Spica SSC - help, and some feature requests

The place to discuss creating, porting and modifying Celestia's source code.
Topic author
Evil Dr Ganymede
Posts: 1386
Joined: 06.06.2003
With us: 21 years 5 months

Spica SSC - help, and some feature requests

Post #1by Evil Dr Ganymede » 26.09.2004, 18:34

I'm trying to make an SSC of the Spica system (see the Spica thread in Physics & Astronomy)... what's the orbital period of the B5 V companion at 4 AU and the B7 V companion at 40 AU? I'm guessing their radii are a little smaller than the innermost B4 V companion?

I guess I'll make it so that they orbit the B1 V itself, I suppose I can't set it so that everything orbits a common barycentre because the B1 V is fixed?

Here's what I got so far...

Code: Select all

"SpicaB" "Spica"
{
   Texture "bstar.jpg"   # B4 V
   Radius 2785060      #

   Emissive true

   EllipticalOrbit {
      Period          0.01099   # 4.0145 days
      SemiMajorAxis   0.12     
      Eccentricity    0.0
      ArgOfPericenter 0
      MeanAnomaly     0
   }

   RotationPeriod 3
}

"SpicaC" "Spica"
{
   Texture "bstar.jpg"      # B5 V
   Radius 2600000           # ????

   Emissive true

   EllipticalOrbit {
      Period          1    # ????
      SemiMajorAxis   4.0     
      Eccentricity    0.0
      ArgOfPericenter 0
      MeanAnomaly     0
   }

   RotationPeriod 3
}


"SpicaD" "Spica"
{
   Texture "bstar.jpg"       # B7 V
   Radius 2200000            # ????

   Emissive true

   EllipticalOrbit {
      Period          50   # ????
      SemiMajorAxis   40.0     
      Eccentricity    0.0
      ArgOfPericenter 0
      MeanAnomaly     0
   }

   RotationPeriod 3
}


"SpicaE" "Spica"
{
   Texture "gstar.jpg"       # K5 V
   Radius 417759            # ????

   Emissive true

   EllipticalOrbit {
      Period          1000000   # ????
      SemiMajorAxis   10000.0   
      Eccentricity    0.0
      ArgOfPericenter 0
      MeanAnomaly     0
   }

   RotationPeriod 30
}

"Spicaworld" "Spica/SpicaE"
{
Texture "mars.*"
Radius 6000

   Atmosphere {
      Height 60
      Lower [ 0.43 0.52 0.65 ]
      Upper [ 0.26 0.47 0.84 ]
      Sky [ 0.40 0.6 1.0 ]
      Sunset [ 1.0 0.6 0.2 ]
      # Sunset [ 0.3 1.0 0.5 ]
      CloudHeight 7
      CloudSpeed 65
      CloudMap "earth-clouds.*"
   }


EllipticalOrbit {
Period 82.98
SemiMajorAxis 60000000
Eccentricity 0.00
Inclination 0.00
AscendingNode 0.0
LongOfPericenter 0.0
MeanAnomaly 0.0
}

Albedo 0.30
RotationPeriod 1991.474348 
}



And can someone remind me if there's a way to stick a lens flare on a planet? (or in this case, a star that's pretending to be a planet ;)).


One thing that drove me nuts when I was making this SSC was that the orbital periods and orbital distances for each body were in different units. Can we just have a standardised system instead? Is there any way to specifically classify objects in SSCs as "stars" or "planets", and from that determine what sort of units to use (e.g. AU and years for the orbital distance and period of all objects orbiting things that are classed as "stars" in the SSC, and km and days for the orbital distance and period of all objects orbiting things that are classed as "planets"?). That'd save having to get horribly confused by switching between different units when making systems like this, with stars orbiting other stars, and planets orbiting those stars, and moons orbiting those planets.


Again, I found it rather annoying that Spica A was the light source for this system, despite the fact that the planet orbited the K5 V companion star (and was tidelocked to it). The view below from the surface of the planet near the twilight zone on the day side illustrated this - it thinks it's sunset because Spica A is low on the horizone, while Spica E (its actual primary) is fairly high up in the sky.

Image

I know Celestia can't handle multiple light sources, but what could be rather awesome would be the ability to specify in the SSC which star out of many nearby (such as in this case) to use as the light source. So for Spicaworld I could say that the light source is Spica E , and override the default. Would something like that be even remotely possible?
Last edited by Evil Dr Ganymede on 26.09.2004, 20:50, edited 1 time in total.

HS

Spica

Post #2by HS » 26.09.2004, 19:37

Thanks for the Spica System.

I believe that you have an extraneous quote mark at the beginning of your ssc file. If you try to run the spica system with that extra symbol, no "planetary companions" (ie., the additional stars) will be present.

Topic author
Evil Dr Ganymede
Posts: 1386
Joined: 06.06.2003
With us: 21 years 5 months

Post #3by Evil Dr Ganymede » 26.09.2004, 20:51

Well spotted. I've corrected it now, thanks! :)

The extra " was in the code I posted here, not in my original file. I just didn't notice it ;)

Obviously, the planet is a bit of a placeholder. I haven't bothered with special textures or anything like that.

