SPA603: Solar System Processes and Space Missions

HW 1 (due by 26 August)

1. Tisserand’s relation. Consider a test particle, such as a comet, that interacts with a large body, such
as a planet like Jupiter; see gure at bottom. The comet, Jupiter and the Sun may be modeled as a
CR3BP. It is possible to establish the following relation between the pre- and post- encounter orbital
parameters of the test particle:
1 1
+ a (1 − e 2 ) cos I = + a′(1 − e ′2 ) cos I′,
2a 2a′
where a , e and I are the orbit’s semi-major axis, ellipticity and inclination, respectively, and (′) signi es the
post-impact parameters. The above is called Tisserand’s relation, which helps determine if a comet is
new or has been observed before. Obtain the above through the following steps.
i. We will take units of length and time such that Jupiter’s orbit about the Sun is rJ = 1 and its orbital
angular velocity n = 1 . The mass unit is such that G ms = 1 . We will ignore the mass of Jupiter and
the comet in comparison to the Sun’s, so that G (ms + mJ ) ≈ 1 and G (ms + mc ) ≈ 1. Consequently, we
will assume that the center of mass of the CR3BP system lies at the Sun, as it is so much heavier.
Finally, the comet-Sun will form a two-body problem in which the comet moves on an elliptic orbit at
all times, except when the comet encounters Jupiter.
ii. Consider a xed (inertial) coordinate system (CS) with origin at the Sun and whose ê3 is normal to
Jupiter’s orbital plane. Let the location of the comet in this CS be r = ξ e1̂ + η ê 2 + ζ ê3 , so that its
· ·
velocity in the inertial CS is r· = ξ e1̂ + η· ê 2 + ζ ê3. In terms of these the Jacobi constant CJ = 2U − v 2
may be written as

( r1 r2 )
μ1 μ 2 · · ·
CJ = 2 + + 2n (ξ η· − η ξ ) − ξ 2 − η· 2 − ζ 2 .
iii. Before it encounters Jupiter we may consider the comet-Sun system to be a two-body problem. Use
the energy integral from the two-body problem to show that
· · 2 1
ξ 2 + η· 2 + ζ 2 = − .
r a
iv. The angular momentum per unit mass of the comet in the comet-Sun two body problem is given by
h = r × r· . If I is the inclination of the comet’s orbital plane with respect to Jupiter’s orbital plane
before its encounter with Jupiter, then show that
·
h ⋅ ê 3 = h cos I = ξ η· − η ξ.
A similar expression will hold for the ê3 component of the comet’s speci c angular momentum after
its Jupiter encounter.
v. Show that the speci c angular momentum in the two-body problem is given by h = a (1 − e 2 ) .
vi. Combine the formulae we have derived to obtain Tisserand’s relation. You will have to make one
more approximation, which you should defend.






fi


fi

fi












fi



fi
 2. Hill’s equations and Hill’s sphere. In CR3BP usually the primary is much bigger than the
secondary, so that the test particle generally moves as per the two-body problem around the primary. It is
only when the test particle gets really close to the secondary that the effects of the secondary show up. We
will now reformulate the CR3BP equations to investigate the effect of the secondary on the test particle
when it makes a close approach. We will consider a planar situation and implement the following steps:
i. We will rst estimate how close the test particle has to be to the secondary for its motion to be
dominated by the secondary. To this end, rst, show that in CR3BP if a test particle is inserted with
zero initial velocity in the rotating frame at a location closer that the L1 point then it remains bound
to the secondary. Thus, conclude that for the secondary to dominate the test particles distance from
the secondary should be of the order of the distance of L1 from the secondary.
ii. We will now estimate the distance of the L1 point through the following steps:
a. S h o w t h a t i n C R 3 B P t h e p o t e n t i a l U m a y b e w r i t t e n a s
r2 r2
( 1 ) ( 2 )
1 1 μ μ
U = μ1 + 1 + μ2 + 2 − 1 2.
r 2 r 2 2
μ2 1 − r2 + r22 /3
b. Now show that at the L1 point we have the relation = 3r23 .
μ1 (1 + r2 + r22 )(1 − r2 )3
c. Argue that at L1 the distance r2 is small, so that the leading-order estimate for r2 obtained from
the preceding relation yields the distance of the L1 point to be (μ2 /3μ1)1/3 . Thus, for the
secondary to dominate the motion of the test particle, its distance from the secondary should be
of this order.
iii. We will now consider a small secondary, so that μ1 ≈ 1 ; thus, the center of mass of the system is at
the primary. Show that the CR3BP equations are now approximated by
x x −1
x·· − 2y· − x = − − μ2
r13 r23
··y + 2 x· − y = − y − μ y
2 3
r13 r2
iv. Now transform the origin of the CR3BP problem to the center of the secondary, i.e.
x → 1 + x , y → y. Further, because we want to focus in the neighbourhood of the secondary that is
of the order of the distance of the L1 point, we will assume that the new x , y are (μ 1/3). Argue that
this means that μ2 ≪ x , y ≪ μ1 ≈ 1. Thus, derive the Hill’s equations:

