1: \documentclass[preprint]{aastex}
2:
3: \newcommand\lum{$\log L/L_{\sun}$}
4: \def\kms{\relax \ifmmode {\ \rm km s}^{-1}\else \ km\ s$^{-1}$\fi}
5: \def\degree{\mbox{$^{\circ}$}}
6: \def\Mso{{M$_{\rm \odot}$}}
7: \def\mlr{\rm $M_\odot$~yr$^{-1}$}
8: \def\cm3{${\rm cm}^{-3}~$}
9: \def\etal{et al.\ }
10: \def\ha{H$\alpha~$}
11: \def\hb{H$\beta$}
12:
13: %\slugcomment{}
14:
15: \shorttitle{Kinematical analysis of BPNe}
16: \shortauthors{Dobrin\v{c}i\'{c}, et al.}
17:
18:
19: \usepackage{natbib}
20: \bibliographystyle{apj}
21:
22: \begin{document}
23:
24:
25: \title{Kinematical Analysis of a Sample of Bipolar Planetary Nebulae}
26:
27: \author{Martina Dobrin\v{c}i\'{c}}
28: \affil{Instituto de Astrofis\'{i}ca de Canarias, 38200 La Laguna,
29: Tenerife, Canary Islands, Spain; nina@iac.es}
30: \author{Eva Villaver\altaffilmark{1}}
31: \affil{Space Telescope Science Institute, 3700 San Martin Drive,
32: Baltimore, MD 21218, USA}
33: \author{Mart{\'{\i}}n A. Guerrero and}
34: \affil{Instituto de Astrof\'{\i}sica de Andaluc\'{\i}a,
35: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cient\'{i}ficas (CSIC), Apartado
36: Correos 3004, E-18080 Granada, Spain}
37: \author{Arturo Manchado\altaffilmark{2}}
38: \affil{Instituto de Astrofis\'{i}ca de Canarias, 38200 La Laguna,
39: Tenerife, Canary Islands, Spain}
40:
41: \altaffiltext{1}{Affiliated with the Hubble Space Telescope Space Department
42: of ESA}
43: \altaffiltext{2}{Affiliated Consejo Superior Investigaciones Cient\'{i}ficas,
44: Spain}
45: \begin{abstract}
46:
47: We present the kinematics of a sample of bipolar planetary nebulae (PNe)
48: which cover a wide range of observed morphologies and collimation degrees,
49: from bipolar PNe with a marked equatorial ring and wide lobes to highly
50: collimated objects.
51: We use an empirical model in order to derive the expansion velocity,
52: collimation degree, and inclination angle of the PN with respect to
53: the plane of the sky.
54: The equatorial expansion velocities measured in the
55: objects in our sample are always in the low to medium range (3--16\kms),
56: while their polar expansion velocities range from low to very high
57: (18--100\kms). None of the objects in our sample, even those that show
58: an extreme
59: collimation degree, seem to be (kinematically) younger than $\simeq10^3$ yr.
60: We compare our results with the state-of-the-art theoretical models for the
61: formation of bipolar PNe. We find good agreement between the
62: observed expansion velocities and numerical models that use magnetic
63: fields with stellar rotation as collimation mechanism.
64:
65: \end{abstract}
66:
67: \keywords{planetary nebulae: bipolar --- kinematic: planetary nebulae ---
68: individual(Hen\,2-428, K\,3-58, M\,2-48, Hen\,2-437, K\,3-46, M\,3-55,
69: WeSb\,4, M\,1-75, and M\,4-14}
70:
71: \section{INTRODUCTION}
72:
73: The interacting stellar winds model, initially proposed by
74: \citet{1978ApJ...219L.125K}, is now the widely accepted
75: scenario to explain planetary nebula (PN) formation.
76: However, it has not yet been unequivocally determined what is the
77: ultimate mechanism responsible for the collimation of the subclass
78: of PNe that show bipolar or highly collimated morphologies
79: (e.g. \citealt{2002ARA&A..40..439B}).
80: In the context of the interacting stellar winds model, the formation
81: of a bipolar PN requires a collimation mechanism. An isotropic fast wind
82: interacting with an aspherical mass loss structure formed during the top of
83: asymptotic giant branch (AGB) phase is the most commonly invoked scenario,
84: although
85: a collimated fast wind and a spherical AGB structure
86: has also been considered \citep{2003ApJ...586..319L}. Despite the fact that
87: models are able to reproduce a wide variety of observed morphologies, it is
88: still not clear how the aspherical mass-loss during the AGB (or the
89: axisymmetric fast wind) is produced.
90:
91: From the numerical standpoint, several variations and additions to
92: the interacting stellar wind model have been developed extensively
93: in the literature under the name of Generalized Interacting Stellar
94: Winds (GISW) model
95: \citep{B87,1989AJ.....97..462I,1989ApJ...339..268S,Fm94,1995MNRAS.273..401M,
96: 1992A&A...253..224I,1994A&A...290..915M}.
97: In the GISW model, a fast, tenuous wind from the central star expands
98: into a slow, dense wind whose geometry is assumed to be toroidal.
99: Magnetic fields have also been considered in
100: numerical models; the magnetized wind blown bubble model (MWBB) produces
101: an aspherical mass distribution by including toroidal magnetic fields that
102: constrain the outflow and produce jets in the polar direction
103: \citep{1999ApJ...517..767G}. In addition, the precession of an episodic jet has been used
104: to reproduce point-symmetric morphologies
105: \citep{1995ApJ...447L..49C,1998ApJ...508..696S,2001ApJ...557..256S,
106: 2000ApJ...544..336G}. Variations to the magnetic
107: approach to generate the AGB aspherical density structure include using a
108: stellar companion rapidly rotating around the
109: central star \citep{1983RMxAA...5..319C,Gf04}.
110: Although models accurately replicate the PNe shapes, the ultimate
111: question still remains: whether the magnetic
112: field, and/or the stellar rotation, required to develop an aspherical
113: AGB mass-loss can be sustained by a single star or if they
114: require the presence of a binary companion \citep{N07}.
115:
116: In order to distinguish between the physical processes that may play a
117: role in the process of shaping PNe, it is important to have a
118: detailed morphological classification scheme that includes the basic
119: morphological features \citep{1992A&AS...96...23S,1997A&A...318..256G},
120: and also allows for more detailed subclasses (e.g. the presence of
121: multiple shell PNe, multipolar axis) within each group
122: \citep{2000ASPC..199...17M}. We should proceed further in the classification and explore the
123: degree of collimation observed in bipolar objects, as this most likely
124: reflects the type(s) and strength(s) of the physical process(es)
125: involved. Finally, the kinematics of the nebula allows us to recover
126: its 3-D structure, as it gives access to the extra-dimension hidden
127: in direct imaging.
128:
129: In this paper, we present high resolution echelle long-slit spectroscopy of
130: a sample of 9 PNe from the \citet{1996ApJ...466L..95M} catalog that show
131: highly axisymmetric morphologies with different degrees of
132: collimation. Seven of the PNe in our sample are classified as bipolar
133: (K\,3-46, K\,3-58, Hen\,2-428, Hen\,2-437, M\,2-48,
134: M\,3-55, and WeSb\,4), and the other two (M\,1-75 and
135: M\,4-14) present quadrupolar morphologies that are
136: characterized by two pairs of bipolar lobes symmetric with
137: respect to two different axes.
138: Two objects in the sample, K\,3-58 and M\,4-14, show also point
139: symmetric features.
140: In \S2 we describe the observations and data reduction,
141: in \S3 we outline the procedure used in the analysis of the data, and
142: in \S4 we present the results of the kinematical fits performed to the objects in our sample.
143: Finally, the results are discussed in \S5 and the conclusions summarized in \S6.
144:
145: \section{OBSERVATIONS}
146: The images are from ``The IAC morphological Catalog of Northern Galactic
147: Planetary Nebulae'' \citep{Man96}. The long-slit echelle spectra were
148: obtained in July 1995 and August 1996
149: at the 4.2m William Herschel Telescope (WHT) using the Utrecht Echelle
150: Spectrograph (UES).
151: A Tektronix CCD detector 1024$\times$1024 pixels, with a spatial scale
152: of 0\farcs36~pixel$^{-1}$ was used.
153: The 79 line mm$^{-1}$ echelle was centered on the \ha emission line,
154: covering the spectral range from 6530 to 6600 {\AA} with a dispersion of 0.07
155: {\AA}~pixel$^{-1}$.
