Possible approach to detecting the mysterious Saturnian convective dynamo through gravitational sounding

Abstract

Context. Planetary dynamo research is mathematically and numerically difficult. Forward calculations are numerically expensive and subject to much uncertainty in key magnetohydrodynamics parameters. For a gaseous planet such as Saturn, even the precise location of its dynamo and typical convective strength are unknown, which further complicates studies. Aims. We test the idea of inversely probing Saturnian convective dynamo through gravitational sounding, based on the principle that the convective fluid motion can distort the internal density distribution and hence induce the gravitational anomaly. Methods. The Cassini Grand Finale mission has reported unprecedentedly accurate measurements of the gravitational field of Saturn. An unexplained nonaxisymmetric component of the gravitational field was detected in the data. By performing precise orbit determination (POD) simulations, we studied the possibility that the Cassini spacecraft might sense the dynamo-related nonaxisymmetric gravitational signature in the Grand Finale phase. In addition, further extensively simulated missions of various orbit configurations were carried out in order to explore promising mission strategies that might fulfill the objective of detecting the Saturnian convective dynamo. Results. Our POD simulations show that the gravity science carried out in the Cassini Grand Finale mission is insufficient to determine weak nonaxisymmetric gravitational moments because good subspacecraft-point coverage is lacking. The origin of the unexplained Saturnian gravity remains a puzzle. However, it is positively indicated by our simulations that future gravitational sounding is probably able to detect dynamo-related gravity when the subspacecraft-point coverage of a mission is sufficient. We suggest that the mission orbits be purposely designed into a near-polar orientation with a height of about 6000 km at periapsis and a moderate eccentricity of 0.5. A total POD tracking time of five months would enable the detection of the secular nonaxisymmetric gravitational moments that are caused by the deep convective dynamo of Saturn. The orbit strategy can facilitate engineering implementation by keeping the spacecraft marginally away from the Saturn radiation belt throughout the mission.

The Case for Future Gravity Science Investigations at Saturn with a Planetary Orbiter

“…Although the perspective of reliably detecting normal modes with Doppler tracking of an orbiter is promising for the understanding of planetary interiors (Durante et al 2017(Durante et al , 2022Friedson 2020),we will defer such complex discussion to a future paper. Nor will we discuss the fields that could arise from deepseated mass anomalies, a nonhydrostatic core, or convective dynamo effects (Liu et al 2020). While it is clear that there are nonzonal, nonstatic components of the gravity field of Saturn, here we focus on the determination of the static zonal gravity field and tidal perturbations.…”

Review of the Precise Orbit Determination for Chinese Lunar Exploration Projects

“…We have strictly validated LUGREAS software with the well‐known planetary spacecraft POD and dynamical parameters software GEODYN II (Pavlis, 2001; Ye et al., 2016). It has been extended to analyze orbital tracking data from various missions targeting different planetary bodies such as Mars (e.g., Yan, Yang, Ye et al., 2018), Mercury (e.g., J. Yan et al., 2019), asteroids (e.g., Jin et al., 2020) and Saturn (e.g., Liu, Kong et al., 2020). In this study, we will first use LUGREAS to process the radio tracking data from the Chang’e 1 to the Chang’e 4 together.…”

Influence of reference states on Jupiter’s dynamo simulations

“…It is widely accepted that planetary magnetic fields are generated in an electrically conducting fluid layer in their deep interiors through the dynamo process (Jones, 2011). Therefore, planetary magnetic fields provide a window to infer the internal structure and dynamics of planets (Stevenson, 1982a, 2003; Guillot, 2005; Schubert and Soderlund, 2011; Liu SH et al, 2020). Among our solar system’s planets, Jupiter exhibits the strongest magnetic field, which is thought to be generated in its metallic hydrogen region (Stevenson, 1982a; Guillot, 2005; Jones et al, 2011).…”