Issue 
A&A
Volume 557, September 2013



Article Number  A26  
Number of page(s)  30  
Section  Stellar atmospheres  
DOI  https://doi.org/10.1051/00046361/201321274  
Published online  15 August 2013 
Online material
Appendix A: The Staggergrid 1D atmospheres
The following discussion concerns solely 1D atmosphere models and MLT, therefore, similar quantities as discussed above may deviate (e.g. F_{conv}). The numerical code that we used for computing 1D atmospheres for the Staggergrid models solves the coupled equations of hydrostatic equilibrium and energy flux conservation in 1D planeparallel geometry. The 1D models use the same EOS and opacity package in order to allow consistent 3D1D comparisons. The set of equations and numerical methods employed for their solution are similar to those of the MARCS code (Gustafsson et al. 2008) with a few changes and simplifications that will be outlined in the following. The resulting model atmospheres yet maintain very good agreement with MARCS models (see Sect. 3.3.2).
Appendix A.1: Basic equations
Assuming 1D planeparallel geometry with horizontal homogeneity and dominance of hydrostatic equilibrium over all vertical flow simplifies the equation of motion (Eq. (2)) to the hydrostatic equilibrium equation (A.1)where κ_{std} and τ_{std} are a standard opacity and corresponding optical depth (e.g. the Rosseland mean), p_{gas} and p_{turb} denote gas pressure and turbulent pressure, ρ is the gas density, and g is the surface gravity. Radiation pressure is neglected, as in the 3D simulations. Turbulent pressure is estimated using the expression (A.2)with the scaling parameter β that corrects for asymmetries in the velocity distribution and the mean turbulent velocity v_{turb} that is used as a free, independent parameter.
The depthintegral of the energy equation (Eq. (3)) reduces to the flux conservation equation, (A.3)where F_{rad} is the radiative energy flux, F_{conv} is the convective energy flux, σ is the StefanBoltzmann constant and T_{eff} is the stellar effective temperature. Contrary to the 3D case, effective temperature now appears as a boundary value and is thus a free parameter. Owing to numerical instabilities of the formulation, Eq. (A.3) is replaced in the higher atmosphere (τ_{Ross} ≲ 10^{2}) with the radiative equilibrium condition (A.4)where J_{λ} and S_{λ} are the mean intensity and the source function, similar to Eq. (6). In the 3D case, q_{rad} is explicitly calculated and is nonzero in general. Enforcing the condition of radiative equilibrium q_{rad} ≡ 0 in 1D leads to an atmospheric stratification where an exact balance of radiative heating and cooling in each layer is achieved, ignoring the effects of gas motion.
The mean intensity and the radiative energy flux at each depth are obtained by solving the radiative transfer equation, (A.5)where μ = cosθ with the polar angle θ off the vertical, I_{λ} is the specific intensity at wavelength λ, and τ_{λ} is the vertical monochromatic optical depth (with τ_{λ} = 0 above the top of the atmosphere). A Planck source function S_{λ} = B_{λ} is assumed. The monochromatic mean intensity and radiative flux are then delivered by the integrals In the absence of an explicit convection treatment, convective energy transfer is estimated using a variant of the mixing length recipe described in Henyey et al. (1965). The convective flux is given by the expression (A.8)where ρ is the gas density, c_{p} is the specific heat capacity, T is the temperature, and v_{MLT} is the convective velocity. The wellknown free mixing length parameter α_{MLT} = l_{m}/H_{p} sets the distance l_{m} in units of the local pressure scale height H_{p} over which energy is transported convectively. See Gustafsson et al. (2008) for details of the expressions used to obtain the convective velocity v_{MLT} and the factor δΔ = Γ/(1 + Γ)∇_{sad}, which scales superadiabaticity ∇_{sad} = ∇ − ∇_{ad} of the atmospheric stratification (see also Sect. 3.2.7), by a convective efficiency factor with the optical thickness τ_{e} = κ_{Ross}l_{m}. We adopt the same parameters y = 0.076 and ν = 8 as Gustafsson et al. (2008) for the radiative heat loss term and turbulent viscosity that enter the above quantities.