156: The slit width was set to 1\farcs1, providing
157: a spectral resolution of 0.14 {\AA} which corresponds to 6.5 \kms.
158: The unvignetted field of view is up to 160\arcsec~long.
159:
160: The spectra were reduced using
161: standard IRAF tasks for two-dimensional spectra.
162: The images were corrected for differential illumination of the slit using
163: sky flat fields obtained with the same configuration.
164: The wavelength scale and geometrical distortion were set by a
165: two-dimensional fit to a Th-Ar calibration lamp.
166: The wavelength calibration has an accuracy
167: better than 0.004 {\AA} (0.2 \kms).
168: The sky emission, which includes the geocoronal \ha line,
169: was removed by fitting and subtracting the background using a
170: low order polynomial function.
171:
172: The observing log is summarized in Table~\ref{observations} were the common
173: PN name is given in column (1), the PN~G number in column (2), the date of
174: the observations in column (3), the slit position angle (P.A.) in column
175: (4), and the exposure time in column (5).
176: The slit positions
177: go through the center of the nebulae, and their P.A.\ have been chosen
178: to cut across their main symmetry axis.
179: In most cases, spectra were obtained at two slit positions along
180: perpendicular directions.
181:
182:
183: \section{FITTING PROCEDURE}
184:
185: Bipolar PNe have typically hourglass or butterfly morphology,
186: meaning that they show two bipolar lobes connected by a
187: narrow waist.
188: The exact geometry can be very different from one bipolar PN to another.
189: These differences can basically be described by the aspect ratio of the
190: bipolar lobes and by the relative width of the waist with respect to
191: these bipolar lobes.
192: In addition, the inclination with respect to the plane of the sky affects
193: the apparent morphology, while the nebular kinematics
194: determines the observed expansion velocity.
195: In order to determine the 3D geometry and kinematics
196: of the bipolar PNe in our sample, we have used the empirical model
197: of \citet{1985A&A...148..274S} which was originally developed to
198: interpret the velocity field of the bipolar nebula around the
199: symbiotic star R~Aquarii.
200: In this model, hereafter referred to as the Solf \& Ulrich's model, the
201: velocity distribution along a plane going through the main nebular symmetry
202: axis is described by
203: \begin{equation} \label{solf}
204: v(\alpha) = v_{\rm e} + (v_{\rm p} - v_{\rm e}) \sin^{\gamma}(\arrowvert \alpha
205: \arrowvert)
206: \end{equation}
207: \noindent
208: where $\alpha$ is the latitudinal angle from the symmetry axis
209: of the nebula, $v_{e}$ is the equatorial velocity,
210: the minimum velocity along the nebular waist, $v_{p}$ is the polar velocity,
211: the maximum velocity of the farthest point from the center of the nebula,
212: and $\gamma$ is a geometrical factor that defines the hourglass geometry,
213: with $\gamma\approx1$ for round, bubble-like bipolar lobes, and
214: $\gamma>>1$ for very elongated bipolar lobes.
215:
216: One advantage of the Solf \& Ulrich's model
217: is the possibility to fit simultaneously
218: images and spectra of a given nebula in order to recover the
219: 3D geometry lost by projection effects.
220: As an illustration, we show in Fig.~\ref{fig4inc.ps} simulated
221: images and position-velocity (PV) diagrams of a nebula
222: obtained using Eq.~\ref{solf} for three different inclination
223: angles with respect to the plane of the sky.
224: From Fig.~\ref{fig4inc.ps}, it is clear
225: that the tilt of the simulated line strongly depends on the inclination angle
226: of the object.
227: Therefore, the shape of the PV diagram can be used to derive
228: the inclination angle which may only be assessed from the
229: aspect ratio of the central ring under the strong assumption that it
230: is circular.
231: Similarly, Fig.~\ref{fig3gamma.ps} shows simulated images and PV
232: diagrams for nebulae with different $\gamma$ factors.
233: In this case, we see that as $\gamma$ increases, the shape of the PV
234: diagram becomes narrower and the line tilt more apparent.
235: Fig.~\ref{fig3gamma.ps} also shows that it is not possible to determine
236: the inclination angle of the nebula from the projected shape of its
237: cylindrical narrow waist for $\gamma\ge9$.
238: However, it is readily seen that we can determine the inclination from
239: the line tilt in the PV diagram.
240:
241: The fitting procedure is an iterative process that is started by
242: modeling simulated images and PV diagrams with parameters that
243: are first order estimates.
244: The set of free parameters includes the polar and equatorial velocities,
245: $v_{\rm p}$ and $v_{\rm e}$, the 1 kpc kinematical age \footnote{
246: We use the term 1 kpc kinematical age throughout the text to refer
247: to the age obtained from the kinematical fitting assuming that the nebula is
248: located at a distance of 1 kpc. The 1 kpc kinematical age that is determined in the model
249: explicitly assumes that the lobes and the waist started to grow
250: simultaneously. The {\it distance-corrected kinematical age} is the 1 kpc age
251: corrected for the distance to the object.},
252: the inclination angle of the PN with respect to the plane of sky,
253: the $\gamma$-factor describing the shape of the nebula, and the radial
254: velocity.
255:
256: For the objects with a clearly visible central ring structure, we can
257: estimate both the equatorial expansion velocity and the radial velocity
258: just by measuring the velocity of the two brightness maxima at the
259: opposite sides of the ring;
260: the average of the two velocities gives us the radial velocity, while the
261: half difference of the velocities give us a lower limit of the equatorial
262: expansion velocity.
263: In this case, we can even assess the inclination of the nebula
264: as the axis ratio of the equatorial ring is a direct measurement of
265: the inclination angle if we assume that the ring is circular.
266: Then, the synthetic nebular image and PV diagram are plotted over the
267: H$\alpha$ or H$\alpha$+[N~{\sc ii}]
268: image and [N~{\sc ii}] spectra\footnote{
269: For the spectral fits, we use the [N~{\sc ii}] emission line
270: because of its relative brightness and small thermal broadening.},
271: respectively.
272: The initial estimates of the parameters are changed until we reach
273: an optimum fit when the synthetic PV diagram passes through the
274: intensity maxima in the spectral data and the simulated image traces tightly
275: the nebular geometry.
276:
277: We note that the geometry of the nebula can be reproduced with different
278: sets of values for the free parameters.
279: However, the degeneracy is broken by fitting
280: the geometry of the object together with the spectral line shape. The
281: accuracy of this iterative process is hard to quantify and it has to be
282: determined for each object individually.
283:
284: The parameters of the best fits are listed in Table~2 and
285: Figs.~\ref{double1} to \ref{double6} show the images and PV diagrams
286: overplotted with our best fits to the data. The velocities in the horizontal
287: axis of Figs.~\ref{double1} to
288: \ref{double6} have been converted to the LSR system.
289: The images are shown at the same scale as the spectra and have been rotated
290: to allow a direct comparison of the kinematical features along the spatial
291: direction.
292:
293:
294: \section{RESULTS: THE FITS TO THE IMAGES AND SPECTRA}
295:
296: In the following we provide a detailed description of both the data and the
297: best fit parameters obtained for each object.
298:
299: \noindent
300: {\bf Hen\,2-428}\\
301: Hen~2-428 (Fig. \ref{double1}) is a bipolar PN with a noticeable
302: equatorial ring and two open hourglass bipolar lobes of which the Northern
303: one is brighter and more extended.
304: The central star, unusually bright for bipolar PNe, has a known binary
305: companion \citep{2001A&A...377.1042R}.
306: For this nebula, we acquired
307: long-slit echelle spectra along
308: PA's, 77\degree\ and 157\degree\ (see Fig. \ref{double1}).
309: We note that the spectrum taken along P.A.~77\degree\ is off-center and
310: passes through the bright knots in the equatorial ring.
311: Therefore, the basic spectral fitting relies on the spectrum at
312: P.A.=157\degree\ which has adequate signal-to-noise ratio in the central region and the
313: brightest Northern lobe to constrain the fit.
314: From our best fit, we get an equatorial expansion velocity, $v_{\rm e}$, of
315: 16\,\kms, and a polar velocity, $v_{\rm p}$, of 80\,\kms.
316: A value of $v_{\rm e}$=15\,\kms\ was obtained for this object by
317: \citet{2001A&A...377.1042R}.
