Applicability and dynamical characterization of the associated sets of the Algorithmic Weak Stability Boundary in the lunar SOI

Priscilla A. Sousa Silva and Maisa O. Terra

Departamento de Matemtica, Instituto Tecnolgico de Aeronutica, a o a Praa Marechal Eduardo Gomes, 50, 12.228-900, So Jos dos Campos, SP, Brazil c a e maisa@ita.br

Abstract The present contribution investigates the applicability of the associated initial condition sets generated by the algorithmic denition of the Weak Stability Boundary (WSB) in the lunar sphere of inuence in the context of Earth-to-Moon low-energy capture transfers. First, we test the applicability of the initial condition sets in view of two mission strategies, namely, direct inner transfers in the Planar Circular Restricted ThreeBody Problem and external transfers based in the Patched Three-Body approach. Then, we check the consistency of the stability classication regarding the selection of captured solutions, identifying the stable subsets which provide temporary capture solutions. Additionally, we show the diversity of behaviors classied as stable by the current stability criteria of the algorithmic denition, which indicates that the algorithmic criteria must be reviewed in order to guarantee that the stable solutions correspond solely to low-energy capture orbits. The combination of our analyses allows the detection of the subsets of stable initial conditions that provide feasible Earth-to-Moon transfer solutions. Specically, we show an external low-energy Earth-to-Moon transfer with zero midcourse correction at the patching section. Keywords Weak Stability Boundary; Restricted Three-Body Problem; Earth-to-Moon transfers; Low-energy capture orbits

Introduction

The Weak Stability Boundary (WSB) concept was heuristically proposed by Belbruno (1987) in the context of Earth-to-Moon transfer orbit design. This concept aims to produce low-energy transfers in which the spacecraft approaches the Moon in a state dened as lunar ballistically captured, reducing the propellant mass needed to stabilize its motion at arrival (ideally, v = 0). For the time being, three distinct denitions share the WSB nomenclature, although no formal relation among them has been established.
The nal version of this article (DOI: 10.1007/s10569-012-9409-z) is soon to appear in Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy, available at www.springerlink.com.

Originally, the design strategy of low-energy transfer trajectories was associated to a fuzzy boundary region located at approximately 1.5 million km away from the Earth in the Sun-Earth direction (Belbruno and Miller, 1993) and was usually based on general three or more body models. This concept was employed in the rescue of the Japanese Hiten mission to the Moon (Belbruno and Miller, 1990, 1993), motivating several papers about WSB transfers ever since (Belbruno, 1994; Mora et al, 2000; Belbruno and Carrico, 2000; Circi and Teolatto, 2001). Later, Belbruno (2004) proposed an algorithmic denition of the WSB based on the classication of initial condition sets around the Moon as stable or unstable according to some prescribed stability criteria, aiming to detect capture-escape transitions along the set. Implicitly, the initial conditions of the algorithmic denition correspond to states which are candidate solutions for the nal portion of an Earth-to-Moon transfer trajectory. In particular, the stable initial conditions are said to be ballistically captured by the Moon1 . The WSB algorithmic denition procedure was reviewed and extended by Garc a and Gmez (2007) in the framework of the Planar Circular Restricted Threeo Body Problem (PCR3BP), and has motivated a number of papers (Romagnoli and Circi, 2009; Belbruno et al, 2010), including the extension of the concept to other three-body subsystems (Topputo and Belbruno, 2009; Mak et al, 2010). o Moreover, Belbruno (2004); Belbruno et al (2008); and others also discuss an analytical approximation to the WSB, which is dened by the intersection of three subsets of the phase space. Despite the algorithmic WSB denition has already been extended to more sophisticated mathematical models and to other subsystems of the Solar system, a certication analysis concerning the adequacy of the stable orbits as temporary capture transfers still deserves attention. The present contribution presents a broad dynamical characterization of the sets generated by the WSB algorithmic denition stated by Garc and Gmez a o (2007) in the context of the PCR3BP in the lunar sphere of inuence (SOI) to verify the applicability of the solutions classied as stable in Earth-to-Moon transfers with temporary capture. Our rst analysis aims to verify if the considered initial conditions provide transfer orbits, performing a backward dynamical investigation in view of two mission strategies for Earth-to-Moon ballistic capture transfers. The motivations of this analysis are twofold. First, the ballistic capture solutions should be required to approach the region of the initial conditions by natural dynamics; and, second, the algorithmic denition does not consider any condition regarding the past behavior of the initial condition sets. The mission strategies considered in this work are direct inner transfers and external transfers. Low-energy external transfers can be obtained considering the patched three-body approach presented by Koon et al (2000, 2001); Perozzi and Ferraz-Mello (2010). Low energy Earth-to-Moon inner transfers were obtained by Yagasaki (2004a,b) using the R3BP and a Sun perturbed version of that problem and also by Miele et al (2001) using a simplied version of the R3BP.
1 In this case, the temporary capture state is dened by the measurement of the Kepler energy of the spacecraft w.r.t the Moon. However, it is worth to remark that there exist other denitions of ballistic capture. In Koon et al (2001), for example, it refers to an orbit which under natural dynamics of the R3BP gets within a 20, 000 km radius region around the Moon and performs at least one revolution around that primary.

Our second analysis veries if the stable initial conditions are classied inside or outside the lunar SOI. We also check if the stable trajectories remain inside that region from the initial condition until the instant of classication. This analysis aims to conrm if the stable solutions indeed present captured behavior. In addition, the dynamical diversity of the stable set is discussed. Jointly, these two analyses provide a method to obtain feasible Earth-toMoon low-energy transfers within the set of stable initial conditions. Particularly, we are able to build external transfers with zero midcourse correction. Concerning our numerical implementation, besides presenting the explicit subclassication of the unstable set according to the instability criteria of the algorithmic denition, we considered a second implementation of the algorithm in which collisions of the spacecraft with the surfaces of the Earth and of the Moon are taken into account. We show the relation of the stability boundary and of the stable set with the lunar crashing orbits as a function of the eccentricity of the initial oscullating ellipse and the sense of the initial velocity. These collisional initial condition subsets imply in large restrictions to the WSB sets for practical applications in space mission design. The relevance of collisional orbits has also been investigated in other capture-escape analyses using threebody models (Nagler, 2005, 2004). The present paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we present our implementations of the WSB algorithmic denition, discussing some properties of the generated sets. Specically, we discuss the presence of crashing orbits along the boundary and the spatial distribution of the Jacobi constant along the initial condition sets. In Section 3, we establish some applicability criteria for direct inner transfers and for external transfers and perform the backward time characterization of the associated sets. Then, in Section 4, a dynamical characterization of the forward time history is performed for the stable sets. Also, the diversity of the stable solutions is illustrated and discussed. In Section 5, we present a method based on our analyses to obtain feasible Earth-to-Moon transfer trajectories, showing an external low-energy transfer with null correction at the patching section. Finally, the last section is devoted to nal remarks and conclusions. A short revision of the dynamical model is given in Appendix A and the current algorithmic denition of the WSB is presented in Appendix B, along with the pertinent denitions of capture and stability.

