Càdlàg: Difference between revisions

From formulasearchengine
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
 
→‎Skorokhod space: Fixed some minor typos (missing spaces and extra commas)
Line 1: Line 1:
We'd like to have you join our neighborhood and participate in the conversation! We utilised to set a block of ice on the porch with a fan behind it. You could obtain mini fans that had a tray on major for ice with drains that ran in front of the fan so the air passed over the water cooled drains.   If you loved this short article and you would like to acquire additional facts relating to [http://www.bestcoolerreviewshq.com/best-coolers-for-keeping-ice/ coolers for keeping ice] kindly check out our own web site. Some may perhaps feel it's alot but it's like something your funds can always go to one thing elsePrint procedure of the cooler lids outcomes in slight variations on the printing surface.<br><br>Ice Chests are applied to keep many drinks cold, utilizing ice outside of the drink but inside the chest, you cannot drink it when it is in the chest but you can many drinks cold for a pretty long time. Somebody wants to make a cooler out of those tiles they use for the space shuttle. I purchased one particular there that said holds ice 7 days and they weren't lyingOn river trips they are in the sun mulitiple days, all day long without having any opportunity for new ice.<br><br>The market is now just about crammed with these sort of freezers nevertheless Best Coolers For Maintaining Ice 2013 although buying the industrial refrigerator freezer maintain the space demand in mind. In truth no matter if you even use a mini commercial chest cooler, simply because you'd ultimately make use of quite a bit of floor space.  Save the bags, for they can be made use of to fill with bought bags of ice. And attempt to keep the opening and closings of the cooler at a minimum.<br><br>And by melt water I ment the residual water in the chest with the blocks of ice... not a cooler full of freaken water and it wasnt rock solid ice but skim ice either way incredibly impressive compaired to the multitude of shitty coolers about six -8 years ago when I saw the SSI for the 1st time. The ice still appears fresh with about 1/two inch of water. Took our cooler for a week of camping in Wis.<br><br>I like the [http://photo.net/gallery/tag-search/search?query_string=ARB+fridge ARB fridge] and all that but I really feel like I have to plan out when I want to use it. Also when I do use these  Coolers That Preserve Ice Frozen ice chest extra then probably the dog will be with me and requires up my storage area in the fj so I want some thing I can match in my back seatOne of the factors we are so excited about the Ice Chest is that we had been able to incorporate a lot of feedback from our prospects into the design and style.<br><br>And by melt water I ment the residual water in the chest with the blocks of ice... not a cooler full of freaken water and it wasnt rock solid ice but skim ice either way really impressive compaired to the multitude of shitty coolers about six -8 years ago when I saw the SSI for the 1st time.  The ice still appears fresh with about 1/2 inch of water. Took our cooler for a week of camping in Wis.<br><br>Fill your metal box with ice and close it securely.  If the box is smaller enough to match in your freezer, contemplate filling it with water and freezing the whole thing into 1 massive block, as this will generate more ice all round and much better cooling. Either way, it is most effective to use a galvanized or otherwise rust-proof box, or, at least, to thoroughly dry the box following the ice has melted. You can also alternate some ice and heat.<br><br>Acquire a generator.. you are going to thank oneself for it when you are sleeping in the cool as an alternative of asking yourself why a foam container full of ice isn't actuallly carrying out anything and you camper is suddenly kickin away at 50000% humidity. Ice them up the day ahead of going on your trip, make positive all the stuff you place in them is pre-chilled, and you are superior to go! I undoubtedly got my money's worth out of that cooler.
{{Multiple issues
| technical = December 2011
| one source = December 2011
| more footnotes = December 2011
}}
'''Orbital perturbation analysis''' is the activity of determining why a [[satellite|satellite's]] orbit differs from the mathematical ideal orbit.  A satellite's [[Kepler orbit|orbit]] in an ideal two-body system describes a conic section, or ellipse.  In reality, there are several factors that cause the conic section to continually change.  These deviations from the ideal Kepler's orbit are called [[Perturbation (astronomy)|perturbations]]. 
 
==Perturbation of spacecraft orbits==
 
It has long been recognized that the [[Lunar theory|Moon]] does not follow a perfect orbit, and many theories and models have been examined over the millennia to explain it. [[Isaac Newton]] determined the primary contributing factor to orbital perturbation of the moon was that the shape of the Earth is actually an [[oblate spheroid]] due to its spin, and he used the perturbations of the lunar orbit to estimate the oblateness of the Earth.
 
In Newton's [[Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica]], he demonstrated that the gravitational force between two mass points is inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the points, and he fully solved the corresponding [[Kepler orbit|"two-body problem"]] demonstrating that the radius vector between the two points would describe an ellipse. But no exact closed analytical form could be found for the [[three body problem]].  Instead, mathematical models called "orbital perturbation analysis" have been developed. With these techniques a quite accurate mathematical description of the trajectories of all the planets could be obtained. Newton recognized that the Moon's perturbations could not entirely be accounted for using just the solution to the three body problem, as the deviations from a pure Kepler orbit around the Earth are much larger than deviations of the orbits of the planets from their own Sun-centered Kepler orbits, caused by the gravitational attraction between the planets. With the availability of digital computers and the ease with which we can now compute orbits, this problem has partly disappeared, as the motion of all celestial bodies including planets, satellites, asteroids and comets can be modeled and predicted with almost perfect accuracy using the method of the numerical propagation of the trajectories. Nevertheless several analytical closed form expressions for the effect of such additional "perturbing forces" are still very useful.
 
All celestial bodies of the [[Solar System]] follow in first approximation a [[Kepler orbit]] around a central body. For a satellite (artificial or natural) this central body is a planet. But both due to gravitational forces caused by the Sun and other celestial bodies and due to the flattening of its planet (caused by its rotation which makes the planet slightly oblate and therefore the result of the [[Shell theorem]] not fully applicable) the satellite will follow an orbit around the Earth that deviates more than the Kepler orbits observed for the planets.
 
The precise modeling of the motion of the Moon has been a difficult task. The best and most accurate modeling for the lunar orbit before the availability of digital computers was obtained with the complicated [[Charles-Eugène Delaunay|Delaunay]] and [[Ernest William Brown|Brown]]'s [[lunar theory|lunar theories]].
 
For man-made spacecraft orbiting the Earth at comparatively low altitudes the deviations from a Kepler orbit are much larger than for the Moon. The approximation of the gravitational force of the Earth to be that of a homogeneous sphere gets worse the closer one gets to the Earth surface and the majority of the artificial Earth satellites are in orbits that are only a few hundred kilometers over the Earth surfaceFurthermore they are (as opposed to the Moon) significantly affected by the solar radiation pressure because of their large cross-section to mass ratio; this applies in particular to [[3-axis stabilized spacecraft]] with large [[solar arrays]]. In addition they are significantly affected by rarefied air below 800–1000&nbsp;km. The air drag at high altitudes is also dependent on [[Space weather|solar activity]].
 
