Position of a Body on a Hyperbolic/Parabolic Orbit with Respect to Time

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the position of a body on hyperbolic and parabolic orbits using Keplerian elements. The original poster successfully coded an elliptic orbit but encountered issues when the eccentricity reached or exceeded 1.0, as traditional Kepler's equations do not apply to these types of orbits. Contributors clarified that for parabolic orbits, Barker's equation is necessary, while hyperbolic orbits require the hyperbolic anomaly. They also noted that the formulas for plotting these orbits differ from those used for elliptical orbits, emphasizing the need for alternative equations. The conversation concludes with the poster seeking further clarification on the relationship between hyperbolic anomaly and true anomaly.
whiterook6
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
.. Using Keplerian Elements

Hi. Disclaimer: this is the first foray into orbits I've ever taken. I only did mechanics in university and haven't really touched it sincew.

I'm busy coding a simulation of a solar system. I've managed to code a routine to calculate the position of a body along an elliptic orbit, using a wikipedia article, but the code breaks down when the eccentricity of the orbit approaches or passes 1.0. Specifically, the true anomaly goes to π and the radius goes to ∞ pretty much immediately when the eccentricity is 1.0; when the eccentricity is >1.0, the true anomaly goes to ∞ too.

So, I'm looking for a little help with an algorithm to calculate points on a parabolic orbit, or on a hyperbolic orbit, using the same parameters like semimajor axis and eccentricity. From what I can see, mean/eccentric/true anomalies don't make sense for parabolic and hyperbolic orbits.

I'll take whatever help you can lend, and I don't need anyone to code me a solution, but I'm specifically looking to calculate the coordinates of a point on the orbit with respect to time.

Thanks for your help!

If you're curious, here's the code:
Code:
float meanAnomaly=(2.0f*pi*age)/(period)+meanAnomalyAtEpoch,
      eccentricAnomaly=solveForEccentricAnomaly(meanAnomaly, eccentricity),
      trueAnomaly=2.0f*atan2f(sqrt(1.0f+eccentricity)*sin(eccentricAnomaly/2.0f),
                              sqrt(1.0f-eccentricity)*cos(eccentricAnomaly/2.0f)),
      radius=semiMajorAxis*(1.0f-(eccentricity*eccentricity))/(1+eccentricity*cos(trueAnomaly));
where solveForEccenticAnomaly solves M=E-e*sin(E).
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
whiterook6 said:
where solveForEccenticAnomaly solves M=E-e*sin(E).
That's the source of your problem. That is Kepler's equation for an elliptical orbit. It isn't valid for hyperbolic orbits (e>1) or for orbits with e=1 (parabolic orbits, plus three kinds of degenerate orbits (angular momentum=0)).

The solutions for parabolic and hyperbolic orbits can be found in a number of references:
- Vallado & McClain, Fundamentals of astrodynamics and applications
- Battin, An introduction to the mathematics and methods of astrodynamics
- Astrodynamics, MIT Open CourseWare, http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/aeronautics-and-astronautics/16-346-astrodynamics-fall-2008/
 
D H said:
That's the source of your problem. That is Kepler's equation for an elliptical orbit. It isn't valid for hyperbolic orbits (e>1) or for orbits with e=1 (parabolic orbits, plus three kinds of degenerate orbits (angular momentum=0)).

The solutions for parabolic and hyperbolic orbits can be found in a number of references:
- Vallado & McClain, Fundamentals of astrodynamics and applications
- Battin, An introduction to the mathematics and methods of astrodynamics
- Astrodynamics, MIT Open CourseWare, http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/aeronautics-and-astronautics/16-346-astrodynamics-fall-2008/

Phew, that's a little beyond me. However, I know that it's certainly possible to plot a parabola/hyperbola in polar coordinates (or at least wikipedia says we can):

r=a(e2-1)/(1+e*cosθ)

Can I consider θ to be a true anomaly, and if so, is it possible to calculate θ from time t given parameters similar to Keplerian elements, like semimajor axis, focus distance, or period?
 
whiterook6 said:
Phew, that's a little beyond me. However, I know that it's certainly possible to plot a parabola/hyperbola in polar coordinates (or at least wikipedia says we can):

r=a(e2-1)/(1+e*cosθ)

Can I consider θ to be a true anomaly, and if so, is it possible to calculate θ from time t given parameters similar to Keplerian elements, like semimajor axis, focus distance, or period?

You can't use r=a(e^2-1)/(1+e\cos\theta) for a parabola. You can use r=p/(1+e\cos\theta) where p is the semi latus rectum as a general rule. This is valid for everything but the degenerate cases with zero angular momentum.

Kepler's equation does generalize to parabolic and hyperbolic orbits. For parabolae you need to use Barker's equation. For hyperbolae you need to use the hyperbolic anomaly. The hyperbolic equivalent of Kepler's equation is M=e\sinh H - H.

For more, and for derivations, I suggest you see the references I supplied in my previous post.
 
D H said:
You can't use r=a(e^2-1)/(1+e\cos\theta) for a parabola. You can use r=p/(1+e\cos\theta) where p is the semi latus rectum as a general rule. This is valid for everything but the degenerate cases with zero angular momentum.

Kepler's equation does generalize to parabolic and hyperbolic orbits. For parabolae you need to use Barker's equation. For hyperbolae you need to use the hyperbolic anomaly. The hyperbolic equivalent of Kepler's equation is M=e\sinh H - H.

For more, and for derivations, I suggest you see the references I supplied in my previous post.

Thanks. That doesn't really answer my question, but it's certainly a start. I can get the hyperbolic anomaly from the above formula; can I go from that to a true anomaly, and in the above formula, is M the same as for elliptical orbits? And does Barker's Equation also give a "parabolic anomaly" from a mean anomaly?
 
Publication: Redox-driven mineral and organic associations in Jezero Crater, Mars Article: NASA Says Mars Rover Discovered Potential Biosignature Last Year Press conference The ~100 authors don't find a good way this could have formed without life, but also can't rule it out. Now that they have shared their findings with the larger community someone else might find an explanation - or maybe it was actually made by life.
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
Back
Top