Implementations of the WSB algorithmic definition

Algorithm 1 (Appendix B) asserts nothing about the extension of the conguration space to which the algorithmic WSB is associated. In this paper, we restricted our investigation to initial conditions inside the lunar sphere of inuence (SOI). This choice was made for two reasons: (i) In the Laplace approximation, the lunar SOI is a region around the Moon (P2 ) where the gravitational interaction of that primary with the spacecraft (P3 ) is expected to be approximated by a two-body problem; so the use of the Kepler energy as a reliable quantier should be restricted to this region. (ii) Each initial condition of the algorithmic construction corresponds to a possible arrival state of a complete Earth-to-Moon transfer orbit; therefore these points should be chosen in a near

enough vicinity of the Moon. We considered Laplaces denition of the SOI, which compares the disturbing acceleration due to a third body on the two-body interaction between P2 and P3 (Battin, 1987; Prussing and Conway, 1993; Roy, 2005). In this denition, the lunar SOI radius is 6.619104 km. Here, we approximated this value by the distance from the Moon to the L1 Lagrangian point of the EM-system, denoted by rS , which is 6.4 104 km ( 0.1678 EM-system dimensionless units). The generation of the initial condition sets for xed e and a sense (clockwise or counterclockwise) of the initial velocity was accomplished with a discrete grid of points in the plane, using P2 -centered polar coordinates, r2 and . We considered a radial range varying from rM + 50 km to rM + 80, 000 km, where rM = 1.738 103 km is the mean radius of the Moon. The maximum r2 considered exceeds rS in order to inspect the tendency of the distribution of the associated sets in this near vicinity. In dimensionless units of the Earth-Moon 0 system this range corresponds to 0.00465140 r2 < 0.21263787, with r2 = 4 7.80437044 10 . Concerning the angular variation, we took 0 < 2, with = /1000. So, for each grid, the number of points with r2 < rS is N0 = 420, 000. These subsets of initial conditions in the lunar SOI are denoted by IC + (e) and IC (e), where e identies the eccentricity and the signs refer to counterclockwise (positive) and clockwise (negative) initial velocity, respectively. We performed two implementations of Algorithm 1: Implementation A: Sets of initial conditions were generated for xed values of e and a sense of initial velocity. Then, these initial conditions were integrated forwards (t > 0) under the PCR3BP dynamics, and classied according to Denition 2 (Appendix B), resulting in stable S and unstable U sets. This corresponds to the usual implementation found in the literature. Additionally, the unstable set was explicitly subclassied in ve subsets according to the instability criteria: E: instability due to non-negative Keplerian energy, when trajectories return to l() after one turn around the Moon; G 1 : primary interchange through the neck around L1 with C C3 ; G 2 : primary interchange through the neck around L2 with C C3 ; G 3 : generic geometric escape with C < C3 ; T: instability due to exceeding the maximum integration time, without returning to l() or going around the Earth. In the unstable cases G 1 , G 2 , and G 3 , P3 is required to complete a full revolution around the Earth (P1 ). The threshold value C3 separates the cases for which the exits through L1 or L2 are easily distinguishable or not. Implementation B: The punctual mass idealization of the mathematical model was substituted by nite bodies with the explicit inclusion of the mean radii of the Earth and the Moon. Thus, in addition to the stable and unstable sets described above, this alternative implementation generates a set C of trajectories which collide with the surface of the Moon before the stability classication. For the considered sets of initial conditions, no collisional trajectories with the surface of the Earth were observed. We remark that the inclusion of the mean radii of the primaries does not aect the mathematical modeling of the gravitational

interaction, which remains given by a central potential. When needed, we will denote the stable sets in the lunar SOI by S (e). Following Denition 3 (Appendix B), the boundary between the stable and the unstable sets for a constant value of e is denoted by W e . The numerical integration of the equations of motion of P3 was achieved using a Runge-Kutta-Felhberg 7-8 method with automatic step size control and local truncation error less than 1014 . When the particle moves inside a region of radius 102 around any primary, the equations of motion are regularized using Lema tres global regularization method (Szebehely, 1967). As in Garc a and Gmez (2007), the maximum time interval for the numerical integration o of trajectories during the stability classication procedure was set equal to 80 dimensionless time units, which corresponds to approximately 347.9 days.

2.1

The associated sets

Usually, the works concerning the algorithmic WSB only present the stable set or the stable-unstable boundary obtained through an implementation of the algorithmic denition. In Figure 1, we present the projection onto the x-y plane of all the W e associated sets generated by implementation B, including the lunar collisional set, for initial conditions with positive and negative velocities and three eccentricity values, namely, e = 0.0, 0.6, and 0.9. We see that, for small e, the stable set is usually located in a large region around the Moon for both senses of the initial velocity, in such a way that no part of the W e set is found at low altitudes for small eccentricity values. This stable core diminishes considerably as the eccentricity increases. For positive initial velocity, thin structures spread vertically from this central region and for negative initial velocity the shape of the stable core region becomes irregular as the eccentricity increases. The spatial distribution of the unstable subsets shows which criterion of the algorithm is relevant in determining the stability classication along the IC (e) sets. For negative initial velocity, E is the predominant unstable subset for all e, followed by G 3 . Very few initial conditions belong to G 1 and G 2 and they only appear very near the stable core around the Moon. On the other hand, for positive initial velocity, G 1 and G 2 are predominant. For small values of e, there is a clear distinction between the regions that G 1 and G 2 occupy inside the lunar SOI. However, as e increases, they mix around the stable area that appears for y < 0. Now, subset E is restricted to two small disjoint portions along the the stable arms. The knowledge of the spatial distribution of these sets is important to guide the investigation of the mechanisms accounting for the stability classication along the IC (e) sets (Sousa Silva and Terra, 2011).

2.2

Collision along the stability boundary

Figure 1 shows that the lunar collisional set always appears along the boundary of the stable set. However, while C always accompanies the stable set boundary for initial conditions with positive velocity, in the case of negative initial velocity, C is more restricted and there are regions of the WSB that do not coexist with collisional orbits.

Figure 1: Projection onto the x-y plane of the W e associated sets generated by implementation B of Algorithm 1 for initial conditions with positive velocity and (a) e = 0.0, (c) e = 0.6, and (e) e = 0.9; and initial conditions with negative velocity and (b) e = 0.0, (d) e = 0.6, and (f) e = 0.9. Black: S; Red: C; Green: E; Blue: G 1 ; Cyan: G 2 ; Grey: G 3 . The white curve depicts the approximated lunar SOI boundary.

Table 1: The second and the fourth columns present N, the number of initial conditions in each S (e) for each implementation. The third and the fth columns give the the percentage of stable points with respect to IC (e). Implementation A N S + (0.0) S + (0.6) S + (0.9) S + (0.95) S (0.0) S (0.6) S (0.9) S (0.95) 252,139 95,966 32,822 23,505 417,847 190,429 53,123 39,257 % of IC 60.00 22.83 7.81 5.59 99.43 45.31 12.64 9.34 Implementation B N 241,342 76,943 18,358 14,205 417,847 185,826 47,655 38,198 % of IC 57.43 18.31 4.36 3.38 99.43 44.22 11.34 9.09

Conversely, implementation A overlooks completely the lunar collisional set, neglecting that portions of the stability boundary extracted from this implementation and part of the associated stable set correspond to unsafe orbits concerning practical applications. Table 1 gives the number of stable initial conditions of implementation A and implementation B both for the sets with positive and negative initial velocities and e = 0.0, 0.6, 0.9, and 0.95 in the lunar SOI. The decrease of the stable set population in implementation B is due to the existence of lunar crashing orbits. This variation is more pronounced in the case of initial conditions with positive initial velocity. In fact, many times, collisional motion plays an important role in the stability classication besides the expected separatrix role of the hyperbolic invariant manifolds of the Lyapunov orbits of the collinear equilibria. In implementation A, when one follows the time evolution of initial conditions in a vicinity of the stability boundary, it is common to observe, in the phase space, that thin bunches of trajectories remain close for considerable time spans, until they approach a region at which the lunar gravitational potential varies considerably, causing the separation of these trajectories. This, associated or not to the approach to a Lyapunov orbit, can imply in stable-unstable transitions (Sousa Silva and Terra, 2011).

