J/MNRAS/469/3738 Complete sample of galaxy clusters (Schellenberger+, 2017)
HICOSMO - cosmology with a complete sample of galaxy clusters.
I. Data analysis, sample selection and luminosity-mass scaling relation.
Schellenberger G., Reiprich T.H.
<Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 469, 3738-3761 (2017)>
=2017MNRAS.469.3738S 2017MNRAS.469.3738S (SIMBAD/NED BibCode)
ADC_Keywords: Clusters, galaxy ; X-ray sources
Keywords: galaxies: clusters: intracluster medium - cosmological parameters -
large-scale structure of Universe - cosmology: observations -
X-rays: galaxies: clusters
Abstract:
The X-ray regime, where the most massive visible component of galaxy
clusters, the intracluster medium, is visible, offers directly
measured quantities, like the luminosity, and derived quantities, like
the total mass, to characterize these objects. The aim of this project
is to analyse a complete sample of galaxy clusters in detail and
constrain cosmological parameters, like the matter density,
Ωm, or the amplitude of initial density fluctuations,
σ8. The purely X-ray flux-limited sample (HIFLUGCS) consists
of the 64 X-ray brightest galaxy clusters, which are excellent targets
to study the systematic effects, that can bias results. We analysed in
total 196 Chandra observations of the 64 HIFLUGCS clusters, with a
total exposure time of 7.7Ms. Here, we present our data analysis
procedure (including an automated substructure detection and an energy
band optimization for surface brightness profile analysis) that gives
individually determined, robust total mass estimates. These masses are
tested against dynamical and Planck Sunyaev-Zeldovich (SZ) derived
masses of the same clusters, where good overall agreement is found
with the dynamical masses. The Planck SZ masses seem to show a
mass-dependent bias to our hydrostatic masses; possible biases in this
mass-mass comparison are discussed including the Planck selection
function. Furthermore, we show the results for the (0.1-2.4)keV
luminosity versus mass scaling relation. The overall slope of the
sample (1.34) is in agreement with expectations and values from
literature. Splitting the sample into galaxy groups and clusters
reveals, even after a selection bias correction, that galaxy groups
exhibit a significantly steeper slope (1.88) compared to clusters
(1.06).
Description:
The HIFLUGCS (Reiprich & Boehringer, 2002ApJ...567..716R 2002ApJ...567..716R) was selected
from the ROSAT All-Sky Survey (RASS; Truemper 1993Sci...260.1769T 1993Sci...260.1769T;
Voges et al. 1999A&A...349..389V 1999A&A...349..389V, Cat. IX/10). It consists of 64
galaxy cluster above a flux limit of 2x10-11erg/s/cm2 in the
(0.1-2.4)keV band (ROSAT band) and within a region outside the Milky
Way disc (|b|≥20°), the Magellanic Clouds and the Virgo cluster,
which sums up to 64.78 per cent of the sky. This results in a sample
of very bright and local galaxy clusters. Looking at it in more detail
highlights the effort spent on creating a complete, flux-limited
sample.
