Active space debris removal by a hybrid propulsion module

Abstract During the last 40 years, the mass of the artificial objects in orbit increased quite steadily at the rate of about 145 metric tons annually, leading to a total tally of approximately 7000 metric tons. Now, most of the cross-sectional area and mass (97% in LEO) is concentrated in about 4600 intact objects, i.e. abandoned spacecraft and rocket bodies, plus a further 1000 operational spacecraft. Simulations and parametric analyses have shown that the most efficient and effective way to prevent the outbreak of a long-term exponential growth of the catalogued debris population would be to remove enough cross-sectional area and mass from densely populated orbits. In practice, according to the most recent NASA results, the active yearly removal of approximately 0.1% of the abandoned intact objects would be sufficient to stabilize the catalogued debris in low Earth orbit, together with the worldwide adoption of mitigation measures. The candidate targets for removal would have typical masses between 500 and 1000 kg, in the case of spacecraft, and of more than 1000 kg, in the case of rocket upper stages. Current data suggest that optimal active debris removal missions should be carried out in a few critical altitude–inclination bands. This paper deals with the feasibility study of a mission in which the debris is removed by using a hybrid propulsion module as propulsion unit. Specifically, the engine is transferred from a servicing platform to the debris target by a robotic arm so to perform a controlled disposal. Hybrid rocket technology for de-orbiting applications is considered a valuable option due to high specific impulse, intrinsic safety, thrust throttle ability, low environmental impact and reduced operating costs. Typically, in hybrid rockets a gaseous or liquid oxidizer is injected into the combustion chamber along the axial direction to burn a solid fuel. However, the use of tangential injection on a solid grain Pancake Geometry allows for more compact design of the propulsion unit. Only explorative tests were performed in the past on this rocket configuration, which appears to be suitable as de-orbiting system of new satellites as well as for direct application on large debris in the framework of a mission for debris removal. The paper describes some critical aspects of the mission with particular concern to the target selection, the hybrid propulsion module, the operations as well as the systems needed to rendezvous and dock with the target, and the disposal strategy.

[1]  Michele Grassi,et al.  Active debris removal of a Cosmos-3M second stage by hybrid rocket Module , 2012 .

[2]  Robert P. Hoyt,et al.  The ‘Terminator Tether’: An Efficient Mechanism for End-of-Life Deorbit of Constellation Spacecraft , 1998 .

[3]  D. S. McKnight Summary of IAA Position Paper on Orbital Debris: Recent Events and Observations , 1993 .

[4]  Kazuya Yoshida,et al.  On the Capture of Tumbling Satellite by a Space Robot , 2006, 2006 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[5]  Carlo Menon,et al.  Characterization of electro-adhesives for robotic applications , 2011, 2011 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics.

[6]  Toshiya Hanada,et al.  Benefits and risks of using electrodynamic tethers to de-orbit spacecraft , 2006 .

[7]  Giancarmine Fasano,et al.  A Stereo-Vision Based System for Autonomous Navigation of an In-Orbit Servicing Platform , 2009 .

[8]  Carmen Pardini,et al.  Assessment of the consequences of the Fengyun-1C breakup in low Earth orbit , 2009 .

[9]  S. Nishida,et al.  Space debris capture by a joint compliance controlled robot , 2003, Proceedings 2003 IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics (AIM 2003).

[10]  J.-C. Liou,et al.  A sensitivity study of the effectiveness of active debris removal in LEO , 2009 .

[11]  Kazuya Yoshida,et al.  Whole-body motion control for capturing a tumbling target by a free-floating space robot , 2007, 2007 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[12]  Hiroshi Sako,et al.  Real-time facial-feature tracking based on matching techniques and its applications , 1994, Proceedings of the 12th IAPR International Conference on Pattern Recognition, Vol. 3 - Conference C: Signal Processing (Cat. No.94CH3440-5).

[13]  Kenneth K. Kuo,et al.  Fundamentals of Hybrid Rocket Combustion and Propulsion , 2007 .

