2

Wikipedia's Geopotential_model; The deviations of Earth's gravitational field from that of a homogeneous sphere discusses the expansion of the potential in spherical harmonics. The first few zonal harmonics ($\theta$ dependence only) are seen after the monopole term in

$$u = -\frac{GM}{r} - \sum_{n=2} J^0_n \frac{P^0_n(\sin \theta)}{r^{n+1}}$$

where $P^0_n$ are Legendre polynomials. I want to calculate the first three terms for $J_2, J_3, J_4$ by hand. I have

$$P^0_2(\sin \theta) = \frac{1}{2}(3 \sin^2 \theta - 1)$$

$$P^0_3(\sin \theta) = \frac{1}{2}(5 \sin^3 \theta - 3 \sin \theta)$$

$$P^0_4(\sin \theta) = \frac{1}{8}(35 \sin^4 \theta - 30 \sin^2 \theta + 3)$$

Since these terms are cylindrically symmetric I can write

$$\sin^2(\theta) = \frac{x^2+y^2}{r^2} = \frac{x^2+y^2}{x^2+y^2+z^2} $$

The $J_2$ term in the potential is then:

$$u_{J_2} = -J_2 \frac{1}{2} \frac{1}{r^3} \frac{3x^2 + 3y^2 - r^2}{r^2} = -J_2 \frac{1}{2} \frac{1}{r^5} (2x^2 + 2y^2 - z^2)$$

and the acceleration from this would be the negative gradient $-\nabla u$ or

$$\mathbf{a_{J_2}} = -\nabla u_{J_2}$$

Using this Wolfram Alpha link to make sure I don't make errors taking derivatives, I get (after a slight adjustment)

$$a_x = J_2 \frac{x}{r^7} \left( \frac{9}{2} z^2 - 3(x^2 + y^2) \right)$$

$$a_y = J_2 \frac{y}{r^7} \left( \frac{9}{2} z^2 - 3(x^2 + y^2)\right)$$

$$a_z = J_2 \frac{z}{r^7} \left( \frac{3}{2}z^2 - 6 (x^2 + y^2)\right)$$

and these look very similar to but not the same as the results in Wikipedia's Geopotential_model; The deviations of Earth's gravitational field from that of a homogeneous sphere:

$$a_x = J_2 \frac{x}{r^7} \left(6 z^2 - \frac{3}{2}(x^2 + y^2\right)$$

$$a_y = J_2 \frac{y}{r^7} \left(6 z^2 - \frac{3}{2}(x^2 + y^2\right)$$

$$a_z = J_2 \frac{z}{r^7} \left(3 z^2 - \frac{9}{2}(x^2 + y^2\right)$$

I'm close but I can't reproduce Wikipedia's result here. Once I'm confident with the process I can continue for the $J_3$ and $J_4$ terms and start doing numerical integration of orbits.

Qmechanic
  • 201,751
uhoh
  • 6,308
  • 2
    Note that the Wikepedia article is using spherical coordinates $\theta=0$ is at the equator rather than the pole. I.e. we have $\cos^2\theta = \frac{x^2+y^2}{r^2}$ – TimRias Apr 27 '20 at 16:38
  • Related: https://physics.stackexchange.com/q/8074/2451 – Qmechanic Apr 27 '20 at 16:39
  • @mmeent I have a hunch that's going to be exactly what's necessary, and I'll verify as soon as morning coffee kicks in, thanks! Assuming it does I'll write it up as an answer. – uhoh Apr 27 '20 at 22:39
  • @Qmechanic I considered then rejected the newtonian gravity tag because it's wiki excerpt is "The Newtonian model of gravity in which the force between two objects is given by GMm/r^2." shild my question is only about the higher harmonics which this explicitly excludes. Yes Newton did address Earth's oblateness at some point, but I don't think this tag applies based on its wiki. – uhoh Apr 27 '20 at 22:46
  • 1
    The underlying interaction is still Newtonian gravity. If you feel you can improve the tag wiki please do. – Qmechanic Apr 27 '20 at 22:49
  • @Qmechanic oh I see what you mean, yes the potential is just the integral of $-\rho/r$; there's none of this going on (currently unanswered). – uhoh Apr 27 '20 at 22:52
  • @mmeent Thank you for your suggestion! I've posted a partial answer; I'm almost there, but I haven't been able to get rid of a minus sign between my results for acceleration and those in Wikipedia, which still harkens back to What is the sign of Earth's J2? – uhoh Apr 28 '20 at 13:23
  • 1
    The signs in your first equation, differ from those in eq (9) on the linked Wikipedia page. – TimRias Apr 28 '20 at 14:27
  • @mmeent if there is an equation-specific form of reading disability, then I've had it my whole life. I've looked at that several times and each time I've seen minus signs in front of all terms, apparently because my brain thinks there should be and overwrites what my eyes are providing. Thank you very much for your patience and kind help! – uhoh Apr 28 '20 at 15:28

1 Answers1

1

Let's look at @mmeent's comment suggesting that the spherical coordinates used in the linked Wikipedia article set the polar angle equal to zero at the equator rather than the pole.

where spherical coordinates (r, θ, φ) are used, given here in terms of cartesian (x, y, z) for reference

While that link shows $\theta = 0$ at the "north pole" (how I've usually seen spherical coordinates defined) the equations directly below that line do indeed define $\theta = 0$ to be the equator with $z=0$:

$$x = r \cos \theta \cos \phi$$

$$y = r \cos \theta \sin \phi$$

$$x = r \sin \theta$$

$$\sin^2(\theta) = \frac{z^2}{r^2} = \frac{z^2}{x^2+y^2+z^2} $$

then (noting that in the original question I'd put a minus sign where none existed):

$$u_{J_2} = +J_2 \frac{1}{2} \frac{1}{r^3} \frac{3z^2 - r^2}{r^2} = J_2 \frac{1}{2} \frac{1}{r^5} (2z^2 - (x^2 + y^2))$$

and using $\mathbf{a_{J_2}} = -\nabla u_{J_2}$ and Wolfram Alpha I get:

$$a_x = J_2 \frac{x}{r^7} \left( 6 z^2 - \frac{3}{2}(x^2 + y^2) \right)$$

$$a_y = J_2 \frac{y}{r^7} \left( 6 z^2 - \frac{3}{2}(x^2 + y^2) \right)$$

$$a_z = J_2 \frac{z}{r^7} \left( 3 z^2 - \frac{9}{2}(x^2 + y^2) \right)$$

which agrees with Wikipedia.

uhoh
  • 6,308