Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T23:00:42.526Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

New methods for space debris collision assessment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2015

Daniel Casanova ,
Chiara Tardioli  and
Anne Lemaître
Daniel Casanova
Affiliation:
University of Namur, naXys - Department of Mathematics, 8 Rempart de la Vierge, 5000, Namur, Belgium email: [email protected]
Chiara Tardioli
Affiliation:
University of Strathclyde, Department of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering, 75 Montrose Street, Glasgow, UK
Anne Lemaître
Affiliation:
University of Namur, naXys - Department of Mathematics, 8 Rempart de la Vierge, 5000, Namur, Belgium email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

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.

Collisions between two pieces of space debris or between a piece of debris and an operative satellite is a real problem. Furthermore, collisions are responsible for the creation of new space debris systematically. The way to exclude the possibility of a collision consists of analysing the trajectories and looking for a time of coincidence. However, the analysis of all pairs of objects collected in a large orbit catalogue is unfeasible. The proposed method consists of reducing the possible pairs of candidates for a collision into a short list of pairs at real risk of collision. The method is based on a three-filter sequence: the first two filters are based on the geometry of the orbits, while the third one searches for a time of coincidence. This new method is tested resulting into an efficient tool for space debris collision assessment.

Keywords

Celestial MechanicsEarthephemerides
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union , Volume 9 , Issue S310: Complex Planetary Systems , July 2014 , pp. 150 - 153
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2014 

References

Casanova, D., Tardioli, C., & Lemaitre, A. 2014, MNRAS, 442 (4), 3235–3242Google Scholar
Casanova, D. & Lemaitre, A. 2014, Submitted to Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astr.Google Scholar
Delsate, N., Lemaitre, A., Carletti, T., & Robutel, P. 2010, Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astr., 108 (3), 275–300Google Scholar
Dimare, L., Farnocchia, D., Gronchi, G. F., Milani, A., Bernardi, F., & Rossi, A. 2011, Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance Technologies Conference, 1, 51Google Scholar
Gronchi, G. F. 2002, SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 24 (1), 61–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gronchi, G. & Tommei, G. 2007, Discret. Contin. Dyn-B., 7 (4), 755–778Google Scholar
Gronchi, G. F., Dimare, L., & Milani, A. 2010, Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astr., 107 (3), 299–318Google Scholar
Hoots, F. R. & Crawford, L. L., Roehrich, R. L. 1984, Celest. Mech., 33 (2), 143–158Google Scholar
Hubaux, C., Lemaitre, A., Delsate, N., & Carletti, T. 2012, Adv. Sp. Res., 49 (10), 1472–1486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemaitre, A., Delsate, N., & Valk, S. 2009, Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astr., 104 (4), 383–402Google Scholar
Milani, A., Tommei, G., Chesley, S., Sansaturio, M., & Valsecchi, G. 2005, Icarus, 173 (2), 362–384Google Scholar
Pardini, C. & Anselmo, L. 2011, Adv. Sp. Res., 48 (3), 557–569Google Scholar
Valk, S., Lemaitre, A., & Anselmo, L. 2008, Adv. Sp. Res., 41 (7), 1077–1090Google Scholar
Valk, S., Lemaitre, A., & Deleflie, F. 2009, Adv. Sp. Res., 43 (7), 1070–1082Google Scholar
Valk, S., Delsate, N., Lemaitre, A., & Carletti, T. 2009, Adv. Sp. Res., 43 (10), 1509–1526CrossRefGoogle Scholar