==Mathematical approach==
 
Consider any function
:<math>g(x_1,x_2,x_3,v_1,v_2,v_3)\,</math>
 
of the position
:<math>x_1,x_2,x_3\,</math>
 
and the velocity
:<math>v_1,v_2,v_3\,</math>
 
From the chain rule of differentiation one gets that the time derivative of <math>g</math> is
 
:<math>\dot{g}\ =\ \frac{\partial g }{\partial x_1}\ v_1\ + \ \frac{\partial g }{\partial x_2}\ v_2\ + \frac{\partial g }{\partial x_3}\ v_3\ + \ \frac{\partial g }{\partial v_1}\ f_1\ + \ \frac{\partial g }{\partial v_2}\ f_2\ + \ \frac{\partial g }{\partial v_3}\ f_3</math>
 
where <math>f_1\ ,\ f_2\ ,\ f_3</math> are the components of the force per unit mass acting on the body.
 
If now <math>g</math> is a "constant of motion" for a [[Kepler orbit]] like for example an [[orbital element]] and the force is corresponding "Kepler force"
:<math>
(f_1\ ,\ f_2\ ,\ f_3)\  = \ - \frac {\mu} {r^3}\ (x_1\ ,\ x_2\ ,\ x_3)
</math>
one has that <math>\dot{g}\ =\ 0\,</math>.
 
If the force is the sum of the "Kepler force" and an additional force (force per unit mass)
 
:<math>(h_1\ ,\ h_2\ ,\ h_3)</math>
 
i.e.
 
:<math>
(f_1\ ,\ f_2\ ,\ f_3)\ = \ - \frac {\mu} {r^3}\ (x_1\ ,\ x_2\ ,\ x_3)\ +\ (h_1\ ,\ h_2\ ,\ h_3)
</math>
 
one therefore has
 
:<math>\dot{g}\ =\frac{\partial g }{\partial v_1}\ h_1\ + \ \frac{\partial g }{\partial v_2}\ h_2\ + \ \frac{\partial g }{\partial v_3}\ h_3</math>
 
and that the change of <math>g\,</math> in the time from <math>t=t_1\,</math> to  <math>t=t_2\,</math> is
:<math>
\Delta g\ =\ \int\limits_{t_1}^{t_2}\left(\frac{\partial g }{\partial v_1}\ h_1\ + \ \frac{\partial g }{\partial v_2}\ h_2\ + \ \frac{\partial g }{\partial v_3}\ h_3 \right)dt
</math>
 
If now the additional force <math>(h_1\ ,\ h_2\ ,\ h_3)\,</math> is sufficiently small that the motion will be close to that of a [[Kepler orbit]] one gets an approximate value for <math>\Delta g\,</math> by evaluating this integral assuming
<math>x_1(t),x_2(t),x_3(t)\,</math> to precisely follow this [[Kepler orbit]].
 
In general one wants to find an approximate expression for the change <math>\Delta g\,</math> over one orbital revolution using the true anomaly <math>\theta\,</math> as integration variable, i.e. as
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\Delta g\ =\ \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\left(\frac{\partial g }{\partial v_1}\ h_1\ + \ \frac{\partial g }{\partial v_2}\ h_2\ + \ \frac{\partial g }{\partial v_3}\ h_3 \right)\frac{r^2}{\sqrt{\mu p}}d\theta
</math>|{{EquationRef|1}}}}
 
This integral is evaluated setting <math>r(\theta)=\frac {p}{1+e\cos \theta}\,</math>, the elliptical Kepler orbit in polar angles.
For the transformation of integration variable from time to [[true anomaly]] it was used that the angular momentum <math>H\ =\ r^2\ \dot{\theta}\ =\ \sqrt{\mu p} \,</math> by definition of the parameter <math>p\,</math> for a Kepler orbit (see equation (13) of the [[Kepler orbit]] article).
 
For the special case where the Kepler orbit is circular or almost circular
:<math>r\ =\ p</math> and ({{EquationNote|1}}) takes the simpler form
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\Delta g\ =\ \frac{P}{2\pi}\ \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\left(\frac{\partial g }{\partial v_1}\ h_1\ + \ \frac{\partial g }{\partial v_2}\ h_2\ + \ \frac{\partial g }{\partial v_3}\ h_3 \right)d\theta
</math>|{{EquationRef|2}}}}
 
where <math>P\ =\ 2\pi\ r\ \sqrt{\frac{r}{\mu}}\,</math> is the orbital period
 
===Perturbation of the semi-major axis/orbital period===
 
For an elliptic [[Kepler orbit]], the sum of the kinetic and the potential energy
 
:<math>g = \frac{V^2}{2}-\frac {\mu} {r}</math>,
 
where <math>V\,</math> is the orbital velocity, is a constant and equal to
 
:<math>g\ =\ -\frac {\mu} {2 \cdot a}</math> (Equation ([[Kepler_orbit#equation_44|44]]) of the Kepler orbit article)
 
If <math>\bar{h}\,</math> is the perturbing force and <math>\bar{V}\,</math>is the velocity vector of the Kepler orbit the equation ({{EquationNote|1}}) takes the form:
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\Delta g\ =\ \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\bar{V} \bar{h}\frac{r^2}{\sqrt{\mu p}}d\theta
</math>|{{EquationRef|3}}}}
 
and for a circular or almost circular orbit
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\Delta g\ =\ \frac{P}{2\pi}\ \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi} \bar{V} \bar{h}d\theta
</math>|{{EquationRef|4}}}}
 
From the change <math>\Delta g\,</math> of the parameter <math>g\,</math> the new semi-major axis <math>a\,</math> and the new period <math>P\ =\ 2\pi\ a\ \sqrt{\frac{a}{\mu}}\,</math> are computed (relations (43) and (44) of the [[Kepler orbit]] article).
 
