Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Bi-elliptic transfer

The bi-elliptic transfer is an that enables a to move from one coplanar to another, typically larger, using three impulsive velocity changes () and two intermediate elliptical transfer orbits, and it can require less total than the Hohmann transfer in specific scenarios involving large orbit size differences. This technique exploits the , particularly through the initial burn at high velocity near the initial orbit's periapsis, allowing for efficient energy adjustment. The maneuver begins with the first burn at the periapsis of the initial , which raises the apoapsis to a highly eccentric elliptical extending far beyond the target 's (denoted as r^*). At this apoapsis, the second burn adjusts the trajectory to a second elliptical sharing the same apoapsis but with its periapsis at the desired final (r_f). Finally, a third burn at the new periapsis circularizes the to match r_f. The total is calculated using the , v = \sqrt{\mu \left( \frac{2}{r} - \frac{1}{a} \right)}, applied at each burn point, where \mu is the gravitational parameter, r is the radial distance, and a is the semi-major axis. Compared to the Hohmann transfer, which uses two burns and a single elliptical tangent to both initial and final orbits, the bi-elliptic approach is less efficient for small orbit radius ratios (r_f / r_i < 11.94), roughly equivalent between 11.94 and 15.58 depending on the apoapsis height, and more efficient above 15.58 regardless of the intermediate apoapsis choice. For example, transferring from an initial orbit at Earth's radius plus 191 km to a final orbit at 60 Earth radii requires approximately 3.9 km/s total Δv via bi-elliptic (with r^* = 80 Earth radii), versus 4.0 km/s for Hohmann. However, the bi-elliptic transfer demands significantly longer flight times—often weeks or months—due to the extended path, making it suitable when fuel savings outweigh time constraints.

Description

Maneuver Sequence

The bi-elliptic transfer is a three-impulse maneuver designed to move a between two circular, coplanar orbits, from an initial orbit of radius r_1 to a target orbit of radius r_2 where r_2 > r_1. This method assumes familiarity with basic , such as circular orbits where the radius remains constant and elliptical orbits where the spacecraft alternates between periapsis (closest point to the central body) and apapsis (farthest point). Unlike the simpler Hohmann transfer, which relies on a single elliptical path and requires only two impulses, the bi-elliptic approach uses two successive elliptical transfer orbits to achieve the change, necessitating three burns for insertion, adjustment, and circularization. The sequence commences in the initial at radius r_1. The first burn, performed prograde (tangential and in the direction of motion) at periapsis—effectively any point on the —raises the apapsis to a distant radius r_a, typically much larger than r_2, placing the into the first highly eccentric elliptical transfer orbit. The then coasts along this ellipse to its apapsis at r_a. At apapsis, the second prograde adjusts the by raising the periapsis from r_1 to r_2, transitioning to the second elliptical , which now has its periapsis at r_2 and retains the apapsis at r_a. The coasts from apapsis through to the new periapsis at r_2. The third and final occurs at this periapsis of the second ellipse. A (tangential and opposite to the direction of motion) reduces the to lower the apapsis to r_2, circularizing the at the target radius. All three burns are impulsive and tangential, exploiting the 's vector to efficiently modify the orbital and shape. The additional compared to the Hohmann accommodates the dual-ellipse , enabling potential optimizations for large radius ratios.

Orbital Geometry

The bi-elliptic employs a geometric consisting of an initial with r_1, followed by two successive elliptical transfer orbits that connect to a final with r_2. The first elliptical orbit is to the initial at its perigee, located at r_1, and extends to an apogee at r_a. The second elliptical orbit shares the same apogee at r_a and is to the final at its perigee, located at r_2. This setup assumes all are coplanar and share a common focus at the central body's . The key parameters defining this geometry are r_1, the of the initial ; r_2, the of the target (typically with r_2 > r_1); and r_a, the apogee , which serves as a design variable selected to optimize the overall efficiency. The semi-major axis of the first elliptical orbit is given by a_1 = \frac{r_1 + r_a}{2}, while that of the second elliptical orbit is a_2 = \frac{r_2 + r_a}{2}. These relations highlight the interdependence of the orbits, with r_a influencing the and extent of both ellipses. For transfers involving large separations between r_1 and r_2, r_a is typically chosen to be much larger than r_2, often approaching in limiting cases, to leverage the reduced perturbations at greater distances from the central . This configuration allows the transfer orbits to become highly eccentric, minimizing the energy required for the intermediate phases. Textually, the orbital depicts concentric and final circular , with the first departing from a point on the initial orbit and reaching apogee, where the second ellipse begins, curving inward to tangentially intersect the final orbit at perigee; the burns occur at these tangent points, ensuring smooth transitions between orbits.

