Enhanced Mass Loss Rates in Red Supergiants and Their Impact in The

© Copyright 2019: Instituto de Astronomía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/ia.01851101p.2019.55.02.04 eit eiaad srnmı Astrof´ısica Astronom´ıa y de Mexicana Revista u´ nm eMéxico, México.Autónoma de ooa emslo ooa México. Sonora, Hermosillo, Sonora, ooa emslo ooa México. Sonora, Hermosillo, Sonora, México, México. Autónoma de Nacional Comunicación, Universidad mación y u´ nm eMeio neaa aaClfri,México. California, Baja México, Ensenada, Autónoma de oil,Snr,México. Sonora, mosillo, DOI: .Hernández-CervantesL. 1 2 3 4 5 6 NACDMS OSRTSI E UEGAT N THEIR AND SUPERGIANTS RED IN RATES LOSS MASS ENHANCED nttt eAtooá nvria Nacional Universidad Astronom´ıa, de Instituto rgaad otrd inis(´sc) nvria de (F´ısica), Universidad Ciencias Doctorado de Programa eatmnod netgcńe ´sc,Uiesddde F´ısica, Investigación Universidad en de Departamento iecńGnrld ´muoyd enlgısd Infor- Tecnolog´ıas de de Cómputo y de Dirección General nttt eAtooá nvria Nacional Universidad Astronom´ıa, de Instituto eatmnod ´sc,Uiesddd ooa Her- Sonora, de Universidad F´ısica, de Departamento https://doi.org/10.22201/ia.01851101p.2019.55.02.04 e Words: como Key comportan se roja alt supergigante con de masa. estrellas etapa las la durante que masa Encontramos com circunestelar. usarlos medio para código para hidrodinámico expl´ıcito tiempo el ZEUS-3D del en torno dependientes estelar viento pa del obtuvimos evolutivos modelos los De código BEC. estelar o aa ncae e1,1,2 23 y 20 18, 15, de circ p iniciales medio masas evoluc fuerte su con la numéricos dinámica una de simulando experimentos la de de en conjunto impacto y un el estrella la explorar evolución de para la roja supergigante de 5a23 a 15 stars. mass st larger that a as found behave We phase CSM. RSG the the of in dynamics loss (CSM mass the medium to circumstellar the evolution in stellar hydrodynamica dynamics the gas in the conditions parameter simulates boundary wind inner stellar as time-dependent plicitly obtained we models, in( tion fsnl tr ihiiilmse f1,1,2 n,23 and, 20 18, 15, of masses initial with experimen numerical stars of single set Ou ev a of stellar computed We phase. on mass-loss supergiant medium. supergiant cumstellar red red extreme the of during impact the rates loss mass enhanced Z nti ok epeetmdl fmsiesasbten1 an 15 between stars massive of models present we work, this In net rbj rsnao oeo vltvsd estrella de evolutivos modelos presentamos trabajo este En MATO H ICMTLA MEDIUM CIRCUMSTELLAR THE ON IMPACT M 0 = ⊙ 1,2 snou nrmnoe ats epedd ems uat s durante masa pérdida de de tasa la en incremento un usando , . S:bbls—sas al-ye—sas vlto stars: — evolution outflows stars: winds, — stars: early-type — loss stars: — bubbles ISM: 1) sn h ueia tla oeBC rmteeevolu these From BEC. code stellar numerical the using 014), .Pérez-Rendón B. , eevdSpebr2 08 cetdMy82019 8 May accepted 2018; 25 September Received , 3 .Santillán A. , 55 ABSTRACT RESUMEN 6–7 (2019) 161–175 , M ⊙ eaiia oa ( solar metalicidad y ( aisadeegtc ftecruselrmedium (8 circumstellar stars the Massive dy- of (CSM). the energetics affects and their luminosities namics whereas mechanical 1986), and Maeder photon & history(Chiosi loss ilms.Teaon fms osdrn h RSG the during loss mass of amount ini- The their of mass. fraction tial important an ejecting 2011)and hspae ecigms osrtsfo 10 from rates loss mass reaching during phase. winds phase, (RSG) temperature this supergiant low generate red stars the Those during loss mass 10 > M − 4 h vlto n aeo asv stars massive of fate and evolution The .Garc´ıa-Segura G. , 6 M 8 ⊙ M yr ⊙ ssrnl nune ytermass their by influenced strongly is ) − M 1 iua aevolución del la simular lto n ntercir- their on and olution rámetros caracter´ısticos oeZU-D which ZEUS-3D, code l ´ nd srla aisladas estrellas ión de .INTRODUCTION 1. stssd pérdida de de tasas as Slsihe l 99 oiae al. et Moriya 1999; al. et (Salasnich ⊙ nsea.Calculamos unestelar. odcoe econ- de condiciones o ,ta eeue ex- used were that s, n oa composi- solar and , Z ,tu opigthe coupling thus ), s nteevolution the on ts, i st explore to is aim r e dd ems en masa érdida de 0 = ne nevl de intervalo el en s srla emayor de estrellas r ihextreme with ars 5 . n .Rodr´ıguez-Ibarra C. and , 23 d 1)uad el usando 014) − 40 M M ⊙ tionary fase u with , mass- ⊙ xeinelarge experience ) − 4 161 6 to © Copyright 2019: Instituto de Astronomía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/ia.01851101p.2019.55.02.04 nta assgetrta 5-30 - 25 than greater with masses stars of initial evolution al. slightly post-RSG but ensure et to 1990), obser- Jager enhanced Jager on de (de based & stars Nieuwenhuijzen are 1988; hot them for RSG of prescriptions the Some vational set rates. to evolu- loss ”recipes” Numerical mass empirical use models poor. late tion remains for evolution supergiants and knowledge parameters type our wind stellar Thus, still the of 2014). are (Smith observations uncertain very multiwavelength using stars after and during rate phase. loss RSG mass understand the of to (SN) features important main supernova is the the it to Therefore, prior explosion. of gas, energetics circumstellar and structure the post- the the influence during stages stages RSG wind compo- subsequent chemical the of and sition velocity amount, pro- The in core-collapse genitor. the bluewards to evolve appearance com- supernova different can a pletely giving they as diagram, or (HR) explode Hertzsprung-Rusell stage the either RSG mas- can the those They of in fate the stars. determine sive to critical is phase tr ewe n 25 massive and rates that 8 predicts loss between models mass stars numerical those in obser- input Using from as derived diagnostics. rates time-averaged vational describe mass-loss Van only smoothed 1999; that al. and 2005), et al. Salasnich et specific Other 1975; Loon recipes (Reimers loss RSG 1985). mass for al. empirical et use approaches (Humphreys observations to ofimdS-I r oemsieta 5-17 al. - et 15 than Smartt massive However, more of are progenitors SN. SN-IIP observed confirmed the II-L of leading none or that envelope, found II-P (2009) hydrogen type massive a a to with RSG a n ti nla h oRGwt niiilmass initial an with 25 RSG - no 15 why of range unclear is it and ta.(09 lofudta oeosrainlfea- observational some that found also (2009) al. relative et Pérez-Rendón higher parametrization. be classical must Reimer’s rates found to loss and mass winds RSG cool by the loss that mass the in semiempiri- for currently relation a cal of derived those favor (2005) than Cuntz in Schröder rates or & evidence use; loss II, some mass type is RSG SN There higher H-poor SN-Ib/c. progenitor a a leading SN in even the resulting 2015), in and al. content envelope, hydrogen et smaller 2012A; Meynet a Georgy 2013A; (Vanbev-to 2010; al. Cantiello et models & Georgy cur- Yoon stellar those 1998; canonical than eren rates in loss used mass rently higher invoke to be problem”. “RSG simulations. the numerical as known from is expected This as SN-IIP, a 6 HERN 162 h esrmnso asls ae o RSG for rates loss mass of measurements The osbeslto o h S rbe would problem RSG the for solution possible A M ⊙ a enosre oepoeas explode to observed been has M ⊙ iledterlf as life their end will M ⊙ according , NE-EVNE TAL. ET ANDEZ-CERVANTES ´ M ⊙ asls nteselreouin n hratron thereafter In and evolution, medium. circumstellar stellar their the on loss mass work. be will this which in CSM, explored their and evolution be- stellar has connection tween behavior the This regarding implications important prescription. cho- mass-loss the the on RSG that depends sen found strongly They models the (2017). ex- of et al. evolution been Meynet et (2012B); Renzo has al. (2015); loss CSM. et al. mass