Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T17:11:03.038Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Two cylindrical masses in orbit for the test of the equivalence principle

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 January 2010

Ratana Chhun ,
Pierre Touboul  and
Vincent Lebat
Ratana Chhun
Affiliation:
ONERA, BP-72, F-92322 CHATILLON CEDEX, FRANCE email: [email protected]
Pierre Touboul
Affiliation:
ONERA, BP-72, F-92322 CHATILLON CEDEX, FRANCE email: [email protected]
Vincent Lebat
Affiliation:
ONERA, BP-72, F-92322 CHATILLON CEDEX, FRANCE 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.

Two pairs of solid test-masses have been considered to perform in space the test of the universality of free fall with an accuracy of at least 10−15. These cylindrical masses are precisely at the heart of the MICROSCOPE mission instrument comprising two differential electrostatic accelerometers. These masses shall exhibit material quality, shapes, positions and alignments in regard to stringent experimental requirements. Indeed the space experiment is based on the control of the two masses submitted to the same gravity acceleration along the same orbit at 810 km altitude with an accuracy of 10−11 m. Thus effects of Earth and satellite gravity gradients shall be contained as well as any other disturbances of the mass motions induced by their magnetic susceptibility or electrical dissymmetries, by outgassing of the materials or radiation emissivity. Furthermore, the electrostatic levitation of the two masses depends dramatically on the mass shapes and electrical properties in particular for the definition of the sensitive axes orientation. All these aspects will be presented from the mass characteristics to the space MICROSCOPE experiment performance.

Keywords

MICROSCOPEEquivalence principleaccelerometergravity
Type
Contributed Papers
Information
Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union , Volume 5 , Symposium S261: Relativity in Fundamental Astronomy: Dynamics, Reference Frames, and Data Analysis , April 2009 , pp. 402 - 408
Copyright
Copyright © International Astronomical Union 2010

References

Damour, T., Piazza, F., & Veneziano, G. (2002), Violations of the equivalence principle in a dilaton-runaway scenario, Phys. Rev. D, 66Google Scholar
Fayet, Pierre (2003), Theoretical Motivations for Equivalence Principle Tests, Adv. Sp. Res., 32, 7, pp. 1289–1296Google Scholar
Schlamminger, S., Choi, K., Wagner, T. A., Gundlach, J. H., & Adelberger, E. G. (2008), Test of the equivalence principle using a rotating torsion balance, Phys. Rev. Letter, 100, 041101Google Scholar
Touboul, P., Rodrigues, M., Metris, G., & Tatry, B. (2001), MICROSCOPE: Testing the equivalence principle in space, CRAS, Paris, 2, IV, 9, pp. 1271–1286Google Scholar
Guiu, E., Rodrigues, M., Touboul, P., & Pradels, G. (2007), Calibration of MICROSCOPE, Advances in Space Research, 39, 2, pp. 315–323Google Scholar