I wish there was a way for Celestia to recognise that the Spica B,C,D, and E are actually stars and tell you what their apparent magnitudes are...

chris
Site Admin
Posts: 4211
Joined: 28.01.2002
With us: 22 years 9 months
Location: Seattle, Washington, USA

Post #4by chris » 26.09.2004, 23:56

Evil Dr Ganymede wrote:I wish there was a way for Celestia to recognise that the Spica B,C,D, and E are actually stars and tell you what their apparent magnitudes are...


I'm working right now on proper support for multiple star systems. You won't have to fuss with missing glare haloes, apparent magnitudes, and light sources for much longer.

--Chris

Topic author
Evil Dr Ganymede
Posts: 1386
Joined: 06.06.2003
With us: 21 years 5 months

Post #5by Evil Dr Ganymede » 27.09.2004, 03:55

chris wrote:
Evil Dr Ganymede wrote:I wish there was a way for Celestia to recognise that the Spica B,C,D, and E are actually stars and tell you what their apparent magnitudes are...

I'm working right now on proper support for multiple star systems. You won't have to fuss with missing glare haloes, apparent magnitudes, and light sources for much longer.

--Chris


*sobs with joy*

Thank you! Oh, thank you sir! :D

Buggs

common center

Post #6by Buggs » 27.09.2004, 18:02

Somewhere around here I saw a tidbit about creating an invisible barycenter... ah here it is


http://www.lns.cornell.edu/~seb/celestia/hutchison/invisible-130.html

Buggs

Topic author
Evil Dr Ganymede
Posts: 1386
Joined: 06.06.2003
With us: 21 years 5 months

Re: common center

Post #7by Evil Dr Ganymede » 27.09.2004, 21:03

Buggs wrote:Somewhere around here I saw a tidbit about creating an invisible barycenter... ah here it is


Problem is that I don't think I can do that because the position of Spica A is fixed in Celestia. I'd probably have to have the barycentre orbiting Spica A, and then have everything orbiting that, which would make things horribly awkward to calculate.

How do you calculate the barycentre for a system with multiple companions anyway? Do you just do it by pairs, and then treat each pair as a single mass relative to the other bodies?

buggs_moran
Posts: 835
Joined: 27.09.2004
With us: 20 years 1 month
Location: Massachusetts, USA

invisible barycenters

Post #8by buggs_moran » 28.09.2004, 00:28

I haven't done any of my own development, but could you edit the stars.dat for Spica A to put in a null radius gravity point and use that for your barycenter to have the other stars (aka planets) orbit around it?

-Buggs

Topic author
Evil Dr Ganymede
Posts: 1386
Joined: 06.06.2003
With us: 21 years 5 months

Re: invisible barycenters

Post #9by Evil Dr Ganymede » 28.09.2004, 07:48

buggs_moran wrote:I haven't done any of my own development, but could you edit the stars.dat for Spica A to put in a null radius gravity point and use that for your barycenter to have the other stars (aka planets) orbit around it?


That would basically involve removing Spica A entirely from stars.dat and replacing it with an 'invisible object' as the barycentre via an SSC. Unfortunately I don't know how to do that, and it would also not be very transportable as an add-on since people would have to edit their stars.dats to make it work.

granthutchison
Developer
Posts: 1863
Joined: 21.11.2002
With us: 22 years

Post #10by granthutchison » 29.09.2004, 15:30

From their orbit, your inner pair have a mass of ~14 solar masses. The B5V will add ~6 solar masses to that. You have a group with a total of 20 solar masses at four times the Earth-Sun separation, so their period is going to be sqrt(4^3/20) = 1.8 years. The B7V adds another ~4 solar masses, so its period is going to be sqrt(40^3/24) = 52 years.
At 10000AU, the K star would have a period of sqrt(10000^3/24) = 200000yrs (neglecting its own mass as trivial among all the approximations).

Don't you have some vast spreadsheet you just read stellar radii off? (I thought you did.) The B5V is going to about four solar radii, the B7V about three.

Why don't you just define the K star in an stc, since it's moving so slowly and may not be gravitationally bound at all? Then at least it would be the primary light source. The data are available on Simbad:

Code: Select all

355999 "Spica E"
{
   RA 201.3203334
   Dec -11.1263333
   Distance 262.2
   SpectralType "K5V"
   AppMag 12
}


The barycentre for this system will be lolloping around all over the place, from the viewpoint of any given star ... that's why Keplerian ellipses just don't do the job except as approximations.

Grant

Topic author
Evil Dr Ganymede
Posts: 1386
Joined: 06.06.2003
With us: 21 years 5 months

Post #11by Evil Dr Ganymede » 29.09.2004, 16:08

Thanks Grant. Yeah, I guess I could do the K star as an STC. It wouldn't have moved much in 3000 years (the year the background is set)...


Return to “Development”