Georgy the by extreme of recently RSG evolution plored of the follow effect to The used Evolutionary was (Binary ZEUS-3D code magnetohydrodynamical BEC the Then code Code). the with cal- keep culated was to uncertainties) care observational (taking the within phase them RSG the during rates loss ietepyis n ueia eu sdt explore to used setup numerical and physics, the rize assi h ag 5-23 - 15 range the in itself. masses star the to evolution, CSM the stellar of to evolution linked the closely coupling are winds stellar ihrms osrtsfrRGsaswt initial 23 to with 15 stars of RSG range for the in rates masses loss mass higher unnecessary. rate loss mass RSG the larger making inferred required increase, the often account, mass. masses into progenitor taken initial SN-IIP is effect estimated this their if Thus, lowering progen- masses, SN-IIP the itor of extinction Beasor determination dust Alternatively, the that affect proposed could with rates. have 4 (2016) (1988) Davies of al. & factor et a based Jager within rates Jos- de agree mass-loss & excesses RSG Mauron infrared that but on Jager RSG, found de galactic (2011) by for selin obtained (1988) those dust- than al. higher that et factor times observed a 50 are (2005) - rates 3 loss al. evolu- mass et present binary RSG of Loon enshrouded result Van the be tion. also previous However, could in phase. stars RSG loss these the in mass less i.e. enhanced (probably) stages, an evolutionary were to WC due and could massive, WNE these but if 2012B), explained al. be & et (Maeder Georgy models cannot 1994; ob- stellar that Meynet current are stars with there WC explained Additionally, be luminosity low of rates. servations higher loss with explained mass better RSG be could A Cass of tures eedn nselrprmtr ( structure. parameters pre-supernova stellar the on on on loss Depending and mass extreme evolution this We of the influence problem”. the the “RSG study on the also some understand impact uncover better and its to gas clues examine circumstellar We the of structure increase. an cause such could that mechanisms physical underlying the epooet td h mato nacdRSG enhanced of impact the study to propose We h vlto fasto tla oeswt inital with models stellar of set a of evolution The nti okw xlr h osqecsof consequences the explore we work this In M § ⊙ ebifl summa- briefly we 2 n ieetmass different and M L ⊙ , eadesof regardless , M , Z etc.), , © Copyright 2019: Instituto de Astronomía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/ia.01851101p.2019.55.02.04 ta.(06.Temdl osdrZM assof 23 masses and ZAMS 20 consider Yoon 18, models (2005); 15, The al. (2006). et ex- al. Petrovic et Code), by Evolutionary described (Binary tensively BEC code stellar results. the h ihrRGms osrtso h tla evolu- In stellar the medium. circumstellar on the rates and loss tion mass RSG higher the In ZEUS-3D. with CSM § the of dynamics the explore Cs oes,o ihiiilrttoa veloci- rotational reac- initial burning with of O or ties and models), rotation without Ne A either built C, (Case were He, models The H, includ- tions. network major nuclear a the (Igle- and ing 1996), opacities Rogers, OPAL & with sias performed are ulations iinof sition h tla vlto ihteBCcd.In code. BEC the with evolution stellar the α oa rsuesaehih.W e the set We the height. times scale 0.2 pressure of local parameter overshoot us- moderate account a into ing taken processes. was diffusive overshooting as rota- Convective of considered effects were the mixing star 2000), tional al. the et inside (Heger following species and, chemical trans- of additional convective mechanisms some port of triggers processes of Rotation zones the transport. the and define convection, to criterion stellar Ledoux the used We eedn nselreouin n aaee af- others. parameter the of one behavior are the evolution: fects turn, stellar in on parameters, dependent These luminos- radius, etc. mass, metallicity, as ity, such parameters depend stellar that on (“recipes”) formulations rate mass-loss caution. with are taken features be final must their and but uncertain exahustion, He core numerical to up to Due 23 structure the star. the difficulties, progenitor to supernova correspond the models of affected. final this not our are pre- After layers Thus, in external than the faster and exhaustion. stages, is vious evolution core core stellar carbon the point, to up ZAMS sdi aheouinr tg r ecie in described are rates stage loss evolutionary each Mass in the 2005). used in al. to RSG et order galactic diagram(Levesque in of H-R 2.5, position to observational set the was fit phase RSG the in rameter eso u eut n ecieteipc of impact the describe and results our show we 4 L = .IPTPYISO TLA MODELS STELLAR OF PHYSICS INPUT 2. ebitasto igesa oesuigthe using models star single of set a built We obidteselrmdl eaotdempirical adopted we models stellar the build To the from computed were models stellar The / ICMTLA EIMMODELS MEDIUM CIRCUMSTELLAR V H rot Z P .WN AAEESAND PARAMETERS WIND 3. 1 = 0 = 0 ms km 100 = . . ntemi eune This sequence. main the on 6 1 Apude l 09.Tesim- The 2009). al. et (Asplund 014 M M ⊙ ⊙ oaigmdl eeevolved were models rotating n xdceia compo- chemical fixed a and − NACDMS OSRTSI E UEGAT 163 SUPERGIANTS RED IN RATES LOSS MASS ENHANCED 1 tteZM Cs B). (Case ZAMS the at § α ediscuss we 5 parameter § α we 3 § pa- 3. uigteRGpaeaelbldb “ factors by enhancement labeled the rate are of phase loss RSG mass mass the initial during the the and indicates star label rotational 20) o Bsasi h eprtr ag of range temperature al. the et in Vink stars of 27500 OB (24) loss the for equation to mass an (2001), according in Wind as calculated given were regarded prescription stars models. be hot can stellar for rates These the from as time. or- velocities output wind of in and function stage rates a evolutionary mass-loss obtain stellar to each der at parametriza- specific used the tion describe we section, this In r agdwt “ a with tagged are nldn ealct eedneof dependence metallicity a including n o 12500 for and le h iuehizn&d ae 19)mass (1990) Jager NdJ90): ap- (hereafter de we rate & range, loss Nieuwenhuijzen temperature the this plied Outside (25). tion iha nta oaino ( of rotation initial an with oesaelbldwt n“ Non-rotating an with 2005). labeled al. are et models Loon & Van (Mauron 2011; limits maintain observational Josselin to the found factors within Cantiello our rates be & chosen the can have Yoon we (1988) 1999; Here, al. al. 2010). et et higher Jager 10. (Salasnich are de elsewhere and rates by 6 mass-loss those RSG loss), than that mass evidence factor “canonical” a The by (hereafter, NdJ90 2 in (1) simply of equation we of purpose, those their this increased and For star the than medium. of higher circumstellar evolution values the to in used rates commonly loss mass the increasing log 2005). Koter de & (Vink n “ and hntesraehdoe asfato al below falls fraction mass X hydrogen surface the when be factor. could higher rates even loss within an mass by that lie numerical increased the Note It obtained that 1). likely thus (Figure respectively. is stars rates Galactic 10, for loss values and observational mass 6, RSG 2, all of factor a log (1995): al. et Hamann log s T asls ae r e nrdeti hswork. this in ingredient key a are rates loss Mass o h S hs dfie when (defined phase RSG the For h asls ae o h otRGevolution post-RSG the for rates loss mass The < M M eff ˙ ˙ × 0 T < . < 10 1 = 1 = 5and 45 3 ,frmdl ihicesdls ae by rates loss increased with models for ”, eff . . 3.1 5,w xlrdteiflec of influence the explored we 65), 0 0log( 50 . . 4log( 24 1log( 81 ≤ T < asLs Prescriptions Loss Mass . T 00 setereuto (24)), equation their (see K 50000 eff eff L/L L/L > R/R B ≤ .Tenme ett this to next number The ”. 