J/A+A/607/A81 Properties of the sample of clusters (Biviano+, 2017)
The concentration-mass relation of clusters of galaxies from the
OmegaWINGS survey.
Biviano A., Moretti A., Paccagnella A., Poggianti B.M., Bettoni D.,
Gullieuszik M., Vulcani B., Fasano G., D'Onofrio M., Fritz J., Cava A.
<Astron. Astrophys. 607, A81 (2017)>
=2017A&A...607A..81B 2017A&A...607A..81B (SIMBAD/NED BibCode)
ADC_Keywords: Clusters, galaxy ; Velocity dispersion ; Morphology
Keywords: galaxies: clusters: general - galaxies: kinematics and dynamics
Abstract:
The relation between a cosmological halo concentration and its mass
(cMr) is a powerful tool to constrain cosmological models of halo
formation and evolution.
On the scale of galaxy clusters the cMr has so far been determined
mostly with X-ray and gravitational lensing data. The use of
independent techniques is helpful in assessing possible systematics.
Here we provide one of the few determinations of the cMr by the
dynamical analysis of the projected-phase-space distribution of
cluster members.
Based on the WINGS and OmegaWINGS data sets, we used the Jeans
analysis with the MAMPOSSt technique to determine masses and
concentrations for 49 nearby clusters, each of which has ≳60
spectroscopic members within the virial region, after removal of
substructures.
Our cMr is in statistical agreement with theoretical predictions based
on {LAMBDA}CDM cosmological simulations. Our cMr is different from most
previous observational determinations because of its flatter slope and
lower normalization. It is however in agreement with two recent cMr
obtained using the lensing technique on the CLASH and LoCuSS cluster
data sets.
The dynamical study of the projected-phase-space of cluster members is
an independent and valid technique to determine the cMr of galaxy
clusters. Our cMr shows no tension with theoretical predictions from
{LAMBDA}CDM cosmological simulations for low-redshift, massive galaxy
clusters. In the future we will extend our analysis to galaxy systems
of lower mass and at higher redshifts.
Description:
Observed and derived properties of 49 clusters from the WINGS and
OmegaWINGS surveys used to determined the concentration-mass relation.
File Summary:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FileName Lrecl Records Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ReadMe 80 . This file
table1.dat 129 49 Properties of 49 clusters
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See also:
J/A+A/581/A41 : OmegaWINGS BV photometry of galaxy clusters (Gullieuszik+ 2015)
J/A+A/599/A81 : OmegaWINGS local clusters of galaxies redshifts (Moretti+ 2017)
Byte-by-byte Description of file: table1.dat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1- 6 A6 --- Cluster Cluster name
8- 16 F9.5 deg RAdeg Right-ascension of the BCG (adopted as cluster
center) (J2000)
18- 26 F9.5 deg DEdeg Declination of the BCG (J2000)
28- 31 I4 --- Nz Number of galaxies with measured redshift in
the cluster field
33- 36 I4 --- Nm Number of cluster members before removal of
galaxies in subclusters
38- 41 I4 --- Nmns Final number of cluster members after removal
of galaxies in subclusters
43- 46 I4 --- Ndyn Number of cluster members effectively used in
the dynamical analysis, i.e. those located
between 0.05 Mpc and r200
48- 52 F5.2 Mpc Rmax Largest distance from the BCG among cluster
members outside substructures
54- 60 F7.5 --- zc Mean cluster redshift
62- 65 I4 km/s sigmalos Cluster velocity dispersion
67- 68 I2 km/s e_sigmalos Lower 1 sigma error on sigmalos
70- 71 I2 km/s E_sigmalos Upper 1 sigma error on sigmalos
73- 76 A4 --- nRmod Model, pNFW or King, which provides the best
fit to the cluster galaxy number
density profile
78- 82 F5.2 Mpc rg Best-fit value of the scale radius of the
cluster galaxy number density profile
84- 87 F4.2 Mpc e_rg Lower 1 sigma error on rg
89- 93 F5.2 Mpc E_rg Upper 1 sigma error on rg
95- 97 A3 --- Mrmod Model, Burkert, Hernquist, or NFW, which
provides the best fit to the cluster
mass profile
99-103 F5.2 Mpc r200 Best-fit value of the virial radius
105-108 F4.2 Mpc e_r200 Lower 1 sigma error on r200
110-113 F4.2 Mpc E_r200 Upper 1 sigma error on r200
115-119 F5.2 Mpc rm2 Best-fit value of the mass profile scale radius
121-124 F4.2 Mpc e_rm2 Lower 1 sigma error on rm2
126-129 F4.2 Mpc E_rm2 Upper 1 sigma error on rm2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acknowledgements:
Andrea Biviano, biviano(at)oats.inaf.it
(End) Andrea Biviano [INAF-OATs, Italy], Patricia Vannier [CDS] 18-Sep-2017