2.3

Preliminary investigation of IC sets: energy constraints and the spatial distribution of the Jacobi constant

According to the specications of Algorithm 1, every W e set is obtained by xing a two-body problem quantity, i.e., the osculating ellipse eccentricity, and zero radial velocity. These requirements of the construction imply that the Jacobi constant C, which is invariant along a solution of the PCR3BP, cannot be chosen at will. Given that the Cartesian initial conditions are specied as a function of r2 , , and e by Eqs. B.2, B.3 and B.4, the Jacobi integral C can be

evaluated by C(r2 , , e) = (1 ) + + 2 2 2(1 )r2 cos() + r2 r2 2 2(1 ) (1 + e) r2 , 2 r2 1 2r2 cos() + r2

(1)

where the signs account for positive and negative initial velocities2 , respectively. Given that the availability of Earth-to-Moon natural ballistic capture transfer trajectories3 depends on C, it is important to investigate how the values of the Jacobi constant are distributed along the sets of initial conditions. Indeed, we observe that the spatial distribution of C along the sets IC (e) depends strongly on the sense of the initial velocity, the eccentricity, and the initial distance to the Moon. From Equation 1, we see that for xed eccentricity and at the same position (, r2 ), the initial condition with negative velocity is more energetic than the one with positive velocity. Explicitly, the Jacobi constant gap is given by C(r2 , , e) = 4 (1 + e)r2 . (2)

Equation 2 shows that this gap increases with e and with r2 . This energy variation plays a central role in the dierent dynamical behaviors observed for the sets of initial conditions with positive and negative velocities. For initial conditions with positive velocity, inside the lunar SOI, we nd subsets of initial conditions for which4 : no transfer is possible (C C1 ); only internal transfers may occur (C1 > C C2 ); and both internal and external transfers may occur (C2 > C C min , where C min > C3 , the minimum value of C in the lunar SOI, depends on e). Conversely, for initial conditions with negative velocity, in the lunar SOI, besides subsets of initial conditions with C C1 and C1 > C C2 , we also nd initial conditions with C2 > C C3 , C3 > C C4,5 , and C < C4,5 . For a xed value of eccentricity, sets with negative initial velocity allow transfer at lower altitudes than sets with positive initial velocity. Indeed, for high eccentricity values (e > 0.9), low altitudes already correspond to orbits at very high energies. Specically, for e = 0.9, 92.8% of the initial conditions with negative velocity have C < C4,5 , while, for the same value of e, 99.04% of the initial conditions with positive velocity belong to the case C2 > C C3 . Table 2 displays the minimum values of r2 , for 0 < 2, with C = Ck , k = 1,2 for sets of initial conditions with positive and negative velocity and four values of e. The presence of initial conditions with C C1 determines an immediate obstacle to the existence of the WSB, given that they only generate trajectories that remain indenitely bounded in the Moon realm, so do not play any role
2 We note that some references present similar representations of this mathematical expression without considering the complete dependence on the sense of the initial velocity. 3 See Figure 11 in Appendix A for a brief description of the ve possible Hill region congurations which correspond to distinct transport possibilities through the phase space. 4 The values of C , k = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 for the Earth-Moon system are given in Appendix A. k

Table 2: Minimum values of r2 (km) inside the lunar SOI with C = Ck , k = 1,2,3,4,5, for 0 < 2, for sets of initial conditions with positive and negative initial velocities and four eccentricity values. For positive initial velocities, the minimum values of r2 with C = Ck , k = 3,4,5, only occur outside the lunar SOI. C1 C2 C3 C4 = C5 e = 0.0 e = 0.6 e = 0.9 e = 0.95 vpos vneg vpos vneg vpos vneg vpos vneg 25,315 16,436 9,671 6,813 2,184 1,813 1,059 928 28,087 17,335 10,683 7,210 2,374 1,929 1,146 989 34,646 15,741 4,911 2,702 39,658 18,647 6,203 3,536

in ballistic capture transfer design. Particularly, for the set with e = 0.0 and positive (negative) initial velocity, 39.5% (23.7%) have C C1 . Figure 2 shows the minimum value of r2 for 0 < 2 for which C = C1 in the sets of initial conditions with positive and negative velocities as a function of the eccentricity. Transitions are possible only above this minimum r2 . From the graph, we observe that low eccentricity values only allow capture-escape transitions at high altitudes (above 16,000 km for e = 0.0, as seen in Table 2). Thus, possible weak stability transitions at usual nal selenocentric orbits (altitudes of approximately 100 km or r2 = 4.781478 103 in dimensionless units) can only be found at suciently high e, namely, e > 0.9148, for positive velocity initial condition sets and e > 0.8982, for negative velocity initial condition sets.

Characterization of the stable sets in view of two mission strategies

The stability classication of Algorithm 1 is based on the future behavior of trajectories generated by the forward time integration (t > t0 ) of the IC sets of initial conditions. No information about the past behavior of the solutions is included in the classication procedure. Thus, Denitions 1 and 2 (Appendix B) only contemplate part of the requirements for suitable ballistic transfer trajectories, namely, that capture orbits are given by initial conditions (t = t0 = 0) that, under natural dynamics, take P3 back to l() at some tf > t0 with hK 0. However, it should also be required that P3 has came, under natural dynamics, from an appropriate location dened by some design strategy. With this in mind, our next analyses examine the trajectories generated as the initial conditions (Equations B.3 and B.4) are integrated backwards (t < t0 ). This investigation aims to verify if the initial conditions are able to provide transfer orbits under the PCR3BP dynamics in light of two transport possibilities: (i) direct inner transfers and (ii) external transfers based on a Patched

Figure 2: The minimum value of r2 , for 0 < 2, for which C = C1 as a function of the eccentricity for sets of initial condition with positive and negative velocities. The dotted horizontal line indicates the mean radius of the Moon. Three-Body approach5 . We establish two sets of criteria, displayed in Figure 3. Criteria for direct inner transfers: For direct inner transfer applications, as the initial conditions are integrated backwards, we test if trajectories enter a closed disk B of radius rB = 40, 000 km around the Earth in the x-y plane. We mark the time tB at which the criterion is satised. This criterion was chosen in order to seek trajectories that, for t < t0 , go into the Earth realm and approach that primary enough to insert P3 into a typical parking orbit (Yazdi and Messerschmid, 2004) through an adequate maneuver. Criteria for external transfers: Let be the counterclockwise angle formed by the radial line passing through the position of the Earth and the x-axis, with x > and let be the Poincar section dened by the angle , x > 0 and e r1 = [(x )2 + y 2 ]1/2 > rL3 , where rL3 is the distance between the Earth and the Lagrangian point L3 of the EM-system. For external transfers, we verify which trajectories cross the Poincar sections i , i = 1,2,3,4,5 determined by e the angles 1 = 195 , 2 = 210 , 3 = 225 , 4 = 240 , and 5 = 275 . The instants at which each criterion is satised are denoted by ti , i = 1,2,3,4,5. The choice of the sections is related to dierent initial congurations of the EM-system relative to the SE-system in a patched three-body construction, in which the Sun-Earth-Moon-Spacecraft four-body system is modeled as two coupled restricted three-body problems (Koon et al, 2001; Sousa Silva, 2011). In
5 Since the initial conditions of the algorithmic denition are expected to correspond to states which are candidate solutions for the nal portion of a complete Earth-to-Moon transfer trajectory, alternative four-body approaches could also be considered.

10

Figure 3: Criteria for direct inner transfers and for external transfers in the patched three-body approach. The boundary of the circular disk B and the x-y projection of the sections i are shown. The curve labeled as rL3 depicts the boundary of a region around the Earth with radius equal to the distance from the Earth to L3 of the EM-system. The label ICs indicates the initial conditions of the black and of the red trajectories. this context, the WSB approach should be able to provide low-energy candidate solutions for the nal portion (EM) of a complete mission trajectory (Canalias et al, 2004). The r1 > rL3 restriction is essential in order to take advantage of the transport channels provided by the invariant structures of the EM-system and of the SE-system. With this requirement, P3 will cross the Poincar section e in the exterior realm of the EM-system, where the stable manifold of a L2 EMLyapunov orbit intersects the unstable manifold of a L1 (or L2 ) SE-Lyapunov orbit. By using the presented geometrical criteria for the backward time evolution, we classify trajectories according to a certain measure of employability. For example, in Figure 3 we display two trajectories (black and red) that start at nearby initial conditions and behave quite similarly for a considerable interval of time. Through the performed applicability analysis, we detect that the black trajectory is more adequate for a patching procedure at section 5 than the red trajectory, given that the rst one crosses that section at an earlier time. For the backward time analyses, the maximum time interval, T max , for the numerical integration was set equal to 6 months.