[14]  S. Missonnier,et al.  Optimization of Tethered De-Orbitation of Spent Upper Stages: the ``MAILMAN'' Process , 2005 .

[15]  M. Kassebom,et al.  Evaluation of Propulsion Systems for Satellite End-Of-Life De.Orbiting , 2002 .

[16]  Peter Jankowitsch,et al.  Report of the Legal Sub-Committee on the Work of its Third Session (9 - 26 March 1964) to the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space , 1964, International Legal Materials.

[17]  Luciano Anselmo,et al.  The survivability of space tether systems in orbit around the earth , 2005 .

[18]  Claudio Bruno,et al.  satellite de-orbiting by means of electrodynamic tethers part i: general concepts and requirements , 2002 .

[19]  Claudio Bruno,et al.  Future Spacecraft Propulsion Systems: Enabling Technologies for Space Exploration , 2006 .

[20]  Richard T. Howard,et al.  Orbital Express Advanced Video Guidance Sensor: Ground Testing, Flight Results and Comparisons , 2008 .

[21]  R. A. C. Schonenborg,et al.  SOLID PROPULSION DE-ORBITING AND RE-ORBITING , 2009 .

[22]  Toshiya Hanada,et al.  Are de-orbiting missions possible using electrodynamic tethers? Task review from the space debris perspective , 2005 .

[23]  Ronald-Bryan O. Alferez,et al.  Geometric and Illumination Invariants for Object Recognition , 1999, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[24]  D. Kessler,et al.  Collision frequency of artificial satellites: The creation of a debris belt , 1978 .

[25]  J. Liou An active debris removal parametric study for LEO environment remediation , 2011 .

[26]  Fredrik Nilsson,et al.  PRISMA : an in-orbit test bed for guidance, navigation, and control experiments , 2009 .

[27]  R.T. Howard,et al.  Orbital Express Advanced Video Guidance Sensor , 2008, 2008 IEEE Aerospace Conference.

[28]  Alessandro Rossi,et al.  The New Space Debris Mitigation (SDM 4.0) Long Term Evolution Code , 2009 .

[29]  Stephen D. Heister,et al.  Rocket Grade Hydrogen Peroxide (RGHP) for use in Propulsion and Power Devices - Historical Discussion of Hazards , 2007 .

[30]  J.-C. Liou,et al.  Controlling the growth of future LEO debris populations with active debris removal , 2010 .

[31]  F. Angrilli,et al.  The Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee (iadc) Protection Manual , 2005 .

[32]  Jesse R. Quinlan,et al.  On the Design of an Active Debris Removal Architecture for Low Earth Orbit Space Debris Remediation , 2011 .

[33]  Nicholas L. Johnson,et al.  Space Debris Environment Remediation Concepts , 2009 .

[34]  Henry B. Garrett,et al.  Collision Frequency of Artificial Satellites: Creation of a Debris Belt , 1980 .

[35]  Alessandro Rossi,et al.  Collisional evolution of the Earth's orbital debris cloud , 1994 .

[36]  H. Krag,et al.  STRATEGIES FOR ACTIVE REMOVAL IN LEO , 2009 .

[37]  Hiroshi Hirayama,et al.  Assessing the vulnerability to debris impacts of electrodynamic tethers during typical de-orbiting missions , 2005 .

[38]  Shin-ichiro Nishida,et al.  Strategy for capturing of a tumbling space debris , 2011 .

[39]  Claudio Bombardelli,et al.  Space Debris Removal with Bare Electrodynamic Tethers , 2010 .

[40]  Dave M. Gibbon,et al.  Investigation of an Alternative Geometry Hybrid Rocket for Small Spacecraft Orbit Transfer , 2001 .

[41]  N. Johnson,et al.  Risks in Space from Orbiting Debris , 2006, Science.

[42]  Carmen Pardini,et al.  Physical properties and long-term evolution of the debris clouds produced by two catastrophic collisions in Earth orbit , 2011 .

[43]  Charles D. Brown Elements of Spacecraft Design , 2002 .