===Perturbation of the orbital plane===
 
Let <math>\hat{g}\,</math> and <math>\hat{h}\,</math> make up a rectangular coordinate system in the plane of the reference Kepler orbit. If <math>\omega\,</math> is the argument of perigee relative the <math>\hat{g}\,</math> and <math>\hat{h}\,</math> coordinate system the true anomaly <math>\theta\,</math> is given by <math>\theta=u-\omega\,</math> and the approximate change <math> \Delta \hat{z}\,</math> of the orbital pole <math> \hat{z}\,</math> (defined as the unit vector in the direction of the angular momentum) is
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\Delta \hat{z}\ =\ \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\frac{f_z }{V_t} (\hat{g} \cos u  + \hat{h} \sin u)\frac{r^2}{\sqrt{\mu p}}du \quad \times \ \hat{z}
=\ \frac{1}{\mu p}\left[\hat{g}\int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}f_z r^3 \cos u \ du
+\ \hat{h}\int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}f_z r^3 \sin u \ du \right]\quad \times \ \hat{z}
</math>|{{EquationRef|5}}}}
 
where <math>f_z\,</math> is the component of the perturbing force in the <math> \hat{z}\,</math> direction, <math>V_t=\sqrt{\frac{\mu}{p}}\ (1+e\ \cos\theta)\,</math> is the velocity component of the Kepler orbit orthogonal to radius vector and <math>r=\frac{p}{1+e\ \cos\theta}\,</math> is the distance to the center of the Earth.
For a circular or almost circular orbit ({{EquationNote|5}}) simplifies to
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\Delta \hat{z}\ =\ \frac{r^2}{\mu}\left[\hat{g}\int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}f_z \cos u \ du
+\ \hat{h}\int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}f_z \sin u \ du \right]\quad \times \ \hat{z}
</math>|{{EquationRef|6}}}}
 
'''Example'''
 
In a circular orbit a low-force propulsion system ([[Ion thruster]]) generates a thrust (force per unit mass) of <math>F\  \hat{z}\,</math> in the direction of the orbital pole in the half of the orbit for which <math>\sin u\,</math> is positive and in the opposite direction in the other half. The resulting change of orbit pole after one orbital revolution of duration <math>P\ =\ 2\pi\ r\ \sqrt{\frac{r}{\mu}}\,</math> is
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\Delta \hat{z}\ =\ \frac{r^2}{\mu}\left[\ 2\ F\int\limits_{0}^{\pi}\sin u \ du \right]\quad \hat{h}\times \hat{z} =
\ \frac{r^2}{\mu}\ 4\ F\ \quad \hat{g}
</math>|{{EquationRef|7}}}}
 
The average change rate <math>\frac{\Delta \hat{z}}{P}\,</math> is therefore
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\frac{\Delta \hat{z}}{P} =\ \frac{2}{\pi}\ \frac{F}{V}\ \hat{g}
</math>|{{EquationRef|8}}}}
where <math>V\ =\ \sqrt{\frac{\mu}{r}},</math> is the orbital velocity in the circular Kepler orbit.
 
===Perturbation of the eccentricity vector===
 
Rather than applying (1) and (2) on the partial derivatives of the orbital elements '''eccentricity''' and '''argument of perigee''' directly one should apply these relations for the [[eccentricity vector]]. First of all the typical application is a near-circular orbit. But there are also mathematical advantages working with the partial derivatives of the components of this vector also for orbits with a significant eccentricity.
 
Equations (60), (55) and (52) of the [[Kepler orbit]] article say that the eccentricity vector is
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>\bar{e}=\frac{(V_t-V_0) \cdot \hat{r} - V_r \cdot \hat{t}}{V_0}</math>|{{EquationRef|9}}}}
 
where
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>V_0 = \sqrt{\frac{\mu}{p}}</math>|{{EquationRef|10}}}}
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>p = \frac{{(r \cdot V_t)}^2}{\mu }</math>|{{EquationRef|11}}}}
 
from which follows that
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>\frac{\partial\bar{e}}{\partial V_r} = -\frac {1}{V_0} \hat{t}</math>|{{EquationRef|12}}}}
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>\frac{\partial\bar{e}}{\partial V_t} = \frac {1}{V_0} \left(2\ \hat{r}-\frac{V_r}{V_t}\ \hat{t}\right)</math>|{{EquationRef|13}}}}
 
where
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>V_r = \sqrt{\frac {\mu}{p}} \cdot e \cdot \sin \theta</math>|{{EquationRef|14}}}}
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>V_t = \sqrt{\frac {\mu}{p}} \cdot (1 + e \cdot \cos \theta)</math>|{{EquationRef|15}}}}
 
(Equations (18) and (19) of the [[Kepler orbit]] article)
 
The eccentricity vector is by definition always in the [[Osculating orbit|osculating]] orbital plane spanned by <math>\hat{r}</math> and <math>\hat{t}</math> and formally there is also a derivative
:<math>\frac{\partial\bar{e}}{\partial V_z} = -\frac {V_r}{V_0}\  \frac{\partial\hat{t}}{\partial V_z}</math>
 
with
:<math>\frac{\partial\hat{t}}{\partial V_z} =  \frac {1}{V_t}\ \hat{z}</math>
 
corresponding to the rotation of the orbital plane
 
But in practice the in-plane change of the eccentricity vector is computed as
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\begin{align}
\Delta \bar{e}\ = &\frac {1}{V_0}\ \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\left(-\hat{t}\ f_r\ + \ \left(2\ \hat{r}-\frac{V_r}{V_t}\ \hat{t}\right)\ f_t\right)\frac{r^2}{\sqrt{\mu p}}du\ = \\
&\frac {1}{\mu}\ \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\left(-\hat{t}\ f_r\ + \ \left(2\ \hat{r}-\frac{V_r}{V_t}\ \hat{t}\right)\ f_t\right) r^2 du \end{align}
</math>|{{EquationRef|16}}}}
 
ignoring the out-of-plane force and the new eccentricity vector
:<math>\bar{e} + \Delta \bar{e}</math>
is subsequently projected to the new orbital plane orthogonal to the new orbit normal
:<math>\hat{z} + \Delta \hat{z}</math>
computed as described above.
 
'''Example'''
 
The Sun is in the orbital plane of a spacecraft in a circular orbit with radius <math>r\,</math> and consequently with a constant orbital velocity <math>V_0\ =\ \sqrt{\frac{\mu}{r}}</math> . If <math>\hat{k}\,</math> and <math>\hat{l}\,</math> make up a rectangular coordinate system in the orbital plane such that <math>\hat{k}\,</math> points to the Sun and assuming that the solar radiation pressure force per unit mass <math>F\,</math> is constant  one gets that
:<math>\hat{r}=\cos(u)\ \hat{k}\ +\ \sin(u)\ \hat{l}\,</math>
:<math>\hat{t}=-\sin(u)\ \hat{k}\ +\ \cos(u)\ \hat{l}\,</math>
:<math>F_r=-\cos(u)\ F\,</math>
:<math>F_t= \sin(u)\ F\,</math>
 
where <math>u\,</math> is the polar angle of <math>\hat{r}\,</math> in the <math>\hat{k}\,</math>, <math>\hat{l}\,</math> system. Applying ({{EquationNote|2}}) one gets that
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\begin{align}
\Delta \hat{e}\ & =\ \frac{P}{2\pi}\ \frac {1}{V_0}\ \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\left( (-\sin(u)\ \hat{k}\ +\ \cos(u)\ \hat{l}) \ F\  \cos(u)\ + \ 2\ (\cos(u)\ \hat{k}\ +\ \sin(u)\ \hat{l})\ F\ \sin(u)\right)\ du \\
& = P\ \frac{3}{2}\ \frac {1}{V_0}\ \ F\ \hat{l}
\end{align}
</math>|{{EquationRef|17}}}}
 
