Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T15:02:19.269Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Semi-Analytical and Semi-Numerical Methods in Celestial Mechanics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2016

Slawomir Breiter
Slawomir Breiter*
Affiliation:
Astronomical Observatory, Adam Mickiewicz University Poznań, Poland

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Many quite different theories and methods of celestial mechanics are referred to as semi-analytical or semi-numerical. Their common feature is the trade-off of a generality for a computational efficiency. Four main ideas behind semi-analytical theories are identified and reviewed: series contraction, analytical support of numerical integration, piecewise solutions, and numerical evaluation of action-angle variables. The role of numerical analysis tools in analytical theories is briefly discussed.

Type
Theory of Motion
Information
International Astronomical Union Colloquium , Volume 165: Dynamics and Astrometry of Natural and Artificial Celestial Bodies , 1997 , pp. 411 - 418
Copyright
Copyright © Kluwer 1997

References

Breiter, S.: 1996, “On the numerical transformation of variables in perturbation theory”, Celest. Mech. & Dyn. Astron., in press.Google Scholar
Bretagnon, P.: 1986, “Construction of a planetary solution with the help of an N-body program, and analytical complements”, Celest. Mech. 38, 181–190.Google Scholar
Brown, E.W. and Shook, C.A.: 1933, Planetary Theory, Cambridge University Press, London.Google Scholar
Chapront, J.: 1982, “The Fourier-Cheby she v approximation for time series with a great many terms”, Celest. Mech. 28, 415–430.Google Scholar
Chapront, J.: 1984, “Approximation methods in celestial mechanics”, Celest. Mech. 34, 165–184.Google Scholar
Chapront-Touzé, M.: 1982, “Progress in the analytical theories for the orbital motion of the Moon”, Celest. Mech. 26, 53–62.Google Scholar
Danielson, D.A.: 1994, “Semianalytic satellite theory: second-order expansions in the true longitude L”, in: Advances in the Astronautical Sciences (Misra, A.K. et al., eds), 85, 2457–2474.Google Scholar
Delhaise, F. and Henrard, J.: 1993, “The problem of critical inclination combined with a resonance in mean motion in artificial satellite theory”, Celest. Mech. & Dyn. Astron. 55, 261–280.Google Scholar
Diez, C., Jorba, A., and Simó, C.: 1991, “A dynamical equivalent to the equilateral libration points of the Earth-Moon system”, Celest. Mech. & Dyn. Astron. 50, 13.Google Scholar
Ferraz-Mello, S.: 1987, “Expansion of the disturbing force-function for the study of high-eccentricity librations”, Astron. Astrophys. 183, 397–402.Google Scholar
Fox, K.: 1984, “Numerical integration of the equations of motion of celestial mechanics”, Celest. Mech. 33, 127–142.Google Scholar
Gooding, R.H. and King-Hele, D.G.: 1988, “Explicit forms of some functions arising in the analysis of resonant satellite orbits”, R.A.E. Tech. Rep., No 99035.Google Scholar
Henrard, J.: 1978, “Hill’s problem in lunar theory”, Celest. Mech. 17, 195–204.Google Scholar
Henrard, J.: 1990, “A semi-numerical perturbation method for separable Hamiltonian systems”, Celest. Mech. & Dyn. Astron. 49, 43–68.Google Scholar
Hoots, F.R. and France, R.G.: 1987, “An analytic satellite theory using gravity and a dynamic atmosphere”, Celest. Mech. 40, 1–18.Google Scholar
Kizner, W.: 1964, “A high-order perturbation theory using rectangular coordinates”, Celestial Mechanics and Astrodynamics (Szebehely, V.G., ed.), Academic Press, New York, 81–99.Google Scholar
Kovalevsky, J.: 1963, Introduction à la Mécanique Céleste, Armand Colin, Paris.Google Scholar
Kubo, Y.: 1982, “Perturbations by the oblatness of the Earth and by the planets in the motion of the Moon”, Celest. Mech. 26, 97–112.Google Scholar
Laskar, J.: 1990, “The chaotic motion of the Solar system: A numerical estimate of the size of chaotic zones”, Icarus 88, 266–291.Google Scholar
Laskar, J.: 1993, “Frequency analysis of a dynamical system”, Celest. Mech & Dyn. Astron. 56, 191–196.Google Scholar
Lautman, D.A.: 1977, “Perturbations of a close-Earth satellite due to sunlight diffusely reflected from the Earth. I: Uniform albedo”, Celest. Mech. 15, 387–420.Google Scholar
Métris, G. and Exertier, P.: 1995, “Semi-analytical theory of the mean orbital motion”, Astron. Astrophys. 294, 278–286.Google Scholar
Moons, M.: 1994, “Extended Schubart averaging”, Celest. Mech. & Dyn. Astron. 60, 173.Google Scholar
Morbidelli, A.: 1993, “On the succesive elimination of perturbation harmonics”, Celest. Mech. & Dyn. Astron. 55, 101–130.Google Scholar
Morbidelli, A. and Henrard, J.: 1991, “Secular resonances in the asteroid belt: Theoretical perturbation approach and the problem of their location”, Celest. Mech. & Dyn. Astron. 51, 131–168.Google Scholar
Nacozy, P.E. and Diehl, R.E.: 1982, “Long-term motion of resonant satellites with arbitrary eccentricity and inclination”, Celest. Mech. 27, 375–398.Google Scholar
Roth, E.A.: 1979, “On the higher-order stroboscopie method”, J. Appl. Math. Phys. (ZAMP) 30, 315–325.Google Scholar
Saha, P. and Tremarne, S.: 1992, “Symplectic integrators for Solar system dynamics”, Astron. J. 104, 1633–1640.Google Scholar
Schubart, J.: 1968, “Long-period effects in the motion of Hilda-type planets”, Astron. J. 73, 99–103.Google Scholar
Watson, J.S., Mistretta, G.D., and Bonavito, N.L.: 1975, “An analytical method to account for drag in the Vinti satellite theory”, Celest. Mech. 11, 145–178.Google Scholar
Wisdom, J. and Holman, M.: 1991, “Symplectic maps for the N-body problem”, Astron. J. 102, 1528–1538.Google Scholar