318:
319: \noindent
320: {\bf Hen\,2-437}\\
321: Hen\,2-437 (see Fig.\ref{double2} [Top]) is a very elongated PN
322: that does not show a central ring structure.
323: These morphological features make
324: very difficult to constrain its equatorial velocity and to
325: reproduce the spectral shape with the Solf \& Ulrich's model.
326: Since there is almost no tilt in the central maxima of the [N~{\sc ii}] echellogram
327: along PA~77\degree, we assume that the nebula has a small
328: inclination angle, lying almost in the plane of the sky.
329:
330: The geometry of the nebula is thus constrained by its morphology, and
331: the nebular contours can be reproduced relatively well by using an extremely
332: high $\gamma$ factor.
333: Given the difficulties in reproducing the spectral shape of Hen\,2-437,
334: it was not possible to derive firm results.
335: We give a set of the most likely values: the inclination angle is
336: small, within 2\degree, the polar velocity can be constrained to
337: be between 50 and 100 \kms, and the equatorial velocity
338: has to be small, of the order or lower than 10\kms.
339:
340: \noindent
341: {\bf K\,3-46}\\
342: K~3-46 (Fig.~\ref{double2} [Bottom]) has a well defined hourglass geometry
343: with a prominent equatorial ring and a marked waist.
344: For this nebula, we obtained very low expansion velocities
345: from the fit to the PV diagram, with $v_{\rm e}<3$\,\kms and
346: $v_{\rm p}\sim18$\,\kms. We note that it was not possible to find an optimal
347: fit, and
348: Fig.~\ref{double2} [Bottom] indeed suggests that our simulated fit
349: would require a larger central ring.
350: We also note that the kinematical age of K\,3-46 is of 24,000 yr
351: which is, as we will discuss later, the highest value obtained
352: in our sample.
353:
354: \noindent
355: {\bf K\,3-58} \\
356: At a first glance, K\,3-58 shows a classical bipolar morphology
357: (Fig.\ref{double3}), but its conspicuous ring is rather irregular
358: and the bipolar lobes show point-symmetry.
359: All these components are clearly detected in the [N~{\sc ii}]
360: echellogram obtained along P.A.~90\degree, with the brightest emission peaks
361: located on the equatorial ring.
362: Inside the main lobes, a secondary structure reaches approximately up
363: to one half of the length of the main lobes.
364: This secondary structure, that is clearly present in the spectral data
365: as bright emission peaks, may have originated from a later ejection to
366: the one that shaped the main lobes.
367: From the fit we obtain $v_{\rm p}$=38\kms\ and $v_{\rm e}$=12\kms.
368: Interestingly, the ratio between the equatorial and the polar velocities
369: is relatively small for this object.
370:
371:
372: \noindent
373: {\bf M\,1-75}\\
374: M\,1-75 (Fig.~\ref{double4})
375: is the first object classified as
376: quadrupolar \citep{1996ApJ...466L..95M}.
377: M\,1-75 with its complex morphology and extremely high He abundances
378: and N/O ratio is a candidate for a peculiar stellar evolutionary path
379: (Guerrero et al.\ 1996).
380: The nebula does not show a circular equatorial ring, but an
381: irregular annular structure at the central regions.
382: Since the equatorial ring is clearly not circular, it cannot be used
383: to assess the inclination angle of the nebula with respect to the plane of
384: the sky.
385:
386: The spectra for M\,1-75 was obtained along the main symmetry axis of the two
387: pairs of bipolar lobes, namely along P.A. 150\degree\ and 176\degree.
388: The former spectrum (Fig.~\ref{double4} [Top]) proved more useful
389: to guide our spectral fit, as it provides information for both pairs of
390: bipolar lobes. The data taken at the second position angle has been
391: used for control purposes only and is shown at the bottom of Fig.~\ref{double4}.
392:
393: The large lobes, along P.A. 150\degree, can be well fitted by
394: using $\gamma$=6 and an inclination angle of $87\degree$ as determined
395: from the spectra. Since these lobes seem to lie close to the plane of the
396: sky, a change in just 2\degree\ is very noticeable for such an elongated
397: shape, and the inclination angle can be constrained well. The expansion
398: velocities obtained for the largest pair of lobes are relatively low, with
399: $v_{\rm e}$=8\,\kms\ and $v_{\rm p}$=55\,\kms.
400:
401: The kinematics of the small lobes cannot be constrained as
402: accurately because their geometry in the image is not well defined.
403: We have assumed, for simplicity, that the small and large pairs of lobes
404: have
405: identical morphologies, and therefore we use the
406: $\gamma$ factor determined for the large lobes, $\gamma$=6.
407: The range of inclination angles we then obtain is between 60\degree\ and
408: 70\degree. Using an inclination angle of 65\degree, we obtain
409: expansion velocities of $v_{\rm p}$=45\,\kms\ and $v_{\rm e}$=12\,\kms.
410:
411:
412: \noindent
413: {\bf M\,2-48}\\
414: M\,2-48 (see Fig. \ref{double5} [Top]) does not show an equatorial ring,
415: but a pinched waist.
416: The pair of collimated lobes ends in a pair of bow-shocks that
417: were analyzed in detail by \cite{2002A&A...388..652L}.
418: The collimated morphology of the bipolar lobes of M\,2-48 requires
419: to use a high $\gamma$ factor ($\sim 8$). The narrow central waist of M\,2-48
420: does not allow to determine the
421: inclination angle from the geometry of the ring and, therefore, as
422: mentioned in \S3, we have to rely on the line tilt in the observed
423: PV diagram.
424: We reproduce well the geometry of both image and spectra by using an
425: inclination angle of $\sim80\degree$, with the North-Eastern lobe
426: receding from us.
427: We derive a radial velocity of 16\,\kms, a $v_{\rm e}$=10 \kms, and a
428: $v_{\rm p}$ of 100\,\kms\ which is the largest value in our sample.
429: The inclination angle and expansion velocities obtained are consistent
430: with the determination by \citet{2002A&A...388..652L}.
431:
432: \noindent
433: {\bf M\,3-55} \\
434: Despite being very faint, M\,3-55 displays a clear symmetric shape
435: (Fig.~\ref{double5} [Bottom]).
436: We obtain for M\,3-55 a low expansion velocity,
437: lower than 6\,\kms\ in the equator and about 19.5\,\kms\
438: along the polar directions.
439: M\,3-55 also has the lowest $\gamma$-factor of all the objects within
440: our sample which is not surprising given that it has a relatively
441: wide ring and round lobes.
442:
443: \noindent
444: {\bf M\,4-14} \\
445: \cite{1996ApJ...466L..95M} classified M\,4-14 (Fig.~\ref{double6}
446: [Top]) as a PN with quadrupolar morphology (based on imaging).
447: Here, we also remark the noticeable point-symmetry of its
448: bipolar lobes. To fit the cylindrical waist of M\,4-14, a high $\gamma$ factor
449: ($\gamma$=5) is needed. From this fit we obtain $v_{\rm e}=11$\,\kms\ and
450: $v_{\rm p}=$65\,\kms.
451:
452: M\,4-14 has a [N~{\sc ii}]/\ha ratio among the highest found in PNe,
453: indicative of a high nitrogen enhancement and high N/O ratio, that are
454: known to be correlated with bipolarity \citep{1983IAUS..103..233P}.
455: The chemical abundances, expansion velocity, and geometry factor
456: $\gamma$ make M\,1-14 and M\,1-75 very similar.
457:
458: \noindent
459: {\bf WeSb\,4}\\
460: WeSb\,4 is a large, somehow diluted object, that shows one of the
461: most irregular morphologies among the objects in the sample
462: (Fig.\,\ref{double6} [Bottom]).
463: The narrow-band image does not display a clear hourglass shape that,
464: on the other hand, is evident in the much deeper spectrum. In the spectrum
465: we detected weak, and more extended emission than in the
466: optical images.
467: From the image and [N~{\sc ii}] echellograms
468: along P. A. 69\arcdeg\ and {159\arcdeg}, we derive an inclination
469: angle of 50\degree, and a $v_{\rm e}$ of 14\,\kms, and $v_{\rm p}$ of
470: 95\,\kms\. WeSb\,4 has one the highest $v_{\rm p}$ in our sample.