00 r e codn to according set are K 10000 20 eue hi equa- their used we K 22500 ⊙ ⊙ ⊙ 0 + ) 0 + ) ) − A . v 6lg( log 86 14 a hra models whereas tag ” . rot 6log( 16 . 016 0 ms km 100 = , M/M Z/Z M × ˙ 2 ⊙ “ , ” ⊙ ) ∝ − + ) 11 Z − × 0 1 . (1) (2) . 6 95 86 ” ) © Copyright 2019: Instituto de Astronomía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/ia.01851101p.2019.55.02.04 te oaGlci ape(asuae l 06.The 2016). al. “ et our (Matsuura connects line sample relation short-dash Galactic luminosity a versus to mass-loss fitted The the shows stars. loss Galactic line RSG mass solid and observational AGB, oxygen-rich with for comparison rates numer- in our from models obtained averages ical loss mass RSG 1. Fig. HERN 164 o-ahlnsor“ our lines dot-dash uao eJgre l 18)frtpcltemperatures typical for (1988) al. ( et RSG for- Jager of mass-loss de empirical of the mula of shows canonical approximation line to linear long-dash/short-dash within the comparison the lie a models, For rates numerical mass-loss ones. numerical observational our the that note We osrt sehne Fin bot18)b a by 1986) Abbott & (Friend of: mass enhanced factor forces rotational is centrifugal The rate the layers. loss of stellar effect outermost the the at to due rates loss fraction H surface Lamers the & below when Nugis drops the rate adopted mass-loss further (2000) have we and line). h o-oaigsa n Ω and star non-rotating the where ftetesraeeutra eoiyt h critical the as to defined velocity speed) (break-up equatorial velocity rotation surface the the of 1 / 2 o oaigsasteei nices ntemass- the in increase an is there stars rotating For v log escape 2 ξ M T ˙ = eff M 1 = euto 5]. [equation − ˙ 60K pe line; upper K, 3600 = X ( 0 ω . s 0 3 ( 43, = ) . < . 0log 50 9log( 29 × 0 M . 6 ω WEstar): (WNE 3 ˙ n “ and ” ( )i h asls aeof rate mass-loss the is 0) = Z ω L/L − 0) = × 11 ⊙ × 2 1 + ) 10 ≡ . oes ogds and long-dash models, ” × 00 oes respectively. models, ” v/v (1 . T . 3log 73 eff − critic Ω) 00Klower K 4000 = ξ Y , steratio the is NE-EVNE TAL. ET ANDEZ-CERVANTES + ´ v critic 2 (3) (4) = n uiosbu uegatsa LS)when (LBSG) star supergiant blue log( luminous a and oNgs&Lmr (2000): Lamers & according derived Nugis was to stars WR of velocity ranges. wind uncovered The for of interpolation value linear a the made set and To factor. velocity Eddington’s β escape the the is and Γ and velocity wind between tion β n h orsodn tla idvlct a set was velocity wind to: stellar corresponding the and 0ad23 15,18, of and masses initial of 20 with end stars the for until C-burning, ZAMS core during the time from of evolution, function entire a the as velocities wind and rates uegat(S)we 3 when (YSG) supergiant rdaRGsa hnlog( consid- when we star RSG follows: a as the ered of temperature function Post- a effective as models. stellar are defined typical are stage some stages for each sequence 7 main at to lifetimes 3 veloci- Tables and wind in given lost average mass The ZAMS total from ties, lifetime, explosion. stellar supernova entire to a the in over evolution grid dynamical gas 2D the follow in a we but in paper (2009), Pérez-Rendónthis done in al. is as et way This in similar conditions simulations. as hydrodynamical boundary used the inner are ef- velocity, radius) time-dependent, stellar stel- rate, the and The loss temperature (mass fective 1996). viscosity outputs Clarke, of evolution absence 1992; lar the Norman, in & equations hydrodynam- (Stone gas the integrates ideal that ical code Eule- explicit finite-difference ZEUS-3D, rian three-dimensional, code a hydrodynamical is which the used we stars, evolution. stellar of details are numerical that the dynamics to perform and linked to structure closely CSM used the of then models are results stage). (pre-SN These configuration final their have star the h tla aaees hnigoe time: over changing parameters, stellar the eue h rtro rmEdig ta.(2006) al. et Eldridge from criterion the used we , log safe aaee hc consfrterela- the for accounts which parameter free a is sn hs qain,w bandtemass-loss the obtained we equations, these Using osmlt h icmtla a rudour around gas circumstellar the simulate To h saevlct scluae safnto of function a as calculated is velocity escape The T eff v / v escape K) wind v M 3.2 > escape ⊙ 4 yrdnmclModels Hydrodynamical . tti on h ue aesof layers outer the point this At . . 0 = bttesa sntaWolf-Rayet a not is star the (but 0 v = wind 2 . 61 2G − = R M 0 βv ⋆ . . 3log 13 75 ⋆ T escape 2 (1 eff < / − K) log( Γ) L . ⋆ < 0 + 1 T / 3 eff 2 . 5 yellow a 65; . , 0log 30 / K) < . Y 3 (6) (7) (5) . 9; © Copyright 2019: Instituto de Astronomía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/ia.01851101p.2019.55.02.04 trwt oepeec fhdoe ( Wolf-Rayet hydrogen a of is it presence when some two WNL with a distinguished star is we star post- stage the WR to subtypes: the only In refers phases. label RSG “YSG/LBSG” The star). h oiain esttelwrctfftemperature simulate cutoff To lower the 10 of set to effects conduction. we the heat ionization, nor the or flux, fields UV stellar magnetic the from ization IM,o n al- of medium an interstellar into (ISM), homogeneous flowing and wind uniform stellar most the with ZAMS, the log( X pnigt akrudtmeaueof temperature corre- background density a energy to thermal sponding in initial % an 1.0 and of density, perturbations random small with clouds), h eto h oeshv aillnt f1 pc 15 range of a considered length (0 we radial of colatitude, a In have pc/cell). models whereas (0.075 the pc/cell) of 0.06 rest of the resolution spatial a (giving zmta ieto.Tesmltoswr oeo a on alt- done two-dimensional were the simulations in The conditions direction. azimuthal boundary periodic with nates inad9 el nteaglrcodnts o the For coordinates. angular the in 15 cells 90 and tion nteHrzpugRseldarm(R)for (HRD) diagram (Case Hertzsprung-Russell non-rotating the in (Case hto d9,bticesdb atro 2 of factor a by increased is but rate loss NdJ90, (“ mass 2- of RSG Figure that whose In models, “canonical” models. rotating for rate. value mass-loss adopted RSG the the of consequence a in are differences evolution the metallicity, and velocity rotational ihrRGms osrt.Fr“ For rate. loss mass RSG higher (2003). or al. II-L et a Heger to our to lead all according will keep- supernovae, expected, and stars II-P H-envelope, As RSG massive as SN. a lives ing a their end as models up our canonical end all that will assume models we produce so stars supernovae, Massive enough red core-collapse large track. a bluewards not as a is produce life to loss their dia- end mass HR to RSG side the supergiants.The cool once the only towards crossing gram sequence, main the s × M < eew ontcnie h ffcso photoion- of effects the consider not do we Here o h hsclgi,w sdshrclcoordi- spherical used we grid, physical the For iue n hwteeouinr tracks evolutionary the show 3 and 2 Figures iue2soseouinr rcsfrnon- for tracks evolutionary shows 2 Figure h vltoayptscag o oeswt a with models for change paths evolutionary The 2 T , a) l hs oeseov ewrsafter redwards evolve models these All tag). ” 4 ⊙ eff 90 0 B . .Tehdoyaia acltossatat start calculations hydrodynamical The K. / oes h hsclrda xeso s1 pc 12 is extension radial physical the models, 30. .Frmdl aigtesm nta mass, initial same the having models For ). K) ◦ ,gvn naglrrslto f1 of resolution angular an giving ), > o 4 0 cm 100 = . ) hra ti N trwhen star WNL a is it whereas 0); 4.1 r − .RESULTS 4. tla Models Stellar . θ A n oaigselrmodels stellar rotating and ) rdo 0 el nrda direc- radial in cells 200 of grid NACDMS OSRTSI E UEGAT 165 SUPERGIANTS RED IN RATES LOSS MASS ENHANCED − 3 tpclo molecular of (typical left × 6 eso the show we , oes only models, ” X s < T b 0 0K. 10 = . ◦ 5and 45 /cell. vligbuwrst eoeWS h aeoc- 20 same the The for WRS. curs become to bluewards evolving 7.23 ot10.48 lost muto h oa as(esta