Astron. Astrophys. 363, 323-334 (2000)
4. Nongravitational motion of comet 43P/Wolf-Harrington
The orbital motion of the comet has been investigated based on
astrometric observations made during its nine observable apparitions
from 1924 to 1998. The total number of the collected observations
amounted to 415. From the last return of the comet to the Sun, 212
observations are available. For this dominated apparition the numbers
of observations were decreased by taking into account so called normal
places i.e. if more than two observations were made at the same day,
they were replaced by one average comet position. For each apparition
the observations were selected separately according to the
mathematically objective criteria elaborated by Bielicki (Bielicki
& Sitarski 1991). The mean residuals for each apparition have been
calculated. The results from every apparitions have been combined and
the "a priori" mean residual of ,
representing accuracy of the whole observational set, was obtained.
Global characteristics of the observations are given in
Table 1.
![[TABLE]](img63.gif)
Table 1. Characteristics of the astrometric observations of 43P/Wolf-Harrington. Observations reduced by normal places are marked by .
4.1. Symmetrical models
The reasonably linkage of all astrometric observations of the comet
43P/Wolf-Harrington was impossible using the standard Marsden's model.
This model was explicitly inconsistent with the real motion of the
comet giving the mean residual .
To examine temporal variations of the nongravitational effects the
constant nongravitational parameters
have been determined for each three successive observable apparitions.
Values of parameters for such
observational intervals are listed in Table 2. The first interval
of time has spanned six real apparitions of the comet because it was
not observed during its three succesive returns to the Sun after 1924.
A particular behaviour of the parametr
connected with the transverse
component of the nongravitational force should be noticed. The
nongravitational acceleration was slowly decreasing over a long period
of time from 1924 to 1978 and then felt down reaching a small value
close to zero. It is interesting to see that the acceleration did not
switched into deceleration after the 1984 apparition but it started to
increase. The parameter is very
poorly determined for almost all intervals of time.
![[TABLE]](img69.gif)
Table 2. Nongravitational parameters determined as constant values by linking of each three consecutive observable apparitions of the comet. The mean residuals are given in the last column.
An employment of the model (see Sect. 2) in which
are expressed in terms of angular
parameters , I,
of the rotating cometary nucleus
allowed to establish the perturbation in the nongravitational motion
of the comet as a change in the nucleus orientation. When
increases from negative values to
zero, the spin axis of retrograde rotating nucleus approaches the
orbital plane. The values of the angular parameters obtained as
results of the orbital linkages of four successsive observed
apparitions, are presented in Table 3. The parameter
connected with
is rather poorly determined.
Unstability in the comet's behaviour around 1984 did not allow to find
the solution for the interval 1964-1984. The comet's observations from
1952 to 1991 have been linked previously (Szutowicz 1992) assuming
linear variations of the angles I and
. Unfortunately, fitting of all
apparitions of the comet to this model has failed.
![[TABLE]](img74.gif)
Table 3. Angular parameters , I, and A of the nucleus of the comet 43P/Wolf-Harrington determined within of sets of four consecutive apparitions. The last interval covers only three returns to the Sun.
4.2. Asymmetrical model
Asymmetrical model of the nongravitational acceleration understood
as a perihelion shift of the function
(see Sect. 2) provided a much better orbital solution than the
standard model. The orbital linkage of all comet's apparitions with
the mean residual equal to was
obtained. However, it was necessary to introduce a linear variation of
two parameters: the describing the
time shift of with respect to the
perihelion and the angle connected
with the comet's orientation. According to this orbital fit the
function reached peak 23 days before
perihelion passage in 1925 and due to the linear evolution its maximum
occured about 57 days after perihelion of the 1997 apparition. Linear
variations of parameters remarkably limit the physical meaning of the
model especially for the prediction of the future orbit.
To study a behaviour of the perihelion shift of
in shorter intervals of time, the
asymmetric model was applied for each four successively observable
apparitions of the comet. In Table 4, the values of
and
in the appropriate observational
intervals are presented. The last interval includes only three
apparitions, because of difficulty in linking of the observations from
1977 to 1998. One can see that a form of
variations is different than that
for the symmetrical model. The maximum of the function
significantly peaks before
perihelion passages for the comet's returns until the 1972. Then the
acceleration decreases and the parameter
reaches positive values. The second
change of takes place after the 1991
apparition and the maximum of is
shifted again before perihelion. Nonlinear variations of
explain the poor accuracy of the
orbital linkage of all comet's observations where the linear change of
was assumed. However, a general
evolution of the shift of the maximum cometary activity, from negative
to positive number of days in consecutive returns of the comet, has
been confirmed.
![[TABLE]](img84.gif)
Table 4. Constant nongravitational parameters , and the parameter describing the perihelion shift of the function determined from linkages of each four consecutive apparitions of the comet. The last interval covers three apparitions.
4.3. Forced precession model
The analysis of the nongravitational parameters determined as
constant values within sets of three or four consecutive apparitions
has shown long-term variations of the nongravitational perturbations
in the orbital motion of Comet Wolf-Harrington. One of the posssible
explanation of these temporal variations could be forced precession of
a rotating nonspherical cometary nucleus. Therefore the orbital
version of the forced precession model (see Sect. 2) was applied.
