Solar Sail Physics - Do they work on a large scale?

AI Thread Summary
Solar sails can theoretically provide propulsion for large spacecraft, but the required sail area for significant acceleration is impractically large. To accelerate a 1 megaton starship at 100 m/s², thousands of square kilometers of sail would be necessary, far exceeding feasible designs. The force generated by solar radiation diminishes with distance from the Sun, limiting the effective range of solar sails for intrasystem travel. The discussion highlights that while solar sails are an interesting concept, they are not suitable for quick transit times compared to other propulsion methods. Overall, solar sails are not economically viable for moving massive objects at high accelerations within the solar system.
monicamostly
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello physicists! I'm hoping you can help me with a question I'm pondering for a book.

At what acceleration could a 4 km^2 solar sail move a 1 metric megaton starship? Assume we're using the solar radiation from the Sol system as our force and that the solar sail in questions is as low mass and highly reflective as theoretically possible.

Basically, I'm trying to understand if solar sail is an economical method of intrasystem travel in terms of time, not energy. How large would the solar sail have to be to move something that big at an acceleration of greater than 100 m/s^2? (Assume g-forces on the crew are not an issue.)

How far from the sun is too far for a solar sail to be useful? At what point does solar radiation become too weak to maintain a reasonable acceleration?

Are there any simple rules of thumb for this? (Can we invent them?) Such as 1 km^2 sail per X number of tons? X% decrease in acceleration per 1 AU from the sun? X% change in acceleration from solar radiation per X% change in the luminosity of the star compared to the Sun?

Any wisdom you can add would be helpful. Thanks!

-Monica Mostly
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A metric megaton is a lot. That's 10^9 kg. That's the mass of a cube of water 1km across. What could you possibly need to move that is that massive? Trajectory of that mass would remain virtually unchanged with or without a 4km² sail.

Effect on solar sail is dominated by radiation pressure, which is easy enough to compute. At 100% reflectivity, you can get 2x the momentum carried by the light. So the maximum force on the sail is given by following expression.

F=\frac{A L}{2 \pi R^2 c}

Where A is area of the sail, L is total luminosity of the Sun, R is the distance from the Sun's center, and c is the speed of light. Sun's luminosity is 3.846×1026W. So at Earth's orbit, R≈150Gm, the force comes out to 9N per square kilometer.

So to accelerate even a tiniest ship at 1G, you will need thousands of square kilometers of sail, made of material that adds up to considerably less than 1kg per square kilometer.

Hopefully, that answers all of your questions on time-efficiency of solar sails.
 
Welcome to PF!

In short, the acceleration for any realistic solar sail will be minuscule and not appropriate for short transit times.

Just to give you a rough idea what we are talking about the upper limit for the force obtainable. Since solar light has a power P = 1360 W/m2 at the Earths distance from the sun, you can expect a reaction force of F = 2*A*P/c for fully reflected light over an area of A (with c being the speed of light) which means that to give the mass m an acceleration a from this force you need an area of A = 2*m*a*c/P. To give m = 1 kg an acceleration of one G, a = 9.8 m/s2 you therefore need no less than 4.3 km2 of sail, and that is even with the very unrealistic assumption that the sail itself has no mass. Add solar sail mass and maneuvering that gives realistic interplanetary trajectories and you quickly realize that solar sails are not going to accelerate fast or "go" anywhere quick, at least not compared with other existing or feasible propulsion technologies.

You may want to read some more background material about solar sails on [1].


[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_sail
 
Filip, A=m*a*c/(2P) from your equations above, giving a little over 1km², which is the same result that I give in a post right above yours.
 
K^2 said:
Filip, A=m*a*c/(2P) from your equations above, giving a little over 1km², which is the same result that I give in a post right above yours.

You are right. I managed to mess up moving a factor of 2 to the other side :rolleyes:
 
That's what I was afraid of. I was hoping I was doing the math wrong. Thanks everyone!
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top