3.1

Analysis for direct inner transfers

For all tested S (e) sets, we nd that very few initial conditions generate trajectories that approach the Earth enough as to provide feasible direct inner transfers. Typically, less than 1.5% of the trajectories enter sphere B during T max . Moreover, these initial conditions are sparsely distributed over the S (e) sets. 11

Table 3: Backward time characterization of stable initial conditions for application in direct inner transfers. Columns labeled B % present the percentage of trajectories in each S (e) set that enter the closed disk B. For the calculations of these percentages, we excluded initial conditions with C C1 . tmin and mean t correspond, respectively, to the minimum and the mean ight time (in days) to enter the closed disk B. B% S + (0.0) S + (0.6) S + (0.9) S + (0.95) 0.17 0.56 1.05 1.25 tmin 87.9 86.3 85.1 69.3 tmean 104.2 109.2 104.8 101.8 S (0.0) S (0.6) S (0.9) S (0.95) B% 0.22 1.31 0.48 0.73 tmin 80.3 51.9 57.4 84.9 tmean 129.4 106.3 139.3 134.1

For all the eccentricity values considered, the mean time of ight to enter sphere B is over 100 days. The shortest ight time intervals ( 50 days) usually occur for sets of initial conditions with negative velocity and moderate eccentricity, i.e., around e = 0.6. But, for these eccentricity values, there are no feasible trajectories corresponding to low altitudes because initial conditions have C C1 , as discussed in Section 2.3. On the other hand, for high eccentricity values, e > 0.9, the minimum ight time to fulll the criterion is longer than for the previous case, usually around 70 or 80 days. Table 3 shows the percentage of S (e) initial conditions that enter sphere B before T max for e = 0.0, 0.6, 0.9, and 0.95, along with the minimum and the mean ight time intervals to fulll that criterion within each corresponding set. For the calculations of these percentages, we excluded initial conditions with C C1 given that they do not provide transfer possibilities. Actually, the small number of feasible direct inner trajectories is to be expected in the considered mathematical model due to the existence of an invariant torus in the energy surface which restricts the accessible region of disk B, preventing that P3 approaches the Earth in the ranges of energy in the IC (e) sets. The existence of this invariant object separating the primaries in such a way that it is impossible for the particle to pass from a region arbitrarily close to the Moon to a region arbitrarily close to the Earth, was shown by McGehee (1969) for small values of the mass parameter and is discussed in some detail by Koon et al (2006). As an example of this feature, consider the Poincar section through x = e 0 with y > 0, which is convenient to inspect the proximity of P3 to P1 , for C = 3.06734276. This value of the Jacobi constant corresponds to the energy level of the stable initial condition, ic1 , for which the time of ight until B is minimum in the set S + (0.9). In Figure 4 we display the Poincar iterates on e the x-y plane of several initial conditions integrated for 2 104 dimensionless time units ( 238.3 years), along with the 35 Poincar iterates of the trajectory e generated by ic1 , integrated backwards during 75.4 dimensionless time units ( 327.3 days). In this interval of time, the minimum distance of P3 from min Earth, r1 , was 34,072.9 km, achieved after tmin = 25.2 dimensionless units 1 of time or approximately 109.4 days. From the Poincar section, we see that the phase space is extremely ine termixed, presenting large periodic islands interspersed with regions of chaotic

12

Figure 4: Poincar section x = 0, y > 0 for C = 3.06734276. We display the e Poincar iterates on the x-y plane of several initial conditions that were intee grated for 2 104 dimensionless units of time ( 238.3 years). The red dots in the chaotic region are the 35 Poincar iterates of the trajectory generated e by initial condition ic1 integrated backwards during approximately 75 dimensionless units ( 327.3 days). The primaries are represented by blue balls and four equilibrium points are shown as blue crosses. The green dots account for the Poincar iterates of the trajectory that represents the last torus of the large e stable island around the Earth. The brown curve delimits the B region around the Earth with radius of 40,000 km. The gray area represents the forbidden region.

13

Figure 5: Poincar section x = 0, y > 0 for C = 3.06734276. We display a detail e of the B region (see Figure 4) around the Earth. The red dots in the chaotic sea are the Poincar iterates of the trajectory generated by initial condition e ic1 . Here we can clearly see a barrier of quasiperiodic trajectories preventing P3 from approaching P1 . The green curve connects the Poincar iterates of the e trajectory that represents the last torus of the large stable island. The Earth is represented by a blue ball and the brown curve delimits the B region with radius of 40,000 km around the primary. motion. Figure 5 shows a detail of the B region around the Earth, where we can clearly see a barrier of quasiperiodic orbits preventing P3 from approaching P1 . We note that, for this particular trajectory, the minimum distance between P3 and P1 slightly decreases if longer integration time is considered. Also, trajectories at higher energy levels allow that P3 further approaches the Earth. This is the case, for example, of the stable initial condition ic2 with negative initial velocity, e = 0.95, and C = 2.88681599. The minimum distance from min P3 to the Earth r1 = 19, 219.9 was achieved after 27.2 dimensionless time units, or approximately 118.3 days. This particular trajectory approaches the Earth and crosses the plane 11 times before returning to the lunar region and colliding with the surface of the Moon after 56.4 dimensionless units of time. For the sake of comparison, we display some information about the trajectories generated by ic1 and ic2 in Table 4.

14

Table 4: Information about the trajectories generated by ic1 and ic2 . For the rst initial condition, two experiments are displayed in which two dierent maximum integration times are considered. In the table, x0 , y0 , x0 and y0 refer to the initial conditions, T is the integration time (in dimensionless units), min r1 is the minimum distance of P3 from P1 (in km), achieved at time tmin 1 (in dimensionless units) and # accounts for the number of Poincar iterates on e section . ic1 in S + (0.9) ic2 in S (0.95) C (x0 , y0 ) (x0 , y0 ) T min r1 tmin 1 # 3.06734276 (0.929846, 0.047373) (0.303840, 0.372014) 75.4 376.9 34,072.9 29,572.8 25.2 176.7 35 141 2.88681599 (1.134481, 0.004147) (0.015508, 0.548369) 56.4 19,219.9 27.2 11

3.2

Analysis for external transfers

For external transfers based on a patched three-body approach, we nd that the S (e) sets provide a signicant number of candidate initial conditions for several congurations of the initial Sun-Earth-Moon system setup. In Table 5, we present the percentages of stable initial conditions, with positive and negative velocities and four dierent eccentricity values, that generate trajectories that cross each i , i = 1,2,3,4,5 section for t < t0 . We see that, for a xed , the number of orbits that cross the i increases with e. On the other hand, for xed e, the employability of the i sections diminishes slightly as departs from 180 to 270 and, usually, the stable sets with negative initial velocity provide more candidates than the stable sets with positive initial velocity. Moreover, the subsets of orbits which collide with the Moon are more expressive in the case of positive initial velocity, while the sets of trajectories that do not cross the sections nor collide in T max are considerably larger for the case of negative initial velocity. The minimum and the mean ight time intervals to cross the i sections for these stable sets are shown in Table 6. These ight time intervals correspond to the duration of the last portion of a complete Earth-to-Moon transfer orbit, that is, from the patching Poincar section up to the state at which P3 gets e ballistically captured by the Moon (i.e., up to the initial conditions of Algorithm 1). So, to obtain the ight time of the complete Earth-to-Moon transfer, one still has to add the time to go from the Earth parking orbit up to the patching section in the SE-system6 . The large dierence between the minimum and the mean time intervals for each set suggests that the orbits that reach each patching section may present very diverse proles in the phase space. We veried that the same general tendencies shown in Tables 5 and 6 for the stable sets S (e) hold when the backward time characterization for application in external transfers is performed in the complete sets of initial conditions
6 The detailed investigation of the SE portion of the complete Earth-to-Moon transfer is beyond the scope of this work. In the usual Patched Three-Body approach, this portion can take from 90 to 150 days (Koon et al, 2001; Sousa Silva, 2011).