Analytical Model

Delta-v Requirements

The delta-v requirements for a bi-elliptic transfer are determined using the vis-viva equation, which gives the speed of a spacecraft in an elliptical orbit as v = \sqrt{\mu \left( \frac{2}{r} - \frac{1}{a} \right)}, where \mu is the standard gravitational parameter, r is the radial distance from the central body, and a is the semi-major axis of the orbit. This equation is applied at the points of each impulsive burn, assuming a two-body problem with circular, coplanar initial and target orbits of radii r_1 and r_2 (where r_1 < r_2), and an intermediate apapsis radius r_a > r_2. The transfer involves three tangential burns: the first at r_1 to enter the initial elliptical transfer orbit with semi-major axis a_1 = (r_1 + r_a)/2, the second at r_a to switch to the second elliptical transfer orbit with semi-major axis a_2 = (r_2 + r_a)/2, and the third at r_2 to circularize the final orbit. All burns are assumed impulsive, with no atmospheric drag, gravitational perturbations, or non-tangential components. The delta-v for the first burn, \Delta v_1, is the difference between the initial circular v_1 = \sqrt{\mu / r_1} and the perigee speed in the first transfer orbit: \Delta v_1 = \sqrt{\mu \left( \frac{2}{r_1} - \frac{1}{a_1} \right)} - \sqrt{\frac{\mu}{r_1}}. Substituting a_1 = (r_1 + r_a)/2 yields the closed-form expression \Delta v_1 = \sqrt{\frac{\mu}{r_1}} \left( \sqrt{\frac{2 r_a}{r_1 + r_a}} - 1 \right). This increases the spacecraft's velocity to raise the apapsis to r_a. At the apapsis r_a, the second burn \Delta v_2 adjusts the perigee from r_1 to r_2 by changing the orbital . The speed in the first transfer orbit at apapsis is v_{a1} = \sqrt{\mu \left( 2/r_a - 1/a_1 \right)}, and in the second transfer orbit it is v_{a2} = \sqrt{\mu \left( 2/r_a - 1/a_2 \right)}. Since a_2 > a_1, v_{a2} > v_{a1}, so \Delta v_2 = \sqrt{\mu \left( \frac{2}{r_a} - \frac{1}{a_2} \right)} - \sqrt{\mu \left( \frac{2}{r_a} - \frac{1}{a_1} \right)}. The closed form is \Delta v_2 = \sqrt{\frac{\mu}{r_a}} \left[ \sqrt{\frac{2 r_2}{r_2 + r_a}} - \sqrt{\frac{2 r_1}{r_1 + r_a}} \right]. This positive delta-v accelerates the tangentially at apapsis. The third burn occurs at the perigee of the second transfer orbit, r_2, to circularize. The perigee speed is v_{p2} = \sqrt{\mu \left( 2/r_2 - 1/a_2 \right)}, which exceeds the target circular speed v_2 = \sqrt{\mu / r_2}, requiring a deceleration: \Delta v_3 = \sqrt{\frac{\mu}{r_2}} - \sqrt{\mu \left( \frac{2}{r_2} - \frac{1}{a_2} \right)}. The magnitude is |\Delta v_3| = \sqrt{\frac{\mu}{r_2}} \left( \sqrt{\frac{2 r_a}{r_2 + r_a}} - 1 \right). The total delta-v is \Delta v = \Delta v_1 + \Delta v_2 + |\Delta v_3|. To minimize \Delta v, the parameter r_a is optimized, typically by numerical methods solving d(\Delta v)/dr_a = 0. For large orbit radius ratios r_2 / r_1 \gtrsim 12, the minimum occurs at very large r_a, approaching the bi-parabolic limit where \Delta v \approx (\sqrt{2} - 1) \left( \sqrt{\mu / r_1} + \sqrt{\mu / r_2} \right) as r_a \to \infty, with \Delta v_2 \to 0 and the first and third burns each approaching (\sqrt{2} - 1) times the local circular speed. Units for delta-v are typically in m/s, with \mu in m³/s² and radii in m.