This means the eccentricity vector will gradually increase in the direction <math>\hat{l}\,</math> orthogonal to the Sun direction. This is true for any orbit with a small eccentricity, the direction of the small eccentricity vector does not matterAs <math>P\,</math> is the orbital period this means that the average rate of this increase will be
<math>\frac{3}{2}\ \frac {F}{V_0}\,</math>
 
==The effect of the Earth flattening==
[[File:Spherical coordinates unit vectors.svg|thumb|right|Figure 1: The unit vectors <math>\hat{\phi}\ ,\ \hat{\lambda}\ ,\ \hat{r}</math>]]
In the article [[Geopotential model]] the modeling of the gravitational field as a sum of spherical harmonics is discussed. By far, the dominating term is the "J2-term". This is a "zonal term" and corresponding force is therefore completely in a longitudinal plane with one component <math>F_r\ \hat{r}\,</math> in the radial direction and one component <math>F_\lambda\ \hat{\lambda}\,</math>  with the unit vector <math>\hat{\lambda}\,</math> orthogonal to the radial direction towards north. These directions <math>\hat{r}\,</math> and <math>\hat{\lambda}\,</math> are illustrated in Figure 1.
 
[[File:Zonal term force components.svg|thumb|right|Figure 2: The unit vector <math>\hat{t}\,</math> orthogonal to <math>\hat{r}\,</math> in the direction of motion and the orbital pole <math>\hat{z}\,</math>. The force component <math>F_\lambda</math> is marked as "F"]]
 
To be able to apply relations derived in the previous section the force component <math>F_\lambda\ \hat{\lambda}\,</math> must be split into two orthogonal components <math>F_t\ \hat{t}</math> and <math>F_z\ \hat{z}</math> as illustrated in figure 2
 
Let <math>\hat{a}\ ,\ \hat{b}\ ,\ \hat{n}\,</math> make up a rectangular coordinate system with origin in the center of the Earth (in the center of the [[Reference ellipsoid]])  such that <math>\hat{n}\,</math> points in the direction north and such that <math>\hat{a}\ ,\ \hat{b}\,</math> are in the equatorial plane of the Earth with <math>\hat{a}\,</math> pointing towards the [[Orbital node|ascending node]], i.e. towards the blue point of Figure 2.  
 
The components of the unit vectors
:<math>\hat{r}\ ,\ \hat{t}\ ,\ \hat{z}\,</math>
 
making up the local coordinate system (of which <math>\hat{t}\ ,\ \hat{z},</math> are illustrated in figure 2) relative the <math>\hat{a}\ ,\ \hat{b}\ ,\ \hat{n}\,</math> are
 
:<math>r_a= \cos u\,</math>
:<math>r_b= \cos i \ \sin u\,</math>
:<math>r_n= \sin i \ \sin u\,</math>
:<math>t_a=-\sin u\,</math>
:<math>t_b= \cos i \ \cos u\,</math>
:<math>t_n= \sin i \ \cos u\,</math>
:<math>z_a= 0\,</math>
:<math>z_b=-\sin i\,</math>
:<math>z_n= \cos i\,</math>
 
where <math>u\,</math> is the polar argument of <math>\hat{r}\,</math> relative the orthogonal unit vectors <math>\hat{g}=\hat{a}\,</math> and <math>\hat{h}=\cos i\ \hat{b}\ +\ \sin i\ \hat{n}\,</math> in the orbital plane
 
Firstly
 
:<math>\sin \lambda =\ r_n\ =\ \sin i \ \sin u\,</math>
 
where  <math>\lambda\,</math> is the angle between the equator plane and <math>\hat{r}\,</math> (between the green points of figure 2) and from equation (12) of the article [[Geopotential model]] one therefore gets that
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
f_r = J_2\ \frac{1}{r^4}\ \frac{3}{2}\ \left(3\ \sin^2 i\ \sin^2 u\ -\ 1\right)
</math>|{{EquationRef|18}}}}
 
Secondly the projection of direction north, <math>\hat{n}\,</math>, on the plane spanned by <math>\hat{t}\ ,\ \hat{z},</math> is
 
:<math>\sin i \ \cos u \ \hat{t}\ +\ \cos i \ \hat{z}\,</math>
 
and this projection is
:<math>\cos \lambda \ \hat{\lambda}\,</math>
 
where <math>\hat{\lambda}\,</math> is the unit vector <math>\hat{\lambda}</math> orthogonal to the radial direction towards north illustrated in figure 1.
 
From equation (12) of the article [[Geopotential model]] one therefore gets that
 
:<math>f_\lambda \ \hat{\lambda}\ =\ -J_2\ \frac{1}{r^4}\ 3\ \sin\lambda\ (\sin i \ \cos u \ \hat{t}\ +\ \cos i \ \hat{z}) =\ -J_2\ \frac{1}{r^4}\ 3\ \sin i \ \sin u\ (\sin i \ \cos u \ \hat{t}\ +\ \cos i \ \hat{z})\,</math>
 
and therefore:
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
f_t =\ -J_2\ \frac{1}{r^4}\ 3\ \sin^2 i\ \sin u\ \cos u
</math>|{{EquationRef|19}}}}
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
f_z =\ -J_2\ \frac{1}{r^4}\ 3\ \sin i\ \cos i\ \sin u
</math>|{{EquationRef|20}}}}
 
===Perturbation of the orbital plane===
From ({{EquationNote|5}}) and ({{EquationNote|20}}) one gets that
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\Delta \hat{z}\ =\ -J_2\ \frac{3\ \sin i\ \cos i}{\mu p^2}\left[\hat{g}\int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\frac{p}{r}\ \sin u\ \cos u \ du
+\ \hat{h}\int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\frac{p}{r}\ \sin^2 u\ du \right]\quad \times \ \hat{z}
</math>|{{EquationRef|21}}}}
 
The fraction <math>\frac{p}{r}\,</math> is
:<math>\frac{p}{r}\ =\ 1\ +\ e\ \cos (u-\omega)\ =\ 1\ +\ e\ \cos u\ \cos\omega\ +\ e\ \sin u\ \sin\omega\,</math>
where <math>e\,</math> is the eccentricity
and <math>\omega\,</math> is the argument of perigee
of the reference [[Kepler orbit]]
 
As all integrals of type
:<math>\int\limits_{0}^{2\pi} \cos^m u \ \sin^n u\ du\,</math>
are zero if not both <math>n\,</math> and <math>m\,</math> are even one gets from ({{EquationNote|21}}) that
 
:<math>
\Delta \hat{z}\ =\ -2\pi\ \frac{J_2}{\mu\ p^2}\ \frac{3}{2}\ \sin i\ \cos i\ \quad \hat{h} \times \hat{z}
</math>
 