15

Table 5: Backward time characterization of stable initial conditions for application in external transfers. The columns named i , i = 1,2,3,4,5, present the percentage of trajectories in the sets S (e) that cross each i section. The sixth and the seventh columns display, respectively, the percentage of trajectories that collide with the nite radius of Moon and of trajectories that do not cross the i sections. For the calculations of these percentages, we excluded initial conditions with C C1 . 1 % 2 % 3 % 4 % 5 % Collision % None % S + (0.0) S + (0.6) S + (0.9) S + (0.95) S (0.0) S (0.6) S (0.9) S (0.95) 34.23 51.58 68.86 76.71 27.58 54.73 73.13 82.49 34.19 51.56 68.72 76.54 18.77 51.63 71.07 83.47 34.14 51.54 68.60 76.48 16.90 44.91 68.59 82.18 34.12 51.52 68.54 76.42 16.39 42.03 69.07 81.57 34.08 51.50 68.41 76.28 15.99 40.83 68.25 79.55 17.07 22.92 18.70 13.41 1.62 8.71 8.09 4.37 48.70 25.50 12.44 9.78 70.55 32.43 10.48 3.48

Table 6: Time performance for application in external transfers of initial conditions in S (e) that cross each i , i = 1,2,3,4,5 section. Minimum ight time (days) 1 S + (0.0) S + (0.6) S + (0.9) S + (0.95) S (0.0) S (0.6) S (0.9) S (0.95) 7.35 6.06 4.63 3.75 4.52 3.48 3.23 3.16 2 9.73 8.51 7.92 7.50 16.73 9.99 7.71 7.56 3 11.58 10.40 10.03 9.62 20.68 14.10 9.93 9.65 4 13.25 12.07 11.69 11.44 23.04 17.70 11.98 11.53 5 16.26 15.07 14.68 14.62 27.59 24.28 15.76 15.02

Mean ight time (days) 1 S (0.0) S + (0.6) S + (0.9) S + (0.95) S (0.0) S (0.6) S (0.9) S (0.95)
+

2 36.51 41.02 27.05 28.16 70.36 45.85 39.16 34.36

3 38.33 42.98 28.94 30.19 78.06 54.42 36.32 31.60

4 40.07 44.69 30.68 31.92 80.70 57.94 38.52 32.94

5 43.24 47.87 33.79 35.11 85.05 61.97 40.00 35.14

34.09 38.55 24.40 25.07 38.55 31.71 32.68 25.13

16

Figure 6: Backward time characterization regarding application in external transfers for (a) IC + (0.6) and (b) IC + (0.9). The colors indicate the time of ight until trajectories cross 1 , while the white regions correspond to trajectories which do not cross 1 before T max . The black circle depicts the approximated lunar SOI boundary. IC (e). This could be expected given that no information about the past history of the sets of initial conditions is included in the classication procedure of Algorithm 1. As an example, Figure 6 shows initial conditions with positive velocity and e = 0.6 and e = 0.9 that cross 1 . We nd that 59.61% and 72.26% of the initial conditions in IC + (0.6) and in IC + (0.9), respectively, reach 1 . For xed e and positive initial velocity, the quantity and the spatial disposition of initial conditions of trajectories that cross i , do not change considerably with i. On the other hand, the minimum ight time increases considerably with i (for example, 4.55 days for 1 and 15.04 days for 5 in the set IC + (0.9)). Figure 6 shows that initial conditions of trajectories that reach 1 in very short intervals of time (less than 10 days) are gathered, while trajectories that reach 1 in longer intervals of time are interspersed with regions of trajectories that collide or do not reach that patching section. We also present the case of initial conditions with negative velocity and e = 0.6 and e = 0.9. Figure 7 displays the subsets of initial conditions that cross sections 1 and 5 . In this case, 71.45% and 86.88% of the initial conditions in IC (0.6) and in IC (0.9), respectively, reach 1 . This percentages diminish to 49.43% and 66.53%, respectively for 5 . Figure 7 shows that the subsets that reach i , in very short intervals of time is very large for 1 and diminish considerably for 5 . The sharp boundaries between subsets of short and long ight time are dened due to rL3 , the r1 threshold, which delimits the external region of the patching procedure. Again, trajectories with longer ight time until i occur along regions of orbits which collide with the surface of the Moon for t < t0 . Concerning the time of ight up to the sections, we nd 3.11 days to 1 and 15.75 for 5 in the set IC (0.9). 17

Figure 7: Backward time characterization regarding application in external transfers for (a,b) IC (0.6) and (c,d) IC (0.9). Frames (a) and (c) show initial conditions which generate trajectories that cross 1 , while frames (b) and (d) show initial conditions which generate trajectories that cross 5 . The colors indicate the time of ight until each criterion is fullled, while the white regions correspond to trajectories which do not cross the sections before T max . The black circle depicts the approximated lunar SOI boundary.

18

Table 7: The second and the third columns show, respectively, the percentage of S (e) initial conditions with rf < rS and r2 (t) < rS , t [0, tf ]. For the calculations of these percentages, we excluded initial conditions with C C1 . rf < rS r2 (t) < rS rf < rS r2 (t) < rS S + (0.0) S + (0.6) S + (0.9) S + (0.95) 99.82 98.57 82.62 77.97 98.58 89.16 16.01 1.23 S (0.0) S (0.6) S (0.9) S (0.95) 82.99 60.12 34.03 21.93 71.51 31.29 9.85 1.08

We see that it is important to adjust the initial spatial conguration of the EM-system with respect to the SE-system correctly in order to decrease the ight time, as well as to increase the number of candidate solutions. For a given initial conguration, i.e., xed , high eccentricities usually provide more candidates and the shortest ight time intervals. Also, for all the investigated eccentricity values, the mean ight time is much longer than the minimum values of each corresponding initial condition set. All things considered, the backward time characterization of the stable sets reveals that Algorithm 1, as could be expected, is not sucient to guarantee a region in the phase space where all stable initial conditions generate trajectories that correspond to feasible ballistic capture transfers based on the patched threebody approach. Thus, we conclude that this backward time analysis provides an eective strategy, complementary to the WSB stability classication procedure, to look for good candidate solutions for external transfers with ballistic capture within the generated sets initial conditions.

Dynamical diversity of stable sets under forward time integration

Let rf be the distance from P3 to the Moon at tf > t0 = 0, the instant at which the particle returns to l() after a complete turn around the Moon, and let (xf , yf , xf , yf ) be the state of P3 at tf . A trajectory is classied as stable (hK < 0) if rf ((xf + 1 + yf )2 + (xf yf )2 ) < 2. (3) It is not dicult to verify that Equation 3 can be satised far away from the lunar SOI, even when P3 is orbiting P1 . Thus, a trajectory may be erroneously assigned to sets S (e) if the stability classication is performed at rf > rS . Aiming to evaluate the consistency of Algorithm 1 concerning the selection of stable trajectories that correspond to captured orbits by the Moon, we performed two numerical experiments. The rst experiment consisted in observing if the stable orbits are classied inside (rf < rS ) or outside (rf > rS ) the lunar SOI. So, this analysis allows to verify if the classication is performed within a region where the measurement of hK is reliable (considering Laplaces approximation). Figure 8 shows the spatial distribution of the subsets that result from this analysis for stable initial conditions with three values of e and positive and