Transfer Time

The transfer time for a bi-elliptic maneuver is determined using Kepler's third law, which relates the T of an to its semi-major a and the central body's gravitational parameter \mu via the formula
T = 2\pi \sqrt{\frac{a^3}{\mu}}.
This law applies to each of the two elliptical transfer orbits in the bi-elliptic sequence.
The first phase of the transfer begins with a at the periapsis of the initial (radius r_1) to enter the first elliptical , which has an apoapsis at radius r_a. The semi-major of this is a_1 = (r_1 + r_a)/2. The coasts from periapsis to apoapsis, corresponding to a change of 180 degrees. Due to the of elliptical , this half- traversal takes exactly half the full , yielding the time
t_1 = \pi \sqrt{\frac{ \left( \frac{r_1 + r_a}{2} \right)^3 }{\mu} }.
Half- are used because the impulsive occur precisely at periapsis and apoapsis locations, aligning the transfer phases with these symmetric segments of the ellipse.
The second phase follows a burn at the apoapsis (r_a) to enter the second elliptical orbit, with periapsis at the final orbit radius r_2 and semi-major axis a_2 = (r_2 + r_a)/2. The coast from apoapsis to periapsis again spans 180 degrees in , taking half the period of this orbit:
t_2 = \pi \sqrt{\frac{ \left( \frac{r_2 + r_a}{2} \right)^3 }{\mu} }.
The transfer time is the sum of these phases,
t = t_1 + t_2,
which increases as the intermediate apoapsis radius r_a grows larger, since both semi-major axes scale with r_a.
For instance, in a lunar transfer from low Earth orbit (r_1 \approx 6678 ) to a lunar relay orbit (r_2 \approx 384{,}400 km), increasing r_a from $4 \times 10^5 km to $10^6 km raises the time from approximately 15 days to 45 days.
These calculations assume instantaneous impulsive burns at the specified points, coplanar circular initial and final orbits, and no additional coasting phases or plane-change maneuvers, focusing solely on the radial transfer dynamics.
The semi-major axes derive from the orbital geometry, while the choice of r_a indirectly influences time through its role in overall maneuver optimization.

Comparison with Hohmann Transfer

Delta-v Efficiency

The delta-v efficiency of the bi-elliptic transfer relative to the Hohmann transfer is determined by comparing the total velocity change required to transition from an initial of radius r_1 to a final of radius r_2 > r_1, assuming coplanar orbits and impulsive burns. The Hohmann transfer, being a two-burn , provides a baseline for minimum energy in many cases, with its total delta-v given by \Delta v_H = \sqrt{\frac{\mu}{r_1}} \left( \sqrt{\frac{2 r_2}{r_1 + r_2}} - 1 \right) + \sqrt{\frac{\mu}{r_2}} \left( 1 - \sqrt{\frac{2 r_1}{r_1 + r_2}} \right), where \mu is the standard gravitational parameter. The bi-elliptic transfer, involving three burns, can achieve lower total delta-v than this Hohmann value under specific conditions, primarily when the orbital radius ratio \rho = r_2 / r_1 exceeds approximately 11.94. This break-even ratio is derived by setting the limiting-case bi-elliptic delta-v (as the intermediate apoapsis radius r_a \to \infty) equal to \Delta v_H and solving for \rho, marking the threshold beyond which even the infinite-r_a bi-elliptic configuration saves propellant. For $11.94 < \rho < 15.58, savings occur only if r_a is chosen sufficiently large (approaching infinity at the lower end of this range); below 11.94, the Hohmann transfer is always more efficient. In the asymptotic regime of very large \rho, the optimized bi-elliptic transfer's total delta-v approaches \Delta v_{BE} \approx (\sqrt{2} - 1) \left( \sqrt{\frac{\mu}{r_1}} + \sqrt{\frac{\mu}{r_2}} \right), derived from the limiting burns where the first burn nears escape from r_1, the intermediate burn vanishes, and the final circularization leverages a high entry speed at r_2. This is lower than the corresponding Hohmann limit \Delta v_H \approx (\sqrt{2} - 1) \sqrt{\frac{\mu}{r_1}} + \sqrt{\frac{\mu}{r_2}}, yielding asymptotic savings of approximately (2 - \sqrt{2}) \sqrt{\frac{\mu}{r_2}}. Graphical analyses of \Delta v versus \rho illustrate this crossover, with the bi-elliptic curve dipping below the Hohmann curve for \rho > 11.94 and remaining lower thereafter, though relative savings diminish as \rho grows large. The choice of r_a critically affects efficiency, as the total bi-elliptic delta-v is minimized at an optimal finite depending on r_1 and r_2; suboptimal r_a (e.g., too small or excessively large) can increase \Delta v_{BE} beyond \Delta v_H, negating any advantage. This sensitivity underscores the need for numerical optimization in mission design, often balancing delta-v savings against longer transfer times.

