Cooke, Bill

Moorhead, Althea

Moser, Danielle

NASA Technical Reports Server

Spacecra'	  risk	  posed	  by	  the	  
2016	  Perseid	  outburst	  
Bill	  Cooke/Danielle	  Moser/Althea	  Moorhead	  
NASA	  Meteoroid	  Environment	  Oﬃce	  
william.j.cooke@nasa.gov	  
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20160008884 2019-08-29T17:48:04+00:00Z
Showers	  vs.	  Sporadics	  
At	  sub-­‐mm	  &	  mm	  sizes,	  the	  average	  ﬂux	  of	  meteor	  showers	  is	  an	  
order	  of	  magnitude	  below	  the	  sporadic	  (background)	  ﬂux	  
McBride	  &	  McDonnell,	  1999	  
McBride	  &	  McDonnell,	  1999	  
Storms	  vs.	  Sporadics	  
•  Instantaneous	  storm	  ﬂux	  required	  to	  penetrate	  a	  surface	  can	  
exceed	  the	  background	  by	  several	  orders	  of	  magnitude	  
•  PenetraWng	  ﬂuence	  can	  range	  anywhere	  from	  a	  few	  days	  to	  a	  
year’s	  equivalent	  exposure	  to	  background	  meteors	  
McBride	  &	  McDonnell,	  1999	  
Notes	  on	  meteoroid	  risk	  
•  Sporadic	  meteoroid	  background	  is	  direcWonal	  (not	  
isotropic)	  and	  accounts	  for	  90%	  of	  the	  meteoroid	  risk	  
to	  a	  typical	  spacecra'	  
•  Meteor	  showers	  get	  all	  the	  press,	  but	  account	  for	  only	  
~10%	  of	  spacecra'	  risk	  
–  Bias	  towards	  assigning	  meteoroid	  cause	  to	  anomalies	  
during	  meteor	  showers	  
•  Design	  to	  sporadic	  background,	  miWgate	  outbursts/
storms	  by	  operaWonal	  means	  
•  Gun	  tests/damage	  equaWons	  focus	  on	  physical	  damage	  
–	  hard	  to	  assess	  other	  anomaly	  causes,	  such	  as	  
meteoroid	  generated	  plasma	  
Could	  it	  be	  a	  meteoroid	  hit?	  
•  Are	  the	  anomaly	  characterisWcs	  consistent	  with	  a	  
parWcle	  impact?	  
–  Sudden	  change	  in	  a]tude	  most	  common	  
•  Was	  there	  a	  meteor	  outburst	  or	  storm	  at	  the	  Wme	  of	  
the	  anomaly?	  
–  If	  yes,	  was	  the	  shower	  radiant	  visible	  from	  the	  spacecra'?	  
–  If	  yes,	  did	  the	  aﬀected	  surface	  “see”	  the	  shower	  radiant?	  
–  If	  yes,	  shower	  impact	  possible	  
•  Compare	  meteoroid	  (sporadic	  +	  shower)	  ﬂux	  to	  orbital	  
debris	  ﬂux	  at	  spacecra'	  locaWon	  to	  establish	  
likelihood.	  
–  If	  aﬀected	  surface	  is	  sun-­‐ﬁxed,	  must	  use	  a	  direcWonal	  
meteoroid	  model	  to	  compute	  ﬂux	  
5/4/16	   Space	  Environments	  Virtual	  Seminar	   6	  
6/6/2016	   Meteoroids	  2016	   7	  
Possible Possible 
Launch Time MET GMT Perseid? SDA? 
8/8/07 22:36 02 08:49:14 8/11/07 7:25 Y Y 
02 06:17:53 8/11/07 4:54 N N 
02 03:19:10 8/11/07 1:55 N N 
02 21:46:13 8/11/07 20:22 Y N 
02 22:51:46 8/11/07 21:28 N Y 
00 21:51:50 8/9/07 20:28 Y Y 
00 20:46:20 8/9/07 19:22 N Y 
00 20:32:48 8/9/07 19:09 Y Y 
00 21:09:00 8/9/07 19:45 Y N 
00 22:25:31 8/9/07 21:02 N N 
01 16:37:58 8/10/07 15:14 N N 