fteinitial the quies- of % by 5 than lost (less mass). small mass mass a total The the only of is amount phases Wolf-Rayet stars. during winds WR cent blue as lives ot11.35 lost S tg,weestemodels the whereas stage, RSG models: an our su- as all the for shows or progenitor 1 explode (WNL), Table pernova finally (WNE). envelope to one H-poor lacking HRD, an hydrogen the their with of of stars side rest as blue the the remain on will life band. stars sequence main Wolf-Rayet the de- The beyond temperatures, loop cooler blue a slightly scribing to evolve and blue and (“ (Heger . progenitors 2003) WNE for al. the SN-Ib et for a II-L/b and be star will WNL type supernova final The stars. ilepoea N tr hra the whereas star, WNL a as explode will ffc h ieo h ecr) o agrmass shorter larger at For attained is core). ratio Our critical He times. the not the does rates, of rate loss amount size loss same mass the (the the ratio affect mass lose this envelope models simulations, their the our of In when 1967; reached (Giannone . stel- 0.4-0.6 is 2015) the of al. of value et that a Meynet to to envelope drops the the core when of lar mass triggered the is of post- bluewards ratio the to because evolution occurs the RSG This as decreases grows. supergiant rate red note mass-loss a We as lifetime models. the evolu- interesting each that some in lifetimes for stellar phase the tionary show 7 rate: to mass-loss 3 RSG Tables the on depending changes stage CO). of pro- core to bare evolved insufficient (a was more star loss WC as a mass life duce The their stars. end whereas WNE WNL, stars as massive ending more H-envelope, small a keeps W) hnterH-oefato rp eo 0.10 below stars drops (Y Wolf-Rayet fraction He-core become their When to (WR). envelope, losing or H-rich diminishing yel- their phase, short supergiant a blue and through low bluewards evolve which larger, ie sWl-ae tr.Ol the Only stars. Wolf-Rayet as lives h 15 the rgesps-S vlto nsaso 18 of stars and in H-envelope evolution the from loss post-RSG mass mass triggers RSG significant the a of off increase peels the models, the of rest × c l h oeswt xrm S asloss mass RSG extreme with models the All h ieta h tr pn nec post-MS each in spend stars the that time The 10 A23 < M )udrops-S vlto oedtheir end to evolution post-RSG undergo ”) M 0 ⊙ × . hra the whereas , 0,tesasso hi ahtwrsthe towards path their stop stars the 10), ⊙ 6 M M oesedterlvsa ako- WNE lack-of-H as lives their end models tred pa e uegat nthe In supergiant. red a as up ends star A18 ⊙ ⊙ n 11.39 and n 10.60 and M × 2 ⊙ oe ot5.16 lost model oes the models: A20 M M × ⊙ ⊙ 6 sRG oedtheir end to RSGs as epciey before respectively, , and A18 A20 × A20 M A15 × 6 A18 ⊙ 2 and × × uigthe during oe lost model 10 × 10 M 6 A18 models A20 ⊙ model model × and × 10 6 © Copyright 2019: Instituto de Astronomía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/ia.01851101p.2019.55.02.04 i.2 Case 2. Fig. HERN 166 eJgr(90 nrae yafco f2drn h e supergia red the ev during the 2 shows of panel factor left a by The increased core. (1990) stellar Jager the de & in carbon of exhaustion oiino aatcRGosre yLvsu ta.(05.Mdl d (“ Models 6 of (2005). factor al. a by et enhanced Levesque rate by mass-loss observed RSG RSG galactic of position oeta h ieecsi h vltoaytak oeol rmt from only come tracks evolutionary the in differences the that Note o-oaigmdl.Tesmoshv h usual the have symbols “ The meaning: models. non-rotating of morphology and evolution medium. the circumstellar on explo- the supernova also core-collapse but final influence sion, the strong on a have only evolution not stellar final the the and of phase stage evolutionary each of duration the ais “ radius, omaWl-ae trdcessa h S mass- RSG have to the we as necessary so decreases mass star more), Wolf-Rayet initial rate or a minimum loss form 10 the mass of RSG that extreme factor found an a has by it (increased if star WR a m eest h uenv rgntrtp.Note type. progenitor 15 supernova a that the col- “pre-SN” to the refers and umn temperature core stellar the is al hw h r-uenv rprisof properties pre-supernova the shows 1 Table mass, blown wind the that remember must We Y M s steH rcino h ufc,“ surface, the on fraction He the is ” M A ⊙ fin ( igennrttn trcudbecome could star non-rotating single v rot n “ and ” ms km 0 = R fin − ee ofia asand mass final to refer ” 1 :Sto vltoaytak o tr nterne15-23 range the in stars for tracks evolutionary of Set ): NE-EVNE TAL. ET ANDEZ-CERVANTES ´ × 6 )adi h ih ae hyaeehne yafco f1 (“ 10 of factor a by enhanced are they panel right the in and ”) T c ” l:freape o o S asls ae(“ rate loss mass RSG low a for example, for els: aes tla oainas oie h ae evo- the later to the comparison outer in modifies the paths, also its from lutionary rotation and coming Stellar size, fuel core layers. the fresh of with increase enrichment the to non-rotating due to respect models, with lifetimes MS the creases ( stars ing behavior. mod- similar of a rest found the For we els expected. as increase, rates loss n h omto fW tr n asn rotat- causing and stars WR of favor- formation MS, the the models during ing rotating even He-enriched, of slightly envelopes to are outer core The efficiently the surface. more from the products surface, nucleosynthesis stellar bringing the of composition case. non-rotating the unlike RSG, a)terttn 23 rotating the tag) iue3soseouinr rcsfrrotat- for tracks evolutionary shows 3 Figure oainlmxn lomdfistechemical the modifies also mixing Rotational tpae(“ phase nt eehneeto h S asls rates. loss mass RSG the of enhancement he lto sn asls aeo Nieuwenhuijzen of rate mass-loss a using olution slydi h eta ae r acltdwith calculated are panel central the in isplayed aeB Case × 2 .A xetd tla oainin- rotation stellar expected, As ). oes.Tesursidct the indicate squares The models). ” M ⊙ M oe ( model ⊙ rmteZM pt the to up ZAMS the from , B23 × 2 vle post- evolves ) aeA Case × mod- 10 × ”). 2 ” © Copyright 2019: Instituto de Astronomía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/ia.01851101p.2019.55.02.04 i.3 Case 3. Fig. oe o oaigsaswt assi h ag 15-23 range the in masses with stars rotating for core, fNewnuje eJgr(90 nrae yafco f2durin 2 of factor a by increased (1990) Jager de & Nieuwenhuijzen of ftehge oainlms osadmixing. and loss mass rotational consequence higher a the lu- as of progenitors, pre-SN evolved the more that as models, yielding non-rotating observe models, to We compared A increases minosity 2. Case Table to in radius comparison shown mass, in their color, changes and/or often rotation but itors, stellar surrounding the impact- gas. of evolution star, chemical the the from ing He away enriched surface wind-blown This higher is stars. a material WC/WO with as even lives or their abundance, end to stars ing exhaustion. core He until evolved ihms-osrtsehne yafco f1 nRG u onumer to Due RSG. in 10 of factor a by enhan enhanced rates mass-loss rates RSG mass-loss with with calculated are models panel central n eprtr.Teepoete hnedramat- change velocity, properties stellar rate, These loss through mass temperature. the evolution, and as such stellar properties the wind on depends l u oeswl n pa uenv progen- supernova as up end will models our All h vlto ftecruselrgsstrongly gas circumstellar the of evolution The B 4.2 ( v icmtla Medium Circumstellar . rot 0 ms km 100 = NACDMS OSRTSI E UEGAT 167 SUPERGIANTS RED IN RATES LOSS MASS ENHANCED − 1 :Sto vltoaytak rmteZM pt h xasino c of exhaustion the to up ZAMS the from tracks evolutionary of Set ): M ⊙ h etpnlsosteeouinuigtems-osrate mass-loss the using evolution the shows panel left The . osrt n idvlct ntecus fstellar of course the in velocity mass wind evolution. the and of variation rate the of around loss consequence bubbles a and as star shells will the of we section