As
:<math>
\hat{n}\ =\ \cos i\ \hat{z}\ + \sin i\ \hat{h}
</math>
 
this can be written
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\Delta \hat{z}\ =\ -2\pi\ \frac{J_2}{\mu\ p^2}\ \frac{3}{2}\ \cos i\ \quad \hat{n} \times \hat{z}
</math>|{{EquationRef|22}}}}
 
As  <math>\hat{n}</math> is an inertially fixed vector (the direction of the spin axis of the Earth) relation ({{EquationNote|22}}) is the equation of motion for a unit vector <math>\hat{z}\,</math> describing a cone around <math>\hat{n}</math> with a precession rate (radians per orbit) of <math>-2\pi\ \frac{J_2}{\mu\ p^2}\ \frac{3}{2}\ \cos i\,</math>
 
In terms of orbital elements this is expressed as
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\Delta i\ =\ 0
</math>|{{EquationRef|23}}}}
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\Delta \Omega\ =\ -2\pi\ \frac{J_2}{\mu\ p^2}\ \frac{3}{2}\ \cos i
</math>|{{EquationRef|24}}}}
 
where
:<math>i\,</math> is the inclination of the orbit to the equatorial plane of the Earth
 
:<math>\Omega\,</math> is the right ascension of the ascending node
 
===Perturbation of the eccentricity vector===
 
From ({{EquationNote|16}}), ({{EquationNote|18}}) and ({{EquationNote|19}}) follows that in-plane perturbation of the eccentricity vector is
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\Delta \bar{e}\ =\ \frac {J_2}{\mu\ p^2}\ \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\left(-\hat{t}\ \left(\frac{p}{r}\right)^2\ \frac{3}{2}\ \left(3\ \sin^2 i\ \sin^2 u\ -\ 1\right)\ - \ \left(2\ \hat{r}-\frac{V_r}{V_t}\ \hat{t}\right)\ \left(\frac{p}{r}\right)^2\ 3\ \sin^2 i \cos u\ \sin u\right)du
</math>|{{EquationRef|25}}}}
 
the new eccentricity vector being the projection of
:<math>\bar{e}+\Delta \bar{e}</math>
 
on the new orbital plane orthogonal to
:<math>\hat{z}+\Delta \hat{z}</math>
where <math>\Delta \hat{z}\,</math> is given by ({{EquationNote|22}})
 
Relative the coordinate system
:<math>\hat{g}=\hat{a}\,</math>
:<math>\hat{h}=\cos i\ \hat{b}\ +\ \sin i\ \hat{n}\,</math>
 
one has that
 
:<math>\hat{r}=\cos u\ \hat{g}\ +\ \sin u\ \hat{h}\,</math>
:<math>\hat{t}=-\sin u\ \hat{g}\ +\ \cos u\ \hat{h}\,</math>
 
Using that
 
:<math>\frac {p}{r}\ =\ 1 + e \cdot \cos \theta\ =\ 1 + e_g \cdot \cos u + e_h \cdot \sin u</math>
and that
 
:<math>\frac {V_r}{V_t} = \frac {e_g \cdot \sin u\ -\ e_h \cdot \cos u}{\frac {p}{r}}</math>
 
where
 
:<math>e_g =\ e\ \cos \omega</math>
:<math>e_h =\ e\ \sin \omega</math>
 
are the components of the eccentricity vector in the <math>\hat{g}\ ,\ \hat{h}\,</math> coordinate system this integral ({{EquationNote|25}}) can be evaluated analytically, the result is
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\Delta \bar{e}\ =\ -2\pi\ \frac {J_2}{\mu\ p^2}\ \frac{3}{2} \left(\frac{3}{2}\ \sin^2 i\ -\ 1\right)\ \left(-e_h \hat{g}\ +\ e_g \hat{h}\right)\ =\ -2\pi\ \frac {J_2}{\mu\ p^2} \frac{3}{2} \left(\frac{3}{2}\ \sin^2 i\ -\ 1\right)\ \hat{z}\ \times \ \bar{e}
</math>|{{EquationRef|26}}}}
 
This the difference equation of motion for the eccentricity vector <math>\bar{e}\,</math> to form a circle, the magnitude of the eccentricity <math>e\,</math> staying constant.
 
Translating this to orbital elements it must be remembered that the new eccentricity vector obtained by adding <math>\Delta \bar{e}\ \,</math> to the old <math>\bar{e}\ \,</math> must be projected to the new orbital plane obtained by applying ({{EquationNote|23}}) and ({{EquationNote|24}})
 
[[File:J2-perturbation.svg|thumb|right|Figure 3: The change <math>\Delta\omega\,</math> in "argument of perigee" after one orbit is the sum of a contribution <math>\Delta \omega_1\,</math> caused by the in-plane force components and a contribution <math>\Delta \omega_2\,</math> caused by the use of the ascending node as reference]]
This is illustrated  in figure 3:
 
To the change in argument of the eccentricity vector
 
:<math>\Delta \omega_1\ =\ -2\pi\ \frac {J_2}{\mu\ p^2}\ \frac{3}{2} \left(\frac{3}{2}\ \sin^2 i\ -\ 1\right)\,</math>
 
must be added an increment due to the precession of the orbital plane (caused by the out-of-plane force component) amounting to
 
:<math>\Delta \omega_2\ =\ -\cos i\ \Delta\Omega \ =\ 2\pi\ \frac {J_2}{\mu\ p^2}\ \frac{3}{2}\ \cos^2 i\,</math>
 
One therefore gets that
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\Delta e\ =0
</math>|{{EquationRef|27}}}}
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\Delta \omega\ =\Delta \omega_1\ +\ \Delta \omega_2\ =\ \ -2\pi\ \frac {J_2}{\mu\ p^2}\ 3 \left(\frac{5}{4}\ \sin^2 i\ -\ 1\right)</math>|{{EquationRef|28}}}}
 
In terms of the components of the eccentricity vector <math>e_g,e_h\,</math> relative the coordinate system <math>\hat{g} ,\hat{h}\,</math> that precesses around the polar axis of the Earth the same is expressed as follows
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\begin{align}
&(\Delta e_g,\Delta e_h)\ = \\
&-2\pi\ \frac {J_2}{\mu\ p^2}\ \frac{3}{2} \left(\frac{3}{2}\ \sin^2 i\ -\ 1\right)\ (-e_h ,e_g)\ + \ 2\pi\ \frac {J_2}{\mu\ p^2}\ \frac{3}{2}\ \cos^2 i\ (-e_h ,e_g ) = \\
&-2\pi\ \frac {J_2}{\mu\ p^2}\ 3 \left(\frac{5}{4}\ \sin^2 i\ -\ 1\right)\ (-e_h ,e_g)
\end{align}
</math>|{{EquationRef|29}}}}
 
where the first term is the in-plane perturbation of the eccentricity vector and the second is the effect of the new position of the ascending node in the new plane
 
From ({{EquationNote|28}}) follows that <math>\Delta \omega\,</math> is zero if <math>\sin^2 i\ =\frac{4}{5}\,</math>. This fact is used for [[Molniya orbit]]s having an inclination of 63.4 deg. An orbit with an inclination of 180 - 63.4 deg = 116.6 deg would in the same way have a constant argument of perigee.
 
