Classical Mechanics: Retarding force on a satellite

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the retarding force on a spherical satellite moving through a tenuous atmosphere. The retarding force is determined to be -ρAv², where ρ is the atmospheric density and A is the cross-sectional area of the satellite. Participants emphasize the importance of conservation laws, specifically momentum for particles adhering to the satellite and kinetic energy for particles bouncing off. The conversation highlights the significance of simplifying assumptions, such as treating the mass of impacting particles as negligible compared to the satellite's mass.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of classical mechanics principles, particularly conservation of momentum and kinetic energy.
  • Familiarity with the concepts of retarding forces and fluid dynamics.
  • Knowledge of basic satellite dynamics and atmospheric interactions.
  • Ability to apply mathematical equations related to motion and forces.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of retarding forces in fluid dynamics, focusing on the equation -ρAv².
  • Learn about conservation laws in mechanics, specifically how they apply to collisions and interactions.
  • Explore the effects of atmospheric density on satellite motion and drag forces.
  • Investigate the implications of frame of reference changes in classical mechanics problems.
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, aerospace engineering, and anyone involved in satellite design or atmospheric science will benefit from this discussion.

Niall Kennedy
Messages
7
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A spherical satellite of radius r is moving with velocity v through a uniform tenuous atmosphere of density ρ. Find the retarding force on the satellite if each particle which strikes it (a) adheres to the surface and (b) bounces off it elastically.

I know the answer should be: -ρAv2

Homework Equations


I am not fully sure one what equations are relevant but I am thinking, for part (a) conservation of momentum and for part (b) conservation of kinetic energy.

The Attempt at a Solution


For part (a):
This is what I tried but it did not really lead to anything that makes sense, maybe I set it up wrong or took a wrong approach?
Mv + dm(v - u)= (M + dm)(v - dv)

For part (b):
I intended to use the conservation of kinetic energy but I ended up getting confused on the set up of it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For part a) why not focus on momentum and first consider the effect of a single particle of mass ##m##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Niall Kennedy
PeroK said:
For part a) why not focus on momentum and first consider the effect of a single particle of mass ##m##.
Something like,
Mv = (M + m)u ?
Or am I taking it the wrong way?
 
Niall Kennedy said:
Something like,
Mv = (M + m)u ?
Or am I taking it the wrong way?

Do you know ##M##?
 
PeroK said:
Do you know ##M##?
Sorry, I probably should have explained. I don't know what M is but I was using it as the mass of the satellite.
 
Niall Kennedy said:
Sorry, I probably should have explained. I don't know what M is but I was using it as the mass of the satellite.
Yes, I understood that. But, if you don't know ##M## and it probably isn't intended to be a factor in the answer, then you may need to think again.

Can you estimate ##u## from that equation?
 
PeroK said:
Yes, I understood that. But, if you don't know ##M## and it probably isn't intended to be a factor in the answer, then you may need to think again.

Can you estimate ##u## from that equation?
Oh okay, that makes a lot of sense.

In terms of M, yes but without M, no. So could I make the assumption that the particles in the atmosphere are at rest and say that the mass of the particles hitting the satellite = ρA which hit the satellite at -v?
 
Niall Kennedy said:
Oh okay, that makes a lot of sense.

In terms of M, yes but without M, no. So could I make the assumption that the particles in the atmosphere are at rest and say that the mass of the particles hitting the satellite = ρA which hit the satellite at -v?

Let me help you out. The idea is that if ##m## is very small compared to ##M##, then you can ignore the negligible change in velocity over a short time. I'm not sure whether this has been mentioned somewhere in your course or whether you are expected to be able to think on your feet.

Actually, changing the frame of reference, so that you imagine a large satellite being bombarded by a stream of small particles is a good idea. Especially for part b).

Does that make sense?
 
PeroK said:
Let me help you out. The idea is that if ##m## is very small compared to ##M##, then you can ignore the negligible change in velocity over a short time. I'm not sure whether this has been mentioned somewhere in your course or whether you are expected to be able to think on your feet.

Actually, changing the frame of reference, so that you imagine a large satellite being bombarded by a stream of small particles is a good idea. Especially for part b).

Does that make sense?
That makes sense, a lot of sense actually, thank you!

That's something I've used a lot before and should really think of straight away, I think this question has just been annoying me for too long haha
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K