formation this be the In to describe stage. gas each in circumstellar distinctive of quite causing behaviour phase, dynamical evolutionary the the on depending ically eune asv trbosahproi wind hypersonic a main blows the val- star During ( the massive vary. a and parameters sequence, structures di- physical physical sculpted of the ues the in of only same sequence; mensions the main qualitatively is the models during our all in gas stellar hc htsprtstefe lwn idfo the from wind blowing free the reverse separates a that and ISM shock the star’s with the colliding (in frame) outwards reference traveling shock struc- shock outer double an a ture: of formation the to leading ISM ≈ anSqec Stage: Sequence Main 2 e yafco f6adtergtpnli calculated is panel right the and 6 of factor a by ced − h e uegatpae(“ phase supergiant red the g 3 × cldffiute h 23 the difficulties ical 10 3 ms km − 1 htclie ihtecold the with collides that ) h vlto fcircum- of evolution The M ⊙ × oeswr only were models 2 oes.The models). ” ro nthe in arbon © Copyright 2019: Instituto de Astronomía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/ia.01851101p.2019.55.02.04 oe.Tekntceeg ftefe lwn idis wind blowing free the of energy kinetic The model. ae,adhshg eprtrsadlwdensities low and domi- temperatures ( pressure high is has region and bubble nated, The zone. wind shocked free of (called region wind inwards isobaric advances initially stellar and shock hot reverse a leaving This one. shocked HERN 168 nopst a,a hw nFgr o the for 4 Figure in shown as in way, drops stel- velocity opposite effective wind an The the luminosity. of and function radius a lar as time, with slightly rxmtl 10 proximately T A18 A15 A18 A15 A23 A20 A18 A15 Model A23 A20 A23 A20 B23 B20 B18 B15 Model B23 B20 B18 B15 B23 B20 B18 B15 R-UENV ETRSO OAIGSELRMDL CS B) (CASE MODELS STELLAR ROTATING OF FEATURES PRE-SUPERNOVA ≈ ntemi eune h asls aei ap- is rate loss mass the sequence, main the In 10 × × × × × × × × × × × × × × × × × × × × × × × × 10 10 6 6 2 2 2 2 6 6 10 10 2 2 2 2 6 6 6 6 10 10 10 10 7 R-UENV RPRISO O-OAIGSELRMDL ( MODELS STELLAR NON-ROTATING OF PROPERTIES PRE-SUPERNOVA K , ρ 0259564315 6 .40961. WNE 17.8 WNL 0.976 12.5 5.04 0.677 364 59 4.80 3.1 275 25 6.4 13.2 965 225 10 5.2 001 724 12 0294168883 4 .70771. WNL 12.0 RSG 0.707 13.0 5.07 0.295 040 36 4.88 8.8 000 4 6.8 574.0 431 219 10 6.2 338 716 12 022201. 0. 6 .90301. RSG 15.1 RSG 0.310 13.0 5.09 0.295 061 4 4.89 708.0 143 4 12.5 538.0 270 232 10 12.0 026 717 12 029151. 1. 5 .60361. RSG 10.7 RSG 0.316 15.0 5.16 0.301 950 3 4.95 811.1 070 4 11.6 599.2 185 299 10 11.7 695 972 12 0379866833 8 .70701. WNE 19.1 RSG 0.770 11.6 5.17 0.305 283 39 4.93 8.3 030 4 6.6 598.2 978 347 10 5.7 069 951 12 0365759247 2 .10961. WNE 15.3 WNL 0.986 12.2 5.11 0.663 123 71 4.93 2.4 753 20 5.9 22.6 567 386 10 5.1 966 957 12 8 3 2693540653 .1 51RSG 15.1 RSG 0.314 15.0 5.32 0.300 026 4 5.19 933.5 019 4 12.6 807.5 136 684 7 12.4 644 910 8 8 2 . . 89252 .8 25WNE 12.5 WNE 0.987 15.1 5.27 0.782 942 68 5.16 3.0 129 50 5.0 8.9 127 684 7 7.6 797 909 8 8 4 . . 90752 .8 30WNE 13.0 WNE 0.987 12.0 5.25 0.936 027 69 5.14 2.9 010 62 3.2 8.6 342 689 7 7.4 075 913 8 6 9 . 632 2 .2 .0 . WNL 6.6 RSG 0.708 11.6 5.42* 0.318 429 25 5.29* 26.3 900 3 9.4 1009.0 195 965 7 10.4 509 186 9 1 7 . . 5 7 .109049WNE 4.9 WNE 0.980 17.0 5.21 0.985 871 152 5.19 0.6 313 81 2.0 7.6 574 010 8 6.8 333 255 9 1 6 . . 4 1 .209854WNE 5.4 WNE 0.978 16.5 5.22 0.985 412 144 5.21 0.7 222 80 2.1 7.4 565 019 8 6.5 252 253 9 ≈ t − t life life 7 10 (yrs) − (yrs) − tla bubble) stellar 10 28 − cm g 8 M M M ⊙ − fin 3 fin yr /M /M ). − 1 urudn the surrounding ⊙ ⊙ n increases and , R R NE-EVNE TAL. ET ANDEZ-CERVANTES ´ fin fin /R A18 /R ⊙ ⊙ × AL 1 TABLE AL 2 TABLE 6 T T eff eff K log (K) icisaiiisi aitv hls(y Vishniac, & (Ryu shells Vish- radiative to in due ini- instabilities or the niac simulations, of in our result in variations a perturbations as tial to maybe position, due front shock instabilities the MS shear dense shows den- The shell and 2007). pressure (Dwarkadas, of fluctuations consequence sity a as turbulence of the 1977). surrounds al. which interstel- et shell), (Weaver swept bubble MS of (called shell material external overdense lar The an size. pushes in shock grows bub- progressively stellar which the ble, inside energy thermal into converted K log (K) stebbl rw,w bev h appearance the observe we grows, bubble the As L/L L/L ⊙ ⊙ Y Y s s . T V T c rot (10 c (10 AEA) CASE 0 ms km 100 = 8 8 )pre-SN K) )p-SN K) star − 1 © Copyright 2019: Instituto de Astronomía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/ia.01851101p.2019.55.02.04 tla id aentto o als4 ,6ad7. and 6 5, 4, Tables for notation Same wind. stellar h oaih ftems osrt,∆ rate, and loss phase mass each during the lost of logarithm the ueweeteRGwl xadatrad.Tbe8 Table struc- afterwards. CSM expand the will is RSG this the the where sphericity; fragment ture its not affect do as or they slowly and shell, grow expands, shell instabilities MS these the However, 1987). oe ∆ Note: S/BG0.217 YSG/LBSG S/BG0.004 YSG/LBSG 0.082 YSG/LBSG IDPOETE FTHE OF PROPERTIES WIND tg ∆ Stage S11.997 MS IDPOETE FTHE OF PROPERTIES WIND THE OF PROPERTIES WIND IDPOETE FTHE OF PROPERTIES WIND S 0.699 RSG N 0.061 WNL tg ∆ Stage N 0.073 WNE N 0.127 WNL 0.080 WNL tg ∆ Stage ∆ Stage S 0.428 RSG S 0.209 RSG 0.318 RSG S12.017 MS S8.483 MS 9.723 MS t eest h uaino h tg,log stage, the of duration the to refers Mr ( (Myr) t Mr ( (Myr) ( (Myr) Mr ( (Myr) t t t M AL 4 TABLE AL 6 TABLE 5 TABLE AL 3 TABLE − − log ⊙ 5 7 M M yr M . . NACDMS OSRTSI E UEGAT 169 SUPERGIANTS RED IN RATES LOSS MASS ENHANCED M 828 35 2.89 38 301 2200 0.14 93 − − − − − − − − − log log − − − − log ˙ v ⊙ ⊙ − ⊙ ∞ 4 5 4 4 5 5 7 7 5 5 5 4 7 1 yr yr ...... yr . . . . ( ) M M 600 900 0.07 76 800 0.21 59 71.525 11.35 27 30 10.48 48 704 2800 0.43 47 2100 0.25 51 103 2300 0.33 41 2265 0.29 53 602 2000 0.20 56 M 401 2000 0.11 74 303 800 0.32 83 692 35 9.28 66 301 2200 0.14 93 steaeaevlct of velocity average the is ˙ ˙ ˙ − − − 1 1 1 ( ) ( ) ∆ ( ) M A15 A20 A18 A15 v M ⊙ ∆ ∆ ∆ M M M k s (km ) × v M v M M v M × × × ⊙ ⊙ ⊙ 10 k s (km ) s (km ) 6 6 2 k s (km ) stemass the is MODEL MODEL MODEL MODEL ∞ − ∞ ∞ ∞ M − − − 1 ˙ ) 1 1 1 ) ) ) is hl)wihepnsa o eoiy( (RSG velocity shell low second a at and build expands decelerated to which is shock shell) the wind into RSG up termination The piles a and formed. bubble, is sequence shock main pressure hot thermal the the of becomes balances mass be- eventually wind fluctuating wind The RSG velocities RSG with the tween supergiant. slower, the and and red of increases denser side a rate cool become the loss toward to evolve HRD models our all hw h nlpsto fM hlsa r-Ntime pre-SN at progenitors. shells supernova MS RSG of for position final the shows hydrody- circumstellar the for These input simulations. the as namic distinguishable. used for were clearly time data are of and phases function (top) Wolf-Rayet rate a loss as mass A18 (bottom) stellar typical velocity of wind Plots 4. Fig. ae,etn a:u o12p eodtesel Fig- shell. some the in beyond pc that, 1-2 to “fingers” up RT far: extend of cases, growth could the Rayleigh- we presents observe and shell 2007), RSG (Dwarkadas the instabilities Taylor of edge outer The tg ∆ Stage IDPOETE FTHE OF PROPERTIES WIND S 0.642 RSG S8.531 MS × e uegatStage: Supergiant Red 6 ≈ oe.Temi eune e uegatand supergiant red sequence, main The model. 