====Proof====
 
Proof that the integral
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\left(-\hat{t}\ \left(\frac{p}{r}\right)^2\ \frac{3}{2}\ \left(3\ \sin^2 i\ \sin^2 u\ -\ 1\right)\ - \ \left(2\ \hat{r}-\frac{V_r}{V_t}\ \hat{t}\right)\ \left(\frac{p}{r}\right)^2\ 3\ \sin^2 i \cos u\ \sin u\right)du
</math>|{{EquationRef|30}}}}
 
where:
:<math>\hat{r}=\cos u\ \hat{G}\ +\ \sin u\ \hat{H}\,</math>
:<math>\hat{t}=-\sin u\ \hat{G}\ +\ \cos u\ \hat{H}\,</math>
:<math>\frac{p}{r}\ =\ 1\ +\ e_g\ \cos u\ +\ e_h\ \sin u</math>
:<math>\frac{V_r}{V_t}\ =\ \frac{e_g\ \sin u\ -\ e_h\ \cos u}{\frac{p}{r}}</math>
 
has the value
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
-2\pi\  \frac{3}{2} \left(\frac{3}{2}\ \sin^2 i\ -\ 1\right)\ \left(-e_h \hat{G}\ +\ e_g \hat{H}\right)
</math>|{{EquationRef|31}}}}
 
Integrating the first term of the integrand one gets:
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\begin{align}
&\int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}-t_g\ \left(\frac{p}{r}\right)^2\ \frac{3}{2}\ 3\ \sin^2 i\ \sin^2 u\ du\  =\ 
\frac{9}{2}\ \sin^2 i\ \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\ \left(1\ +\ e_g\ \cos u\ +\ e_h\ \sin u\right)^2\ \ \sin^3 u\ du\  = \\ 
&9\ \sin^2 i\ e_h\ \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\sin^4 u\ du\ =\ 2\pi \frac{27}{8}\ \sin^2 i\ e_h
\end{align}
</math>|{{EquationRef|32}}}}
 
and
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\begin{align}
&\int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}-t_h\ \left(\frac{p}{r}\right)^2\ \frac{3}{2}\ 3\ \sin^2 i\ \sin^2 u\ du\  =\ 
-\frac{9}{2}\ \sin^2 i\ \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\ \left(1\ +\ e_g\ \cos u\ +\ e_h\ \sin u\right)^2\ \ \sin^2 u\ \cos u\ du\  = \\ 
&-9\ \sin^2 i\ e_g\ \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\sin^2 u\ \cos^2 u\ du\ =\ -2\pi \frac{9}{8}\ \sin^2 i\ e_g
\end{align}
</math>|{{EquationRef|33}}}}
 
For the second term one gets:
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\int\limits_{0}^{2\pi} t_g\ \left(\frac{p}{r}\right)^2\ \frac{3}{2}\ du\  =\ 
-\frac{3}{2}\ \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\ \left(1\ +\ e_g\ \cos u\ +\ e_h\ \sin u\right)^2\ \ \sin u\ du\  =\   
-3\ e_h\ \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\sin^2 u\ du\ =\ -2\pi \frac{3}{2}\ e_h
</math>|{{EquationRef|34}}}}
 
and
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\int\limits_{0}^{2\pi} t_h\ \left(\frac{p}{r}\right)^2\ \frac{3}{2}\ du\  =\ 
\frac{3}{2}\ \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\ \left(1\ +\ e_g\ \cos u\ +\ e_h\ \sin u\right)^2\ \ \cos u\ du\  =\   
3\ e_g\ \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\cos^2 u\ du\ =\ 2\pi \frac{3}{2}\ e_g
</math>|{{EquationRef|35}}}}
 
For the third term one gets:
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\begin{align}
&-\int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\ 2\ r_g \ \left(\frac{p}{r}\right)^2\ 3\ \sin^2 i \cos u\ \sin u\ du\ =\
-6\ \sin^2 i \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\ \left(1\ +\ e_g\ \cos u\ +\ e_h\ \sin u\right)^2\ \cos^2 u\ \sin u\ du\ =\  \\
&-12\ \sin^2 i\ e_h \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\ \cos^2 u\ \sin^2 u\ du\ =\ -2\pi \frac{3}{2}\ \sin^2 i\ e_h
\end{align}
</math>|{{EquationRef|36}}}}
 
and
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\begin{align}
&-\int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\ 2\ r_h \ \left(\frac{p}{r}\right)^2\ 3\ \sin^2 i \cos u\ \sin u\ du\ =\
-6\ \sin^2 i \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\ \left(1\ +\ e_g\ \cos u\ +\ e_h\ \sin u\right)^2\ \cos u\ \sin^2 u\ du\ =\ \\
&-12\ \sin^2 i\ e_g \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\ \sin^2 u \cos^2 u\ du\ =\ -2\pi \ \frac{3}{2}\ \sin^2 i\ e_g
\end{align}
</math>|{{EquationRef|37}}}}
 
For the fourth term one gets:
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\begin{align}
&\int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}t_g\ \frac{V_r}{V_t}\ \left(\frac{p}{r}\right)^2\ 3\ \sin i \cos^2 u\ \sin u\ du\ =
-3\ \sin^2 i \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}(e_g\ \sin u\ -\ e_h\ \cos u)\ \frac{p}{r}\ \cos u\ \sin^2 u\ du \ = \\
&-3\ \sin^2 i \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}(e_g\ \sin u\ -\ e_h\ \cos u)\ (1\ +\ e_g\ \cos u\ +\ e_h\ \sin u)\ \cos u\ \sin^2 u\ du\ = \\
&3\ \sin^2 i \ e_h\int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\ \ \cos^2 u\ \sin^2 u\ du\ =\ 2\pi \frac{3}{8} \sin^2 i \ e_h
\end{align}
</math>|{{EquationRef|38}}}}
 
and
 
#    {{NumBlk|:|<math>
\begin{align}
&\int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}t_h\ \frac{V_r}{V_t}\ \left(\frac{p}{r}\right)^2\ 3\ \sin^2 i \cos u\ \sin u\ du\ =
3\ \sin^2 i \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}(e_g\ \sin u\ -\ e_h\ \cos u)\ \frac{p}{r}\ \cos^2 u\ \sin u\ du \ = \\
&3\ \sin^2 i \int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}(e_g\ \sin u\ -\ e_h\ \cos u)\ (1\ +\ e_g\ \cos u\ +\ e_h\ \sin u)\ \cos^2 u\ \sin u\ du\ = \\
&3\ \sin^2 i \ e_g\int\limits_{0}^{2\pi}\ \ \cos^2 u\ \sin^2 u\ du\ =\ 2\pi \frac{3}{8} \sin^2 i \ e_g
\end{align}
</math>|{{EquationRef|39}}}}
 
