Advertisement

Journal of Geodesy

, Volume 70, Issue 9, pp 554–561 | Cite as

Compatibility of first-order circular orbit perturbations theories; consequences for cross-track inclination functions

  • G. Balmino
  • E. Schrama
  • N. Sneeuw
Article

Abstract

First-order circular orbit perturbation techniques have found their application in geodesy since the early beginning of modern spaceflight. Two representatives of such techniques, the first one Kaula's linear perturbation theory based on Lagrange's planetary equations, the other one a perturbation theory based on the Hill equations, have been compared. Direct attention is paid to the perturbations in a local Cartesian frame, especially to the cross-track orbit error representations. The equality of both theories is proven analytically and numerically. Furthermore, the comparison reveals two interesting properties, connecting inclination functions with their derivatives and the so-called cross-track inclination functions.

Keywords

Perturbation Theory Interesting Property Circular Orbit Perturbation Technique Error Representation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Balmino G., “Orbit choice and the Theory of Radial Orbit Error for Altimetry”, Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences, Vol. 50, Springer Verlag, 1993.Google Scholar
  2. Betti and Sansò, “The Integrated Approach to Satellite Geodesy”, Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences, Vol. 25, Springer Verlag, 1989.Google Scholar
  3. Brouwer D. and G.M. Clemence, “Methods of Celestial Mechanics”, Academic Press, 1961.Google Scholar
  4. Cretaux J.-F., Nouel F., Valorge C. and P. Janniere, “Introduction of empirical parameters deduced from the Hill's equations for satellite orbit determination”, Manuscripta Geodaetica 19:135–156, 1994.Google Scholar
  5. Colombo O.L., “Notes on the mapping of the gravity field using satellite data”, Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences, Vol 7, Springer Verlag, 1986Google Scholar
  6. Emeljanov N.V. and A.A. Kanter, “A Method to Compute Inclination Functions and their Derivatives,” Manuscripta Geodaetica, 14:77–84, 1989.Google Scholar
  7. Goad C.C., “An Efficient Algorithm for Evaluation of Inclination and Eccentricity Functions,” Manuscripta Geodaetica, Vol. 12, pp. 11–15, 1987.Google Scholar
  8. Kaula W.M., “Theory of Satellite Geodesy”, Blaisdell Publ. Co., Mass. 1966.Google Scholar
  9. Kaplan M.H. “Modern Spacecraft Dynamics and Control,” John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1976.Google Scholar
  10. Koop R.J.J. “Global Gravity Field Modelling Using Satellite Gravity Gradiometry,” Delft University of Technology, Thesis, 1993.Google Scholar
  11. Rosborough G.W., “Satellite Orbit Perturbation Due to the Geopotential,” Report No. CSR-86-1, Center for Space Research, The University of Texas at Austin, 1986.Google Scholar
  12. Rummel R. et al., “Spherical Harmonic Analysis of Satellite Gradiometry”, Netherlands Geodetic Commission, Report 39, 1993.Google Scholar
  13. Schrama E.J.O., “The Role of Orbit Errors in Processing of Satellite Altimeter Data”, Netherlands Geodetic Commission, report 33, 1989.Google Scholar
  14. Schrama E.J.O., “Gravity Field Error Analysis: Applications of GPS Receivers and Gradiometers of Low Orbiting Platforms”, NASA TM 100769, November 1990. Also published in JGR Vol. 96, No. B12, pp. 20,041 – 20,051, 1991.Google Scholar
  15. Sneeuw N., “Representation Coefficients and their use in Satellite Geodesy,” Manuscripta Geodaetica 17, pp. 117–123, 1992.Google Scholar
  16. Wagner C.A., “Radial Variations of a Satellite Orbit Due to Gravitational Errors: Implications for Satellite Altimetry,” JGR Vol. 90, No. B4, pp. 3027–3036, 1985.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Balmino
    • 1
  • E. Schrama
    • 2
  • N. Sneeuw
    • 3
  1. 1.CNES/GRGSToulouse CedexFrance
  2. 2.TUD/FMRDelftThe Netherlands
  3. 3.TUM/IAPGMünchenGermany

Personalised recommendations