Height and Acceleration of a Satellite in Orbit

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the height and acceleration of a satellite in orbit, using gravitational equations. The calculated radius of the satellite's orbit is approximately 9.41 million meters, leading to a height of about 3,030 kilometers above Earth's surface. There is confusion regarding the gravitational field strength (Eg) and whether the equations used are correct. Participants clarify that gravitational force acts as centripetal acceleration, directing towards Earth's center. The calculations align with expectations, confirming that a height of over 3,000 kilometers is reasonable for the given gravitational conditions.
benca
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
A satellite is designed to orbit earth at an altitude above its surface that will place it in a gravitational field with a strength of 4.5 N/Kg

a) Calculate the distance above the surface of the earth at which the satellite must orbit

b) Assuming the orbit is circular, calculate the acceleration of the satellite and its direction

c) at what speed must the satellite travel in order to maintain this orbit?
Relevant Equations
Eg = Gme/r^2

me = mass of the earth
a)

Eg = Gme/r^2
r = √Gme/Eg
r = √[(6.67x10^-11 N*m^2*kg^2)(5.98x10^24 kg)]/(4.5 N/kg)
r = 9.41x10^6 m

h = r2 - r1
h = 9.41x10^6 m - 6.38x10^6 m
h = 3.03x10^6 m

that's over 3000 km. Did I not use for right equation? Is Eg not 4.5 N/kg?

Also for b), isn't the force of gravity the centripetal acceleration? so wouldn't it be the same equation? ac = Gme/r^2

and I don't know what it means by direction. isn't it accelerating in a circular motion? This one has really got me confused.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
benca said:
that's over 3000 km. Did I not use for right equation? Is Eg not 4.5 N/kg?

Also for b), isn't the force of gravity the centripetal acceleration? so wouldn't it be the same equation? ac = Gme/r^2

and I don't know what it means by direction. isn't it accelerating in a circular motion? This one has really got me confused.

Why do you think over 3000km is wrong?

Acceletration is a vector, and has a direction. What is the directioin for uniform circular motion?
 
PeroK said:
Why do you think over 3000km is wrong?

Acceletration is a vector, and has a direction. What is the directioin for uniform circular motion?

Well in examples provided the satellites were much less. I guess I thought it should have been similar. And now that I say it, the direction of acceleration is towards the centre of the Earth (?)
 
benca said:
Well in examples provided the satellites were much less. I guess I thought it should have been similar. And now that I say it, the direction of acceleration is towards the centre of the Earth (?)
Yes. That's what "centripetal" means.

By the way, you can get the radius by noticing that the gravitational force is inversely proportional to the square of the distance. So:

##\frac{r^2}{R^2} = \frac{g_R}{g_r}##

The force you were given was just under half the Earth's surface gravity, so ##r \approx 1.5 R##. ##R \approx 6,000km##, so ##h \approx 3,000 km## looks about right.
 
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Back
Top