Orbiter-Forum  

Go Back   Orbiter-Forum > Far Side of the Moon > Spaceflight News
Register Blogs Orbinauts List Social Groups FAQ Projects Mark Forums Read

Spaceflight News Share news, stories, or discussions about government and private spaceflight programs; including ESA, ISS, NASA, Russian Space Program, Virgin Galactic, & more!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old
cristiapi's Avatar
cristiapi cristiapi is offline
Orbinaut
Question Tiangong 1 reentry
by cristiapi 06-19-2017, 11:24 AM

I wrote a program to calculate the Tiangong 1 reentry date.
Starting from a TLE, my prog propagate the initial state down to an altitude of 20 km.
The simulation uses the NRLMSISE-00 atmospheric model considering the observed and predicted solar activity and geomagnetic levels.

As can be seen from the attached graph, while my calculations are in fairly good agreement with this site:
http://www.satflare.com/track.asp?q=37820#TOP
This object is expected to decay around Mon, 16/07/2018 06:20:00 +/- 84 hours UTC (these predictions are provided by Joseph Remis).Ē),

the reentry dates calculated by my program are well beyond the date calculated here:
http://www.aerospace.org/cords/reent...ong-1-reentry/
Tiangong-1 is predicted to reenter in 2018 January Ī 2 months.Ē).

I have 2 questions:
1) has anyone tried to simulate the Tiangong 1 reentry using Orbiter? (Since itís almost impossible to predict the exact impact location, Iím only interested in the possible reentry date).
2) does anyone know another site where the reentry date is calculated?
Attached Thumbnails
Tiangong_1_reentry.pdf  
Reply With Quote
Views 676 Comments 9
Thanked by:
Total Comments 9

Comments

Old 06-19-2017, 11:26 PM   #2
boogabooga
Bug Crusher
 
boogabooga's Avatar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cristiapi View Post
 1) has anyone tried to simulate the Tiangong 1 reentry using Orbiter? (Since itís almost impossible to predict the exact impact location, Iím only interested in the possible reentry date).
It sounds interesting. We need to know the exact mass, area, and ballistic coefficient. (Or their product).

Also, I don't think there is any way in Orbiter to input predicted solar activity, is there?

On your graph, what am I looking at? It looks like you are predicting mmultiple re-entry dates over a wide range of time. Is this the result of Monte Carlo simulations or something?
boogabooga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-20-2017, 10:56 AM   #3
cristiapi
Orbinaut
 
cristiapi's Avatar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by boogabooga View Post
 It sounds interesting. We need to know the exact mass, area, and ballistic coefficient. (Or their product).
The mass and the area (cross-section) are known with a sufficient degree of accuracy, but the ballistic coefficient is very hard to estimate (it's not constant) and small differences lead to big fluctuations on the predicted date.

Quote:
Originally Posted by boogabooga View Post
 Also, I don't think there is any way in Orbiter to input predicted solar activity, is there?
I should "translate" my NRLMSISE-00 class in an atmosphere module (dll) for Orbiter...
But a simulation with the Orbiter's NRLMSISE-00 built-in module still would be interesting because I can use my atmospheric model with the default Orbiter's values (excluding the data file) and then I can estimate the differences including the data file for the predicted solar activity and geomagnetic levels.

Quote:
Originally Posted by boogabooga View Post
 On your graph, what am I looking at? It looks like you are predicting mmultiple re-entry dates over a wide range of time. Is this the result of Monte Carlo simulations or something?
I download updated TLE that I use to calculate the initial position and velocity of the Tiangong-1. Then I propagate the state starting from that TLE. The graph shows the predicted altitude (above the WGS 84 ellipsoid) as a function of time for each TLE I downloaded.
I generated the graph using 52 TLE, so the graph shows 52 orbit predictions.
From those TLEs, the most probable reentry date range from 2018-09-10 to 2018-10-14.

If this topic is of some interest, I can periodically upload (say once a week or twice in a month) the new version of the graph where I use different colors for the plots based on the age of the starting TLE (new TLEs are more "important").
cristiapi is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Old 09-04-2017, 12:58 PM   #4
cristiapi
Orbinaut
 
cristiapi's Avatar
Default

Here is the updated result which comes from a vastly improved version of my simulation:



I read the Tiangong-1 starting position and velocity from a TLE, then I integrate those vectors down to an altitude of 80 km.
Since in that graph I used 103 TLEs, 103 trajectories are showed.
The color is for the age of the TLE: new TLEs are vivid blue.

In the simulation, the Earth is the ellipsoid WGS 84 which includes the zonal spherical harmonics up to order and degree 20. Then I add:
• perturbations from: Sun, Moon and all the planetary systems;
• relativistic acceleration;
• atmospheric acceleration based on the NRLMSISE-00 model along with a data file for the updated geomagnetic and solar activity indices.

The initial state of the celestial bodies is read from the DE431 ephemerides. At the end of the simulation, after about 200 days, the differences between the position calculated with my simulation and those calculated with the DE431 are about 1.8 km for the Moon, 600 m for the Earth and a few meters for the other bodies.

The integrator is the very good DOPRI853. The step I use is about 144 s; with that step, the simulation speed is about 6.85 days/s.

The mathematical model of the Tiangong-1 is hard to write and I don’t know its attitude. According to my simulation, it seems that it rotates about the lateral (pitch) axis of about 5 deg/day, but without a visual observation I can only guess that value.

Last edited by cristiapi; 09-04-2017 at 02:37 PM. Reason: Typo
cristiapi is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Old 09-05-2017, 03:02 AM   #5
boogabooga
Bug Crusher
 
boogabooga's Avatar
Default

I think you are going about this a little wrong. You need to calibrate the ballistic coefficient of the spacecraft before you have any kind of meaningful simulation. If the trajectory from the 1st TLE is very different from the 103rd TLE, the only thing you know for sure is that you are wrong there. A "correct" model would predict the same trajectory (reentry date) regardless of what TLE you use as your starting point.

Start with the first TLE position, velocity, and time and integrate until the epoch of the 103rd TLE. How close do the positions and velocities agree at that time? If those two don't agree, your model is off. Adjust the ballistic coefficient or whatever parameters you have and integrate again until you can start from the frst TLE and accurately predict the position/velocity of a future TLE. Make sense?

Last edited by boogabooga; 09-05-2017 at 03:05 AM.
boogabooga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2017, 10:17 PM   #6
cristiapi
Orbinaut
 
cristiapi's Avatar
Default

It makes plenty of sense! And itís what Iím doing. To calibrate the Tiangong-1 parameters I do exactly what you say (Iím currently using 224 TLEs and I calculate several statistical parameters), while for the air density I can just take the result from the NRLMSISE-00 model as is (but I use the data file to keep it up to date). But I cannot agree with this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by boogabooga View Post
 A "correct" model would predict the same trajectory (reentry date) regardless of what TLE you use as your starting point.
because even the best model in the world cannot predict the same trajectory, because no parameter is exactly known.
The first error comes from the TLE uncertainty which is typically 1 km and when 1 km error is propagated in a perfectly written simulation, the final error will be much bigger.
For example, if I propagate one TLE, I obtain the following re-entry date: 2018-03-21 21:42 at a location situated on latitude= -17.5623 and longitude= -42.3516.
Then, I simply write rj2k[0] += 1 to translate the ECI J2000 x coordinate of the same TLE of 1 km and I obtain: 2018-03-25 06:32, latitude= 0.341365, longitude= -38.7379, a totally different re-entry date and location.

The second error comes from the conversion from the TEME reference frame (used for the TLEs) to ECI J2000 reference frame and itís probably bigger than the former (because of the uncertainty in the nutation and precession values).

Also, consider that I donít want to do a correct simulation because if, for example, I switch from WGS 84 gravitational model to the very accurate EGM2008 gravitational model, the time taken to propagate 200 days will be well beyond the actual Tiangong-1 re-entry date (it will probably take some years). Just consider that to propagate 200 days, the function that calculates the accelerations is called about 1.7 million times (with DOPRI853 integrator).
cristiapi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2017, 02:49 PM   #7
boogabooga
Bug Crusher
 
boogabooga's Avatar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cristiapi View Post
 It makes plenty of sense! And itís what Iím doing. To calibrate the Tiangong-1 parameters I do exactly what you say (Iím currently using 224 TLEs and I calculate several statistical parameters), while for the air density I can just take the result from the NRLMSISE-00 model as is (but I use the data file to keep it up to date).
Okay. If you've calibrated, you've done what you can do.


So what are you getting as output, a probability distribution?

It is hard to distinguish shades of blue. Is there a systematic relationship between the age of the TLE and the predicted re-entry date.
boogabooga is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Old 09-06-2017, 04:39 PM   #8
cristiapi
Orbinaut
 
cristiapi's Avatar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by boogabooga View Post
 So what are you getting as output, a probability distribution?
I get the ďusualĒ parameters: min, max, average, skewness, kurtosis, RMS error. But I donít see any particular distribution for the reentry dates.

Quote:
Originally Posted by boogabooga View Post
 It is hard to distinguish shades of blue.
Youíre right. I did that because with the old versions the range of the reentry dates was much wider.

Quote:
Originally Posted by boogabooga View Post
 Is there a systematic relationship between the age of the TLE and the predicted re-entry date.
No, Iíd say:



If someone is interested in the data files, they can be downloaded from here (216 kB) as a 7z file.
cristiapi is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Old 09-06-2017, 05:10 PM   #9
boogabooga
Bug Crusher
 
boogabooga's Avatar
Default

Yes, I'd say. Not linear, but you can see a kind of sine-wave developing. That might be a clue. Are you using a variable ballistic coefficient?
boogabooga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-2017, 09:30 PM   #10
cristiapi
Orbinaut
 
cristiapi's Avatar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by boogabooga View Post
 Yes, I'd say. Not linear, but you can see a kind of sine-wave developing. That might be a clue.
We can see two peaks of outliers and a wide region of uniformly distributed values. I meant that no useful fit seems possible with those data.

Quote:
Originally Posted by boogabooga View Post
 Are you using a variable ballistic coefficient?
Yes, I change the drag coefficient with the altitude. Iím currently using:
Cd= 2.05 * .91263 / .55
Cd *= .55 + ((-1.4119E-8 * ALT + 1.1568E-5) * ALT - 2.0701E-3) * ALT
but I need to change 2.05 and .55 when I update the simulation, because the biggest problem with the Tiangong-1 model is that I donít know how to calculate the acceleration about the pitch axis (I donít know the moment of inertia), so I rotate the station using an empirical angular speed (the angular speed is important because the cross sectional area is variable).
cristiapi is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  Orbiter-Forum > Far Side of the Moon > Spaceflight News

Tags
tiangong-1


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:02 AM.

Quick Links Need Help?


About Us | Rules & Guidelines | TOS Policy | Privacy Policy

Orbiter-Forum is hosted at Orbithangar.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2007 - 2017, Orbiter-Forum.com. All rights reserved.