010k s km 10-160 Mr ( (Myr) t M AL 7 TABLE log − − − ⊙ 1 7 4 yr . . a rsueo h dense the of pressure Ram . M 103 2300 0.33 41 492 20 9.27 84 ˙ − fe h ansequence, main the After 1 ( ) ∆ M B20 v M ⊙ k s (km ) × ≈ 2 ms km 5 MODEL ∞ − − 1 1 ) ). © Copyright 2019: Instituto de Astronomía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/ia.01851101p.2019.55.02.04 n h o n aee tla ube niethe Inside bubble. stellar enclos- rarefied pc 10.8 and of hot radius a the with ing shell MS the note we neo Ryeg-alr nes h S idand 2.9 of wind mass RSG combined The a have shell fingers. “Rayleigh-Taylor” of ence niaethe indicate ( itneof distance a of dius eimaon yia S tr(model star circumstellar RSG typical pre-supernova a the around shows medium (top), 5 ure color The explosion. online. SN viewed the be before can shell figure and with MS merged shell already outer RSG have the built The previously shells structure. WR turbulent the a with bubble the for representation Same 200 n 0dgesi aiue( e/el.Selrequa- Stellar deg/cell). (1 the pc/cell) latitude on (0.075 is in extension tor degrees radial in 90 pc and 12 of distance ical S is ISM tg ( stage iy(gcm g ( sity 5. Fig. HERN 170 t 12 = × 0clsin cells 90 t ≈ n , Top: 12 = 724 0 cm 100 = 08p.A ntbeRGselapasat appears shell RSG unstable An pc. 10.8 − 3 , r 0 r) h Sselecoe h hot the encloses shell MS The yrs). 001 x r , fthe of ) cl ubri u simulation. our in number -cell ai.Temi euneselhsara- a has shell sequence main The -axis. oaih ftecruselrgsden- gas circumstellar the of Logarithm 717 r ≈ × , 1 2 r) h nta est fthe of density initial The yrs). 026 − . θ cfo h tr oetepres- the Note star. the from pc 2 3 ieto,crepnigt phys- a to corresponding direction, A15 n h rdhsdmnin of dimensions has grid the and × 2 oe ttepresupernova the at model A15 × M 10 ⊙ aeson Labels . oe tpre-SN at model NE-EVNE TAL. ET ANDEZ-CERVANTES ´ A15 Bottom: y × -axis 2 ); iitr eso fteM ube differences bubble: MS forming the wind of RSG version slow miniature previous a the sweeps wind explode finally to HRD, the of supernova. side as blue the to back lwals es n atrwn o order (of wind faster and dense that stars less 2500 Wolf-Rayet a become blow to H-envelope evolution the post-RSG clude a S rgntr ssoni iue5( 5 Figure in 9. shown Figure is typi- progenitors some RSG cal for The pre-supernova lightcurve. medium SNII-P circumstellar or circumstel- ex- SNII-L will the a wave producing be blast pand, supernova will the This where by MS medium, bordered lar shell. hot shell MS The RSG shocked the the shell. beyond RSG remains massive bubble and unstable an icmtla eimcnit fadneadfree profile and a dense with wind a RSG of for streaming pre-SN consists stage The pre-supernova medium MS models. the circumstellar progenitor the at supernova of RSG shell our position RSG the the shows mechanical and 8 injected Table the stel- of luminosity. the and of and lifetimes, difference MS phase’s the the to lar due of lives vary, position shells their RSG the end the that only models supergiants, all red for as same the is ration hl ihardu of RSG radius unstable a an with observe we shell star, the to near bubble, en hre steiiilms n asls aegrows. rate loss mass and mass initial the as shorter being h tr os esta %o hi nta as(xetfor (except mass initial their WR, of to 1% RSG to than between star evolution less 15 the their loose carries In stars this the side. maybe blue rate, HRD loss the mass multiplied the IA OIINO TLA HLSFOR SHELLS STELLAR OF POSITION FINAL 7 M tteosto h ofRytpae h fast the phase, Wolf-Rayet the of onset the At ofRytStage: Wolf-Rayet esol on u htatrteRGsaew keep we stage RSG the after that out point should We B20 B18 B15 B15 A23 A20 A18 A15 oe S hl Sshell MS shell RSG A15 Model ⊙ − oes htlssu o3%,tetastoa stage transitional the %), 3 to up loses that models, S UENV PROGENITORS SUPERNOVA RSG 00k s km 3000 × × × × × × × × × 2 2 6 2 2 2 2 6 2 − ais(c ais(pc) radius (pc) radius 1 AL 8 TABLE r ,weestesa evolves star the whereas ), . 13.8 3.0 . 13.5 2.3 . 11.0 3.0 . 11.0 2.0 . 15.0 3.6 . 13.9 3.2 . 13.1 1.7 . 9.8 2.3 . 9.8 1.2 ≈ oeo u oesin- models our of Some 1 . c hsCMconfigu- CSM This pc. 2 7 hs tr shed stars These . ρ ∝ r − top 2 inside , and ) © Copyright 2019: Instituto de Astronomía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/ia.01851101p.2019.55.02.04 n tro 18 of star a ing i.6 oaih fgsdniy(gcm g ( density gas of Logarithm 6. Fig. ue Ssel( shell MS outer S hl tapsto of position a at shell RSG egho 5p 005p/el n 0dgesi latitude in degrees 90 and pc/cell) (0.075 (1 pc 15 of length uino h tr ert h tri h atW shell WR fast the is star the to near at star: the of lution 01052ys h rd(200 grid The yrs. 10,110,512 h tri h Rpaefrthe for phase WR the in star the struc- filamentary a inter- presents ture. velocity the and high unstable, in with Taylor build-up expanding shell and WR ( 2013), new a face al. rarefac- et (Georgy, a shock Walder a in by result accompanied zone possibly wave, transition tion the in velocity in online. viewed be The can formed. figure is structure color turbulent slightly a with bubble n h rvosRGsel( shell RSG previous the and ( hw nFgrs5(otm,7 n ,frthree for 8, and 7, (bottom), 5 Figures in shown the for at important medium is stage. circumstellar pre-supernova This the of it. shell morphology into MS the outer merge the and/or reach fin- stop could the to the debris collapse, on knot core and Depending final gers the ir- until it. and remaining into knots time expanding dense with tails bubble structure regular stellar turbulent de- The a shell manner. has WR+RSG asymmetrical an the in of spreading bris interior bubble, the dragged MS into of the outwards tails travel up and which break clumps and material, forming merge zones, will some shells in both slower the and with shell, collide RSG strongly will shell WR fast the ≈ r ◦ ≈ r nFgr ,w hwteselfre near formed shell the show we 6, Figure In h icmtla eimfrW rgntr is progenitors WR for medium circumstellar The cl) he hlsaefre uigteetr evo- entire the during formed are shells Three /cell). 0 ms km 100 ≈ 1 . 1 c odrdb h es S idzone wind RSG dense the by bordered pc) 7 . cbree ytedneRGwn n the and wind RSG dense the by bordered pc 9 − 1 r MS .Ti atW hl sRayleigh- is shell WR fast This ). M ≈ ⊙ 12 . (model c o rsuedominated pressure hot a pc) 8 NACDMS OSRTSI E UEGAT 171 SUPERGIANTS RED IN RATES LOSS MASS ENHANCED ≈ c ewe hsadthe and this Between pc. 3 r × ≈ A18 0cls a radial a has cells) 90 3 . × c.Eventually, pc). 0 6 tatm of time a at ) A18 − 3 surround- ) × 6 model rsproamdu fthe of medium presupernova 2007). (Dwarkadas velocities outward different traveling slightly shocks at trans- wave the reflected with and wrinkled, mitted highly turbu- point. be this will to with medium wave point blast lent SN from the of vary interaction density The an and into where blows pressure that bubble, the hot wind, turbulent WR slightly fast and a anisotropic of zone a of sists bounces cases some in and it back. with merges the shell, reaches material MS fragmented This hot the bubble. into stellar spread are and debris both the breaking outwards; traveling shell, RSG previous the with lided rsproa h ue Sselhsardu of As radius a shells. has WR shell and MS r RSG, outer the MS, presupernova, the of formation t S S n Rsel.Tels w locollide also two last The develops star shells. WR the and evolution, RSG the MS, as its During life IIL/b. its SN ending a path, evolutionary similar a follows N tr fe olwn h etevolutionary next the following after path: star, WNL a n tro 18 of star a ing i.7 oaih fgsdniy(gcm g ( density gas of Logarithm 7. Fig. ieetcsso neet iue5(otm cor- (bottom) 5 the Figure to interest. responds of cases different bubble. hot the online. inside viewed be turbulence can high figure to the color 6 Note The shell from WR spreads debris pc. + The RSG 8 former collision). their the by from (broken debris dense of knots aeta iue6 h Sselhsardu of radius a has shell MS The 6. ≈ Figure than same ( t 10 = 12 ≈ sscn aeo neet iue7sosthe shows 7 Figure interest, of case second As con- case first this for medium presupernova The uigteeouino hssa,w bev the observe we star, this of evolution the During MS . csronigatruethtbbl ihsome with bubble hot turbulent a surrounding pc 8 10 , . 