01 12:03:15 8/10/07 10:39 N N 
01 10:27:42 8/10/07 9:04 N N 
01 15:53:58 8/10/07 14:30 Y Y 
01 16:45:12 8/10/07 15:21 N N 
Perseid	  Summary	  
•  Parent	  comet:	  	  109P/Swi'-­‐
Tujle	  
•  Peak:	  	  Max.	  around	  Aug	  
11-­‐13	  
•  AcWvity	  range:	  	  Jul	  17	  –	  Aug	  
24	  
•  Speed:	  	  59	  km/s	  (2.5-­‐3x	  
average	  sporadic	  speed)	  
•  Radiant:	  	  α	  =	  48°,	  δ	  =	  +58°	  
at	  peak	  
•  Typical	  ZHR:	  100/hr	  
•  Recent	  major	  displays:	  	  
1991-­‐1995,	  2004,	  2009	  
Perseid	  ﬁreball	  recorded	  Aug	  12,	  2012	  
6/6/2016	   8	  Meteoroids	  2016	  
Rich	  in	  bright	  meteors	  
5/4/16	   Space	  Environments	  Virtual	  Seminar	   9	  
Perseid	  seen	  from	  STS-­‐105	  
The	  1993	  Perseids	  
•  The	  Perseid	  parent,	  Comet	  Swi'-­‐Tujle,	  
reached	  perihelion	  in	  late	  1992.	  High	  Perseid	  
rates	  were	  also	  seen	  near	  the	  last	  perihelion	  
passage	  of	  the	  comet,	  in	  the	  1860’s	  	  
•  Many	  astronomers	  postulated	  a	  dense	  
concentraWon	  of	  dust	  near	  the	  comet’s	  orbit	  
•  Perseids	  had	  never	  been	  observed	  to	  reach	  
storm	  levels,	  but	  historical	  record	  showed	  
outbursts	  of	  a	  few	  hundred	  per	  hour	  
•  STS-­‐51	  launch,	  slated	  for	  late	  July	  
delayed	  unWl	  a'er	  Perseid	  peak	  
(August	  12)	  
–  NASA	  unable	  to	  predict	  shower	  intensity	  
–  Head	  of	  astronaut	  oﬃce	  decided	  to	  delay	  
launch	  
•  Perseid	  outburst	  with	  ZHR	  of	  ~360	  
occurred,	  peaking	  at	  03:30	  UT	  on	  
August	  12.	  
•  Cosmonauts	  aboard	  Mir	  space	  staWon	  
reported	  hearing	  “pings”	  on	  outside	  
of	  cra',	  and	  retreated	  to	  Soyuz	  
(Science	  News,	  1993)	  
Spacecra'	  struck	  by	  Perseids	  
Olympus	  	  
ESA communication satellite 
Struck by a Perseid near the 
time of the shower peak in 
August 1993 
Sent tumbling, fuel 
exhausted, end of mission 
Landsat-­‐5	  	  
NASA/USGS imaging satellite 
Struck by a Perseid near the 
time of the shower peak in 
August 2009 
Sent tumbling, stabilized, 
returned to normal operations 
6/6/2016	   12	  Meteoroids	  2016	  
Olympus	  
•  Technology	  demonstraWon	  satellite	  -­‐	  launched	  12	  July	  
1989;	  largest	  civilian	  comm	  satellite	  built	  up	  to	  that	  
Wme	  
•  South	  solar	  panel	  stopped	  tracking	  the	  Sun	  in	  January	  
1991	  (parWcle	  impact?)	  
•  19	  June	  1991–	  a]tude	  control	  issue;	  incorrect	  
commands	  uplinked	  from	  ground	  resulted	  in	  tumbling	  
and	  dri'	  oﬀ	  staWon.	  Vehicle	  recovered	  and	  put	  back	  
into	  service	  at	  19W	  on	  7	  August	  1992	  
•  Olympus	  roll	  gyro	  stops	  at	  23:32	  UTC	  August	  11	  during	  
1993	  Perseid	  outburst.	  Spacecra'	  enters	  Emergency	  
Sun	  AcquisiWon	  (ESA)	  mode	  and	  fails	  to	  acquire	  the	  Sun	  

