Proving Least-Energy Orbits of Spacecraft

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Lonewolf
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Orbits
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of proving that a least-energy orbit for a spacecraft is indeed the least-energy orbit, particularly in the context of sending a probe to Saturn. Participants explore theoretical and mathematical aspects of orbital mechanics without reaching a definitive conclusion.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks guidance on how to prove that a least-energy orbit is the least-energy orbit without wanting a direct answer.
  • Another participant questions the constraints of the problem, suggesting that the complexity may depend on specific conditions such as the type of orbits involved.
  • A participant provides context by mentioning the goal of sending a probe to Saturn, indicating that while it seems obvious that the least-energy orbit is optimal, proving it is challenging.
  • One participant describes the characteristics of the least-energy orbit as an elliptical path, detailing how the perihelion and aphelion relate to the spacecraft's trajectory and energy calculations.
  • A mathematical explanation is provided regarding the energy of orbits, comparing circular and elliptical orbits, and discussing how the average distance from the Sun affects energy levels.
  • Another participant acknowledges the contributions of others and expresses gratitude for the explanations provided.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the proof of the least-energy orbit, and multiple viewpoints and approaches are presented without resolution.

Contextual Notes

Some limitations include the dependence on specific orbital mechanics principles and the assumptions regarding the nature of the orbits being discussed. The mathematical steps involved in proving the least-energy orbit remain unresolved.

Lonewolf
Messages
329
Reaction score
1
How would one go about proving that a least-energy orbit of a spacecraft is actually the least-energy orbit? I don't want the answer, just a push in the right direction.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
delta v

Hmm, this may not be as easy as it seems at first.

Do you have some contraints? For example, "between two neighbouring planetary orbits"? or, "excluding gravitational slingshots"?
 
In context, the question is to do with sending a probe to Saturn. Not sure if that's helpful, or not. It seems to be a case of being obvious that it is the least energy orbit, but being a pain to prove it.
 
The least energy orbit from Earth to another member of the solar system is an ellipse where the shuttle's perihelion, or distance where the shuttle is closest to the Sun, is the point at which the shuttle leaves the Earth's orbit. The shuttle's contact with the larger body occurs at the shuttle's aphelion or point in the elliptical orbit farthest from the Sun. It can be shown that the major axis of the resulting ellipse is found by adding the average distance in astronomical units from the Sun for each of the two bodies together: Earth and the target planet.

Not sure if this helps, but oh well, I don't understand the question clearly enough to elaborate on mathematics. But I'm only 15, so I doubt I'd be any assistance there! I'll try though.
 
The energy of an orbit is equal to the kinetic energy of the body plus the gravitational potential energy of the the body, or

E = mv²/2 - GMm/r

Now for a circular orbit, v= [squ](GM/r), so

E= GMm/2r - GMm/r = -GMm/2r

Now for an eliptical orbit, the body swings in and out from an average distance from the sun and this average distance is equal to the semimajor axis of the orbit (a) . as it does so, its orbital velocity increases and decreases also.

When the orbital distance is equal to 'a', the orbital velocity is equal to the velocity it would have in a circular orbit at that distance. Since the the energy of an orbit doesn't change, this means that any eliptical orbit has the same energy as a circular one of radius 'a', and we can rewrite our second equation as

E =-GMm/2a

As 'a' gets' larger E become less negative and thus is less.

If you are launching a craft from orbit one to orbit two, it is obvious that if 'a' is less than the average of the distance from the sun of the two planets, then the craft won't reach the second orbit. So 'a' must at least be that large. If the outer limb of the orbit swing out further than the second orbit, then 'a' has to become larger and the energy of the orbit increases.

Thus the energy difference between the first orbit and the transfer orbit increases (As does the energy needed to put the craft into the transfer orbit from oribt one.

This works even if the planet you are launching to orbits closer to the sun.

If you try and make the orbit so that it swings in closer to the sun than the target planet, then 'a' of this orbit gets smaller and the orbit has less energy. But such a tranfer orbit willhave less energy than the launch planet's orbit to start with, so decreasing its energy, increases the difference from the launch orbit, and increases the energy needed to mak the transfer.
 
Yup, that answers it. Thanks Janus. Thanks for having a go, Jeebus :smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 86 ·
3
Replies
86
Views
9K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K