The model has been preliminary employed to link all of the comet
apparitions (Krolikowska et al. 1998a), where the last return was
represented by observations made only till December 1997. Values of
six model parameters has been found for a prolate spheroid nucleus of
the comet. The comparison of the mean residual of that orbital
solution which reached with the `a
priori' residual of indicated that
the forced precession model needs some additional parameters to give
better approximation to the real motion of the comet. As it follows
from Table 2 the nongravitational perturbations exibit some
irregular behaviour represented by unexpected changes not only in
but in
, too. Time shift of the function
described by
can be determined together with the
basic parameters of the forced precession model. To model
discontinuities in the nongravitational motion of the comet changes of
values of close to the selected
moments of aphelion passage has been assumed. After some numerical
calculations two moments of discontinuities in 1975 and in 1988 has
been established. The model parameters: A,
, ,
, ,
s, ,
,
as well as orbital elements were determined together in a process of
the iterative improvement of the orbit. All parameters are listed in
Table 5 as Model C. The orbital solution was fitted to all
observations of the comet with the mean residual of
. According to the model, the nucleus
is a slightly prolated spheroid with the ratio of the longer axis to
shorter one being equal to .
Precessional variations of the equatorial obliquity, I, and the
solar longitude at the perihelion, ,
during 72 years of the comet's motion are shown in Fig. 1. Time
dependences of the acceleration's orbital components
, ,
during the same interval of time are
presented in Fig. 2. They are compared with appropriate
evolutions of obtained from the
orbital solution for the spotty nucleus (Model A).
![[FIGURE]](img97.gif) |
Fig. 1. Temporal variation of angles I and for Comet 43P/Wolf-Harrington due to the spin-axis forced precession of the comet's nucleus.
|
![[FIGURE]](img101.gif) |
Fig. 2. Orbital components of the nongravitational acceleration as functions of time for 43P/Wolf-Harrington obtained from dicrete outgassing model (Model A) and forced precession model (Model C)
|
![[TABLE]](img103.gif)
Table 5. Parameters describing the comet nucleus and the orbit obtained from fitting the forced precession model to all positional observations of the comet 43P/Wolf-Harrington
Based on discontinuities in the nongravitational perturbations the
comet 43P/Wolf-Harrington may be classified as an "erratic" comet. Its
orbital motion was compared with that of five comets which exhibit
strongly variable nongravitational effects (Krolikowska et al. 1999,
2000). The satisfactory precessional models were found for all of
these comets.
4.4. Spotty nucleus model
Time dependent shifts of a maximum activity seem to play essential
role in the nongravitational motion of the comet Wolf-Harrington.
Attemps to model the nongravitational acceleration as a result of the
outgassing from one emission source which is active in the same degree
over the whole interval motion of the comet 43P/Wolf-Harrington, have
not been successful even taking into account a linear precession of
the spin axis. Extensive numerical experiments with using a model of
the spotty-nucleus described in Sect. 3, allowed to ascertain
that processes of activation and/or deactivation of emission sources
on the nucleus surface took place at least three times. From numerical
fitting of the model parameters to positional observations, the lag
angle, , the orientation of the
nucleus in space described by the angles I and
, the localization of three active
regions given by cometocentric latitudes,
, and appropriate values of the
,
parameters have been derived. Two
orbital solutions called Model A and Model B were found on the
assumption of slightly different lifetimes of active regions. In
Table 6 both solutions are represented by the model parameters
and orbital elements. Time of activation and deactivation of the
regions are given too. The models have been satisfactory fitted to
real motion of the comet, with the same mean residual of
as in the case of the precessional
model. From presented solutions follows that the appearance and
disappearance of regions located on the southern hemisphere of the
comet nucleus are resposible for the variation of the nongravitational
behaviour of the comet.
![[TABLE]](img108.gif)
Table 6. Physical parameters of the nucleus and orbital elements obtained from linking all apparitions of the comet 43P/Wolf-Harrington by using of discrete outgassing model. Two possible orbital solutions called Model A and Model B are presented. The active regions are denoted by I, II, III.
In both cases the first region (I) is situated on the
northern hemisphere of the nucleus at the latitude of about
. It was found to be the largest and
persistent active, whereas on the southern hemisphere the variations
of activity have been discovered. The second region (II), which
was localized near to the cometary equator, became active about 150
days after perihelion of the 1965. According to scenario related to
the Model A the total active area increased once again before 1978
apparition due to activation of the third region (III) on the
latitude of . This region decayed
about 160 days after perihelion passage of the 1991. While from the
Model B follows that the second region vanished after perihelion in
1978 and the third one was localized nearer to the equator than the
analogue region of Model A.
Taking into account that the activation of new regions could
disturb the nucleus spin axis, the orbital programme was run to search
for the possible change of the angles I and
. Solution with the discontinuity in
the equatorial obliquity around 1978 was found. However, the mean
residual did not change in spite of introducing new parameters,
therefore the new solution was given up.
In Fig. 2 variations of three orbital components of the
nongravitational acceleration during the whole investigated period of
the comet's motion resulting from the Model A are shown. One easily
recognizes that in the case of the forced precession model the
component is always negative or close
to zero, whereas for the spotty - nucleus model
is strongly variable near perihelions
and reaches either positive and negative values.
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 2000
Online publication: December 5, 2000
helpdesk.link@springer.de  |