Adding the right hand sides of ({{EquationNote|32}}), ({{EquationNote|34}}), ({{EquationNote|36}}) and ({{EquationNote|38}}) one gets
<math>
2\pi \frac{27}{8}\ \sin^2 i\ e_h\ -\ 2\pi \frac{3}{2}\ e_h\ -\ 2\pi \frac{3}{2}\ \sin^2 i\ e_h\ +\ 2\pi \frac{3}{8} \sin^2 i \ e_h
\ =\ 2\pi\  \frac{3}{2} \left(\frac{3}{2}\ \sin^2 i\ -\ 1\right)\ e_h
</math>
 
Adding the right hand sides of ({{EquationNote|33}}), ({{EquationNote|35}}), ({{EquationNote|37}}) and ({{EquationNote|39}}) one gets
<math>
-2\pi \frac{9}{8}\ \sin^2 i\ e_g\ +\ 2\pi \frac{3}{2}\ e_g\ -\ 2\pi \ \frac{3}{2}\ \sin^2 i\ e_g\ +\ 2\pi \frac{3}{8} \sin^2 i \ e_g\ =\ -2\pi\  \frac{3}{2} \left(\frac{3}{2}\ \sin^2 i\ -\ 1\right)\ e_g
</math>
 
==References==
 
* El'Yasberg "Theory of flight of artificial earth satellites", '''Israel program for Scientific Translations (1967)'''
 
==See also==
* [[Frozen orbit]]
* [[Molniya orbit]]
 
[[Category:Orbital perturbations]]
[[Category:Spaceflight concepts]]

Revision as of 01:32, 9 January 2014

Template:Multiple issues Orbital perturbation analysis is the activity of determining why a satellite's orbit differs from the mathematical ideal orbit. A satellite's orbit in an ideal two-body system describes a conic section, or ellipse. In reality, there are several factors that cause the conic section to continually change. These deviations from the ideal Kepler's orbit are called perturbations.

Perturbation of spacecraft orbits

It has long been recognized that the Moon does not follow a perfect orbit, and many theories and models have been examined over the millennia to explain it. Isaac Newton determined the primary contributing factor to orbital perturbation of the moon was that the shape of the Earth is actually an oblate spheroid due to its spin, and he used the perturbations of the lunar orbit to estimate the oblateness of the Earth.

In Newton's Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica, he demonstrated that the gravitational force between two mass points is inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the points, and he fully solved the corresponding "two-body problem" demonstrating that the radius vector between the two points would describe an ellipse. But no exact closed analytical form could be found for the three body problem. Instead, mathematical models called "orbital perturbation analysis" have been developed. With these techniques a quite accurate mathematical description of the trajectories of all the planets could be obtained. Newton recognized that the Moon's perturbations could not entirely be accounted for using just the solution to the three body problem, as the deviations from a pure Kepler orbit around the Earth are much larger than deviations of the orbits of the planets from their own Sun-centered Kepler orbits, caused by the gravitational attraction between the planets. With the availability of digital computers and the ease with which we can now compute orbits, this problem has partly disappeared, as the motion of all celestial bodies including planets, satellites, asteroids and comets can be modeled and predicted with almost perfect accuracy using the method of the numerical propagation of the trajectories. Nevertheless several analytical closed form expressions for the effect of such additional "perturbing forces" are still very useful.

All celestial bodies of the Solar System follow in first approximation a Kepler orbit around a central body. For a satellite (artificial or natural) this central body is a planet. But both due to gravitational forces caused by the Sun and other celestial bodies and due to the flattening of its planet (caused by its rotation which makes the planet slightly oblate and therefore the result of the Shell theorem not fully applicable) the satellite will follow an orbit around the Earth that deviates more than the Kepler orbits observed for the planets.

The precise modeling of the motion of the Moon has been a difficult task. The best and most accurate modeling for the lunar orbit before the availability of digital computers was obtained with the complicated Delaunay and Brown's lunar theories.

For man-made spacecraft orbiting the Earth at comparatively low altitudes the deviations from a Kepler orbit are much larger than for the Moon. The approximation of the gravitational force of the Earth to be that of a homogeneous sphere gets worse the closer one gets to the Earth surface and the majority of the artificial Earth satellites are in orbits that are only a few hundred kilometers over the Earth surface. Furthermore they are (as opposed to the Moon) significantly affected by the solar radiation pressure because of their large cross-section to mass ratio; this applies in particular to 3-axis stabilized spacecraft with large solar arrays. In addition they are significantly affected by rarefied air below 800–1000 km. The air drag at high altitudes is also dependent on solar activity.

Mathematical approach

Consider any function

of the position

and the velocity

From the chain rule of differentiation one gets that the time derivative of is

where are the components of the force per unit mass acting on the body.

If now is a "constant of motion" for a Kepler orbit like for example an orbital element and the force is corresponding "Kepler force"

one has that .

If the force is the sum of the "Kepler force" and an additional force (force per unit mass)

i.e.

one therefore has

and that the change of in the time from to is

If now the additional force is sufficiently small that the motion will be close to that of a Kepler orbit one gets an approximate value for by evaluating this integral assuming to precisely follow this Kepler orbit.

In general one wants to find an approximate expression for the change over one orbital revolution using the true anomaly as integration variable, i.e. as

  1. Template:NumBlk

This integral is evaluated setting , the elliptical Kepler orbit in polar angles. For the transformation of integration variable from time to true anomaly it was used that the angular momentum by definition of the parameter for a Kepler orbit (see equation (13) of the Kepler orbit article).

For the special case where the Kepler orbit is circular or almost circular

and (Template:EquationNote) takes the simpler form
  1. Template:NumBlk

where is the orbital period

Perturbation of the semi-major axis/orbital period

For an elliptic Kepler orbit, the sum of the kinetic and the potential energy

,

where is the orbital velocity, is a constant and equal to

(Equation (44) of the Kepler orbit article)

If is the perturbing force and is the velocity vector of the Kepler orbit the equation (Template:EquationNote) takes the form:

  1. Template:NumBlk

and for a circular or almost circular orbit

  1. Template:NumBlk

From the change of the parameter the new semi-major axis and the new period are computed (relations (43) and (44) of the Kepler orbit article).

Perturbation of the orbital plane

Let and make up a rectangular coordinate system in the plane of the reference Kepler orbit. If is the argument of perigee relative the and coordinate system the true anomaly is given by and the approximate change of the orbital pole (defined as the unit vector in the direction of the angular momentum) is

  1. Template:NumBlk

where is the component of the perturbing force in the direction, is the velocity component of the Kepler orbit orthogonal to radius vector and is the distance to the center of the Earth.

