5

I was looking at the JWST halo and wondering if getting the halo orbit phased with earths elliptical orbit would be a way of keeping gravitational variations regular and periodic so that station keeping burns could be more predicable, preserving fuel and thereby extending useable life of JWST. Right now JWST is near max +Y travel... when earth is just past Periapsis. Is this a coincidence? The halo could be tailored with precision burns to get max Y at Periapsis and min Y at midpoint between Periapsis and Apoapsis. At Apoapsis JWST would be at max Y again, 1 halo orbit in 1/2 year.

and so the question: Is (or will) the JWST halo orbit period sync'd with earth's elliptical orbit about sun?

EDIT: More directly about my "Sync'd orbit" question... Is there a need or benefit to have JWST at a specific place in its halo when earth is at a specific place in its orbit.

BradV
  • 3,284
  • 11
  • 33
  • @BradV FYI, I just estimated the period from the Horizon's data we looked at earlier. It comes out at 6.07 months. It's not quite a closed orbit so there's no exact number. I'd be surprised if the Earth's orbit was eccentric enough to cause much difference over 10 years. The Moon would have a lot more effect but it's period is not close JWST's in any simple ratio. – Roger Wood Jan 28 '22 at 22:06
  • 1
    @BrendanLuke15 I've adjusted the wording of the title to match the sentiment of the question, basically from "is?" to "could?" – uhoh Jan 29 '22 at 02:01
  • @BradV this is a really interesting question! Sun-Earth halo orbits are really heliocentric orbits in a 1:1 resonance with Earth; JWST is 1% further from the Sun than Earth so should orbit the Sun about 1.5% slower than Earth, but it's resonance with Earth means that it gets pulled along a little faster. As you know, this class of orbit does also have some harmonic-like motion about that situation with a period of very roughly six months, but depending on the details of the halo orbit it could be five or seven months or even more different. – uhoh Jan 29 '22 at 02:05
  • @BradV so I think that you are really wondering "Hey! What if it were adjusted to be exactly half a year? Would that help reduce perturbations and lower station-keeping delta-v?" I think it's a great idea and if it were a "simple" ER3BP (elliptical, restricted three-body problem) there might be something there. There will certainly be research papers on that topic that hopefully answers can find and explain! But we have a problem, that darn Moon of ours is so massive! – uhoh Jan 29 '22 at 02:08
  • The Earth and Moon rotate around their common center of mass and produce monthly perturbations as well, and my hunch is that this scheme is of the class "robbing Peter to pay Paul" in that they've already found a "sweet spot" and trying to reduce perturbations due to Earth's elliptical orbit might make JWST's trajectory more susceptible to other perturbations, including the Earth-Moon dance. But it's just a hunch, let's see what the orbital mechanics think. +n! for the question! – uhoh Jan 29 '22 at 02:10
  • FWIW, my script here can be used to plot the distance between JWST & various centres, eg the EM barycentre (@3), L2 (@32), the Sun (@10). JWST's motion relative to the Moon is rather complex. – PM 2Ring Jan 29 '22 at 04:22
  • @uhoh Re Sun-Earth halo orbits are really heliocentric orbits in a 1:1 resonance with Earth That is IMHO the wrong way to look at things. The Sun-Earth L1 and L2 points are key points at which the question of "does object X orbit the Earth or the Sun" is completely ambiguous. The correct answer, to me, regarding the question Does the JWST orbit the Sun or the Earth? is an unambiguous and very emphatic YES. Does X orbit Y or Z is oftentimes framed as a mutually exclusive question when that shouldn't be the case. – David Hammen Jan 29 '22 at 12:08
  • 1
    I suspect (but do not know with enough certainty) that the answer to this question is that the JWST Flight Dynamics Team (FDT) already does what the OP is asking about. While there are additional complexities to the Elliptical Restricted Three Body Problem (ER3BP) compared to the Circular Restricted Three Body Problem (CR3BP), numerous papers have been written on the ER3BP. The FDT would be remiss if they didn't account for the eccentricity of the Earth's orbit. They would also be remiss if they didn't account for the Moon. This isn't a three body problem; It's a restricted four body problem. – David Hammen Jan 29 '22 at 12:17
  • 1
    @uhoh: Sorry, but I'd rather not have folks edit my questions and discussion without first discussing with me. Most of the time I have a specific reasoning for structuring things the way I do. Also... I've learned to 'see past' minor things like capitalizations and mis-spellings if they do not affect meaning or context. I don't mean to be snarky here, but I'm not pleased when what appears to be my questions is actually someone elses. – BradV Jan 29 '22 at 15:07
  • @BradV No problem at all and I'll work really hard to remember that. If I ever fail and accidentally edit one of your posts again, indeed roll back and yell at me for being well-meaning but occasionally forgetful. I've made almost 10,000 revisions here and I think I nearly always get it right and am frequently thanked, but in your case I'll try my best to achieve laissez-faire – uhoh Jan 29 '22 at 21:10
  • @BradV wow, after actually checking, I'm really surprised how close it is! It seems my prediction that the answer would be "No" was pretty wrong. – uhoh Jan 29 '22 at 23:14
  • 1
    @uhoh: thanks for putting up with "five year old" sitting in on a PhD level discussion! I realize I'm in well over my head. I've looked at several halos and they seem to be 2:1 but I have no idea if positioning of object within halo is related to and sync'd with M2 orbit.. – BradV Jan 30 '22 at 01:43
  • I always get frustrated when I hear people say "that's not the question you should be asking" and it seems that's exactly what I said above and I was way wrong! I really think you are on to something here! – uhoh Jan 30 '22 at 02:00
  • @uhoh after a bit of time it seems as if a precisely exact 2:1 is not happening and so my initial premise is 'off'. your thoughts? – BradV Aug 16 '22 at 06:29
  • @BradV the final orbit will maximize the likelihood of success of the mission along with perhaps some emphasis on the probability that the first one or two of the inevitable mission extensions will have a good shot. It seems that "synchronicity" was not necessary for those. – uhoh Aug 16 '22 at 07:54

