MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014720422 · doi:10.2514/1.1759

Effect of Electromagnetic Forces on the Orbital Dynamics of Tethered Satellites

2005· article· en· W2014720422 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Guidance Control and Dynamics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpace Satellite Systems and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsLorentz forcePhysicsSatelliteDragOrbital mechanicsAerodynamic forceOrbit (dynamics)Dynamics (music)Classical mechanicsAerospace engineeringMechanicsElectrical conductorMagnetic fieldAerodynamicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tethered satellites have a vast potential for space applications. If the tether is conductive, electrodynamic forces result from the motion of the conductive tether relative to the magnetic field of the Earth. The long-term effect of electrodynamic forces on the equinoctial orbital elements of a tethered system is studied with use of a detailed model of the Earth’s magnetic field as well as of the tether dynamics. A detailed gravity and aerodynamic model is used. In all cases studied, bare tethers induce larger electrodynamic forces than insulated tether systems. The results show that Lorentz forces can remove a satellite from orbit more effectively than air drag if a conductive tether is attached to it. A simple control law is used to stabilize tether librations caused by electrodynamic forces. Such an approach for junk removal is practical if the satellite mass is greater than 100 kg or so.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.002
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.186 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it