471:
472: \section{DISCUSSION}
473:
474: We summarize in Table~\ref{results} the parameters obtained from the
475: best fits to the data. Column (2) gives
476: the size of the lobes and waist as measured from the maximum extension of
477: the 3$\sigma$ contour levels extracted from the images obtained by Manchado
478: et al. (1996). The polar and equatorial expansion velocities are given in column (3) and
479: (4), respectively, the 1~kpc kinematical age is given in column (5),
480: the inclination angle in column (6), and the $\gamma$ factor in column
481: (7). Below the values obtained from our best fit (when the synthetic PV
482: diagram passes through the intensity maxima in the spectral data and the
483: simulated image traces tightly the nebular geometry), we have listed the range
484: of values that still provide reasonable matches (when we can still provide a fit
485: that passes through the main features) to the images and
486: spectra in order to provide an estimate of the uncertainties in our
487: fits.
488:
489: The equatorial velocities
490: range from very low values (3\,\kms~for K\,3-46) to typical
491: expansion velocities (16\,\kms~for Hen\,2-428).
492: None of the objects in our sample has high, $\sim$40\kms, equatorial
493: expansion velocities such as the
494: ones found by \citet{1993A&A...278..247C} in the bipolar PNe CTS\,1
495: and Hen\,2-84.
496: The polar velocities cover the whole range, from very low (18\kms\ in K\,3-46) to medium/high
497: (100\kms\ in M\,2-48).
498:
499: The PNe analyzed in this paper can be classified into three different
500: groups, according to their morphology and kinematics.
501: The first group, formed by Hen\,2-428, K\,3-46, K\,3-58, M\,3-55, and
502: M\,4-14 consists of bipolar PNe with notable central rings.
503: For these objects, we have a direct estimate of their equatorial
504: expansion velocities measured from the spectral emission of the
505: ring (as it was described in \S3).
506: A second group is formed by the highly collimated objects
507: Hen\,2-437 and M\,2-48 having the highest polar expansions and elongated
508: bipolar morphology typical mostly for younger PNe.
509: Finally, the third group is formed by the somewhat deteriorated
510: objects with
511: poorly defined morphologies; M\,1-75 and WeSb\,4.
512: The PNe belonging to this third group are expected to be more evolved
513: since they have the highest kinematical ages.
514: Although K\,3-46 also has a large kinematical age, we did not include
515: it in this group of evolved objects.
516: We suspect that its
517: large kinematical age is probably a consequence of deceleration in the course of its
518: evolution.
519:
520:
521: \subsection{PN Ages}
522:
523: Our spatio-kinematical study provides a direct estimate of the
524: kinematical age that can be used to assess the nebular age.
525: It is important to keep in mind in this comparison the very likely
526: possibility of acceleration or deceleration of the nebular material
527: due to the complex interaction between the ionization and dynamics
528: of the shell driven by the hot bubble.
529: As a result, kinematical ages often do not match the age of the central
530: stars, as shown theoretically by \cite{2002ApJ...581.1204V}, who proved
531: that kinematical ages overestimate the age in young nebulae and
532: underestimate it for evolved ones. Moreover, the definition of PN age is a rather
533: tricky concept. It can be considered that a PN is born when the central star
534: supplies enough photons capable of ionizing the nebula. However, the kinematical
535: age is a dynamical concept that tell us when the gas started moving. At the
536: time of nebular ionization the gas is already moving
537: and the fotoionization itself is expected to change the gas dynamics. In
538: addition, the gas velocity as
539: inferred from models \cite{2002ApJ...581.1204V} is not constant. If the gas
540: has been accelerated the kinematical ages are underestimated and the opposite
541: is true if the gas has suffered deceleration.
542: The age obtained in Table~2 is one of the
543: parameters of the fitting and it is obtained under very simplistic
544: assumptions, namely that the lobes and the waist were formed at the same
545: time and they have been moving at a constant velocity since then. Therefore, the ages
546: determined this way are just an order of magnitude approximation to the time
547: since the formation of the nebula (both dynamically and from
548: ionization).
549:
550: The kinematical model assumes the same age for the
551: lobes and the waist of a nebula. As a consequence the larger lobes always
552: have larger expansion velocities. Note that under this simplistic assumption we are
553: excluding the possibility that the lobes were formed before the waist.
554:
555: We provide in Table~\ref{results}
556: the 1~kpc kinematical ages.
557: Here, we have estimated the ``real'' ages by multiplying the 1~kpc
558: kinematical ages derived from our fits by the individual distances.
559: It is well known that PNe distances
560: are poorly determined, however they are a necessary parameter
561: for the age estimation. It is important to note that the ages determined in
562: Table~3 are the ones given in Table~2 but scaled to the distance to the nebula.
563: We have used the distances obtained
564: from the Galactic rotation curves of Burton (1974) when possible,
565: as these distances are considered to be the most reliable.
566: In some cases, our data was out of the range covered by the rotational
567: curves, and therefore the distance estimate was not viable through this
568: method.
569: This also applies for M\,2-48, for which this method gives ambiguous results,
570: and for M\,1-75, for which the distance derived from this method (5.4 Kpc) is
571: unreasonable and gives a too long kinematic age for a PN.
572: When it was not possible to estimate the distance from the rotational curves, we have used the
573: statistical distances from Cahn et al (1991) when available.
574: Otherwise we have used the distance from \citet{1971ApJS...22..319C}
575: or, as a last resort, an average of available distances in the literature.
576: We note that the values given by \citet{1984A&AS...55..253M} are
577: systematically lower than the values given by others.
578: Therefore, Maciel's distances have not been used for
579: the averages.
580:
581: In Table \ref{ages},
582: column (1) gives the PN name,
583: column (2) the radial velocity,
584: column (3) the kinematic age at 1~kpc obtained from the model fitting,
585: column (4)
586: the statistical distances taken from \citet{1992secg.book.....A},
587: column (5) the distances estimated from the galactic rotation curve
588: (Burton 1974), and column (6) the distance used to estimate the kinematical age which is given in
589: column (7).
590:
591: The distance-corrected kinematical ages range between $\sim$5,000 and
592: $\sim$20,000\,yr.
593: Intuitively, it is expected that younger PNe would have better defined
594: morphologies than the older ones.
595: This appears to be the case for almost all the objects analyzed.
596: Hen\,2-428, M\,2-48, M\,3-55, and M\,4-14 are relatively young,
597: with kinematical ages $\sim$5,000 \,yr, and all have
598: well defined morphologies.
599: M\,1-75 and especially WeSb\,4 are older, with kinematical ages
600: $\sim$10,000 \,yr, and their morphologies are not sharp.
601:
602: In old objects such as WeSb \,4, ionization-driven instabilities
603: which act on a timescale comparable to the kinematical age of the
604: nebula might be responsible for the development of irregular shapes
605: \citep{1995ApJ...447L..49C}.
606:
607: There are two objects in our sample for which a relation between their age
608: and their morphology is not
609: straightforward.
610: K\,3-46, the oldest PN in our sample ($\sim$20,000 yr), and K\,3-58, a
611: relatively old PN, have sharp morphologies.
612: One possibility is that the distances used are wrong, which would not
613: be a surprise given the high uncertainties involved in PN distance
614: determinations.
615: Another possibility for K\,3-46 is that it has experienced deceleration,
616: in which case the age given in the Table~3 would be an underestimation
617: of the real age of the object.
618:
619: Adopting
620: a distance of 1\,kpc to Hen 2-437, this is the youngest
621: PN in our sample, with a kinematical age between 750 and 2000\,yr.
622: This age is consistent with those of high collimated PNe
623: \citep{2003ApJ...586..319L}.
624:
625: \subsection{Comparison with Numerical Models}
626:
627: Quite often the comparison between theoretical models and
628: observed objects is based only on a morphological match since this
629: the only available information in most cases.
630: From our experience in matching published models to data, we have
631: found that it is possible to find models that can simulate the
632: morphology of a PN but with velocities different to those
633: measured; in this case we need to know whether the model can
634: simultaneously reproduce the morphology and kinematical
635: properties that, in the case of bipolar PNe, are parameterized by the
636: expansion velocity, the physical nebular size, and geometry (the
637: $\gamma$ factor). Note that, in the model of Solf \& Ulrich, the expansion of a
638: bipolar PN is homologous, i.e., in its expansion, the nebula keeps
639: its proportions, as well as the ratio between the polar and equatorial
640: velocities.
641:
642: Only the models by \citet{1999ApJ...517..767G} and \citet{2000ApJ...544..336G}
643: provide enough information on the evolution of the morphology
644: for different collimation parameters for us to compare to our data.