Duration Comparison

The duration of a Hohmann transfer between two coplanar circular orbits with radii r_1 and r_2 (where r_2 > r_1) is given by half the of the transfer ellipse, whose semi-major axis is a_H = (r_1 + r_2)/2. This yields the transfer time t_H = \pi \sqrt{ \frac{a_H^3}{\mu} }, where \mu is the of the central body. In contrast, the bi-elliptic transfer duration is the sum of the half-periods of its two elliptical arcs: the first from the initial to the intermediate apogee at r_a, with semi-major a_1 = (r_1 + r_a)/2, and the second from r_a to the final , with semi-major a_2 = (r_a + r_2)/2. Thus, t_{BE} = \pi \sqrt{ \frac{a_1^3}{\mu} } + \pi \sqrt{ \frac{a_2^3}{\mu} }. This results in t_{BE} > t_H for all practical cases, as the highly eccentric intermediate extends the path length despite the two-stage structure. The time penalty arises primarily from the elevated apogee radius r_a, which lengthens both transfer arcs compared to the more compact Hohmann ellipse; as r_a increases, t_{BE} grows significantly, often exceeding t_H by factors of 2–3 or more when r_2 / r_1 > 11.94, the threshold beyond which bi-elliptic transfers offer delta-v advantages over Hohmann. This extended duration represents a key : while the bi-elliptic approach enables savings by leveraging lower-velocity burns at apogee, mission planners must weigh the added time against operational constraints, such as communication windows or . Optimizing r_a minimizes total delta-v for a given r_2 / r_1 but at the cost of progressively longer times, particularly for distant orbits where r_a must be substantially larger than r_2 to realize gains.

Break-even Conditions

The break-even condition for preferring a bi-elliptic transfer over a Hohmann transfer in terms of total \Delta v occurs when the ratio of the final radius to the initial radius, r_2 / r_1, exceeds approximately 11.937. This threshold is derived by equating the \Delta v requirement for a bi-elliptic transfer with the intermediate apogee radius r_a approaching (effectively a bi-parabolic transfer) to that of the Hohmann transfer and solving for the radius ratio. Above this value, the bi-elliptic transfer can achieve lower total \Delta v, with efficiency improving as r_2 / r_1 increases further. However, significant limitations apply. For r_2 / r_1 < 11.94, the bi-elliptic transfer requires more [\Delta v](/page/Delta-v) than the Hohmann transfer for any choice of r_a, including the optimal. These analyses assume coplanar circular initial and final orbits in a two-body central with impulsive maneuvers; real-world inefficiencies arise from non-optimal r_a selection, orbital perturbations, or non-impulsive burns. A key advantage of the bi-elliptic transfer is its versatility for incorporating plane-change maneuvers at the intermediate apogee, where orbital velocity is minimized, thereby reducing the additional needed for inclination adjustments compared to performing the change in a Hohmann transfer. To sketch the derivation of the break-even ratio, one sets the total for the bi-elliptic transfer in the limit r_a \to \infty equal to the Hohmann \Delta v and solves the resulting equation for r_2 / r_1, yielding \approx 11.937. This limit simplifies the middle maneuver to zero while leveraging the at perigee for the initial burn.