19

negative velocities. The green, black and grey points depict the solutions with rf < rS . The quantication of these results is presented in Table 7. We see that, for xed e, the percentage of trajectories with rf < rS in S + (e) is larger than the percentage in S (e). This is because initial conditions with negative velocity have higher energies than their corresponding counterparts with positive velocity. Notably, as e increases, the number of trajectories with rf < rS decreases considerably for the stable sets with negative initial velocity. This is due to the fact that higher eccentricity values imply higher energies, allowing P3 to wander far away from the vicinity of the Moon. This decreasing is less signicant in the case of positive initial velocity. The second experiment consisted in verifying which stable initial conditions generate trajectories that remain inside the lunar SOI for 0 t tf . This analysis aims to identify a remnant subset of orbits corresponding to temporary capture states in the sense that they remain, during the classication procedure, in a vicinity of the Moon where the gravitational eects of the other primary can be considered as a perturbation7 . Naturally, each remnant subset is contained in the corresponding subset of initial conditions which are classied inside the SOI in the rst experiment. We veried that a large remnant subset prevails in the stable core region for initial conditions with low eccentricity values and both senses of velocity. However, we remind that many of these trajectories have C C1 . Moreover, as seen in Table 7, the remnant subsets diminish drastically with the eccentricity, subsisting only at very low altitudes around the Moon (as seen in Figure 8 (e) and (f)). The inspection of the time evolution of the stable initial conditions reveals that these sets present a wide variety of dynamical behavior. In fact, many stable trajectories wander far away from P2 before returning to l() with hK < 0. Figure 9 illustrates part of these dynamical diversity and Table 8 contains specications about the presented trajectories, such as their initial e, initial conditions, value of C, and tf . Figure 9 (a) exemplies trajectories that remain in the lunar SOI for 0 t tf . While trajectory (a1 ) presents quasiperiodic motion, trajectory (a2 ) transits through the neck around L1 soon after it is classied as stable. These solutions are typical of low values of e, persisting only at very low altitudes for higher values of the eccentricity. On the other hand, frames (b) to (f) display trajectories that are less restricted in position space and are common in the stable sets with intermediate and high values of e. Frame (b) shows a trajectory that clearly approaches and surrounds the L1 Lyapunov orbit on its corresponding energy level. Frames (c) and (d) display stable orbits that move outside the lunar SOI for most of the time before being classied. Particularly, trajectories (c1 ) and (d) return to l() at rf < rS , while trajectory (c2 ) is classied outside the lunar SOI. Frames (e) and (f) show trajectories with very long classication time and with large spatial extension compared to the size of the lunar SOI. In particular, trajectory (f1 ) visits both the Earth and the
7 Actually, for practical applications, a ballistic capture orbit usually may be required to remain within a region that is considerably smaller than the sphere of inuence of the primary body. For instance, Koon et al (2001) require that the spacecraft remains within a radius of 20,000 km around the Moon, while the lunar SOI radius is of approximately 66,000 km.

20

Figure 8: Subsets obtained with the forward time analyses for (a) S + (0.0), (b) S (0.0), (c) S + (0.6), (d) S (0.6), (e) S + (0.9), and (f) S (0.9). Red: rf > rS ; Green: rf < rS ; Black and Grey: r2 (t) < rS , t [0, tf ], respectively, for C < C1 and C C1 (naturally, these two subsets also satisfy rf < rS ). In all frames, the black circle represents the approximated lunar SOI boundary.

21

Figure 9: Examples of trajectories generated by stable initial conditions with positive and negative initial velocities and several eccentricity values. The initial conditions are marked by red xs. The lunar SOI is depicted by the grey shaded region, the Moon and the Earth are represented by blue circles, and the equilibrium points are indicated by blue crosses. Specications about each trajectory are found in Table 8.

22

Table 8: Specications about the stable trajectories shown in Figure 9. The columns display the stable set to which they belong, the initial conditions, the Jacobi constant value and the time to return to l() in dimensionless units. In the last column we mark trajectories that are classied as stable inside the lunar SOI with a . In the fourth column the numbers in parenthesis refer to Jacobi constant intervals, namely, (3) C2 > C C3 and (5) C < C4,5 . Set (a1 ) (a2 ) (b) (c1 ) (c2 ) (d) (e) (f1 ) (f2 ) S (0.0) S + (0.0) S + (0.9) S (0.6) S (0.9) S (0.95) S (0.9) S (0.6) S + (0.9) x0 y0 -0.919235 0.002156 -1.054727 -0.087347 -0.968184 -0.016582 -1.098784 0.011894 -1.062076 0.058326 -1.057133 0.037524 -1.014359 0.006452 -1.047662 -0.005464 -0.922916 0.043239 x0 y0 0.015371 -0.489121 0.176527 -0.135161 0.594139 0.704563 0.056397 0.525986 0.363873 0.463065 0.298678 0.551474 0.223998 0.920276 -0.057225 0.626383 -0.258277 0.387856 C 3.092768 (3) 3.149227 (3) 3.060013 (3) 2.935747 (5) 2.890479 (5) 2.892575 (5) 2.959201 (5) 2.982770 (5) 3.070653 (3) tf 0.841677 1.990005 5.543347 4.514383 5.013351 11.442071 57.298392 56.726007 15.111677 rf < rH

23

exterior realms before returning to l() at rf < rS . We remark that, in spite of the stable classication assigned by Algorithm 1, these orbits are far from corresponding to captured states by the Moon for the nal portion of Earth-toMoon transfers. The anomalous trajectory proles in terms of capture are also indicated by the large values of ight time underlined in Table 8, which diverge substantially from typical values of ight time of applicable trajectories. For each value of e, the analyses of this section show that the stable subset of adequate solutions with respect to low-energy ballistic capture is located just above the altitudes corresponding to states with C C1 . This restriction to the generated stable sets follows because the criteria of the current stability classication are unable to select appropriate temporary capture states, specially at high energy levels. Particularly, the measurement of the Kepler energy at rf alone does not guarantee the fulllment of qualitative aspects of the full cycle orbits that may be required for practical applications. Therefore, the stability criteria should also restrict the acceptable spatial extension of the stable trajectories with respect to the lunar SOI, besides the position with respect to the lunar SOI at the instant of classication.

Obtaining feasible Earth-to-Moon transfer trajectories

The union of the backward and the forward time analyses provides a method to obtain feasible Earth-to-Moon transfer solutions. In this approach, these solutions must be selected among the initial conditions in the subset which is the intersection of the applicable subset obtained through the backward time analyses for external transfers (Section 3) and the subset of stable solutions with spatially restricted trajectory proles (Section 4). In fact, for external transfers in the Patched Three-Body approach, we nd that this intersection provides a considerable number of solutions for all the eccentricity values considered in the generation of the IC (e) sets. The number of feasible solutions in the intersection, as well as their dynamical characteristics (range of C, ight time to the patching section, range of altitudes at t = 0) depend on e and on the sense of the initial velocity. For example, for initial conditions with positive velocity and e = 0.9, the intersection of the applicable subset with the spatially restricted stable subset provides solutions with 3.10393426 C EM 3.18239982. On the other hand, for initial conditions with negative velocity and e = 0.9, we nd solutions with 3.04861656 C EM 3.12933852. In particular, we are able to obtain external transfers with no velocity correction at midcourse, that is, with v = 0 at the patching section. As an illustration, Figure 10 displays one of such complete Earth-to-Moon trajectories obtained within the the WSB stable set of initial conditions with e = 0.9 and positive velocity. This trajectory departs from the Poincar section y = 0, e x > xEarth , y > 0, with 6,136 km of altitude from the surface of the Earth and arrives at the stable WSB initial condition after 109.6 days. No maneuver is needed at the patching Poincar section 1 to match the energy levels of the e trajectory in the SE and the EM systems. The values of C in each system are

24

Figure 10: Earth-to-Moon transfer orbit with null v at midcourse. (a) x-y view in the Sun-Earth rotating frame (in dimensionless units of the SE-system). (b) X-Y view in the geocentric inertial frame (in 105 km). The departing point, the patching point, and the WSB stable initial condition are indicated by A, B, and C, respectively. In frame (a) the forbidden regions for C SE = 3.00083537 are shown in grey. C SE = 3.00083537 and C EM = 3.12078912. In this case, during the rst revolution around the Moon, the minimum distance from P3 to the surface of the Moon is 444.15 km. Both the initial and the nal altitudes and the total ight time can be improved if some small v is applied at the patching section.

