
our observations, which show that both April and November
superoutbursts lasted about 15 days.
On the other hand, the transitions
and
are consistent with
and
times indicated by the
global light curve of SS UMi shown in Fig. 2. But in this case, we
should assume the decrease in the mass transfer rate by a factor of 2-4.
It is not justified by the behavior of the star between superoutbursts,
when we observed an increase in the quiescent magnitude by about
0.2-0.3 mag and increased frequency of normal eruptions, which was most
probably the reaction of the system to enhanced mass flow to the
accretion disk. The question why the star expelled the matter by a series
of frequent and low-amplitude normal outbursts observed from July to
September 2004, and not by one or two superoutbursts, remains open.
Another question arising in the case of SS UMi concerns its typical state. It might be that SS UMi is a normal SU UMa star with a supercycle length of 197 days and behavior observed in 1999-2000, with a supercycle of 85 days, was atypical.
According to Kato et al. (2000), in 1999-2000 SS UMi had a supercycle of 84.7 days, a cycle of 11.0 days, and a mean amplitude of normal outbursts of 2.7 mag. In 2004, it switched to a supercycle of 197 days. Due to the gaps in the observational coverage, we can not estimate the normal cycle length precisely. But between the superoutbursts from April and November, we recorded at least 11 normal outbursts with a mean amplitude of 2.0 mag. Taking the length of the gaps into account, we estimate that the number of normal eruptions could reach the level of 15, indicating a cycle length of around 12-13 days.
The amplitudes of the dwarf novae follow the famous Kukarkin-Parenago
relation (Kukarkin & Parenago 1934; Warner 1987) in the form:
| (4) |
Another empirical relation followed by dwarf novae connects
their cycle and supercycle lenghts (Patterson et al. 1995; Warner 1995;
Olech et al. 2004a):
| (5) |
![]() |
Figure 8: The relation between amplitude supercycle and cycle lengths for dwarf novae. The filled and open circles denote the positions of SS UMi for 1999-2000 and 2004, respectively. |
The nine-month observational campaign of SS UMi performed in 2004 allowed us to draw the following conclusions:
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the referee Prof. Yoji Osaki for valuable remarks and pointing out the mistake in our interpretation. We are also grateful to Prof. Józef Smak and Dr. Grzegorz Stachowski for reading and commenting on the manuscript. We gratefully acknowledge the generous allocation of time at the Warsaw Observatory 0.6-m telescope. This work was partially supported by KBN grant number 1 P03D 006 27 to A. Olech and used the on-line service of the AAVSO.
| Date of | Start | End | Length | No. of | Date of | Start | End | Length | No. of |
| 2004 | 2 453 000. + | 2 453 000. + | [hr] | frames | 2004 | 2 453 000. + | 2 453 000. + | [hr] | frames |
| Apr. 13/14 | 109.54367 | 109.60431 | 1.455 | 14 | Jul. 31/01 | 218.31734 | 218.34645 | 0.699 | 7 |
| Apr. 14/15 | 110.52498 | 110.60747 | 1.980 | 43 | Aug. 01/02 | 219.32961 | 219.35228 | 0.544 | 12 |
| Apr. 15/16 | 111.44819 | 111.55250 | 2.503 | 54 | Aug. 04/05 | 222.32545 | 222.33127 | 0.140 | 4 |
| Apr. 18/19 | 114.56803 | 114.57752 | 0.228 | 3 | Aug. 07/08 | 225.43890 | 225.45064 | 0.282 | 5 |
| Apr. 19/20 | 115.44451 | 115.55515 | 2.655 | 27 | Aug. 09/10 | 227.31842 | 227.32588 | 0.179 | 6 |
| Apr. 20/21 | 116.46420 | 116.53175 | 1.621 | 36 | Aug. 10/11 | 228.31429 | 228.32109 | 0.163 | 4 |
| Apr. 21/22 | 117.43697 | 117.45411 | 0.411 | 6 | Aug. 11/12 | 229.30221 | 229.31089 | 0.208 | 5 |