Practical Applications

Mission Examples

One illustrative hypothetical mission involves transferring a from a () at an altitude of 629 km (orbital radius r_1 = 7000 km) to a () at an altitude of 35,786 km (orbital radius r_2 = 42,000 km), yielding a radius ratio of approximately 6, which is below the break-even threshold of 11.94 where bi-elliptic transfers become advantageous. Using Earth's gravitational parameter \mu = 3.986 \times 10^{14} m³/s², the Hohmann transfer requires a total \Delta v_H = 3.767 km/s, comprising \Delta v_{H1} = 2.332 km/s at injection and \Delta v_{H2} = 1.435 km/s at GEO insertion, with a transfer time of about 5.3 hours. In contrast, a bi-elliptic transfer with an optimized intermediate apogee radius r_a = 100,000 km demands a total \Delta v_{BE} = 4.156 km/s (\Delta v_1 = 2.769 km/s, \Delta v_2 = 0.813 km/s, \Delta v_3 = 0.574 km/s), exceeding the Hohmann by roughly 10%, while extending the transfer time to approximately 43 hours due to the longer intermediate legs. For scenarios with larger orbital separations where the radius ratio exceeds 12, bi-elliptic transfers offer propellant savings. Consider a hypothetical deep-space probe departing from (r_1 = 7000 ) to a at approximately the Moon's distance (r_2 = 384,000 , ratio ≈ 55). The Hohmann requires \Delta v_H = 3.854 /s (\Delta v_{H1} = 3.032 /s, \Delta v_{H2} = 0.822 /s), with a transfer time of roughly 4.8 days. An optimized bi-elliptic transfer, with intermediate apogee r_a \approx 1,000,000 approaching the bi-parabolic limit, achieves a total \Delta v_{BE} \approx 3.548 /s—a savings of about 8% over Hohmann—though the transfer time increases to over 10 days. Further optimization for such ratios can yield savings of 10-15% by leveraging the Oberth effect more effectively at the distant apogee.
ParameterHohmann (LEO to GEO)Bi-elliptic (LEO to GEO)Hohmann (LEO to Moon Distance)Bi-elliptic (LEO to Moon Distance)
Total \Delta v (km/s)3.7674.1563.8543.548
Transfer Time5.3 hours43 hours4.8 days~10 days
Radius Ratio665555
Bi-elliptic transfers have also been used in operational rendezvous, such as the Soyuz fast-track docking with the International Space Station (ISS), where a bi-elliptic maneuver raises the spacecraft from its initial parking orbit to the station's altitude. While primarily theoretical for large orbit changes due to prolonged durations prohibitive for time-sensitive operations like crewed flights or rapid satellite deployment, studies have explored their application in rendezvous scenarios, but no major NASA missions have implemented them for primary transfers, favoring Hohmann transfers for efficiency in near-Earth applications. However, they hold potential for deep-space probes where extended travel time is acceptable, and propellant savings justify the approach in uncrewed interplanetary transfers.

Combined Maneuvers

The second burn in a bi-elliptic transfer occurs at the apapsis of the highly elliptical intermediate orbit, where the spacecraft achieves its lowest velocity. This characteristic enables efficient integration of a plane change maneuver during the same impulse, as the delta-v cost for inclination adjustment is \Delta v_{\text{plane}} = 2 v \sin(\Delta i / 2), with v minimized at apapsis, thereby reducing the overall propellant requirement compared to performing the plane change elsewhere. Bi-elliptic transfers are commonly combined with plane changes for missions involving inclined target orbits, such as adjusting from an equatorial to a high-inclination . They also integrate well with swing-by assists in multi-body transfers, leveraging the distant apapsis for interactions with intermediate celestial bodies to gain velocity toward outer destinations. For example, studies for proposed lunar missions like LUNAR-A showed that a bi-elliptic with a lunar swingby at apapsis could reduce total delta-v by about 150 m/s relative to a Hohmann equivalent, while facilitating solar for capture. A key advantage of these combinations is the minimized delta-v for plane changes at the high apapsis, which contrasts with Hohmann transfers that necessitate distinct burns for radius alteration and inclination adjustment, escalating the total cost. This approach enhances in hybrid profiles requiring simultaneous orbital and attitudinal modifications. However, such integrations heighten complexity through additional sequencing and extend durations significantly, factors that typically render bi-elliptic combinations impractical despite potential savings, resulting in infrequent real-world . In broader architectures, like Earth-to-outer-planet trajectories with inclination corrections, bi-elliptic s function as an enabling phase, with the apapsis burn absorbing adjustments to optimize alignment for downstream assists. A representative case is the Earth-Pluto , where an optimized bi-elliptic path with a 17.14° change—predominantly at apocenter—yields a total normalized delta-v of 0.481, outperforming alternatives for large separations.