Appendix A.2: Numerical methods
The system of equations is solved using a modified NewtonRaphson method with an initial stratification of temperature T and gas pressure p_{gas} on a fixed Rosseland optical depth grid. Discretized and linearized versions of the hydrostatic equation and the energy flux equation (or radiative equilibrium condition, respectively) provide the inhomogeneous term and the elements of the Jacobian matrix for the system of 2N linear equations, where N is the number of depth layers. The radiation field is computed for each NewtonRaphson iteration using the integral method, based on a secondorder discretization of the fundamental solution of the radiative transfer equation (Eq. (A.5)).
The corrections ΔT and Δp_{gas} derived from the system of linear equations are multiplied by a variable factor < 1 that is automatically regulated by the code to aid convergence. Convergence is assumed when the (relative) residuals of the 2N equations decrease beneath a preset threshold. Note that, contrary to the 3D simulations, the effective temperature is now an adjustable parameter; the requirement of minimal residuals automatically leads to an atmospheric stratification with correct T_{eff} through the energy flux equation.
In order to obtain a 1D model, a given ⟨3D⟩ stratification provides the initial input for the NewtonRaphson iterations, along with the targeted effective temperature and surface gravity. The same EOS tables that were used for the 3D simulation provide gas density, specific heat capacity, and adiabatic gradient as a function of T and p_{gas}. Likewise, the tables containing group mean opacities and the Rosseland mean opacity provide the required microphysics for solving the radiative transfer equation, ensuring maximal consistency with the 3D simulations.
Once convergence has been achieved for the 1D stratification, the mixing length parameter α_{MLT} can be calibrated to obtain a better approximation to the ⟨3D⟩ stratification in the convection zone beneath the stellar surface.
Appendix B: Functional fits
The resulting amount of data from our numerical simulations is enormous. A convenient way to provide important key values is in form of functional fits, which can be easily utilized elsewhere (e.g. for analytical considerations). In the present paper we have frequently discussed various important global properties that are reduced to scalars. Some of them are global scalar values and
some are determined at a specific height from the ⟨3D⟩ stratifications, i.e. temporal and spatial averages on layers of constant Rosseland optical depth. We fitted these scalars with stellar parameters for individual suitable functions, thereby enforcing a smooth rendering. However, we would like to warn against extrapolating these fits outside their range of validity, i.e. outside the confines of our grid. Also, one should consider that possible small irregularities between the grid steps might be neglected, which arise due to nonlinear response of the EOS and the opacity. On the other hand, we provide also most of the actual shown values in Table C.1.
We use three different functional bases for our fits and we perform the leastsquares minimization with an automated LevenbergMarquardt method. Instead of the actual stellar parameters, we employ the following transformed coordinates: x = (T_{eff} − 5777)/1000, y = log g − 4.44 and z = [Fe/H]. Furthermore, we find that in order to accomplish an optimal fit with three independent variables, f_{i}(x,y,z), simultaneously, the metallicity should be best included implicitly as nested functions in the form of second degree polynomial , each resulting in three independent coefficients a_{i}. The linear function (B.1)is applied for the following quantities: s_{min} (Fig. 5), log ρ_{peak} (Fig. 18), (Fig. 18), log d_{gran} (Fig. 10), log Δt_{gran} and . The resulting coefficients are given in Table B.1. On the other hand, we considered the exponential function (B.2)for s_{bot}, Δs (Figs. 5 and 18) and [p_{turb}/p_{tot}]_{peak} (Fig. 21). For ∇_{peak} and 15 we applied the following function (B.3)with coefficients for f_{2} and f_{3} listed in Table B.2. Finally, we showed in Fig. 7 the entropy jump Δs as a function of s_{bot}, which we fitted with (B.4)The resulting coefficients are listed in Table B.3.
Appendix C: Tables
In Table C.1 we have listed important global properties with the stellar parameters. Due to the lack of space, we show only an excerpt with solar metallicity ([Fe/H] = 0.0). The complete table is available at CDS http://cds.ustrasbg.fr.
Stellar parameters: effective temperature, surface gravity (Cols. 1 and 2 in [K] and [dex]).
© ESO, 2013
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (fulltext article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 4896 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.