645: In the \citet{1999ApJ...517..767G} models (hereafter, GS99), the
646: velocity ratio between the equator and the poles depends on the shaping
647: mechanism, while the absolute values of the velocities
648: depend on the initial velocity of the slow wind.
649: Therefore, when evaluating the ability of the theoretical models to match our
650: observations, we are more interested in comparing the nebular shapes
651: and velocity ratios rather than the absolute velocity values.
652:
653: To compare the models with the observations, we need a parameter that can
654: quantify the degree of collimation. The $\gamma$ factor in the Solf \&
655: Ulrich geometrical model is an appropriate parameter to account for the degree
656: of collimation observed. The shape in the GS99 models
657: is controled using different values of $\sigma$ (the ratio of the magnetic
658: to the kinetic energy density in the fast wind)
659: and $\Omega$ (ratio of the stellar rotational velocity to the
660: critical breakup velocity).
661:
662: In order to allow a better comparison between
663: the models and the parameters derived from the observations we have determined
664: the Solf \& Ulrich's parameters ($\gamma$ factor) that
665: correspong to the GS99 simulated cases. We find that low $\sigma$ and $\Omega$ values
666: produce shapes that are similar to those generated by
667: low values of $\gamma$ ($\gamma<1$) (see Fig.\ 5 in GS99).
668: The GS99 cases with low $\sigma$ and high $\Omega$ values are equivalent
669: to medium $\gamma$ values,
670: while high $\sigma$ and high $\Omega$ values result in very collimated
671: objects, with high $\gamma$ values.
672:
673: For categories J--K in GS99, the morphology develops using only rapid star
674: rotation rates, while for categories Q--V the additional help of magnetic fields
675: is required. Hen\,2-428, K\,3-46, and M\,3-55, which have the lowest $\gamma$
676: (1, 0.9, 0.6, respectively) factors in our group, compare
677: well to the categories J--K of GS99.
678: Both the observed objects and the corresponding theoretical simulations
679: are reproduced with $\gamma$ factors around 1 and, although our PNe do
680: not have the same absolute expansion velocities as the GS99
681: cases, this is not a critical issue
682: as lower expansion velocities in GS99 magneto-hydrodynamic
683: (MHD) simulations could be obtained by choosing lower initial velocities for the slow
684: wind. In fact, the ratio of expansion velocities for K\,3-46 and Hen\,2-428
685: situates them in categories Q--R, but their $\gamma$ factor and
686: morphology place them into the J--K group.
687: It must be noticed that the central star of Hen\,2-428 is in a binary
688: system (Rodr\'\i guez et al.\ 2001).
689: It is tantalizing to consider that the presence of the binary
690: companion may have influenced the nebular shaping, resulting
691: in a bipolar PN with enhanced polar velocities with respect to
692: the bipolar PN that would have been collimated by a single,
693: rotating star.
694:
695:
696: In general, the expansion velocities in GS99 are rather high
697: compared to those observed in our sample. However, M\,1-75, M\,4-14,
698: and WeSb\,4 have similar expansion velocity ratios (i.e. equatorial to polar
699: expansion velocity) and morphologies as the PNe in categories Q--R in
700: GS99. These 3 PNe have $\gamma$ factors between 5 and 6. In fact,
701: M\,4-14 even coincides in its kinematical age and
702: value of its expansion velocities with the example given by GS99.
703:
704: M\,2-48 is more collimated than the previous objects and fits categories
705: S--T, while Hen\,2-437 would go even higher, to the class U in GS99.
706: Such highly collimated objects, with lobes of wedge-shaped polar
707: regions, are not well reproduced by the Solf \& Ulrich's model and therefore
708: our derived velocities carry a large uncertainty.
709:
710: Careful inspection of the images of M 2-48 and Hen 2-437, which have
711: the highest collimation factors in our sample, reveals traces of
712: a dusty disk in the equatorial region, a feature not visible in the
713: low-$\gamma$ objects.
714: Similar features were already detected in various young, highly collimated
715: objects (e.g. \citealt{2006ApJ...653.1241S}) and suggest the existence
716: of thick equatorial disks.
717:
718: Finally, we are left with K\,3-58 a rather peculiar object since it has
719: an expansion ratio and $\gamma$ factor that lie outside of the cases
720: modeled by GS99.
721: K\,3-58 presents a cylindrical equatorial ring which is wider than the
722: one obtained for the J--L categories of GS99, and it shows lobes
723: that are rounder than those in the R--V classes. The
724: best fit to the morphology and kinematics of this object can be found in
725: Fig.\,5 of \citet{2000ApJ...544..336G}.
726: The nebula simulated there has almost identical expansion velocities
727: to those we measure. In this model, the point-symmetric shape is accomplished
728: with a tilt between the
729: magnetic collimation axis and the bipolar wind outflow.
730:
731: To summarize, we find that objects with low $\gamma$ values
732: generally compare well to the GS99 models which are mainly
733: shaped by stellar rotation.
734: The possible exceptions are PNe formed in binary systems that will present
735: low $\gamma$ but somewhat higher expansion velocities (Hen\,2-428),
736: while high $\gamma$ objects show high polar expansions and agree well with
737: the simulations obtained using strong magnetic fields and high rotational velocities.
738:
739: \section{CONCLUSIONS}
740:
741: Although all of our objects are bipolar/quadrupolar, they differ
742: significantly in their morphology and kinematics.
743: Morphologies range from
744: bubble-lobed (Hen\,2-428) to highly collimated (Hen\,2-437) PNe.
745: The sharpness of the nebular shapes also varies from well defined
746: objects to these with somewhat deteriorated shapes (WeSb\,4).
747: This variety is reflected in the range of geometrical $\gamma$ factors
748: (from 0.6 to 20) which might differentiate between the physical processes that
749: originate them.
750:
751: We find that the objects from our sample present as well a variety of
752: expansion velocities, from low (3\kms) to medium (16\kms) equatorial
753: expansions, and from low (18\kms) to medium/high (100\kms) polar
754: expansion velocities. The disagreement between the spectral data of K\,3-46,
755: hardly revealing signs of equatorial expansion, and its image, showing a wide
756: central ring indicate the possibility of deceleration in this nebula.
757: This deceleration may reveal the interaction of the nebular material
758: with a dense equatorial disk.
759:
760: The estimates of kinematical ages, derived using distances inferred from the
761: Galactic rotation curve or otherwise statistical distances, vary from middle age to old with possible
762: significant errors originated from distance errors and non-uniform
763: expansions.
764: The data agree rather well with the state-of-the-art theory for PN
765: collimation, however, we cannot exclude the origin of the possible shaping mechanisms i.e.
766: whether rapid star rotation, and/or magnetic fields are originated by single or binary systems.
767: We suggest that the $\gamma$ factor used to fit the Solf \& Ulrich's model
768: could roughly indicate which shaping process is actually
769: at work.
770:
771: \textbf{Acknowledgments:}
772: M.D. thanks to Katrina Exter for her corrections and useful discussions.
773: The 4.2 m William Herschel Telescope and the 2.5 m Nordic Optical Telescope
774: are operated on the island of La Palma by the Royal Greenwich Observatory and
775: the Lund Observatory, respectively, at the Spanish Observatorio del Roque de
776: los Muchachos of the Instituto de Astrof\'{\i}sica de Canarias. M. D. and
777: A. M. acknowledge support from grant \emph{AYA2004-3136} and M.A.G. from
778: grant \emph{AYA2005-01495} from the Spanish Ministerio de Educaci\'on y Ciencia.