References

  1. [1]
    Chapter 7 – Manuevering – Introduction to Orbital Mechanics
    Find the total burn using the most fuel-efficient transfer. BI-ELLIPTICAL. Another type of transfer between two coplanar orbits is called a bi-elliptical orbit.
  2. [2]
    Bi-Elliptic Transfer - a.i. solutions
    In the bi-elliptic transfer, the first transfer is a highly eccentric orbit with an apoapsis higher than the target orbit radius.Missing: mechanics | Show results with:mechanics
  3. [3]
    [PDF] Lecture 9: Bi-elliptics and Out-of-Plane Maneuvers - Matthew M. Peet
    Feb 27, 2025 · From circular initial orbit to transfer orbit 1. ... A typical strategy is to combine a plane change with a bi-elliptic transfer.Missing: mechanics | Show results with:mechanics
  4. [4]
    The bi-elliptical transfer between co-planar circular orbits
    In this article, we show the optimal total delta velocity for bi-elliptic and bi-parabolic (through infinity) transfers between non-coaxial boundary orbits. ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  5. [5]
  6. [6]
    Orbital maneuvers - t-neumann.github.io
    Sep 8, 2019 · Radial burns are usually not an efficient way of adjusting one's path - it is generally more effective to use prograde and retrograde burns.
  7. [7]
    Bi-elliptic Hohmann transfer - Orbital Mechanics & Astrodynamics
    For a given value of r 3 / r 1 between 11.94 and 15.58, higher values of r 2 / r 1 (moving point 2 farther away) tend to make the bielliptic transfer preferred.Missing: geometry | Show results with:geometry
  8. [8]
    None
    ### Summary of Orbital Geometry for Bi-Elliptic Transfer
  9. [9]
    [PDF] Lecture notes of SPACE MECHANICS - People
    possible to prove that the function ∆v/vcirci has a maximum at Rmax ≈ 15.58. 4.3.2 Bi-elliptic Transfer. In the case of the bi-elliptic transfer, three ...
  10. [10]
    [PDF] Conceptual Design of a Communications Relay Satellite for a Lunar ...
    Sep 1, 2005 · The ∆v and time of flight (TOF) for the Hohmann transfer and for the bi-elliptic transfer, of which three different intermediate radii are.
  11. [11]
    [PDF] Hohmann Transfer Orbit - Physics Courses
    Velocity equation where ... is the semi-major axis of the body's orbit. Therefore the delta-v required for the Hohmann transfer can be computed as follows,.
  12. [12]
    The bi-elliptical transfer between co-planar circular orbits
    An investigation of the area of relative altitudes of co-planar circular orbits for which a bi-elliptical transfer is more economical than the classical ...
  13. [13]
    [PDF] FreeFlyer University Guide - a.i. solutions
    Another thing to note: At an orbit ratio of approximately 11.94, the Hohmann transfer represented by the ... Hohmann Delta V". In this FreeForm script editor, we ...
  14. [14]
    [PDF] 19680026430.pdf - NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)
    the bi-elliptic transfer and the transfer "through infinity" which will be discussed ... Using this criterion, Hoelker and Silber calculated the critical ...
  15. [15]
    [PDF] ON MAKING USE OF LUNAR AND SOLAR GRAVITY ASSISTS IN ...
    bi-elliptic transfer orbit. The equivalent delta-V at the apogee in a two-body calculation is around 280 m/s. Trajectory design with ballistic capture is ...Missing: "orbital | Show results with:"orbital