•  Ajempts	  to	  recover	  spacecra'	  exhausted	  most	  of	  
remaining	  fuel,	  making	  it	  impossible	  to	  return	  the	  
vehicle	  to	  service.	  Mission	  was	  terminated	  August	  12,	  
and	  the	  spacecra'	  was	  moved	  into	  a	  disposal	  orbit	  200	  
km	  below	  GEO	  
•  ESA	  anomaly	  invesWgaWon	  ajributed	  the	  failure	  to	  a	  
Perseid	  strike	  on	  the	  south	  solar	  array	  
–  South	  array	  had	  8.5	  m-­‐2	  of	  area	  exposed	  to	  the	  stream.	  
–  There	  was	  a	  possible	  conducWng	  path	  to	  the	  gyro	  though	  
the	  spacecra'	  umbilical	  
–  Ground	  hypervelocity	  tests	  showed	  plasma	  generated	  by	  a	  
meteoroid	  strike	  to	  be	  proporWonal	  to	  v3.5	  	  

Olympus	  conclusion	  and	  recommendaWons	  
•  Conclusion	  of	  invesWgaWon:	  “The	  impact	  by	  a	  small	  
meteoroid	  may	  have	  generated	  a	  plasma	  triggering	  a	  
discharge	  of	  charged	  surfaces	  entering	  the	  grounded	  
spacecra'	  via	  the	  umbilical	  and	  an	  external	  sensor.	  Such	  a	  
scenario	  is	  parWcularly	  interesWng	  for	  other	  spacecra'	  since	  
the	  Perseid	  shower	  is	  likely	  to	  be	  worse	  for	  the	  next	  few	  
years.”	  
•  RecommendaWons:	  
–  Minimize	  the	  area	  cross-­‐secWon	  as	  much	  as	  possible	  during	  the	  
peak	  period	  of	  the	  shower.	  
–  Prepare	  operaWonal	  conWngency	  plans	  for	  recovery	  from	  and	  
for	  observaWon	  of	  impacts/plasmas.	  
–  Provide	  total	  protecWon	  from	  plasmas	  through	  external	  
electrical	  windows	  such	  as	  sun	  sensors.	  	  
–  Ground	  and	  cover	  all	  interface	  points	  such	  as	  spacecra'	  
umbilical	  connecWons.	  
6/6/2016	   Meteoroids	  2016	   18	  
Landsat-­‐5	  
•  USGS	  remote	  sensing	  
satellite	  launched	  into	  sun-­‐
synchronous	  LEO	  orbit	  
March,	  1984	  
•  Decommissioned	  June,	  
2013	  
•  Began	  tumbling	  at	  5:23	  
UTC	  on	  August	  13	  2009,	  
just	  before	  3rd	  and	  
strongest	  peak	  of	  the	  
Perseid	  shower	  
6/6/2016	   Meteoroids	  2016	   19	  
•  Perseid	  radiant	  was	  
37°	  above	  Earth	  limb	  
at	  Wme	  of	  anomaly	  
•  OperaWons	  restored	  a	  
week	  later	  (August	  
17)	  
6/6/2016	   Meteoroids	  2016	   20	  
21	  6/6/2016	   Meteoroids	  2016	  
Thoughts	  
•  Plasma	  producWon	  (v3.5)	  is	  >40x	  mass	  limited	  and	  5x	  kineWc	  
energy	  
•  Drives	  aﬀecWng	  parWcle	  mass	  down	  the	  mass	  scale	  (e.g.	  1	  
mg	  to	  2.3x10-­‐5	  g),	  with	  corresponding	  increase	  in	  ﬂux	  
•  Both	  satellites	  aging	  at	  Wme	  of	  anomalies	  
•  Neither	  OLYMPUS	  or	  Landsat	  showed	  momentum	  
disturbances	  at	  the	  Wmes	  of	  the	  anomalies	  
22	  
Chandra	  
6/6/2016	   Meteoroids	  2016	  
2016	  Perseid	  model	  results:	  
MSFC	  preliminary	  
23 
157 / 13.5 M 
ParWcles	  (β=10-­‐2	  -­‐10-­‐5)	  ejected	  hourly	  
proporWonal	  to	  r-­‐6	  while	  
Swi'-­‐Tujle	  is	  inside	  2.5	  AU.	  
24	  
KineWc	  energy	  ﬂux	  
25 
2016	  Perseid	  model	  results	  
-­‐	  Summary	  -­‐	  
26 
Modeler	   Rev	   Date	   Time	  (UT)	  
λs	  
(°)	   ZHR	  
rd-­‐rE	  
(AU)	  
Maslov (web, undated) 1862 Aug 11 22:34 139.436 ? -0.00134 
Vaubaillon (Jenniskens, 2006) 1862 Aug 11 22:36 139.438 1 -0.00327 
MSFC single rev (June 2015) 1862 Aug 11 22:47 139.445 - -0.00170 
Maslov (Rao, 2012) - Aug 11 23:23 - 160-180 - 
Maslov (web, undated) 1479 Aug 11 23:23 139.468 ? 0.00008 
Vaubaillon (Rao, 2012) - Aug 12 ~00:00 - “Unusually high activity” - 
Main MSFC (June 2015)  Combined 
15 revs 
Aug 12 00:32 139.515 210 ± 50 - 
MSFC single rev (June 2015) 1079 Aug 12 04:36 139.678 - 0.00194 
Vaubaillon (Jenniskens, 2006) 1079 Aug 12 04:43 139.683 580 0.00023 
MSFC single rev (June 2015) 441 Aug 12 13:03 140.016 Comprises secondary peak? -0.00046 
Increased	  acWvity	  lasts	  about	  half	  a	  day,	  from	  late-­‐Aug	  11	  to	  mid-­‐Aug	  12.	  
2016	  Perseid	  model	  results:	  
Vaubaillon	  
27 
hjp://www.imcce.fr/langues/en/ephemerides/phenomenes/meteor/DATABASE/Perseids/BIN-­‐tout/Noeuds-­‐Earth2016.jpg	  
Vaubaillon	  
Approx.	  region	  
covered	  by	  
MSFC	  model	  
Conclusion	  
•  A	  Perseid	  outburst	  in	  2016	  is	  predicted	  by	  
numerous	  forecasters,	  similar	  in	  intensity	  to	  2009	  
•  Increased	  acWvity	  predicted	  late	  Aug	  11	  –	  Aug	  12,	  
lasWng	  ~half	  a	  day	  
•  Peak	  rates	  predicted	  between	  160	  –	  580	  per	  hour	  
•  KineWc	  energy	  (physical	  damage)	  ﬂux	  is	  elevated	  
by	  a	  few	  10’s	  of	  %	  above	  sporadic	  background	  
•  The	  outburst	  represents	  a	  Wme	  of	  increased	  
potenWal	  for	  meteoroid-­‐induced	  plasmas	  capable	  
of	  causing	  spacecra'	  anomalies	  
	  