219 → c h atW hl a led col- already has shell WR fast The pc. 8 RSG , 3 r) h hscldmnin r the are dimensions physical The yrs). 431 → M A15 ⊙ LBSG × (model 10 → oe hc nslf as life ends which model A18 WNL A18 × × 6 6 → tpeS stage pre-SN at ) oe.Ti star This model. NIIL SN − 3 surround- ) / b . © Copyright 2019: Instituto de Astronomía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/ia.01851101p.2019.55.02.04 ftefe Rwn tl arigteseldebris shell the carrying still ( wind knots consists WR dense case a free this As the for shell. of presupernova MS CSM outer the the reach result, not to do time shell) enough collisional RSG have + the the (WR and outwards and short traveling case shell debris too WR this the is in of explosion However, onset supernova the before. between as time just the up break and has be can shells figure these color The of shell. mass online. MS viewed the outer the of with wind Most merged hot the with into merged bubble. dissipating and shocked both collided shell, has RSG shell former WR the The 6. Figure in model positions. uneven due emission times, increased their different optical to at an in 2005) (Dwarkadas in and knots the X-rays, result of the will of zones wavetemperature densest shock supernova the dense the the with of wind, interaction The WR termination free shock. aspherical an veloc- of and debris complex regions shell the WR+RSG the see in can field We ity velocities. low with h rvoscss xetfrtesproaprogen- supernova the stage: for itor except cases, previous the ( S o the for CSM i.8 oaih fgsdniy(gcm g ( density gas of Logarithm 8. Fig. HERN 172 oavr ieetceia eunit h circum- the into return gas. chemical stellar leading different lacking, How- very hydrogen a be medium. to will turbulent ejecta SN more the a ever, with but model), h S ilb iia otefis ae( case first the to similar be will CSM the MS t 10 = iue8sostepeuenv S fthe of CSM presupernova the shows 8 Figure h neato ftesproabatwv with wave blast supernova the of interaction The → , A20 272 RSG × , 0 r) h iesosaetesm as same the are dimensions The yrs). 006 6 → ρ h vltoaypt ssmlrto similar is path evolutionary The . A20 ≈ LBSG 10 × 6 − 22 oe tpesproastage pre-supernova at model → cm g WNL − 3 rvln outwards traveling ) → WNE − → 3 NE-EVNE TAL. ET ANDEZ-CERVANTES ´ NIb SN fthe of ) A15 × 10 . ie sRGsas xetfrterttoa model rotational the 23 for a except of stars, RSG as lives 02.Or1,2 n 23 and 20 18, al. Ekström Our et 1999; al. with 2012). agreement et in (Salasnich is authors which other for masses, differ- lower blueward with were to stars tracks evolution evolutionary post-RSG stellar presenting fac- ent, the a by 6, rate of mass-loss tor RSG the increased bluewards. we evolution When post-RSG favors mixing ternal NIP ree NIL nareetwt this, with agreement In (“ simulations SNII-L. “canonical” a our type even of explosion or supernova SNII-P, a producing stars, RSG fselreouinpeitta l asv tr with than stars smaller massive masses all that predict evolution stellar of tr.W oe htacneuneo increasing of consequence a Wolf-Rayet that become noted to We stage RSG stars. the after wards togipc anyon: mainly impact strong distribution time. gas pre-supernova at the star on the rate, impact (if around mass-loss strong RSG a post-RSG the having evolution by also determined stellar phase. fully RSG is the the any) that in rates found loss We mass increased of pact igesaswt nta asso 5 8 0and 20 18, 15, of masses initial 23 with for dynamics stars gas single circumstellar and evolution stellar RSG decelerated online. viewed the be of can edge figure fin- color outer “Rayleigh-Taylor” The the large wind. of in presence formed the gers Note pc. 3 ( S tpeS fthe of pre-SN at CSM i.9 oaih fgsdniy(gcm g ( density gas of Logarithm 9. Fig. t 9 = M efudta neteeRGms-oshsa has • mass-loss RSG extreme an that found We nti ok ehv ul ueia oesof models numerical built have we work, this In otRGselrevolution. stellar Post-RSG ⊙ , .DSUSO N CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION 5. 186 rttn n o-oaig oepoeteim- the explore to non-rotating) and (rotating M , 0 r) h S hl a aisof radius a has shell RSG The yrs). 509 ⊙ tr( star B23 ≈ × B20 25 2 hr h oainlin- rotational the where ) × M 2 ⊙ M oe tpre-supernova at model × iledterlvsas lives their end will ⊙ 2 oes n their end models) ” tr vleblue- evolve stars aoia models Canonical − 3 fthe of ) © Copyright 2019: Instituto de Astronomía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/ia.01851101p.2019.55.02.04 yafco f1 (“ 10 of factor a by sin- mass (for minimum star Wolf-Rayet lower a stars). of gle a formation is the for rate limit mass-loss RSG the hscs,ee 15 In a even evolution. post-RSG case, develop this to limit mass lower S ffcigteceia vlto ftegalaxies way. the new of a the evolution causes into in chemical material stars the enriched affecting WR of ISM form return shells. efficient to and more limit bubble a chemi- gas mass CSM the the the Lowering of of proportion stellar composition metals their cal the and change products winds He-burning en- are with stars. stars WR WR riched (post-RSG) to of evolution abundances medium Surface subsequent circumstellar the the favoring of by enrichment metal rates. the loss B/R mass a RSG to higher leads with lifetime grows WR that the ratio in su- increase red combined phase an to RSG blue with This shorter a the on ratio: phase. (B/R) impact pergiant Wolf-Rayet strong a the has of behavior duration some HRD in the RSG the lengthening cases and of the stages, zones shortening YSG-LBSG the blue sequence, and and He-main red the the during it. the in that on spends time is depend the star to modify stage rates not mass-loss but seems RSG evolutionary Larger lifetime rate, each stellar mass-loss total RSG in the the by star influenced the strongly yields. chemical by the spent and stage lutionary assta rdce ymdl ihastandard a with rate. models loss lower by mass at predicted phase, from than RSG stars their masses WR from channel luminosity away possible low evolving stars of a formation also the is for mass-loss RSG Extreme rgntr o assa o s15 as low in as increase supernova masses be An to for stars lives Ib. causes progenitors or rate their mass-loss IIL/b end RSG type the will of that a loops supernovae stars as only blue Wolf-Rayet extended become form triggers to to and phase super- phase, supergiant red transition rates red as mass-loss the RSG lives with largest cause their simulations the but end Our (SNIIP), loss giants mass progenitor. standard SN a of modifies even determin- type and in evolution, the stellar role outcome dominant the a ing plays mass-loss RSG lesd fteHD hscudepantelack the with explain II-P could Type the of This in progenitors supernova HRD. explode observed to the of star of a lowering side for expect rotation), blue we and that mass rate the mass-loss RSG treme h oeswt nRGms-osrt increased rate mass-loss RSG an with models The • to contribute also rates mass-loss RSG Larger • uenv rgntradS type. SN and progenitor Supernova h ieieta h trsed nec evo- each in spends star the that lifetime The × 0 oes ute eraethe decrease further models) 10” M ⊙ NACDMS OSRTSI E UEGAT 173 SUPERGIANTS RED IN RATES LOSS MASS ENHANCED trbcmsaW star. WR a becomes star M ⊙ Increasing h time The wt ex- (with o vn15 even (or ilb netgtdi otcmn paper. forthcoming behavior a This in are investigated wind. phase be WR will RSG intense and the the by scenario in away an swept this ejections in massive explored loss that have mass found We strong driving way. perhaps in episodic 2010), role key Cantiello a & playing (Yoon lifetimes their of pho- being front. knots supernova the the by from shocked N show or and may