1. Name: Envelope Structure of Intermediate-Mass YSOs ============================================ (This is a revised version of DRSP 2.1.9 from DRSP 1.0) The main differences are: 1) the use of mosaics at higher frequency bands so the same fields are covered 2) the elimination of the use of band 7 3) a reduction of the total number of objects from 12 to 8 Author: J. Di Francesco (NRC-HIA) 2. Science goal: Probe the density and thermal structure of envelopes surrounding intermediate-mass young stellar objects by imaging submillimetre continuum emission of selected Herbig Ae/Be stars. This program follows work done by Mannings (1994; MNRAS, 271, 587) based on continuum measurements made from the JCMT. Herbig Ae/Be stars are young stellar objects of 2-10 Msun, with large infrared excesses due to reprocessing of stellar photons by dust in circumstellar disks and envelopes. Such objects may or may not have followed the same formation path as low-mass stars. Comparing the circumstellar structures of Herbig Ae/Be stars with those of low-mass objects should reveal the similarities or differences in their formation. The low-resolution data of Mannings, however, could not distinguish well the relative contributions of submillimetre continuum emission from disks and envelopes around the Herbig Ae/Be stars studied. ALMA will provide very sensitive, high-resolution submillimetre continuum data of the envelopes surrounding these stars. Data from 3 well-spaced bands will allow these structures to be well characterized using modern radiative transfer codes. 3. Number of sources: 12 4. Coordinates: 4.1. 12 sources distributed at low galactic latitudes over sky (RA=any, DEC=any visible) 4.2. Moving target: no 4.3. Time critical: no 5. Spatial scales: 5.1. Angular resolution: 0.50" (all bands) 5.2. Range of spatial scales/FOV: 0.5-30" (all bands) 5.3. Single dish: yes (all bands, if ACA unavailable) 5.4. ACA: yes (all bands, preferred) 5.5. Subarrays: no 6. Frequencies: 6.1. Receiver band: Bands 3, 6, 9 6.2. Line: n/a Frequency: n/a 6.3. Spectral resolution (km/s): n/a 6.4. Spectral coverage (km/s or GHz): n/a 7. Continuum flux density: 7.1. Typical value: O.01, 0.1, 1.0 Jy 7.2. Continuum peak value: 0.001, 0.01, 0.1 Jy 7.3. Required continuum rms: 0.000002, 0.00002, 0.0002 Jy 7.4. Dynamic range in image: 500, 500, 500 8. Line intensity: 8.1. Typical value: n/a 8.2. Required rms per channel: n/a 8.3. Spectral dynamic range: n/a 9. Polarization: no 10. Integration time per setting: 84, 30, 276 hrs 11. Total integration time for program: 390 hr (+ 1560 hours ACA time to get same sensitivity in low uv-spacing data) Note 1: To sample well the envelopes of these objects, mosaicked observations will be necessary at the higher bands. For example, the Band 3 observations will sample the sky within 30" radius of the phase centre beam in one pointing but the Band 6 and Band 9 observations will require respectively 3x3 and 8x8 pointing mosaics to sample the same field. To get the required sensitivities across the respective fields, each object will have to be observed over 7 hrs, 2.5 hrs, and 23 hours in Bands 3, 6, and 9. Note 2: Given the difficulties in observing at high frequencies, Band 7 data could be substituted for Band 9 data in the above program. In this case, the required sensitivities would be very similar to those for Band 6, although the time to make 5x5 pointing mosaics for 12 sources would be 336 hours, and the total integration time would be 450 hours (+ 1800 hours ACA time). Note 3: The dynamic range goal is flexible with a minimum of 100 preferred. Integration times may be scaled down significantly to meet this minimum. Note 4: Simultaneous observations of 12CO/13CO transitions may be useful to trace gas dynamics in the envelopes, although depletion and outflows could make interpreting these data difficult. Note 5: Higher angular resolution observations will begin to probe the disks of these stars. Since this is an interesting topic of its own, it would be useful to define a DSRP for such a project in the disks sub-theme and link this project to it. ************************************************************************ Review John Richer: see program 2.1.1.