SIMBAD references

The 1.5 Seyfert galaxy NGC 3516 presents a strong time variability in X-rays. We re-analyzed the nine observations performed in 2006 October by XMM-Newton and Chandra in the 0.3 to 10 keV energy band. An acceptable model was found for the XMM-Newton data fitting the EPIC-PN and RGS spectra simultaneously; later, this model was successfully applied to the contemporary Chandra high-resolution data. The model consists of a continuum emission component (power law + blackbody) absorbed by four ionized components (warm absorbers), and 10 narrow emission lines. Three absorbing components are warm, producing features only in the soft X-ray band. The fourth ionization component produces Fe XXV and Fe XXVI in the hard-energy band. We study the time response of the absorbing components to the well-detected changes in the X-ray luminosity of this source and find that the two components with the lower ionization state show clear opacity changes consistent with gas close to photoionization equilibrium. These changes are supported by the models and by differences in the spectral features among the nine observations. On the other hand, the two components with higher ionization state do not seem to respond to continuum variations. The response time of the ionized absorbers allows us to constrain their electron density and location. We find that one component (with intermediate ionization) must be located within the obscuring torus at a distance 2.7x10¹⁷ cm from the central engine. This outflowing component likely originated in the accretion disk. The three remaining components are at distances larger than 10¹⁶-10¹⁷ cm. Two of the absorbing components in the soft X-rays have similar outflow velocities and locations. These components may be in pressure equilibrium, forming a multi-phase medium, if the gas has metallicity larger than the solar one ( ≳ 5 Z_☉). We also search for variations in the covering factor of the ionized absorbers (although partial covering is not required in our models). We find no correlation between the change in covering factor and the flux of the source. This, in connection with the observed variability of the ionized absorbers, suggests that the changes in flux are not produced by this material. If the variations are indeed produced by obscuring clumps of gas, these must be located much closer in to the central source.