| Apr. 22/23 | 118.47092 | 118.54493 | 1.776 | 32 | Aug. 12/13 | 230.31946 | 230.32380 | 0.104 | 3 |
| Apr. 23/24 | 119.38887 | 119.49275 | 2.493 | 51 | Aug. 13/14 | 231.32677 | 231.33327 | 0.156 | 4 |
| Apr. 25/26 | 121.31750 | 121.59130 | 6.571 | 178 | Aug. 14/15 | 232.31815 | 232.57177 | 1.356 | 27 |
| Apr. 26/27 | 122.32719 | 122.58720 | 6.240 | 137 | Aug. 15/16 | 233.32523 | 233.58060 | 6.129 | 101 |
| Apr. 27/28 | 123.34403 | 123.45042 | 2.553 | 37 | Aug. 16/17 | 234.44161 | 234.44564 | 0.097 | 2 |
| Apr. 28/29 | 124.32926 | 124.45396 | 2.993 | 39 | Aug. 17/18 | 235.31037 | 235.33822 | 0.668 | 11 |
| Apr. 29/30 | 125.38484 | 125.48146 | 2.319 | 51 | Aug. 18/19 | 236.48867 | 236.51599 | 0.656 | 13 |
| Apr. 30/01 | 126.37744 | 126.50035 | 2.950 | 64 | Aug. 19/20 | 237.30917 | 237.32350 | 0.344 | 10 |
| May 03/04 | 129.48034 | 129.49041 | 0.242 | 4 | Aug. 21/22 | 239.31643 | 239.32572 | 0.223 | 5 |
| May 05/06 | 131.48946 | 131.49493 | 0.131 | 3 | Aug. 22/23 | 240.40505 | 240.41100 | 0.143 | 4 |
| May 10/11 | 136.47427 | 136.48934 | 0.362 | 6 | Sep. 01/02 | 250.31094 | 250.31941 | 0.203 | 4 |
| May 11/12 | 137.42191 | 137.42374 | 0.044 | 2 | Sep. 02/03 | 251.26665 | 251.28535 | 0.449 | 10 |
| May 12/13 | 138.44843 | 138.47103 | 0.542 | 7 | Sep. 03/04 | 252.27148 | 252.28902 | 0.421 | 7 |
| May 14/15 | 140.41082 | 140.43849 | 0.664 | 16 | Sep. 05/06 | 254.30278 | 254.32018 | 0.418 | 5 |
| May 20/21 | 146.43194 | 146.45168 | 0.474 | 10 | Sep. 06/07 | 255.26395 | 255.27509 | 0.267 | 6 |
| May 23/24 | 149.43084 | 149.44656 | 0.377 | 6 | Sep. 07/08 | 256.30955 | 256.45321 | 3.448 | 40 |
| May 24/25 | 150.41066 | 150.41786 | 0.173 | 5 | Sep. 08/09 | 257.29443 | 257.53091 | 5.676 | 91 |
| May 25/26 | 151.44124 | 151.44550 | 0.102 | 2 | Sep. 09/10 | 258.37591 | 258.39313 | 0.413 | 7 |
| Jun. 03/04 | 160.38724 | 160.39526 | 0.192 | 5 | Sep. 10/11 | 259.25465 | 259.27890 | 0.582 | 11 |
| Jun. 30/01 | 187.35596 | 187.38250 | 0.637 | 10 | Sep. 11/12 | 260.31552 | 260.33897 | 0.563 | 11 |
| Jul. 02/03 | 189.44094 | 189.44500 | 0.097 | 3 | Sep. 18/19 | 267.24640 | 267.24861 | 0.053 | 3 |
| Jul. 03/04 | 190.47962 | 190.49031 | 0.257 | 6 | Sep. 19/20 | 268.38386 | 268.41340 | 0.709 | 11 |
| Jul. 04/05 | 191.38762 | 191.40979 | 0.532 | 2 | Sep. 24/25 | 273.25110 | 273.37382 | 2.945 | 50 |
| Jul. 06/07 | 193.36622 | 193.37928 | 0.313 | 6 | Sep. 25/26 | 274.31794 | 274.47224 | 3.703 | 64 |
| Jul. 08/09 | 195.33973 | 195.53558 | 4.700 | 98 | Sep. 27/28 | 276.22740 | 276.23427 | 0.165 | 4 |
| Jul. 09/10 | 196.33697 | 196.53760 | 0.568 | 14 | Oct. 01/02 | 280.39856 | 280.41151 | 0.311 | 6 |
| Jul. 11/12 | 198.34706 | 198.36742 | 0.489 | 12 | Oct. 03/04 | 282.39762 | 282.41202 | 0.346 | 7 |
| Jul. 13/14 | 200.35101 | 200.36211 | 0.266 | 7 | Oct. 12/13 | 291.33376 | 291.35430 | 0.493 | 10 |
| Jul. 15/16 | 202.46961 | 202.47820 | 0.206 | 5 | Oct. 13/14 | 292.32704 | 292.33975 | 0.305 | 6 |
| Jul. 17/18 | 204.34832 | 204.36139 | 0.314 | 7 | Oct. 20/21 | 299.25359 | 299.25545 | 0.044 | 2 |
| Jul. 18/19 | 205.34856 | 205.35433 | 0.138 | 3 | Nov. 06/07 | 316.22524 | 316.22569 | 0.011 | 1 |
| Jul. 19/20 | 206.39249 | 206.40227 | 0.235 | 4 | Nov. 14/15 | 324.17099 | 324.26325 | 2.214 | 50 |
| Jul. 22/23 | 209.36131 | 209.39549 | 0.820 | 10 | Nov. 20/21 | 330.19057 | 330.21009 | 0.468 | 9 |
| Jul. 23/24 | 210.34668 | 210.35964 | 0.311 | 7 | Nov. 21/22 | 331.68761 | 331.69816 | 0.253 | 6 |
| Jul. 28/29 | 215.32681 | 215.54904 | 5.333 | 148 | Dec. 01/02 | 341.21800 | 341.23103 | 0.313 | 6 |
| Jul. 29/30 | 216.33435 | 216.56104 | 5.441 | 89 | Dec. 06/07 | 346.26354 | 346.27634 | 0.307 | 6 |
| Jul. 30/31 | 217.33269 | 217.55530 | 5.343 | 92 | Dec. 08/09 | 348.24499 | 348.25133 | 0.152 | 4 |