Dynamics of Nanosatellite Deorbit by Bare Electrodynamic Tether in Low Earth Orbit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper studies the dynamics of nanosatellite deorbit by a bare electrodynamic tether. The orbital dynamics of the tethered nanosatellite is modeled in Gaussian perturbation equations and the motion-induced voltage-current relationship along the electrodynamic tether is analyzed by using the 2000 International Geomagnetic Reference Field model including up to seventh-order terms and the International Reference Ionosphere 2007 model. The analysis reveals that the high-order magnetic model of Earth affects the dynamic characteristics of the tethered nanosatellite, especially in orbits with high inclination angles, by changing its orbit from circular to elliptical forms. This is beneficial for deorbiting the nanosatellite in near-polar orbits where the electrodynamic force is not as effective as in the equatorial orbit because the denser atmosphere at a lower perigee will provide a larger atmospheric drag. Moreover, the analysis shows that the electrodynamic force is always against the satellite motion in low Earth orbit even when the induced voltage/current across the tether reverses their polarities in near-polar orbits. Compared to the deorbit rate by the atmospheric drag only, the deorbit rate by an electrodynamic tether will be increased by several orders in magnitudes in both equatorial and polar orbits.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".