779:
780:
781:
782: \begin{thebibliography}{}
783:
784: \bibitem[Acker(1978)]{1978A&AS...33..367A} Acker, A.\ 1978, \aaps, 33, 367
785:
786: \bibitem[Acker et al.(1992)]{1992secg.book.....A} Acker, A., Marcout, J.,
787: Ochsenbein, F., Stenholm, B., \& Tylenda, R.\ 1992, Garching: European
788: Southern Observatory, 1992
789:
790: \bibitem[Amnuel et al.(1984)]{1984Ap&SS.107...19A} Amnuel, P.~R., Guseinov,
791: O.~K., Novruzova, K.~I., \& Rustamov, I.~S.\ 1984, \apss, 107, 19
792:
793: \bibitem[Balick(1987)]{B87} Balick, B.\ 1987, \aj, 94, 671
794:
795: \bibitem[Balick et al.(1987)]{B} Balick, B., Preston,
796: H.~L., \& Icke, V.\ 1987, \aj, 94, 1641
797:
798: \bibitem[Balick \& Frank(2002)]{2002ARA&A..40..439B} Balick, B., \&
799: Frank, A.\ 2002, \araa, 40, 439
800:
801:
802:
803: \bibitem[Burton(1974)]{}Burton, W.B. (1974) 'The large scale distribution of
804: neutral hydrogen', in Galactic and extragalactic radio astronomy,
805: eds. G. Verschuur and K.I. Kelleman, Springer Verlag
806:
807: \bibitem[Cahn \& Kaler(1971)]{1971ApJS...22..319C} Cahn, J.~H., \& Kaler,
808: J.~B.\ 1971, \apjs, 22, 319
809:
810: \bibitem[Cahn(1976)]{1976AJ.....81..407C} Cahn, J.~H.\ 1976, \aj, 81, 407
811:
812: \bibitem[Cahn et al.(1992)]{Cks92} Cahn, J.~H., Kaler, J.~B.,
813: \& Stanghellini, L.\ 1992, \aaps, 94, 399
814:
815: \bibitem[Calvet \& Peimbert(1983)]{1983RMxAA...5..319C} Calvet, N., \&
816: Peimbert, M.\ 1983, Revista Mexicana de Astronomia y Astrofisica, 5, 319
817:
818: \bibitem[Chevalier \& Luo(1994)]{1994ApJ...421..225C} Chevalier, R.~A., \&
819: Luo, D.\ 1994, \apj, 421, 225
820:
821: \bibitem[Cliffe et al.(1995)]{1995ApJ...447L..49C} Cliffe, J.~A., Frank,
822: A., Livio, M., \& Jones, T.~W.\ 1995, \apjl, 447, L49
823:
824: \bibitem[Corradi \& Schwarz(1993)]{1993A&A...278..247C} Corradi, R.~L.~M.,
825: \& Schwarz, H.~E.\ 1993, \aap, 278, 247
826:
827: \bibitem[Daub(1982)]{1982ApJ...260..612D} Daub, C.~T.\ 1982, \apj, 260, 612
828:
829:
830: \bibitem[Frank \& Mellema(1994)]{Fm94} Frank, A., \&
831: Mellema, G.\ 1994, \apj, 430, 800
832:
833:
834: \bibitem[Frank(1996)]{1996AAS...188.5002F}
835: Frank, A.\ 1996, Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society, 28, 899
836:
837: \bibitem[Garc{\'{\i}}a-Arredondo \& Frank(2004)]{Gf04}
838: Garc{\'{\i}}a-Arredondo, F., \& Frank, A.\ 2004, \apj, 600, 992
839:
840: \bibitem[Garc{\'{\i}}a-Segura et al.(1999)]{1999ApJ...517..767G}
841: Garc{\'{\i}}a-Segura, G., Langer, N., R{\' o}{\. z}yczka, M., \& Franco,
842: J.\ 1999, \apj, 517, 767
843:
844: \bibitem[Garc{\'{\i}}a-Segura \& L{\'o}pez(2000)]{2000ApJ...544..336G}
845: Garc{\'{\i}}a-Segura, G., \& L{\'o}pez, J.~A.\ 2000, \apj, 544, 336
846:
847: \bibitem[Gorny et al.(1997)]{1997A&A...318..256G} Gorny, S.~K., Stasinska, G., \& Tylenda, R.\ 1997, \aap, 318, 256
848:
849: \bibitem[Icke et al.(1989)]{1989AJ.....97..462I} Icke, V., Preston, H.~L.,
850: \& Balick, B.\ 1989, \aj, 97, 462
851:
852: \bibitem[Icke et al.(1992)]{1992A&A...253..224I} Icke, V., Balick, B., \&
853: Frank, A.\ 1992, \aap, 253, 224
854:
855:
856: \bibitem[Jordan et al.(2005)]{2005A&A...432..273J} Jordan, S., Werner, K.,
857: \& O'Toole, S.~J.\ 2005, \aap, 432, 273
858:
859: \bibitem[Kahn \& West(1985)]{1985MNRAS.212..837K} Kahn, F.~D., \& West,
860: K.~A.\ 1985, \mnras, 212, 837
861:
862: \bibitem[Kwok et al.(1978)]{1978ApJ...219L.125K} Kwok, S., Burton, C.~R.,
863: \& Fitzgerald, P.~M.\ 1978, \apjl, 219, L125
864:
865: \bibitem[Lee \& Sahai(2003)]{2003ApJ...586..319L} Lee, C.-F., \& Sahai, R.\
866: 2003, \apj, 586, 319
867:
868: \bibitem[L{\' o}pez-Mart{\'{\i}}n et al.(2002)]{2002A&A...388..652L} L{\'
869: o}pez-Mart{\'{\i}}n, L., et al.\ 2002, \aap, 388, 652
870:
871: \bibitem[Lopez et al.(1997)]{1997IAUS..180..255L} Lopez, J.~A., Meaburn,
872: J., Bryce, M., \& Rodriguez, L.~F.\ 1997, IAU Symp.~180: Planetary Nebulae,
873: 180, 255
874:
875: \bibitem[Maciel(1984)]{1984A&AS...55..253M} Maciel, W.~J.\ 1984, \aaps, 55,
876: 253
877:
878: \bibitem[Maciel \& Dutra(1992)]{1992A&A...262..271M} Maciel, W.~J., \&
879: Dutra, C.~M.\ 1992, \aap, 262, 271
880:
881: \bibitem[Manchado et al.(1996)]{1996ApJ...466L..95M} Manchado, A.,
882: Stanghellini, L., \& Guerrero, M.~A.\ 1996, \apjl, 466, L95
883: \bibitem[Manchado et al.(1996)]{Man96} Manchado, A.,
884: Guerrero, M.~A., Stanghellini, L., \& Serra-Ricart, M.\ 1996, The IAC
885: morphological catalog of northern Galactic planetary nebulae, Publisher: La
886: Laguna, Spain: Instituto de Astrofisica de Canarias (IAC), 1996, Foreword
887: by Stuart R.~Pottasch, ISBN: 8492180609
888: \bibitem[Manchado et al.(2000)]{2000ASPC..199...17M} Manchado, A.,
889: Villaver, E., Stanghellini, L., \& Guerrero, M.~A.\ 2000, ASP
890: Conf.~Ser.~199: Asymmetrical Planetary Nebulae II: From Origins to Microstructures, 199, 17
891:
892: \bibitem[Mellema(1994)]{1994A&A...290..915M} Mellema, G.\ 1994, \aap, 290,
893: 915
894:
895: \bibitem[Mellema \& Frank(1995)]{1995MNRAS.273..401M} Mellema, G., \&
896: Frank, A.\ 1995, \mnras, 273, 401
897:
898: \bibitem[Nordhaus et al.(2007)]{N07} Nordhaus, J.,
899: Blackman, E.~G., \& Frank, A.\ 2007, \mnras, 376, 599
900:
901: \bibitem[Peimbert \& Torres-Peimbert(1983)]{1983IAUS..103..233P} Peimbert,
902: M., \& Torres-Peimbert, S.\ 1983, IAU Symp.~103: Planetary Nebulae, 103,
903: 233
904:
905: \bibitem[Rodr{\'{\i}}guez et al.(2001)]{2001A&A...377.1042R}
906: Rodr{\'{\i}}guez, M., Corradi, R.~L.~M., \& Mampaso, A.\ 2001, \aap, 377,
907: 1042
908:
909: \bibitem[Sabbadin et al.(2004)]{2004A&A...416..955S} Sabbadin, F., Turatto,
910: M., Cappellaro, E., Benetti, S., \& Ragazzoni, R.\ 2004, \aap, 416, 955
911:
912: \bibitem[Sahai et al.(2006)]{2006ApJ...653.1241S} Sahai, R., Young, K.,
913: Patel, N.~A., S{\'a}nchez Contreras, C., \& Morris, M.\ 2006, \apj, 653,
914: 1241
915:
916: \bibitem[Schwarz et al.(1992)]{1992A&AS...96...23S} Schwarz, H.~E.,
917: Corradi, R.~L.~M., \& Melnick, J.\ 1992, \aaps, 96, 23
918:
919: \bibitem[Soker \& Livio(1989)]{1989ApJ...339..268S} Soker, N., \& Livio,
920: M.\ 1989, \apj, 339, 268
921:
922: \bibitem[Soker \& Rappaport(2001)]{2001ApJ...557..256S} Soker, N., \&
923: Rappaport, S.\ 2001, \apj, 557, 256
924:
925: \bibitem[Solf \& Ulrich(1985)]{1985A&A...148..274S} Solf, J., \& Ulrich,
926: H.\ 1985, \aap, 148, 274
927:
928: \bibitem[Shane \& Bieger-Smith(1966)]{1966BAN....18..263S} Shane, W.~W., \&
929: Bieger-Smith, G.~P.\ 1966, \bain, 18, 263
930:
931: \bibitem[Steffen \& L{\' o}pez(1998)]{1998ApJ...508..696S} Steffen, W., \&
932: L{\' o}pez, J.~A.\ 1998, \apj, 508, 696
933:
934: \bibitem[Villaver et al.(2002)]{2002ApJ...581.1204V} Villaver, E.,
935: Manchado, A., \& Garc{\'{\i}}a-Segura, G.\ 2002, \apj, 581, 1204
936:
937:
938: \end{thebibliography}
939:
940:
941: \clearpage
942:
943: \begin{figure}
944: % \plotone{fig4inc2.ps}
945: \caption[1]{
946: Synthetic images and
947: position-velocity (PV) diagrams for different inclination
948: angles for a bipolar PN with $\gamma$=1.}
949: \label{fig4inc.ps}
950: \end{figure}
951:
952: % \clearpage
953:
954:
955: \begin{figure}
956: % \plotone{fig3gamma2.ps}
957: \caption[2]{ Synthetic images and position-velocity (PV) diagrams for a bipolar PN at an
958: inclination angle of 30\degree\ with different values of $\gamma$.}
959: \label{fig3gamma.ps}
960: \end{figure}
961:
962: % \clearpage
963:
964:
965: \begin{figure}
966: \centering
967: % \includegraphics[width=11.5cm,width=10.5cm,angle=270]{fig6HE2_428_167.cps}
968: % \includegraphics[width=11.5cm,width=10.5cm,angle=270]{fig7HE2_428_77.cps}
969: \protect
970: \caption[ ]{Kinematical fitting of the Hen\,2-428 for a slit position angle
971: of 167\degree\ (\emph{top}) and for a slit position angle of 77\degree\
972: (\emph{bottom}).
