Geosynchrously orbiting satellites

  • Thread starter Thread starter gills
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Satellites
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the orbital radius of a satellite that needs to catch up to a geosynchronous satellite. Initial calculations suggest a radius of approximately 4.01 x 10^7 meters, but further analysis indicates a more accurate radius of 4.09 x 10^7 meters. The error in the first solution stems from incorrectly assuming that angular velocity is inversely proportional to radius, which is clarified through Kepler's third law. The correct relationship shows that a decrease in orbital period results in a smaller radius, leading to a decrease of about 1340 kilometers from geosynchronous altitude. The final conclusion emphasizes the need for precise calculations in orbital mechanics.
gills
Messages
115
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



[PLAIN][PLAIN]http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j64/mrbebu/Physics_orbit_problem.jpg

Homework Equations



\frac{GMm}{R^{2}}

v = \sqrt{\frac{GM}{R}}

v = wR

The Attempt at a Solution



Am I correct in my methods and thinking?

R_g = Geosynchrous orbit from Earth's center = 4.22 x 10^{7}m
R_e = Radius of Earth = 6.37 x 10^{6}

velocity of geosynchrous orbits (same for both satelites) --->
v = \sqrt{\frac{GM}{R_g}} = 3072 m/s

Then I decided to find the angular velocity to relate it with angular displacement--->
w = \frac{v}{R_g} = 7.28 x 10^{-5} rad/s

so 10 orbits in a geosynchrous orbit is 240 hours = 864000 seconds

The satellite that needs to catch up needs to complete 10.5 orbits in the same time.

10.5 orbits = 21\pi radians ---> \bar{w} = \frac{d\theta}{dt} = 7.64 x 10^{-5} rad/s

Ratio of the w's =
\frac{7.28 x 10^{-5}}{7.64 x 10^{-5}} = 0.95

since w is inversely proportional to the radius, the satellite that needs to catch up will need to have a radius 0.95 times a geosynchrous one which --->

0.95 x 4.22 x 10^{7} = 4.01 x 10^{7} m from Earth's center

But, i have a feeling that this is an incorrect assumption.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
I've done another way that is close to my previous answer, but i think is more accurate.

using v = \frac{2\pi r}{T}

and substituting it in for v in--->

v^{2} = \frac{GM}{r} ---> and that gives us --->

T^{2} = \frac{4\pi^{2}r^{3}}{GM}

so using the geosync satellite, we know that one period, T, takes 24 hours = 86400 seconds. And one T = 2\pir traveled

But for the chasing satellite to catch the geo satellite in 10 orbits, it needs to travel and extra \frac{1}{2} orbit during the full 10 orbits which = \pi radians.

so the chasing sat needs to cover an extra \frac{\pi}{10} radians during the same 86400 second T. Therefore --->

2\pi + \frac{\pi}{10} = \frac{21\pi}{10}

instead of \frac{2\pi r}{T} , we use:

(\frac{21\pi r}{10T})^{2} (squaring the whole expression) = \frac{GM}{r}

Then solving for r = \sqrt[3]{\frac{100T^{2}GM}{441\pi^{2}}}

which = 4.09 * 10^{7} meters from center of earth.

I'm thinking this is the right answer
 
Last edited:
Good so far, but you still haven't answered the problem. How much lower is this orbit than a geosynchronous orbit?
 
D H said:
Good so far, but you still haven't answered the problem. How much lower is this orbit than a geosynchronous orbit?
T
I'm not worried about that part. That's the easy part:wink: I'm worried about the actual radius i got for the new orbit. Good so far i guess means that it is correct. Which are you referring to, first solution or second?
 
gills said:

Homework Equations



\frac{GMm}{R^{2}}

v = \sqrt{\frac{GM}{R}}

v = wR
OK, but now express R in terms of \omega:

R^3 = \frac{G M}{\omega^2}

so 10 orbits in a geosynchrous orbit is 240 hours = 864000 seconds
OK. Interpreting the problem as 10 geosynchronous orbits (it could also be 10 orbits of the faster satellite), I'd write it as:
\omega_g T = 10(2\pi) = 20 \pi

The satellite that needs to catch up needs to complete 10.5 orbits in the same time.
I'd write that as:
(\omega_1 - \omega_g)T = \pi

10.5 orbits = 21\pi radians ---> \bar{w} = \frac{d\theta}{dt} = 7.64 x 10^{-5} rad/s

Ratio of the w's =
\frac{7.28 x 10^{-5}}{7.64 x 10^{-5}} = 0.95
By combining the two previous equations, I'd view that as:
20\omega_1 = 21\omega_g

since w is inversely proportional to the radius, the satellite that needs to catch up will need to have a radius 0.95 times a geosynchrous one which --->
There's the problem with this solution: \omega is not inversely proportional to the radius.
 
gills said:
Good so far i guess means that it is correct. Which are you referring to, first solution or second?

The second answer is correct. As Doc Al noted in the previous post, the first solution erroneously assumes "w is inversely proportional to the radius". The correct relationship is Kepler's third law,

r \sim T^{2/3}

You can linearize this relationship as

\frac {\Delta r}{r} \approx \frac 2 3 \frac {\Delta T}{T}

Thus decreasing the period by 1/21st (note well: not by 1/20th) of the original period corresponds to roughly a 1340 kilometer decrease in orbital radius at geosynchronous altitude. This is a lot closer to the correct value than the 2100 kilometers you obtained for your first solution. It's still not correct, as the approximation is just that -- an approximation.
 
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Back
Top