Conclusions

In this contribution, we performed a broad dynamical analysis of the sets generated by the algorithmic denition of the Weak Stability Boundary to verify the potential applicability of the stable solutions in Earth-to-Moon ballistic capture transfers. Our analyses reveal a large presence of crashing orbits along the WSB itself and in parts of the stable sets, restricting the applicability of these sets. Then, the applicability of the initial conditions of the algorithmic denition for inner transfers in the planar version of the CR3BP was investigated through a backward time analysis, nding only a small subset of suitable solutions, spread over the lunar SOI. On the other hand, we detected the spatial location of large subsets of ecient initial conditions for external transfers in the context of the Patched Three-Body approach. Finally, forward time analyses revealed that the subsets which fulll requirements for the nal portion of a ballistic capture transfer orbit are spatially restricted to the lower altitudes immediately above those corresponding to C C1 . In particular, the extensive inspection of stable trajectories revealed that a large diversity of dynamical behaviors are grouped by the current stability classication. This implies that the stability criteria must be reviewed in order to guarantee that the stable solutions correspond solely to low-energy capture orbits. Conversely, our analyses provide a method to obtain subsets of feasible solutions for Earth-to-Moon transfers. Particularly, the intersection of the applicable subsets obtained through of the 25

backward time analyses of Section 3 and the subsets of spatially restricted stable solutions found in Section 4 provide external transfer solutions in the Patched Three-Body approach with zero midcourse correction. Acknowledgements We would like to thank Cleverson M. P. Marinho and Sandro S. Fernandes for the valuable discussions in the beginning of this work. We are also grateful for the comments of the anonymous referees which contributed substantially to the improvement of the clarity of this paper. This work was partially supported by CAPES.

Mathematical model

We briey present the Planar Circular Restricted Three-Body Problem (PCR3BP), the framework in which the algorithmic WSB denition has been originally proposed. For more details on this mathematical model, we refer the reader to Szebehely (1967). The Restricted Three-Body Problem (R3BP) describes the motion of a particle P3 of negligible mass moving under the gravitational inuence of two bodies P1 and P2 , called the primaries, of masses m1 and m2 , respectively. The motion of P1 and P2 is not perturbed by P3 , being a solution of the Kepler Problem, in which the primaries move under mutual gravitational inuence. In the planar circular version of the R3BP, i.e., the PCR3BP, P1 and P2 describe circular coplanar orbits around the barycenter of this two-body system and the motion of the third body is restricted to the orbital plane of the primaries. This dynamical model is expressed in non-dimensional variables, in such a way that the distance between P1 and P2 , the sum of their masses and their angular velocity around the barycenter are normalized to one. The normalized masses of P1 and P2 are given, respectively, by 1 and , with = m2 /(m1 + m2 ), m1 > m2 , being the only parameter of the model. For the Earth-Moon system, = 0.0121506683. In the synodic coordinate system x-y, which rotates with the primaries with respect to an inertial frame X-Y , and is centered in the barycenter of the P1 -P2 two-body system, the primaries P1 and P2 are located, respectively, at (, 0) and ( 1, 0). Let (x, y, x, y) represent the state of P3 in the synodic reference system. The particles equations of motion are given by x 2y = x , y + 2x = y , where (x, y) = 1 2 1 (1 ) (x + y 2 ) + + + , 2 r1 r2 2 (A.1)

(A.2)

is the eective potential and r1 = [(x)2 +y 2 ]1/2 and r2 = [(x+1)2 +y 2 ]1/2 are the distances from P3 to P1 and P2 , respectively. This system has an integral of motion given by J(x, y, x, y) = 2(x, y) (x2 + y 2 ) = C, (A.3)

26

where C is the Jacobi constant. The conservation associated to J denes a three-dimensional invariant manifold immersed in the four-dimensional phase space by M(, C) = (x, y, x, y) R4 |J(x, y, x, y) = constant . (A.4)

The regions obtained by the projection of the M surface onto the position space x-y are called the Hill regions which constitute the accessible areas to the trajectories for each given C value. The dynamical model has ve equilibrium points, Lk , k = 1,2,3,4,5, also called libration or Lagrangian points, for which the the Jacobi constant values are given by Ck , k = 1,2,3,4,5. For each , the energy values associated to Ck dene the ve possible Hill region congurations which correspond to distinct transport possibilities through phase space. Figure 11 displays the rst four cases of Hill regions congurations for the Earth-Moon system: C > C1 , C1 > C > C2 , C2 > C > C3 , and C3 > C > C4 = C5 . In the fth case, C < C4 = C5 , motion over the entire x-y plane is possible. For the Earth-Moon system the critical values are: C1 3.20034491, C2 3.18416414, C3 3.02415026, and C4 = C5 = 3.0. The accessible region of the position space contained in the circle centered at P2 with radius equal to the distance from L1 to P2 , is referred as Moon realm. Analogously, Earth realm refers to the accessible region of the position space contained in the circle centered at P1 with radius equal to the distance from L3 to P1 , excluding the Moon realm. Finally, the accessible region of the position space outside these two delimited areas is called the exterior realm.

The Weak Stability Boundary Algorithmically Dened

The basis to the current algorithmic denition of the Weak Stability Boundary was presented by Belbruno (2004) (Chapter 3.2.1), associated to an alternative type of capture, called ballistic capture. This type of capture is said to be dened analytically based on the measurement of the two-body energy, i.e., the Kepler energy, of P3 with respect to P2 , given by hK = 1 2 2 Gm2 x +y , 2 r2 (B.1)

where (, y , x, y ) is the state of P3 in an inertial reference frame with origin x in P2 ; r2 = x2 + y 2 is the distance between P3 and P2 ; m2 is the mass of the primary; and G stands for the universal gravitational constant (Bate et al, 1971). Denition 1 (Ballistic capture) P3 is ballistically captured by P2 at time t = tc if, for a solution (t) = (x(t), y(t), x(t), y(t)) of the R3BP, hK ((tc )) 0, where hK is the two-body energy of P3 with respect to P2 . It is worth to remark that this use of the word ballistic as an adjective to the capture process is not unique. In general, the idea behind a ballistic capture is a situation in which no propulsion (v = 0) is necessary to achieve a temporary 27

Figure 11: Four possible Hill Region cases for the Earth-Moon system: the white areas correspond to the Hill regions. The forbidden regions and the zero velocity curves are shown in grey and black, respectively. The black lled circles correspond to the primaries and the plus signs to the equilibrium points Lk , k = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. (a) Case 1 (C > C1 ): no transit orbits between the primaries are possible. (b) Case 2 (C1 > C > C2 ): the realms around P1 and P2 are connected by transit orbits through the neck region around L1 . (c) Case 3 (C2 > C > C3 ): in addition to the transit possibility of case 2, now the particle can move to the exterior realm of motion through the neck region around L2 . (d) Case 4 (C3 > C > C4 = C5 ): the forbidden regions diminish and the particle can also transit through the region around L3 . In the fth case (C < C4 = C5 ), motion over the entire x-y plane is possible.