973: The narrow-band image, extracted from the \citet{1996ApJ...466L..95M}
974: catalogue, has been rotated to the position angle of the slits along which
975: the spectra were obtained.
976: The angular scale of images and spectra have been matched to allow an easy
977: comparison of images and spectra.
978: Also note that the PV diagrams have been corrected for the local standard
979: of rest (LSR) velocity.
980: In order to display the complete structure of the spectral line, the
981: contrast of the spectra is adjusted, so the faintest parts can be seen.
982: }
983: \label{double1}
984: \end{figure}
985:
986: % \clearpage
987:
988:
989: \begin{figure}
990: \centering
991: % \includegraphics[width=11.5cm,width=10.5cm,angle=270]{fig17HE2_437_77.cps}
992: % \includegraphics[width=11.5cm,width=10.5cm,angle=270]{fig18K3_46_106.cps}
993: \protect
994: \caption[ ]{
995: Same as Fig.~3 for Hen\,2-437 for a slit position angle of 77\degree\
996: (\emph{top}) and K\,3-46 for a slit position angle of 106\degree\
997: (\emph{bottom}).
998: In the later, the central part of the spectral line is shown
999: saturated, and white contours have been used to show levels of the
1000: same intensity.}
1001: \label{double2}
1002: \end{figure}
1003:
1004: % \clearpage
1005:
1006: \begin{figure}
1007: \centering
1008: % \includegraphics[width=11.5cm,width=10.5cm,angle=270]{fig14K3_58_90.cps}
1009: % \includegraphics[width=11.5cm,width=10.5cm,angle=270]{fig15K3_58_14.cps}
1010: \protect
1011: \caption[ ]{
1012: Same as Fig.~3 for K\,3-58 for a slit position angle of 90\arcdeg\
1013: (\emph{top}) and for a slit position angle of 14\arcdeg\ (\emph{bottom}).
1014: As for K\,3-46, white contours are used for the brightest regions
1015: of the spectral line.
1016: }
1017: \label{double3}
1018: \end{figure}
1019:
1020: % \clearpage
1021:
1022: \begin{figure}
1023: \centering
1024: % \includegraphics[width=11.5cm,width=10.5cm,angle=270]{fig10M1_75_150AB.cps}
1025: % \includegraphics[width=11.5cm,width=10.5cm,angle=270]{fig11M1_75_176AB.cps}
1026: \protect
1027: \caption[ ]{
1028: Same as Fig.~3 for M\,1-75 for a slit position angle of 150\arcdeg\
1029: (\emph{top}) and for a slit position angle of 176\arcdeg\ (\emph{bottom}).
1030: As for K\,3-46, white contours are used for the brightest regions
1031: of the spectral line. }
1032: \label{double4}
1033: \end{figure}
1034:
1035: % \clearpage
1036:
1037: \begin{figure}
1038: \centering
1039: % \includegraphics[width=11.5cm,width=10.5cm,angle=270]{fig16M2_48_66.cps}
1040: % \includegraphics[width=11.5cm,width=10.5cm,angle=270]{fig19M3_55_57.cps}
1041: \protect
1042: \caption[ ]{
1043: Same as Fig.~3 for M\,2-48 for a slit position angle of 66\arcdeg\
1044: (\emph{top}) and M\,3-55 for a slit position angle of 57\arcdeg\
1045: (\emph{bottom}).
1046: As for K\,3-46, white contours are used for the brightest regions
1047: of the spectral line. }
1048: \label{double5}
1049: \end{figure}
1050:
1051: % \clearpage
1052:
1053:
1054: \begin{figure}
1055: \centering
1056: % \includegraphics[width=11.5cm,width=10.5cm,angle=270]{fig12M4_14_40.cps}
1057: % \includegraphics[width=11.5cm,width=10.5cm,angle=270]{fig20WESB4_69.cps}
1058: \protect
1059: \caption[ ]{
1060: Same as Fig.~3 for M\,4-14 for a slit position angle of 40\arcdeg\
1061: (\emph{top}) and WeSb\,4 for a slit position angle of 159\arcdeg\
1062: (\emph{bottom}).