toionized He and of change dynamics lines will wave strong This blast mo- the supernova the explosion. at and supernova the star the short, the of on- too near ment WR still is are the event clumps between supernova RSG+WR time the the and where set case, except one chemical progenitors, for circumstellar Wolf-Rayet the former the of the around is and medium turbulence material This stellar distri- species. turbulence the inhomogeneous an of The to bution leads de- bubble. bubble coupled the wind-blown inside their breaks the spreading and into shell, collides bris star RSG that Wolf-Rayet shell former the this third the case, in fast RSG supernova a the as develops Unlike explode and phase. WRs become to hls aoia oespeitta 15 that predict and models bubbles Canonical distinctive of evolutive gas, formation shells. the surrounding the the in to sculpts wind leading set wind the blown are and The quantities mass stage. lost Both dynam- of gas amount velocity. interstellar the the through on ics impact strong a has r esmsieta us(o o-oaigsimula- non-rotating (for models ours final tions). than the lose massive but usually less stage red are stars their RSG during higher mass their less their rates; despite of RSG mass-loss stars none the that WR RSG of find become They increase models their the stars. massive study for also mass-loss who et (Meynet 2015) authors stars. al. LBSG other or contradicts YSG a behavior as This progeni- explodes supernova them (WR) of blue none or tors, (RSG) red as lives problem”. “RSG a the is understand This to explosion. point the crucial before envelope H-rich their h S a-osrt efudta 18 that found we rate mas-loss increasing By RSG changes. the path when evolutionary deviates models stellar behavior the our canonical in this However, that found phase). we RSG distances the luminos- enclosed mechanical different during the ity and at on sur- (depending lying wind, star supergiants shell the slow from RSG red and massive as a dense by lives a their by rounded end will stars masses Ssaeplainlyusal uigapart a during unstable pulsationally are RSGs • their end models our all though even that Note h icmtla medium. circumstellar The M ≥ M 15 ⊙ − iheteems os r able are loss) mass extreme with 17 M ⊙ u otesrpo of strip-off the to due tla evolution Stellar M − ⊙ 23 stars M ⊙ © Copyright 2019: Instituto de Astronomía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/ia.01851101p.2019.55.02.04 t n ealct.W on htteeouinof evolution 23 the to veloc- that (15 rotational stars found We massive mass, for metallicity. initial evolution and same stellar ity the the modify with stage stars RSG the ing wraa,V 05 p,60 892 630, K. ApJ, Hucht, 2005, der V. Dwarkadas, van & H., Nieuwenhuijzen, C., 291 457, Jager, 329 ApJ, de 24, 1996, ARA&A, A. 1269 1986, D. 463, A. Clarke, MNRAS, Maeder, 2016, P. & B. C. Scott, Davies, Chiosi, & & R. J., E. Beasor, A. Sauval, N., Grevesse, M., Asplund, manuscript. which comments this valuable improved for referee the thank to would like Universidad authors from The México. Autónoma de support L.H- Nacional acknowledge and A.S. Sonora and de C. project Universidad acknowledges Franco, José of B.P-R. thank USO315002206 suggestions. also ad- and We their vice López-Cruz for BEC. Omar of Sánchez and Javier use the for star’s the in stage evolutionary life. by each affected of strongly duration also the unique, is not dynamics CSM is gas star of the progenitor appearance SN because of global type specific the a that for stellar the note initial We same with the vary mass. for even stage rates, pre-supernova mass-loss com- RSG the chemical at and field den- position of velocity distribution temperature, the to sity, that bound circumstellar so tightly evolution, their is stellar of it the because dynamics changes, gas also The medium rate. mass- RSG loss and velocity rotational metallicity, mass, ery . kt¨m . ao . ta.21,ESPub- EAS 2013, al. et H., Saio, Ekström, S., A&A, C., Georgy, 2012, al. et G., 701 Meynet, Ekström, 311, S., L8 C., ApJ, 538, Georgy, 1986, A&A, C. 2012, D. C. Abbott, Georgy, & B. D. R. Friend, Mochkovitch, & F., Daigne, F., Genet, 2012, J., al. J. Eldridge, et P., Eggenberger, C., Georgy, Ekström, S., HERN 174 .18,AA,7,259 72, A&AS, 1988, A. 481 47, ARA&A, 2009, iainSre,6,43 60, Series, lication A29 542, 186 367, MNRAS, 2006, A146 537, A&A, ehv hw htlre asls ae dur- rates mass-loss larger that shown have We h uhr hn .Lne n .C.Yoon S.-Ch. and Langer N. thank authors The 07 p,67 226 667, ApJ, 2007, . REFERENCES M ⊙ eed nteinitial the on depends ) NE-EVNE TAL. ET ANDEZ-CERVANTES ´ on .C atel,M 00 pL 1,L62 717, ApJL, 2010, M. Cantiello, & 460, S.-C. A&A, Yoon, & 2006, C. P., Norman, & Shapiro, N., Langer, J., S.-C., Yoon, Castor, 587 442, R., A&A, 2005, McCray, A. R., Koter, de 2001, Weaver, M. & L. S. G. J. J. Vink, H. Lamers, & A., Koter, de S., Loup, J. & Vink, A., A. Zijlstra, L., M.-R. Cioni, T., J. Loon, Van 753 Rens- 80, Van J., ApJS, Bever, 1992, Van E., L. Donder, M. De Norman, D., Vanbeveren, & M. 487 J. 52, Stone, ARA&A, 2014, Maund, N. & Smith, M., R. Crockett, J., L73 J. 630, Eldridge, J., ApJ, S. 2005, Smartt, M. Cuntz, & 342, P. Schröder, A, K. A& 1999, 820 C. 313, Chiosi, E. & ApJ, S. A., 1987, Bressan, Mink, T. B., de Salasnich, E. Vishniac, & & N., D. S. Ryu, Shore, D., C. Ott, 2005, M., 369 A. 8, Renzo, MSRSL, Heger, 1975, & D. Reimers, S., Yoon, N., Langer, J., Petrovic, 227 360, A&A, 2000, M. L. 2009, G. N. 134 Langer, J. 231, & Pérez-Rendón, H. A&A, G., Lamers, Garcia-Segura, 1990, & B., C. T. Jager, Nugis, de & H. P.Nieuwenhuijzen, Baklanov, I., S. 2015, Blinnikov, N., al. Tominaga, T., et Moriya, S., Ekström, S., A156 526, Chomienne, A&A, G., 2011, 2016, E. Meynet, al. Josselin, & et N. B., Mauron, Swinyard, B., 803 287, Sargent, A&A, M., 1994, Matsuura, G. Meynet, & 2005, A. al. Maeder, et G., A. K. Olsen, P., Massey, M., AJ, E. 1985, Levesque, P. Massey, & & N., M., Nichols, Langer, M., E., R. S. Humphreys, Woosley, L., C. Fryer, 528, ApJ, A., 2000, Heger, E. S. Woosley, & N., Langer, A., Heger, 1995, U. Wessolowski, & L., Koesterke, 226 W.-R., 65, Hamann, ZA, 1967, P. 559, Giannone, A&A, 2013, al. et D., Folini, R., Walder, C., Georgy, 199 377 218, ApJ, 1977, R. Moore, 574 369, A&A, 273 438, 443 A&A, 3, 2005, NewA, C. 1998, C. Loore, De & W., bergen, 1409 395, MNRAS, 2009, R. J. 131 A118 603, A, A& 2017, 247 435, A&A, 1249 506, A&A, 199 415, MNRAS, 2011, I. E. Sorkina, & V., A60 575, A&A, 2995 462, MNRAS, 973 628, ApJ, 101 90, 288 591, ApJ, 2003, H. D. Hartmann, 368 151 299, A&A, A69 © Copyright 2019: Instituto de Astronomía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/ia.01851101p.2019.55.02.04 .Snila:Drcio eea eCopt eTecnolog de Cómputo y de Santillán: Dirección General A. .Rd´ge-bra eatmnod F´ısica, Universid de Rodr´ıguez-Ibarra: Departamento C. ( Ciencias Doctorado Hernández-Cervantes: de L. Programa Astronom´ıa, Hernández-Cervantes: de Unive L. Instituto .Pee-edo:Dpraet eIvsiaio nF´ıs Investigación Pérez-Rendón: en de B. Departamento Astronom´ıa, Universidad de Garc´ıa-Segura: Instituto G. ainlAtooad México, México. Autónoma de Nacional México. México ([email protected]). oil,Snr,México. Sonora, mosillo, México. Californa, Baja 22800, P. C. Ensenada 024 DX ..050 México ([email protected] 04510, C.P. CDMX, 70-264, NACDMS OSRTSI E UEGAT 175 SUPERGIANTS RED IN RATES LOSS MASS ENHANCED sddNcoa Autónoma México, Postal Nacional de Apartado rsidad dd ooa po otl508 emslo Sonora, Hermosillo, 5-088. Postal Apdo. Sonora. de ad c,Uiesddd ooa po otl508 Her- 5-088. Postal Apdo. Sonora. de Universidad ica, ainlAtooad ´xc,Aatd otl877, Postal México, Autónoma Apartado de Nacional ´ sc) nvria eSnr,Hroil,Sonora, Hermosillo, Sonora, de F´ısica), Universidad ı sd nomcńyComunicación, Universidad Información y de ´ıas ).