File Summary:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FileName Lrecl Records Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ReadMe 80 . This file
tableb2.dat 74 64 Properties of the 64 HIFLUGCS clusters
tableb3.dat 149 64 Masses for HIFLUGCS clusters with different
extrapolation methods and for two overdensities
using h=0.7 and {OMETA}m=0.3
tableb1.dat 403 64 Chandra observation IDs for the 64 HIFLUGCS
clusters, which were used here
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Byte-by-byte Description of file: tableb2.dat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1- 8 A8 --- Name Cluster name
10- 11 I2 h RAh Emission weighted centre
right ascension (J2000)
13- 14 I2 min RAm Emission weighted centre
right ascension (J2000)
16- 22 F7.4 s RAs Emission weighted centre
right ascension (J2000)
24 A1 --- DE- Emission weighted centre
declination sign (J2000)
25- 26 I2 deg DEd Emission weighted centre
declination (J2000)
28- 29 I2 arcmin DEm Emission weighted centre
declination (J2000)
31- 37 F7.4 arcsec DEs Emission weighted centre
declination (J2000)
39- 43 F5.3 --- z Redshift
45- 49 F5.3 10+22cm-2 NH H column density
51- 57 F7.3 10+37W LX X-ray luminosity
59- 63 F5.3 10+37W E_LX Error on X-ray luminosity (upper value)
65- 69 F5.3 10+37W e_LX Error on X-ray luminosity (lower value)
71- 74 F4.1 arcmin R Average radius of the largest annulus for
the temperature measurements, RmaxkT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Byte-by-byte Description of file: tableb3.dat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1- 8 A8 --- Name Cluster name
10- 15 F6.3 10+14Msun M500NFWFreeze Mass M500 with NFWFreeze (1)
17- 21 F5.3 10+14Msun E_M500NFWFreeze Error on M500NFWFreeze (upper value)
23- 27 F5.3 10+14Msun e_M500NFWFreeze Error on M500NFWFreeze (lower value)
29- 34 F6.3 10+14Msun M500kTextrp Mass M500 with kTextrp (1)
36- 41 F6.3 10+14Msun E_M500kTextrp Error on M500kTextrp (upper value)
43- 47 F5.3 10+14Msun e_M500kTextrp Error on M500kTextrp (lower value)
49- 55 F7.3 10+14Msun M500NFWHudson Mass M500 with NFWHudson (1)
57- 62 F6.3 10+14Msun E_M500NFWHudson Error on M500NFWHudson (upper value)
64- 69 F6.3 10+14Msun e_M500NFWHudson Error on M500NFWHudson (lower value)
71- 77 F7.3 10+14Msun M500NFWAll Mass M500 with BFW All (1)
79- 84 F6.3 10+14Msun E_M500NFWAll Error on M500NFWAll (upper value)
86- 91 F6.3 10+14Msun e_M500NFWAll Error on M500NFWAll (lower value)
93- 98 F6.3 10+14Msun M200NFWFreeze Mass M200 with NFWFreeze (1)
100-105 F6.3 10+14Msun E_M200NFWFreeze Error on M500NFWFreeze (upper value)
107-111 F5.3 10+14Msun e_M200NFWFreeze Error on M500NFWFreeze (lower value)
113-118 F6.3 10+14Msun M200kTextrp Mass M200 with kTextrp (1)
120-124 F5.3 10+14Msun E_M200kTextrp Error on M200kTextrp (upper value)
126-130 F5.3 10+14Msun e_M200kTextrp Error on M200kTextrp (lower value)
132-137 F6.3 10+14Msun M500PlanckSZ ? Mass M500 with PlanckSZ (1)
139-143 F5.3 10+14Msun E_M500PlanckSZ ? Error on M500PlanckSZ (upper value)
145-149 F5.3 10+14Msun e_M500PlanckSZ ? Error on M500PlanckSZ (lower value)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note (1): Models (see Sect. 4.1 for details):
NFWFreeze = in this case an NFW model is fit to the outermost measured mass
profile, but a relation from Bhattacharya et al.
(2013ApJ...766...32B 2013ApJ...766...32B) between c200 and r200, is used to
decrease the degrees of freedom
kTextrp = kT extrapolate, most simple extrapolation by just using the
temperature and surface brightness model.
NFW Hudson = this method is almost identical to the 'NFW All' case, only that
the central region of the cluster mass profile is not taken
into account for the NFW fit
NFWAll = extrapolation fits an NFW profile
(Navarro, Frenk & White 1996ApJ...462..563N 1996ApJ...462..563N, 1997ApJ...490..493N 1997ApJ...490..493N)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Byte-by-byte Description of file: tableb1.dat
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bytes Format Units Label Explanations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1- 8 A8 --- Name Cluster name
11- 13 I3 ks ExpTime Total exposure time
15-403 A389 --- ObsIS Chandra Observation ID(s) (1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note (1): The first number gives the main ID.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
History:
From electronic version of the journal
References:
Schellenberger & Reiprich, Paper II 2017MNRAS.471.1370S 2017MNRAS.471.1370S
(End) Patricia Vannier [CDS] 16-Apr-2020