Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gvh9x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T05:13:14.335Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ideal Frame and Multi-Revolution Methods for Space Debris Dynamics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2016

C. Calvo ,
B. Melendo  and
M. Palacios
C. Calvo
Affiliation:
Grupo de Mecánica Espacial, Universidad de Zaragoza Zaragoza, Spain
B. Melendo
Affiliation:
Grupo de Mecánica Espacial, Universidad de Zaragoza Zaragoza, Spain
M. Palacios
Affiliation:
Grupo de Mecánica Espacial, Universidad de Zaragoza Zaragoza, Spain

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.

Using the computational advantages offered by the formulation of orbital problems with respect to the ideal frame, with or without regularization, we consider the multi–revolution methods to obtain numerically the short and long–term propagation of the resulting debris clouds after a breakup event of an operational satellite. The problem posed and solved in this form gives high efficiency. We think that software with these features will serve two purposes: it will support studies of the hazards of space debris for operational orbital space systems and also will help to create debris analysis programs more transferable and reliable.

Type
Dynamics of Artificial Satellites and Space Debris
Information
International Astronomical Union Colloquium , Volume 165: Dynamics and Astrometry of Natural and Artificial Celestial Bodies , 1997 , pp. 375 - 380
Copyright
Copyright © Kluwer 1997

References

Bellman, K.L.: 1993, “Debris analysis workstation: A modeling environment for studies on space debris”, in: First European Conference on Space Debris (Flury, W., ed.), European Space Agency, Darmstadt, 303–308.Google Scholar
Calvo, C., Melendo, B., and Palacios, M.: 1995, “The choice of appropriate reference systems in numerical integration of orbits”, Cahiers du Centre Européen de Géodynamique et de Séismologie 10, 99–108.Google Scholar
Grigorief, K.V., Sochilina, A.S. and Vershkov, A.N.: 1993, “On catalogue of geostationary satellites”, in: First European Conference on Space Debris (Flury, W., ed.), European Space Agency, Darmstadt, 665–669.Google Scholar
Landauer, C.: 1993, “Theoretical and practical issues in software for space debris modeling”, in: First European Conference on Space Debris (Flury, W., ed.), European Space Agency, Darmstadt, 299–302.Google Scholar
McNight, D.: 1991, “Determination of breakup initial conditions”, J. Spacecraft 28, 4, 470–477.Google Scholar
Melendo, B. and Palacios, M.: 1996, “A new approach to the construction of multi-revolution methods and their implementation”, Appl. Num. Maths. 20, 1, 1–16.Google Scholar
Palacios, M. and Calvo, C.: 1996, “Ideal frame and regularization in numerical orbit computation”, J. Astronaut. Sci. 44, 1, 63–77.Google Scholar
Utkin, V.F. and Chekalin, S.V.: 1993, “Space debris and orbital flight safety”, in: First European Conference on Space Debris (Flury, W., ed.), European Space Agency, Darmstadt, 559–562.Google Scholar