Ruprecht 94
(MWSC 1950)
0.95
UTI
0.73
CN
1.0
Cdens
1.0
CC3
1.0
Clit
1.0
Cdup
Radius (P>50% members)
5.3 [arcmin]
- CN 0.73 Moderately populated
- Cdens 1.0 Very dense
- CC3 1.0 Very high quality
- Clit 1.0 Very well-studied
- Cdup 1.0 Unique
Overview
Ruprecht 94 is a moderately populated, very dense object of very high C3 quality. Its parallax locates it at a moderate distance, below the mid-plane, affected by low extinction. It is catalogued as a massive, near-solar metallicity, very young cluster, but with a large variance across recent sources for the mass parameter (see Parameters). It is very well-studied in the literature.
Relatively close
Low extinction
Massive
Near-solar metallicity
Very young
Data
| Reference | Year | RA [deg] | DEC [deg] | Plx [mas] | pmRA [mas/yr] | pmDE [mas/yr] | Rv [km/s] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UCC | â | 172.684 | -63.423 | 0.385 | -6.389 | 0.836 | 3.217 |
| Almeida et al. | 2025 | 172.867 | -63.458 | â | â | â | â |
| Hunt & Reffert | 2024 | 172.638 | -63.456 | 0.386 | -6.417 | 0.877 | -0.096 |
| Celli et al. | 2024 | 172.772 | -63.426 | â | â | â | â |
| Cavallo et al. | 2024 | 172.648 | -63.435 | 0.386 | â | â | â |
| Hunt & Reffert | 2023 | 172.638 | -63.456 | 0.386 | -6.417 | 0.877 | -0.096 |
| Just et al. | 2023 | 172.626 | -63.476 | â | â | â | â |
| Dias et al. | 2021 | 172.867 | -63.458 | 0.37 | -6.364 | 0.772 | â |
| Cantat-Gaudin et al. | 2020 | 172.772 | -63.426 | 0.369 | -6.378 | 0.769 | â |
| Cantat-Gaudin & Anders | 2020 | 172.772 | -63.426 | 0.369 | -6.378 | 0.769 | â |
| Dias et al. | 2019 | 172.654 | -63.433 | 0.369 | -6.366 | 0.886 | 1.633 |
| Soubiran et al. | 2018 | 172.772 | -63.426 | â | â | â | -8.71 |
| Cantat-Gaudin et al. | 2018 | 172.772 | -63.426 | 0.369 | -6.378 | 0.769 | â |
| Loktin & Popova | 2017 | 172.65 | -63.433 | â | -5.601 | 0.667 | 2.0 |
| Kharchenko et al. | 2016 | 172.626 | -63.476 | â | â | â | â |
| Dias et al. | 2014 | 172.654 | -63.433 | â | -4.19 | -2.71 | â |
| Kharchenko et al. | 2013 | 172.635 | -63.48 | â | -5.06 | 0.59 | 2.0 |
| Gozha et al. | 2012 | 172.654 | -63.433 | â | â | â | â |
| Piskunov et al. | 2008 | 172.664 | -63.45 | â | â | â | â |
| Kharchenko et al. | 2007 | 172.65 | -63.43 | â | 0.25 | â | 2.0 |
| Piskunov et al. | 2007 | 172.664 | -63.45 | â | â | â | â |
| Kharchenko et al. | 2005 | 172.68 | -63.45 | â | -4.87 | -0.15 | 2.0 |
| Kharchenko et al. | 2003 | 172.44 | -63.39 | â | -3.84 | -4.96 | â |
đĄ Note: The UCC values are estimated from its identified members.
| Reference | Year | Dist [kpc] | Av [mag] | DAv [mag] | Age [Myr] | [Fe/H] [dex] | Mass [Msun] | Bfr | BSS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Almeida et al. | 2025 | 2.33 | 1.19 | â | 14 | â | 297 | â | â |
| Hunt & Reffert | 2024 | â | â | â | â | â | 638* | â | â |
| Celli et al. | 2024 | â | â | â | 24 | â | 351 | â | â |
| Cavallo et al. | 2024 | 1.91 | 0.81 | â | 38 | 0.170 | â | â | â |
| Hunt & Reffert | 2023 | 2.38 | 1.14 | 1.48 | 9 | â | â | â | â |
| Just et al. | 2023 | â | â | â | 10 | â | 1679 | â | â |
| Dias et al. | 2021 | 2.33 | 1.19 | â | 14 | 0.115 | â | â | â |
| Cantat-Gaudin et al. | 2020 | 2.25 | 0.82 | â | 25 | â | â | â | â |
| Cantat-Gaudin & Anders | 2020 | 2.51 | â | â | â | â | â | â | â |
| Dias et al. | 2019 | 1.80 | 0.99 | â | 14 | -1.623 | â | â | â |
| Soubiran et al. | 2018 | 2.51 | â | â | â | â | â | â | â |
| Cantat-Gaudin et al. | 2018 | 2.51 | â | â | â | â | â | â | â |
| Loktin & Popova | 2017 | 1.14 | 0.95 | â | 28 | â | â | â | â |
| Kharchenko et al. | 2016 | 2.93 | 1.58 | â | 10 | â | â | â | â |
| Kharchenko et al. | 2013 | 2.93 | 1.58 | â | 10 | â | â | â | â |
| Gozha et al. | 2012 | 1.11 | â | â | 15 | â | 26303 | â | â |
| Piskunov et al. | 2008 | 3.40 | 0.93 | â | 15 | â | 29040* | â | â |
| Piskunov et al. | 2007 | 3.40 | 0.93 | â | 15 | â | 5470 | â | â |
| Kharchenko et al. | 2005 | 3.40 | 0.93 | â | 15 | â | â | â | â |
| Kharchenko et al. | 2003 | 1.11 | 0.31 | â | â | â | â | â | â |
(*): Indicates that this parameter is assigned more than one value in the corresponding reference.


Almeida et al. (2025)
Mass determination: worst fit. Isochrone match: intermediate fit.
Cavallo et al. (2024)
Gold sample.