1063: As for K\,3-46, white contours are used for the brightest regions
1064: of the spectral line of M\,4-14. }
1065: \label{double6}
1066: \end{figure}
1067:
1068:
1069: \clearpage
1070:
1071:
1072:
1073: \begin{deluxetable}
1074: {lcccc}
1075: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
1076: \tablenum{1}
1077: \tablewidth{0pt}
1078: \tablecaption{Spectroscopic Observations\label{observations}}
1079: \tablehead{
1080: \multicolumn{1}{c}{PN NAME} &
1081: % \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\begin{array}{c}
1082: % ${\em PN G number}$\\
1083: % \end{array} $} &
1084: \multicolumn{1}{c}{PN G Number} &
1085: \multicolumn{1}{c}{Date} &
1086: \multicolumn{1}{c}{
1087: $\begin{array}{c}
1088: {\rm Slit P.A.}\\
1089: (\degree)\\
1090: \end{array}$} &
1091: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\begin{array}{c}
1092: {\rm Exposure Time}\\
1093: {\rm (s)}\\
1094: \end{array} $ }}
1095: \startdata
1096: Hen~2-428 & 49.41$+$2.48 & 1995 Jul 15 & 77 & 1800 \\
1097: & & & 167 & 1800 \\
1098: Hen~2-437 & 61.40$+$3.62 & 1995 Jul 15 & 77 & 1800 \\
1099: & & & 167 & 1800 \\
1100: K~3-46 & 69.21$+$3.81 & 1995 Jul 16 & 16 & 1800 \\
1101: & & & 106 & 1800 \\
1102: K~3-58 & 69.68$-$3.94 & 1996 Aug 07 & 14 & 900 \\
1103: & & & 90 & 1800 \\
1104: M~1-75 & 68.86$-$0.04 & 1996 Aug 07 & 150 & 1800 \\
1105: & & & 176 & 1800 \\
1106: M~2-48 & 62.49$-$0.27 & 1996 Aug 07 & 66 & 1800 \\
1107: M~3-55 & 21.74$-$0.67 & 1995 Jul 15 & 138 & 1800 \\
1108: & & & 57 & 1800 \\
1109: M~4-14 & 43.09$-$3.04 & 1996 Aug 07 & 40 & 1800 \\
1110: & & & 87 & 1800 \\
1111: & & & 153 & 600 \\
1112: WeSb~4 & 31.91$-$0.31 & 1995 Jul 14 & 69 & 1800 \\
1113: & & & 69 & 1800 \\
1114: & & & 159 & 1800 \\
1115:
1116: \enddata
1117: \end{deluxetable}
1118:
1119:
1120:
1121: \clearpage
1122:
1123: \begin{deluxetable}{lcccccc}
1124: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
1125: \tablenum{2}
1126: \tablewidth{0pt}
1127: \tablecaption{Results of Spatio-Kinematical Modeling\label{results}}
1128: \tablehead{
1129: \multicolumn{1}{c}{PN Name}&
1130: \multicolumn{1}{c}{\ha size\tablenotemark{1}}&
1131: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$v_p$} &
1132: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$v_e$} &
1133: \multicolumn{1}{c}{Kin. Age}&
1134: \multicolumn{1}{c}{Incl. Angle}&
1135: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\gamma$}\\
1136: \multicolumn{1}{c}{}&
1137: \multicolumn{1}{c}{[\arcsec]}&
1138: \multicolumn{1}{c}{[\kms]} &
1139: \multicolumn{1}{c}{[\kms]} &
1140: \multicolumn{1}{c}{[yr]}&
1141: \multicolumn{1}{c}{[\degree]}&
1142: \multicolumn{1}{c}{}}
1143: \startdata
1144: Hen\,2-428 & 63$\times$18 & 80 & 16 & 2400 & $-$75 & 1 \\
1145: & & [73,85] & [14,17]& [2400,2500] & $[-74,-76]$& [0.9,1.1]\\
1146: Hen\,2-437& 45$\times$4.6 & ... & (5) & ... & $-$89 & 20 \\
1147: & & [50,100] & $<10$& [750,2000] & $[-88,-90]$& [10,45] \\
1148: K\,3-46 & 81$\times$36 & 18 & 3 & 11000 & $-$70 & 0.9 \\
1149: & & [22,32] & [1,4] & [7000,12000]& [69,72] & [0.6,1.2]\\
1150: K\,3-58 & 23.0$\times$12.7 & 38 & 12 & 1800 & $-60 (-57)$ & 2.5 (2.2) \\
1151: & & [32,42] &[10,15] & [1500,2200] & $[-55,-63)]$& [2.1,2.7]\\
1152: M\,1-75 & 69$\times$23\tablenotemark{2} & 55 & 8 & 2700 & 87 & 6 \\
1153: & & [45,65] & [6,10] & [2300,3400] & [86,88] & [5.5,6.5] \\
1154: M\,1-75\tablenotemark{3} & ... & 45 & 12 & 2400 & 65 & 5.5 \\
1155: & & [25,50] & [6,13] & [2000,5200] & [60,70] & [5.3,5.7] \\
1156: M\,2-48 & 42.6$\times$5.7\tablenotemark{4} & 100 & 10 & 1160 & $-$79 & 8 \\
1157: & & [75,120] & [8,11] & [800,1600] & $[-73,-80]$& [7,9] \\
1158: M\,3-55 & 11.1$\times$8.2 & 19.5 & 6 & 1800 & 40 & 0.6 \\
1159: & & [17.5,23.5]& [4,8] & [1000,2500] & [30,50] & [0.4,0.9]\\
1160: M\,4-14 & 27$\times$8.5 & 65 & 11 & 1500 & 38 & 5 \\
1161: & & [44,76] & [7,11] & [1400,2500] & [37,41] & [4.7,5.2] \\
1162: WeSb\,4 & 77$\times$18\tablenotemark{4} & 95 & 14 & 3400 & 50 & 6 \\
1163: & & [80,110] & [13,17]& [2750,3700] &
1164: [48,53] & [5.8,6.2] \\
1165: \enddata
1166: \tablenotetext{1}{The size is of the lobes and waist}
1167: \tablenotetext{2}{Ring size 24.0$\times$13.1}
1168: \tablenotetext{3}{For the smaller pair of lobes}
1169: \tablenotetext{4}{Size in the [N II] image}
1170:
1171:
1172:
1173: \end{deluxetable}
1174: \clearpage
1175:
1176:
1177: \begin{deluxetable}{lccccccc}
1178: \tabletypesize{\scriptsize}
1179: \tablenum{3}
1180: \tablewidth{0pt}
1181: \tablecaption{Estimated Kinematical Ages\label{ages}}
1182: \tablehead{
1183: \multicolumn{1}{c}{PN Name}&
1184: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\begin{array}{c}
1185: V_{\rm r}\\
1186: (\kms) \\
1187: \end{array} $} &
1188: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\begin{array}{c}
1189: {\rm 1~kpc~Kinematic}\\
1190: {\rm Age}\\
1191: {\rm (yr)}\\
1192: \end{array}$} &
1193: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\begin{array}{c}
1194: {\rm Statistical}\\
1195: {\rm Distance}\\
1196: {\rm (Kpc)}\\
1197: \end{array} $} &
1198: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\begin{array}{c}
1199: {\rm Reference}\\
1200: \end{array} $} &
1201: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\begin{array}{c}
1202: {\rm Rotation}\\
1203: {\rm Curve~~Dist.}\\
1204: {\rm (Kpc)}\\
1205: \end{array} $}&
1206: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\begin{array}{c}
1207: {\rm Adopted}\\
1208: {\rm Distance}\\
1209: {\rm (Kpc)}\\
1210: \end{array} $} &
1211: \multicolumn{1}{c}{$\begin{array}{c}
1212: {\rm Estimated}\\
1213: {\rm Age}\\
1214: {\rm (yr)}\\
1215: \end{array} $ }}
1216: \startdata
1217: Hen\,2-428 & 72 & 2400 & 2.7 & CaKa71 & --& 2.2 & 5280 \\
1218: & & &1.7 & Ma84 & & & \\
1219: K\,3-46 & 66 & 9000 &2.15 & CaKa71 &--&2.2 & 19350 \\
1220: K\,3-58 & 21 & 1800 & 6.6& CaKa71 & --&6.2 & 11070 \\
1221: & & & 5.7 &Ma84 & & & \\
1222: M\,1-75 & 7 & 2700 &2.6-3.7 &CaKa71 & 5.3 & 3.4& 9099 \\
1223: & & & 3.9& Ca76 & & & \\
1224: & & & 2.8& Ac78 & & & \\
1225: & & & 3.21& Da81 & & & \\
1226: & & & 2.40 &AGNR84 & & &\\
1227: & & & 7.0 &Ma84 & & &\\
1228: & & & 3.89&CKs91 & & &\\
1229: M\,2-48 & 16 & 1160 & 3.42 &CaKa71 & & 4.2 & 4872 \\
1230: & & & 1.6 &Ma84 & 1.5-7.7& &\\
1231: & & & 6.97 &CKs91 & & &\\
1232: M\,3-55 & 30 & 1800 & 3.56 &CaKa71 & 2.8 & 2.8 & 5040 \\
1233: & & & 1.4 &Ma84 & & &\\
1234: & & & 3.13 &Ac78 & & &\\
1235: M\,4-14 & 49 & 1500 & 3.7 &CaKa71 & 3.7 & 3.7 & 5550 \\
1236: & & & 1.6 &Ma84 & & &\\
1237: & & & 2.97 &Ac78 & & &\\
1238: & & & 6.69 &CKs91 & & &\\
1239: WeSb\,4 & 69 & 3400 & - & - & 4.7 & 4.7& 15980 \\
1240:
1241: \enddata
1242: \caption[ ]{References: [CaKa71] - Cahn \& Kaler (1971);
1243: [Ma84] - Maciel(1984); [Ca76] - Cahn (1976); [Ac78] -
1244: Acker (1978); [Da82] - Daub (1982); [\emph{AGNR84}] -
1245: Amnuel et al. (1984); [CKs91] - Cahn et al (1991)}
1246: \end{deluxetable}
1247:
1248: \end{document}
1249:
1250:
1251:
1252:
1253:
1254: