Quaternion Regularization of Differential Equations of Perturbed Central Motion and Regular Models of Orbital (Trajectory) Motion: Review and Analysis of Models, Their Applications

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

The review article briefly outlines our proposed general quaternion theory of regularizing and stabilizing transformations of Newtonian differential equations of perturbed motion of a material point in a central force field, the potential of which is assumed to be an arbitrary differentiable function of the distance from the point to the center of the field. The point is also under the influence of a disturbing potential, assumed to be an arbitrary function of time and Cartesian coordinates of the point’s location, and under the influence of a disturbing acceleration, assumed to be an arbitrary function of time, the radius vector and the point’s velocity vector. The conditions for the reducibility of the presented quaternion equations of perturbed central motion to an oscillatory form are considered using three regularizing functions containing the distance to the center of the field. Various differential quaternion equations of perturbed central motion in oscillatory and normal forms, constructed using this theory, are presented, including regular equations that use four-dimensional Euler (Rodrigue–Hamilton) parameters or four-dimensional Kustaanheim–Stiefel variables or their modifications, proposed by us. Regular quaternion equations of spatial unperturbed central motion of a material point, connections of the four-dimensional variables used with orbital elements, and a uniformized solution to the spatial problem of unperturbed central motion are considered. As an application, regularized differential quaternion equations of motion of an artificial satellite in the Earth’s gravitational field are presented in four-dimensional Kustaanheimo-Stiefel variables, as well as in our modified four-dimensional variables and in Euler parameters. An analysis of the stated regular quaternion equations of perturbed central motion is presented, showing that the quaternion regularization method, based on the use of Euler parameters or Kustaanheim–Stiefel variables or their modifications, is unique in joint regularization, linearization and increase in dimension for three-dimensional Keplerian systems and central movement.

Presented regularized (with respect to the Newtonian force of attraction) differential quaternion equations of motion of an artificial satellite in the gravitational field of the Earth in our modified four-dimensional variables have the advantages indicated in the article over quaternion equations in the Kustaanheimo–Stiefel variables. In the presented differential quaternion equations of satellite motion, constructed using four-dimensional Euler parameters, the terms of the equations containing negative powers of the distance to the center of the Earth of the fourth order, inclusive, are regularized. In all these regularized equations, the description of the Earth’s gravitational field takes into account not only the central (Newtonian), but also the zonal, tesseral and sectorial harmonics of the potential of the Earth’s gravitational field (the nonsphericity of the Earth is taken into account).

Keywords: differential equations of the perturbed central motion of a material point, quaternion theory of regularizing and stabilizing transformations, conditions for the reducibility of quaternion equations to oscillatory form, regularizing functions, quaternion equations in oscillatory and normal forms, Euler (Rodrigue–Hamilton) parameters, Kustaanheimo–Stiefel variables, modified four-dimensional variables, orbital elements, uniform solution, regularized quaternion equations of satellite motion; central (Newtonian), zonal, tesseral and sectorial harmonics of the Earth’s gravitational field potential

About the authors

Yu. N. Chelnokov

Institute of Precision Mechanics and Control Problems of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Author for correspondence.
Email: ChelnokovYuN@gmail.com
Russian Federation, Saratov, 410028

References

  1. L. Euler, “De motu rectilineo trium corporum se mutuo attrahentium,” Nov. Comm. Petrop. 11, 144–151 (1765).
  2. T. Levi-Civita, “Traettorie singolari ed urbi nel problema ristretto dei tre corpi,” Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. 1904. V. 9, 1–32.
  3. T. Levi-Civita, “Sur la regularization du probleme des trois corps,” Acta Math. 42, 99–144 (1920). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02418577
  4. T. Levi-Civita, “Sur la résolution qualitative du problème restreint des trois corps,” Opere Mathematiche, No 2, 411–417 (1956).
  5. P. Kustaanheimo, “Spinor regularization of the Kepler motion,” Ann. Univ. Turku 73, 3–7 (1964).
  6. P. Kustaanheimo and E. Stiefel, “Perturbation theory of Kepler motion based on spinor regularization,” J. Reine Anqew. Math. 218, 204–219 (1965).
  7. E.L. Stiefel und G. Scheifele, Linear and Regular Celestial Mechanics (Springer‐Verlag, Berlin, 1971; Nauka, Moscow, 1975).
  8. Yu.N. Chelnokov, “Regularization of equations of three-dimensional two-body problem,” Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR, Ser. Mekh. Tverd. Tela, No. 6, 12–21 (1981).
  9. Yu.N. Chelnokov, “Regular equations of three-dimensional two-body problem,” Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR, Ser. Mekh. Tverd. Tela, No. 1, 151–158 (1984).
  10. Yu.N. Chelnokov, Quaternion Methods in Problems of Perturbed Motion of a Material Point. Part 1. General Theory. Applications to Problem of Regularization and to Problem of Satellite Motion, Available from VINITI, No. 8628 (Moscow, 1985).
  11. Yu.N. Chelnokov, Quaternion Methods in Problems of Perturbed Motion of a Material Point. Part 2. Three-Dimensional Problem of Unperturbed Central Motion. Problem with Initial Conditions, Available from VINITI, No. 8629 (Moscow, 1985).
  12. Yu.N. Chelnokov, “Quaternion regularization and stabilization of perturbed central motion. I,” Izv. RAN, Ser. Mekh. Tverd. Tela, No. 1, 20–30 (1993).
  13. Yu.N. Chelnokov, “Quaternion regularization and stabilization of perturbed central motion. II,” Izv. RAN, Ser. Mekh. Tverd. Tela, No. 2, 3–11 (1993).
  14. W. Velte, “Concerning the regularizing KS-transformation,” Celest. Mech. 17, 395–403 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01228959
  15. M.D. Vivarelli, “The KS-transformation in hypercomplex form,” Celest. Mech. 29, 45–50 (1983).
  16. M.D. Vivarelli, “Geometrical and physical outlook on the cross product of two quaternions,” Celest. Mech. 41, 359–370 (1988).
  17. M.D. Vivarelli, “On the connection among three classical mechanical problems via the hypercomplex KS-transformation,” Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astron. 50 (2), 109–124 (1991).
  18. O.B. Shagov, “Two types of equations of motion for an Earth’s satellite in oscillatory form,” Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR, Ser. Mekh. Tverd. Tela, No. 2, 3–8 (1990).
  19. A. Deprit, A. Elipe, and S. Ferrer, “Linearization: Laplace vs. Stiefel,” Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astr. 58, 151–201 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00695790
  20. J. Vrbik, “Celestial mechanics via quaternions,” Can. J. Phys. 72, 141–146 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1139/p94-023
  21. J. Vrbik, “Perturbed Kepler problem in quaternionic form,” J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 28 (21), 193–198 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1088/0305-4470/28/21/027
  22. J. Waldvogelm, “Quaternions and the perturbed Kepler problem,” Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astr. 95, 201–212 (2006).
  23. J. Waldvogel, “Quaternions for regularizing Celestial Mechanics: the right way,” Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astr. 102 (1), 149–162 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10569-008-9124-y
  24. P. Saha, “Interpreting the Kustaanheimo-Stiefel transform in gravitational dynamics.” Mon. Notices Roy. Astr. Soc. 400, 228–231 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.15437.x
  25. L. Zhao, “Kustaanheimo-Stiefel regularization and the quadrupolar conjugacy,” Regul. Chaotic Dyn. 20 (1), 19–36 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1560354715010025
  26. J. Roa, H. Urrutxua, and J. Pelaez, “Stability and chaos in Kustaanheimo-Stiefel space induced by the Hopf fibration,” Mon. Notices Royal Astr. Soc. 459 (3), 2444–2454 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stw780
  27. J. Roa and J. Pelaez, “The theory of asynchronous relative motion II: universal and regular solutions,” Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astr. 127, 343–368 (2017).
  28. S. Breiter and K. Langner, “Kustaanheimo-Stiefel transformation with an arbitrary defining vector,” Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astr. 128, 323–342 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10569-017-9754-z
  29. S. Breiter and K. Langner, “The extended Lissajous-Levi-Civita transformation,” Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astr. 130, 68 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10569-018-9862-4
  30. S. Breiter and K. Langner, “The Lissajous-Kustaanheimo-Stiefel transformation,” Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astr. 131, 9 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10569-019-9887-3
  31. S. Ferrer and F. Crespo, “Alternative angle-based approach to the KS-Map. An interpretation through symmetry,” J. Geom. Mech. 10 (3), 359–372 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3934/jgm.2018013
  32. Yu.N. Chelnokov, “Application of quaternions in the theory of orbital motion of an artificial satellite. I,” Cosmic Res. 30 (6), 612–621 (1992).
  33. Yu.N. Chelnokov, “Application of quaternions in the theory of orbital motion of an artificial satellite. II,” Cosmic Res. 31 (3), 409–418 (1993).
  34. Yu.N. Chelnokov, “Analysis of optimal motion control for a material point in a central field with application of quaternions,” J. Comp. Syst. Sci. Int. 46 (5), 688–713 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1064230707050036
  35. Yu.N. Chelnokov, Quaternion Models and Methods in Dynamics, Navigation, and Motion Control (Fizmatlit, Moscow, 2011) [in Russian].
  36. Yu.N. Chelnokov, “Quaternion regularization in celestial mechanics and astrodynamics and trajectory motion control. I,” Cosmic Res. 51 (5), 350–361 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1134/S001095251305002X
  37. Yu.N. Chelnokov, “Quaternion regularization and trajectory motion control in celestial mechanics and astrodynamics: II,” Cosmic Res 52 (4), 304–317 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1134/S0010952514030022
  38. Yu.N. Chelnokov, “Quaternion regularization in celestial mechanics, astrodynamics, and trajectory motion control. III,” Cosmic Res. 53 (5), 394–409 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1134/S0010952515050044
  39. Yu.N. Chelnokov, “Quaternion regularization of the equations of the perturbed spatial restricted three-body problem: I,” Mech. Solids 52 (6), 613–639 (2017). https://doi.org/10.3103/S0025654417060036
  40. Yu.N. Chelnokov, “Quaternion regularization of the equations of the perturbed spatial restricted three-body problem: II,” Mech. Solids 53 (6), 633–650 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3103/S0025654418060055
  41. Yu.N. Chelnokov, “The perturbed three-dimensional two body problem: regular quaternion equations of relative motion,” Prikl. Mat. Mekh. 82 (6), 721–733 (2018). https://doi.org/10.31857/S003282350002736-9
  42. Y.N. Chelnokov, “Quaternion equations of disturbed motion of an artificial Earth satellite,” Cosmic. Res. 57, 101–114 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1134/S0010952519020023
  43. Yu.N. Chelnokov, “Quaternion methods and models of regular celestial mechanics and astrodynamics,” Appl. Math. Mech. 43 (1), 21–80 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10483-021-2797-9
  44. T.V. Bordovitsyna, Modern Numerical Methods in Problems of Celestial Mechanics (Nauka, Moscow, 1984) [in Russian].
  45. T.V. Bordovitsyna and V.A. Avdyushev, Theory of Motion of the Earth’s Satellites: Analytical and Numerical Methods (Tomsk. Univ., Tomsk, 2007) [in Russian].
  46. T. Fukushima, “Efficient orbit integration by linear transformation for Kustaanheimo-Stiefel regularization,” Astron. J. 129, 5 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1086/429546
  47. T. Fukushima, “Numerical comparison of two-body regularizations // Astron. J. 133, 6 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1086/518165
  48. J. Pelaez, J.M. Hedo, and P.A. Rodriguez, “A special perturbation method in orbital dynamics,” Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astr. 97, 131–150 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10569-006-9056-3
  49. G. Bau, C. Bombardelli, J. Pelaez, and E. Lorenzini, “Non-singular orbital elements for special perturbations in the two-body problem,” Mon. Notices Royal Astron. Soc. 454 (3), 2890–2908 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stv2106
  50. D. Amato, C. Bombardelli, G. Bau, et al, “Non-averaged regularized formulations as an alternative to semi-analytical orbit propagation methods,” Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astr. 131, 21 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10569-019-9897-1
  51. G. Bau and J. Roa, “Uniform formulation for orbit computation: the intermediate elements. Celest,” Celest Mech. Dyn. Astr. 132, 10 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10569-020-9952-y
  52. Yu.N. Chelnokov and M. Yu. Loginov, “New quaternion models of spaceflight regular mechanics and their applications in the problems of motion prediction for сosmic bodies and in inertial navigation in space,” in Proc. of 28th Saint Petersburg International Conference on Integrated Navigation Systems (Concern CSRI Elektropribor, St. Petersburg, 2021), pp. 292–295.
  53. S.J. Aarseth and K.A. Zare, “Regularization of the three-body problem,” Celest. Mech. 10, 185–205 (1974). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01227619
  54. S.J. Aarseth, Gravitational N-Body Simulations (Cambridge Univ. Press, New York, 2003).
  55. Н. Hopf, “Uber die Abbildung der dreidimensionalen Sphare auf die Kugelflache,” Math. Ann. 104, 637–665 (1931). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01457962
  56. A. Hurwitz, Mathematische Werke, Vol. 2 (Birkhauser, Basel, 1933).
  57. A. Deprit, “Ideal frames for perturbed keplerian motions,” Celest. Mech. 13 (2), 253–263 (1976).
  58. K.F. Sundman, “Memoire sur le probleme des trois crops,” Acta Math. 36, 105–179 (1912). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02422379
  59. I.M. Belen’kii, “On a method for the uniformization of solutions in central motion problems,” J. Appl. Math. Mech. 45 (1), 24–29 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-8928(81)90005-8
  60. Yu.N. Chelnokov, “Quaternion regular models of perturbed orbital motion of a rigid body in the gravitational field of the Earth,” Prikl. Mat. Mekh. 83 (4), 562–585 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1134/S003282351902005X
  61. V.K. Abalakin, E.P. Aksenov, E.A. Grebenikov, et al., Handbook on Celestial Mechanics and Astrodynamics (Nauka, Moscow, 1976) [in Russian].
  62. G.N. Duboshin, Celestial Mechanics: Methods for Theory of Artificial Celestial Bodies (Nauka, Moscow, 1983) [in Russian].
  63. V.G. Demin, Motion of Artificial Satellite in Noncentral Gravitational Field (“Reg. Haot. Din.”, IKI, Moscow, Izhevsk:, 2010) [in Russian].

Copyright (c) 2024 Russian Academy of Sciences

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies