Indian Institute of Space Science and

Technology
AE 322 Spaceflight Mechanics

ASSIGNMENT 2

Shubham Maurya (SC13B050)

April 10, 2016

Answer-1

Hohmann transfers were designed between initial circular orbit of 1000 km to final
circular orbits of altitude (i) 50000 km (ii) 100000 km (iii) 150000 km. In Hohmann
transfer for circular orbits, an initial impulse (v1 ) is provided such that resulting
orbit is elliptical with apogee altitude equal to altitude of final orbit. Then, a secondary impulse (v2 ) is given when the spacecraft is at apogee of transfer orbit. This
maneuver finally places the satellite in the desired orbit. The total change in velocity
(v) is the sum of v1 and v2 . Moreover, all the velocity changes are instantaneous
and tangential.
Similarly, bi-elliptic maneuvers were designed with intermediate orbit point (rc ) at
an altitude of 200000 km for each case. (Refer Table-1)
Final orbit size
50000X50000 km
100000x100000 km
150000x150000 km

Hohmann
v1
v2
v
2.4246 1.3797 3.8044
2.7018 1.2385 3.9404
2.8076 1.1173 3.9250

Bi-elliptical
v1
v2
v3 (absolute)
2.8635 0.5452 0.6736
2.8635 0.7811 0.2880
2.8635 0.9252 0.1065

v
4.0825
3.9327
3.8953

Table 1: Comparison of Hohmann and Bi-elliptical orbit maneuvers from initial circular orbit of altitude 1000 km. Note that all changes in velocity are expressed in
km/s

1.1

Observations

1. From Table.1, for Hohmann transfer, v1 increased as final orbit size increased,
but on the other hand v2 decreased.
2. The total change in velocity required for Hohmann transfer had maximum value
for 100000 km final circular orbit. This is somewhat counter intuitive as we
might expect that as final orbit size increases, v should also increase. But,
this is not true as evident from the table. The v requirement for 150000 km
circular orbit is 0.4% less than that required for 100000 km circular orbit.
3. For the final circular orbit of 50000 km altitude, the Hohmann transfer is more
fuel efficient than bi-elliptic transfer. However, bi-elliptical transfer is more
economical for the other two orbits. v in bi-elliptical orbit maneuvre is 0.75%
less than that of Hohmann transfer for final orbit size of 150000x150000 km.

Answer-2
rc
(km)
156378
181378
206378
231378
256378
281378
306378
331378
356378
381378
406378
431378
456378
481378
506378

v1
(km/s)
2.808
2.839
2.864
2.883
2.898
2.911
2.922
2.931
2.939
2.945
2.951
2.957
2.962
2.966
2.970

v2
(km/s)
1.117
1.012
0.925
0.852
0.790
0.737
0.690
0.649
0.613
0.580
0.551
0.525
0.501
0.479
0.459

v3
(km/s)
0.000
0.058
0.106
0.148
0.183
0.214
0.241
0.264
0.286
0.305
0.322
0.338
0.352
0.365
0.377

v
(km/s)
3.925
3.909
3.895
3.883
3.872
3.862
3.853
3.845
3.837
3.831
3.825
3.819
3.815
3.810
3.806

Table 2: Comparison of v for different intermediate orbit radii

2.1

Observations

1. v requirement decreases as intermediate orbit radius increases. (Fig.1)

2. v1 and v3 increased as rc increased. However, v2 decreased as intermediate
orbit size increased.
3. Moreover, the decrease in v2 is more as compared to combined increase in v1
and v3 . This results in net decrease in v as intermediate orbit size increases.
(Fig.2)
4. It can be concluded that bi-elliptic transfer is more efficient than Hohmann
transfer for transfer between 1000 km and 150000 circular orbits. The efficiency
of bi-elliptic transfer further increases as intermediate orbit radius (rc ) increases.

Figure 1: v vs. radius of intermediate orbit (rc )

Figure 2: Change in velocity vs. radius of intermediate orbit (rc )

3

2.2

Code to calculate v for different intermediate orbit radii

of bi-elliptic transfer

clear all
clc
R=6378;
mu=398600;
ri=input(Enter altitude of initial orbit = )+R;
rf=input(Enter altitude of final orbit = )+R;
rc=input(Enter altitude of intermediate orbit = )+R;
step_size=25000;
ai=ri;
af=rf;
i=1;
rint=rc;
rcmax=506378;
n=(rcmax-rint)/step_size+1;
dv=zeros(n,1);
dv1=zeros(n,1);
dv2=zeros(n,1);
dv3=zeros(n,1);
radii=zeros(n,1);
while(rint<=rcmax)
%% Transfer from initial orbit to T1 orbit
at1=(ri+rint)/2;
vpi=sqrt(mu*(2/ri-1/ai));
vpt1=sqrt(mu*(2/ri-1/at1));
dv1(i)=abs(vpt1-vpi);
%% Transfer from T1 orbit to T2 orbit
vat1=sqrt(mu*(2/rint-1/at1));
at2=(rf+rint)/2;
vat2=sqrt(mu*(2/rint-1/at2));
dv2(i)=abs(vat2-vat1);
%% Transfer from T2 orbit to final orbit
vbt2=sqrt(mu*(2/rf-1/at2));
vbf=sqrt(mu*(2/rf-1/af));
dv3(i)=abs(vbf-vbt2);
%% Total delta v required
dv(i)=dv1(i)+dv2(i)+dv3(i);
radii(i)=rint;
rint=step_size+rint;
i=i+1;
end
plot(radii,dv,-o)
xlabel(Radius of intermediate orbit, rc (km))
ylabel(Delta v (km/s))

Answer-3

Figure 3: RAAN change vs inclination angle

3.1

Code to obtain RAAN change for 1000 km circular orbit

having inclination between 20o and 120o

clear all
clc
inc=20:1:120;
mu=398600;
R=6378;
a=1000+R;
e=0;
J2=1.08263e-3;
RAdot=zeros(numel(inc),1);
Radot=zeros(numel(inc),1);
for i=1:numel(inc)
RAdot(i)=-9.9358*(R/a)^(3.5)*cosd(inc(i))/(1-e^2)^2; % in deg/day
Radot(i)=-1.5*J2*(R/(a*(1-e^2)))^2*sqrt(mu/a^3)*cosd(inc(i)); % in rad/s
end
plot(inc,RAdot,-o);
title(Rate of change of RAAN vs. inclination angle)
xlabel(Inclination angle (deg))
ylabel(RAAN change (deg/day));
grid on
5

Figure 4: Inclination angle vs Altitude of circular orbit

3.2

Code to generate sun-synchronous circular orbit altitudes between 200 km and 1200 km and corresponding
inclinations

clear all
clc
deltai=360/365.2564; % RAAN change required each day
% di=deltai*pi/180/(24*60*60);
mu=398600;
e=0;
J2=1.08263e-3;
Re=6378;
R=200+Re:50:1200+Re;
inc=zeros(numel(R),1);
inc1=zeros(numel(R),1);
for i=1:numel(R)
a=R(i);
inc(i)=acosd(-deltai*((9.9358*(Re/a)^(3.5))/(1-e^2)^2)^(-1));
%
inc1(i)=acosd(-di*(1.5*J2*(Re/(a*(1-e^2)))^2*sqrt(mu/a^3))^-1);
end
plot(R-6378,inc,-o);
title(Inclination angle vs. Altitude of circular orbit)
ylabel(Inclination angle (deg))
xlabel(Altitude of circular orbit (km));
6

3.3

Observations

1. From Fig.3, RAAN change increases as inclination angle increased from 20o to
120o . For prograde orbits (0i< 90o ), RAAN change is negative. Also, RAAN
change for retrograde orbits is positive. Positive value of RAAN change implies
that the nodal line of ascending node moves toward east. That is, for retrograde
orbits, the node line advances eastward. Similarly, for prograde orbits, node line
drifts westward.
2. For i = 90o , RAAN change is zero. This implies that node line remains stationary.
3. From Fig.4, it is observed that inclination angle required to make sunsynchronous circular orbit increases with the size of orbit.