1 Answers1

2

Is the JWST halo orbit period sync'd with earth's elliptical orbit about sun?

Wow, It's surprisingly close!

At first I figured it would be closer to 6.5 or 7 months due to past information and questions and answers based on an earlier JWST trajectory, but wow, trying to define the period of a complicated 3 or 4 body orbit (including the Moon's effect) in a simple way, I've come up with 180 days!

I took the new predicted orbit for JWST in Horizons

Revised: Jan 28, 2022
2Y_SCHEDULE_2022027000000_01U.OEM.V0.1   2022-Jan-27 00:01  2024-Jan-27 00:01

downloaded the heliocentric positions of JWST and Earth, subtracted Earth/Moon barycenter from JWST then rotated by Earth's angle to be in a pseudo-synodic frame (it rotates with EM/Bary angle, not steadily), and got the following (data starts 2022-Feb-08, ends 2024-Jan-27):

JWST motion in synodic Earth/Moon barycenter coordinates

The offset in X is the average distance from Earth, close to the 1.5 million km of the classical L2 distance.

If I pick off the maxima and calculate a period for X, Y and Z motion I get 179.3, 180.0, and 180.7 days!

As this is an ad hoc method, I'll say that these periods are *currently indistinguishable from a half year so my answer is a qualified but quite surprised "yes!"

import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt

fnames = ('Earth orbit heliocentric horizons_results.txt', 'JWST orbit heliocentric horizons_results.txt')

JDs, datas = [], [] for fname in fnames: n_offset = 10 with open(fname, 'r') as infile: lines = infile.readlines() a = [i for (i, line) in enumerate(lines) if 'SOE' in line][0] b = [i for (i, line) in enumerate(lines) if 'EOE' in line][0] lines = lines[a+1+n_offset: b] info = [line.split(',') for line in lines] JD = np.array([float(line[0]) for line in info]) data = np.array([ [float(thing) for thing in line[2:8]] for line in info]) JDs.append(JD) datas.append(data)

JD = JDs[0] Earth, JWST = [thing.T.copy() for thing in datas]

dJWST = JWST - Earth

z = dJWST[2]

th = np.arctan2(Earth[1], Earth[0])

s, c = [f(-th) for f in (np.sin, np.cos)]

x = dJWST[0] * c - dJWST[1] * s y = dJWST[1] * c + dJWST[0] * s

fig, axes = plt.subplots(3, 1) for thing, name, ax in zip([x, y, z], 'XYZ', axes): ax.plot((JD - JD[0]) / 365.2564, thing) ax.set_ylabel(name + ' (km)') plt.show()

maxima = [np.where((p[2:] < p[1:-1]) * (p[1:-1] >= p[:-2])) for p in (x, y, z)]

maxima = [thing[0] for thing in maxima]

periods = [(m[-1] - m[0]) / (len(m) - 1) for m in maxima]

print(periods)

uhoh
  • 148,791
  • 53
  • 476
  • 1,473
  • While within narrow confines uhoh's answer is correct in finding a 2:1 relationship... my question was about JWST being at a specific location in halo relative to a specific location on earth orbit. – BradV Feb 03 '22 at 00:57
  • @BradV Why don't you go ahead and further clarify your question's title. I'd suggest something like "Is JWST's halo orbit's 2:1 relationship with Earth's orbit *phased* with respect to Earth's orbit's apses? If so, was this done intentionally?" I think something like that is necessary to completely capture all that you are after, which I think is really interesting! I'm not sure I can do much better answering myself, but if not I can certainly add a bounty or to to your question to help get it attention and perhaps answered. – uhoh Feb 03 '22 at 01:41