28	  6/6/2016	   Meteoroids	  2016	  
References	  
•  Caswell,	  D.	  R.	  et	  al.	  (1995)	  “Olympus	  end	  of	  life	  anomaly	  –	  A	  Perseid	  meteoroid	  impact	  
event?”	  Int.	  J.	  of	  Impact	  Engineering	  17,	  139-­‐150.	  
•  Cooke,	  W.	  J.	  (2009)	  “The	  2009	  Perseid	  meteoroid	  environment	  and	  Landsat	  5.”	  NASA	  MSFC:	  
NASA	  MEO	  Internal	  Report,	  5pp.	  
•  Jenniskens,	  J.	  (2006)	  “Meteor	  showers	  and	  their	  parent	  comets.”	  Cambridge:	  Cambridge	  
University	  Press,	  p.657.	  
•  Kronk,	  G.	  (n.d.)	  “Meteor	  showers	  online:	  Perseids.”	  hjp://meteorshowersonline.com/
perseids.html.	  
•  Kronk,	  G.	  W.	  (2014)	  “Meteor	  showers:	  An	  annotated	  catalog.”	  New	  	  York:	  Springer-­‐Verlag,	  
362pp.	  
•  Maslov,	  M.	  “Perseids	  1901-­‐2100:	  predicWons	  of	  acWvity.”	  
hjp://feraj.narod.ru/Radiants/PredicWons/1901-­‐2100eng/Perseids1901-­‐2100predeng.html.	  
•  McBride,	  N.,	  &	  McDonnell,	  J.	  A.	  (1999).	  Meteoroid	  impacts	  on	  spacecra':sporadics,	  
streams,	  and	  the	  1999	  Leonids.	  Planetary	  and	  Space	  Science,	  47,	  1005.	  
•  Peterson,	  G.	  E.	  (1999)	  “Dynamics	  of	  meteor	  outbursts	  and	  satellite	  miWgaWon	  strategies.”	  El	  
Segundo,	  Calif.	  :	  Aerospace	  Press	  ;	  Reston,	  Va.	  :	  American	  InsWtute	  of	  AeronauWcs	  and	  
AstronauWcs	  
•  Rao,	  J.	  (2012)	  “August	  Perseid	  meteor	  shower	  has	  long	  legacy,	  bright	  future.”	  	  Space.com,	  3	  
August	  2012,	  hjp://www.space.com/16915-­‐perseid-­‐meteor-­‐shower-­‐2012-­‐history.html.	  
•  Vaubaillon,	  J.	  “Nodes	  (2016)”	  hjp://www.imcce.fr/langues/en/ephemerides/phenomenes/
meteor/DATABASE/Perseids/BIN-­‐tout/Noeuds-­‐Earth2016.jpg	  
29	  6/6/2016	   Meteoroids	  2016	  


Spacecraft Risk Posed by the 2016 Perseid Outburst

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

NASA Technical Reports Server