For a circular or almost circular orbit (Template:EquationNote) simplifies to

  1. Template:NumBlk

Example

In a circular orbit a low-force propulsion system (Ion thruster) generates a thrust (force per unit mass) of in the direction of the orbital pole in the half of the orbit for which is positive and in the opposite direction in the other half. The resulting change of orbit pole after one orbital revolution of duration is

  1. Template:NumBlk

The average change rate is therefore

  1. Template:NumBlk

where is the orbital velocity in the circular Kepler orbit.

Perturbation of the eccentricity vector

Rather than applying (1) and (2) on the partial derivatives of the orbital elements eccentricity and argument of perigee directly one should apply these relations for the eccentricity vector. First of all the typical application is a near-circular orbit. But there are also mathematical advantages working with the partial derivatives of the components of this vector also for orbits with a significant eccentricity.

Equations (60), (55) and (52) of the Kepler orbit article say that the eccentricity vector is

  1. Template:NumBlk

where

  1. Template:NumBlk
  2. Template:NumBlk

from which follows that

  1. Template:NumBlk
  2. Template:NumBlk

where

  1. Template:NumBlk
  2. Template:NumBlk

(Equations (18) and (19) of the Kepler orbit article)

The eccentricity vector is by definition always in the osculating orbital plane spanned by and and formally there is also a derivative

with

corresponding to the rotation of the orbital plane

But in practice the in-plane change of the eccentricity vector is computed as

  1. Template:NumBlk

ignoring the out-of-plane force and the new eccentricity vector

is subsequently projected to the new orbital plane orthogonal to the new orbit normal

computed as described above.

Example

The Sun is in the orbital plane of a spacecraft in a circular orbit with radius and consequently with a constant orbital velocity . If and make up a rectangular coordinate system in the orbital plane such that points to the Sun and assuming that the solar radiation pressure force per unit mass is constant one gets that

where is the polar angle of in the , system. Applying (Template:EquationNote) one gets that

  1. Template:NumBlk

This means the eccentricity vector will gradually increase in the direction orthogonal to the Sun direction. This is true for any orbit with a small eccentricity, the direction of the small eccentricity vector does not matter. As is the orbital period this means that the average rate of this increase will be

The effect of the Earth flattening

Figure 1: The unit vectors

In the article Geopotential model the modeling of the gravitational field as a sum of spherical harmonics is discussed. By far, the dominating term is the "J2-term". This is a "zonal term" and corresponding force is therefore completely in a longitudinal plane with one component in the radial direction and one component with the unit vector orthogonal to the radial direction towards north. These directions and are illustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 2: The unit vector orthogonal to in the direction of motion and the orbital pole . The force component is marked as "F"

To be able to apply relations derived in the previous section the force component must be split into two orthogonal components and as illustrated in figure 2

Let make up a rectangular coordinate system with origin in the center of the Earth (in the center of the Reference ellipsoid) such that points in the direction north and such that are in the equatorial plane of the Earth with pointing towards the ascending node, i.e. towards the blue point of Figure 2.

The components of the unit vectors

making up the local coordinate system (of which are illustrated in figure 2) relative the are

where is the polar argument of relative the orthogonal unit vectors and in the orbital plane

Firstly

where is the angle between the equator plane and (between the green points of figure 2) and from equation (12) of the article Geopotential model one therefore gets that

  1. Template:NumBlk

Secondly the projection of direction north, , on the plane spanned by is

and this projection is

where is the unit vector orthogonal to the radial direction towards north illustrated in figure 1.

From equation (12) of the article Geopotential model one therefore gets that

and therefore:

  1. Template:NumBlk
  2. Template:NumBlk

Perturbation of the orbital plane

From (Template:EquationNote) and (Template:EquationNote) one gets that

  1. Template:NumBlk

The fraction is

where is the eccentricity and is the argument of perigee of the reference Kepler orbit

As all integrals of type

are zero if not both and are even one gets from (Template:EquationNote) that

As

this can be written

  1. Template:NumBlk

As is an inertially fixed vector (the direction of the spin axis of the Earth) relation (Template:EquationNote) is the equation of motion for a unit vector describing a cone around with a precession rate (radians per orbit) of

In terms of orbital elements this is expressed as

  1. Template:NumBlk
  2. Template:NumBlk

where

is the inclination of the orbit to the equatorial plane of the Earth
is the right ascension of the ascending node

Perturbation of the eccentricity vector

From (Template:EquationNote), (Template:EquationNote) and (Template:EquationNote) follows that in-plane perturbation of the eccentricity vector is

  1. Template:NumBlk

the new eccentricity vector being the projection of

on the new orbital plane orthogonal to

where is given by (Template:EquationNote)

Relative the coordinate system

one has that

Using that

and that

where

are the components of the eccentricity vector in the coordinate system this integral (Template:EquationNote) can be evaluated analytically, the result is

  1. Template:NumBlk

This the difference equation of motion for the eccentricity vector to form a circle, the magnitude of the eccentricity staying constant.

Translating this to orbital elements it must be remembered that the new eccentricity vector obtained by adding to the old must be projected to the new orbital plane obtained by applying (Template:EquationNote) and (Template:EquationNote)

Figure 3: The change in "argument of perigee" after one orbit is the sum of a contribution caused by the in-plane force components and a contribution caused by the use of the ascending node as reference

This is illustrated in figure 3:

To the change in argument of the eccentricity vector

must be added an increment due to the precession of the orbital plane (caused by the out-of-plane force component) amounting to

One therefore gets that

  1. Template:NumBlk
  1. Template:NumBlk

In terms of the components of the eccentricity vector relative the coordinate system that precesses around the polar axis of the Earth the same is expressed as follows

  1. Template:NumBlk

where the first term is the in-plane perturbation of the eccentricity vector and the second is the effect of the new position of the ascending node in the new plane

From (Template:EquationNote) follows that is zero if . This fact is used for Molniya orbits having an inclination of 63.4 deg. An orbit with an inclination of 180 - 63.4 deg = 116.6 deg would in the same way have a constant argument of perigee.

Proof

Proof that the integral

  1. Template:NumBlk

where:

has the value

  1. Template:NumBlk

Integrating the first term of the integrand one gets:

  1. Template:NumBlk

and

  1. Template:NumBlk

For the second term one gets:

  1. Template:NumBlk

and

  1. Template:NumBlk

For the third term one gets:

  1. Template:NumBlk

and

  1. Template:NumBlk

For the fourth term one gets:

  1. Template:NumBlk

and

  1. Template:NumBlk

Adding the right hand sides of (Template:EquationNote), (Template:EquationNote), (Template:EquationNote) and (Template:EquationNote) one gets

Adding the right hand sides of (Template:EquationNote), (Template:EquationNote), (Template:EquationNote) and (Template:EquationNote) one gets

References

  • El'Yasberg "Theory of flight of artificial earth satellites", Israel program for Scientific Translations (1967)

See also