28

capture orbit around the destination body (Koon et al, 2001; Marsden and Ross, 2005). The algorithm procedure proposed by Belbruno (2004) was reviewed in Sections 1 and 2 of Garc and Gmez (2007), making explicit the two-fold posa o sibility for the sense of the initial velocity of P3 and including a time limit to the numerical integration of the trajectories. Following, we present the WSB algorithmic denition as given by Garc and Gmez (2007). a o ALGORITHM 1 (Stability classication associated to the WSB) Let l() be the radial segment connecting the positions of P2 and P3 , where is the counterclockwise angle measured from the x-axis, for x > 1 + , to l(). Sets of initial conditions are constructed for which P3 is assumed to start its motion on the periapsis of an osculating ellipse around P2 with the modulus of the sidereal initial velocity, , given by (1 + e) 2 = , (B.2) r2 where e is the eccentricity of the osculating ellipse. Given that the two-body energy computed at the periapsis (Bate et al, 1971) is hK = (e 1)/(2r2 ), the initial Kepler energy of P3 with respect to P2 is negative for e [0, 1). For a xed position on l(), clockwise osculating motions of P3 about P2 are generated by initial conditions given by x = 1 + + r2 cos , x = r2 sin sin , y = r2 sin , y = r2 cos + cos , (B.3)

while counterclockwise osculating motions of P3 about P2 are generated by initial conditions given by x = 1 + + r2 cos , x = r2 sin + sin , y = r2 sin , y = r2 cos cos . (B.4)

Due to the sign of , the initial conditions given by Equations B.3 and B.4 are said to have positive and negative velocity, respectively. The following denition of stable behavior is given by Belbruno (2004) for the two sets of trajectories generated with these initial conditions for each e [0, 1). Denition 2 (Stability) The motion of a particle is said to be stable about P2 , under the PCR3BP dynamics, if after leaving l() it makes a full cycle about P2 without going around P1 and returns to l() at a point with negative Kepler energy with respect to P2 . Otherwise, the motion will be unstable. As noted in Garc and Gmez (2007), some maximum time interval must a o be xed for the numerical integration. If a trajectory does not cross again the segment l() during this time interval, then the orbit is also considered unstable. The classication according to this stability criterion of the trajectories generated by the prescribed initial conditions produces stable and unstable subsets and leads to the denition of regions in phase space known as boundaries of stability. Denition 3 (Algorithmic WSB) The Weak Stability Boundary is given by the set W = {r | [0, 2), e [0, 1)} , (B.5) 29

where r (, e) are the points along the radial line l() for which there is a change of stability in the sense of Denition 2. The subset obtained by xing the eccentricity e of the osculating ellipse is W e = {r | [0, 2), e = constant} . (B.6)

Garc and Gmez (2007) extended the stability denition for the case of a o trajectories that complete n > 1, n N, turns around P2 without making a complete turn around P1 . Concerning the choice of the variables and parameters of Algorithm 1, we remark that: (a) the range of variable r is not prescribed. Following the implementation of Garc and Gmez (2007), several papers have appeared (Topputo a o and Belbruno, 2009; Belbruno et al, 2010; Sousa Silva and Terra, 2010) in which the WSB construction is performed over a broad region in position space that extends far away from the smaller primary; (b) Neither the value of the maximum time interval for the numerical integration of the trajectories, nor a criterion to dene it, is assigned. (c) The value of e is allowed to vary from 0 to 1, although it is usually taken above 0.9 for practical applications in mission design. (d) The numerical implementation requires the discretization of x-y plane in order to build the sets of initial conditions. The spatial grid has to be ne enough to provide a stability boundary within a desired accuracy.

References
Bate R, Mueller D, White J (1971) Fundamentals of Astrodynamics. Dover Publications Battin R (1987) An Introduction to the Mathematics and Methods of Astrodynamics. AIAA Education Series Belbruno E (1987) Lunar capture orbits, a method of constructing Earth Moon trajectories and the lunar GAS mission. In: Proceedings of AIAA/DGLR/JSASS International Eletric Propulsion Conference, AIAA 871054 Belbruno E (1994) Ballistic lunar capture transfers using the fuzzy boundary and solar perturbations: a survey. Journal of The British Interplanetary Society 47:7380 Belbruno E (2004) Capture Dynamics and Chaotic Motions in Celestial Mechanics. Princeton University Press Belbruno E, Carrico J (2000) Calculation of weak stability boundary ballistic lunar transfer trajectories. In: Proceedings of the AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, AIAA 2000-4142 Belbruno E, Miller J (1990) A ballistic lunar capture trajectory for the Japanese spacecraft Hiten. Tech. Rep. 312/90.4-1731-EAB, Jet Propulsion Laboratory Belbruno E, Miller J (1993) Sun-perturbed Earth-to-Moon transfers with ballistic capture. Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics 16:770775 30

Belbruno E, Topputo F, Gidea M (2008) Resonance transitions associated to weak capture in the restricted three-body problem. Advances in Space Research 42:13301351 Belbruno E, Gidea M, Topputo F (2010) Weak stability boundary and invariant manifolds. SIAM Journal of Applied Dynamical Systems 9:10611089 Canalias E, Gomez G, Marcote M, Masdemont J (2004) Assessment of mission design including utilization of libration points and weak stability boundaries. Tech. Rep. 18142/04/NL/MV, Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya / Universitat de Barcelona, Ariadna Final Report 03-4103 Circi C, Teolatto P (2001) On the dynamics of weak stability boundary lunar tranfers. Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy 79:4172 Garc F, Gmez G (2007) A note on weak stability boundary. Celestial Mea o chanics and Dynamical Astronomy 97:87100 Koon W, Lo M, Marsden J, Ross S (2000) Shoot the Moon. In: Proceedings of AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, AAS 00-166 Koon W, Lo M, Marsden J, Ross S (2001) Low energy transfer to the Moon. Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy 81:6373 Koon W, Lo M, Marsden J, Ross S (2006) Dynamical Systems, The Three-Body Problem, And Space Mission Design. Springer-Verlag Mak Z, Szenkovits F, Salamon J, Olh-Gl R (2010) Stable and unstable orbits o a a around Mercury. Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy 108:357370 Marsden J, Ross S (2005) New methods in celestial mechanics and mission design. Bulletin (New Series) of the American Mathematical Society 43:43 73 McGehee R (1969) Some homoclinic orbits for the restricted three-body problem. PhD thesis, University of Wisconsin, Madison Miele A, Wang T, Mancuso S (2001) Optimal trajectories for Earth-Moon-Earth ight. Acta Astronautica 49:5971 Mora M, Graziani F, Teolatto P, Circi C, Porlio M, Hechler M (2000) A systematic analysis on weak stability boundary transfers to the Moon. In: Proceedings of the 51st International Astronautical Congress, IAF 00-A.6.03 Nagler J (2004) Crash test for the Copenhagen problem. Physical Review E 69, 066218 Nagler J (2005) Crash test for the restricted three-body problem. Physical Review E 71, 026227 Perozzi E, Ferraz-Mello S (eds) (2010) Space Manifolds Dynamics. Springer, New York Prussing J, Conway B (1993) Orbital Mechanics. Oxford University Press

31

Romagnoli D, Circi C (2009) Earth-Moon weak stability boundaries in the restricted three and four body problem. Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy 103:79103 Roy A (2005) Orbital Motion, 4th edn. Institute of Physics Publishing Sousa Silva P (2011) The algorithmic WSB in Earth-to-Moon mission design: dynamical aspects and applicability. PhD thesis, Instituto Tecnolgico de o Aeronutica - So Jos dos Campos a a e Sousa Silva P, Terra M (2010) Dynamical properties of the weak stability boundary and associated sets. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 246, 012007 Sousa Silva P, Terra M (2011) Diversity and validity of stable-unstable transitions in the algorithmic Weak Stability Boundary, submitted. Szebehely V (1967) Theory of Orbits. Academic Press Topputo F, Belbruno E (2009) Computation of weak stability boundaries: SunJupiter system. Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy 105:317 Yagasaki K (2004a) Computation of low energy Earth-to-Moon transfers with moderate ight time. Physica D 197:313331 Yagasaki K (2004b) Sun-perturbed Earth-to-Moon transfers with low energy and moderate ight time. Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy 90:197212 Yazdi K, Messerschmid E (2004) Analysis of parking orbits and transfer trajectories for mission design of cis-lunar space station. Acta Astronautica 55:759 771

32