( Δ )
μ2 ∂UH
x·· − 2y· = 3−
x =
3 ∂x
,
··y + 2 x· = − μ 2 y = ∂UH
Δ3 ∂x
where Δ2 = x 2 + y 2 and UH = 3x 2 /2 + μ2 /Δ.
v. Show that the Jacobi constant is now given by CH = 3x 2 + 2μ2 /Δ − x· 2 − y· 2.
vi. Find equilibrium points of Hill’s equations. Show that they lie on the Hill’s sphere centered at the
secondary having radius (μ2 /3)1/3 . How do these equilibrium points relate to the L1, L 2 equilibrium
points of CR3BP? What happens to a test particle that starts from rest within the Hill’s sphere?
vii. Hill’s equations above scale by μ21/3 , in that if we scale coordinates as x → x′(μ2 /3)1/3 and
y → y′(μ 2 /3)1/3, so that Δ → Δ′(μ 2 /3)1/3 then show that we obtain the following equations

( Δ′3 )
·· − 2y′
x′ · = 3x′ 1 − 1
.
· = − 3y′ = ∂UH
··y′ + 2 x′
Δ′3 ∂x
viii. The above equations contain no parameters! Roughly this implies that as long as the particle is close
enough to the secondary, the paths of the test particle will be same in any CR3BP system. Integrate
the above equations on the computer for several initial conditions of the test particle to obtain a plot
similar to the gure below that was shown in class.








𝒪



fi

fi
fi






 3. Solid tides and orbital evolution. In class we saw that the lag in the tidal bulge causes a tidal torque
Γ. The value of this torque is, of course, related to the size of the tidal bulge which, in turn, depends on
the material of the body on which the tide is raised. One estimate of the tidal torque due to tides raised
on the planet by a satellite on a circular orbit is
3 G ms2 5
Γ= k 2p rp sin 2ϵ,
2 a6
where the subscripts ′p′ and ′s′ refer to, respectively, the planet and the satellite, and k 2p is a Love number
that capture the effect of the material on the extent of the tidal bulge. For a homogeneous elastic sphere,
3/2 19μp
k 2p = , where μ̄p = in terms of the rigidity μ and density ρp of the planet and the
1 + μ̄p 2ρp gc rp
gravitational acceleration gc on the planet’s surface. Now do the following.
i. Employing the above formula for Γ compute the rate of change of the size of the satellite’s orbit,
assuming that the planet’s quality factor is Qp .
ii. Find the time after which a satellite starting from inside a synchronous orbit will impact the planet’s
surface. A synchronous orbit is one in which the satellite’s angular velocity equals the rotation rate of
the planet.

4. Effect of tides on orbital eccentricity. In

class we considered the effect of tides on the size of
a satellite’s orbit, assuming the orbit to be circular.
We will now investigate the effect of tides on an
elliptical orbit of a satellite. As a variation of the
model, we will consider the planet to be a point
mass, which raises tides on the satellite, as shown in
the gure on the right. Do the following:
i. Show that the total angular momentum of the
system is
m p ms
L = a 2 n 1 − e 2 + In,
m p + ms

where I = α ms rs2 is the satellite’s moment of









fi










 inertia. Recall that the planet is a point mass, so that its rotational angular momentum and kinetic
energy are ignored.
ii. Assuming rs ≪ a , as is usually the case, we ignore the rotational angular momentum in contrast to
the orbital angular momentum Lo. Now compute the eccentricity in terms of Lo.
iii. Noting that the total angular momentum has to be preserved, now show that for nearly circular
orbits
·
E
e· ≈ − .
2e E
iv. Prove that tidal interaction in this system also leads to energy dissipation. Argue now that orbits are
circularized due to tidal activity.