Paper detail

ADBSat: Verification and validation of a novel panel method for quick aerodynamic analysis of satellites

We present the validation of ADBSat, a novel implementation of the panel method including a fast pseudo-shading algorithm, that can quickly and accurately determine the forces and torques on satellites in free-molecular flow. Our main method of validation is comparing test cases between ADBSat, the current de facto standard of direct simulation Monte Carlo (DSMC), and published literature. ADBSat exhibits a significantly shorter runtime than DSMC and performs well, except where deep concavities are present in the satellite models. The shading algorithm also experiences problems when a large proportion of the satellite surface area is oriented parallel to the flow, but this can be mitigated by examining the body at small angles to this configuration (${\pm}$ 0.1°). We recommend that an error interval on ADBSat outputs of up to 3\% is adopted. Therefore, ADBSat is a suitable tool for quickly determining the aerodynamic characteristics of a wide range of satellite geometries in different environmental conditions in VLEO. It can also be used in a complementary manner to identify cases that warrant further investigation using other numerical-based methods.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.