System rigidization and control for post-capture maneuvering of large space debris

In this paper, we present the results of the investigation on post-capture maneuvering of the Envisat spacecraft that would comprise a sub-task of a larger robotic mission to actively remove this now defunct satellite. The specific task considered is that of rigidizing the chaser-manipulator-Envisat system after the capture of the spacecraft has been executed. The challenge lies in the fact that Envisat is tumbling and thus, its angular momentum must be redistributed during the rigidization maneuver so that at the end, the whole system is rotating as a single rigid body. Two rigidization methods are proposed in the paper: a proportional-integral control of the joint rates to the desired null rates for rigidizing the arm. The second scheme, referred to as redundancy resolution control, generates the desired joint rates which, as a primary objective, satisfy the rigid-body velocity constraint between chaser and target motions and, secondly, dissipates energy of the system to ensure rigidization of the arm. The benefit of this approach is that it can also account for joint limits, which maybe critical to the success of the rigidization maneuver. The two rigidization methods are applied to the chaser-manipulator-Envisat system for three tumbling rates of the Envisat spacecraft. The so-called nominal rate corresponds to the observations collected during the 2013 measurement campaign. The additional two rates considered are 1.5 and 2 times the nominal rate, to allow for the uncertainty in Envisat's spin rate as mission planning must accommodate the worst case scenario. Simulation results are presented which demonstrate that rigidization can be accomplished for the nominal and intermediate spin rates; however, the manipulator arm is not sufficiently strong, for the assumed torque limits, to rigidize the system for the worst case considered.

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

[2]  Colin R. McInnes,et al.  A passive high altitude deorbiting strategy , 2011 .

[3]  Xavier Cyril,et al.  Dynamical modelling and control of a spacecraft-mounted manipulator capturing a spinning satellite☆ , 1995 .

[4]  Inna Sharf,et al.  Reactionless Path Planning Strategies for Capture of Tumbling Objects in Space Using a Dual-Arm Robotic System , 2013 .

[5]  Arun K. Misra,et al.  Postcapture Dynamics of a Spacecraft-Manipulator-Payload System , 2000 .

[6]  I. Sharf,et al.  Adaptive Reactionless Motion and Parameter Identification in Postcapture of Space Debris , 2013 .

[7]  Inna Sharf,et al.  Vision-Based Tracking and Trajectory Generation for Robotic Capture of Objects in Space , 2005 .

[8]  R. Benvenuto,et al.  FLEXIBLE CAPTURE DEVICES FOR MEDIUM TO LARGE DEBRIS ACTIVE REMOVAL : SIMULATIONS RESULTS TO DRIVE EXPERIMENTS , 2013 .

[9]  Inna Sharf,et al.  On the simulation of tether-nets for space debris capture with Vortex Dynamics , 2016 .

[10]  Kazuya Yoshida,et al.  Dynamics, control and impedance matching for robotic capture of a non-cooperative satellite , 2004, Adv. Robotics.

[11]  Kazuya Yoshida,et al.  Reaction null-space control of flexible structure mounted manipulator systems , 1999, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..

[12]  Zhang Jing-rui,et al.  Space Tether Net System for Debris Capture and Removal , 2012, 2012 4th International Conference on Intelligent Human-Machine Systems and Cybernetics.

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

[14]  Joshua J. Loughman Overview and Analysis of the SOLDIER Satellite Concept for Removal of Space Debris , 2010 .

[15]  Zhongping Zhang,et al.  Attitude and Spin Period of Space Debris Envisat Measured by Satellite Laser Ranging , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[16]  Inna Sharf,et al.  Reactionless capture of a satellite by a two degree-of-freedom manipulator , 2010 .

[17]  Farhad Aghili,et al.  An adaptive vision system for guidance of a robotic manipulator to capture a tumbling satellite with unknown dynamics , 2008, 2008 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

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

[19]  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.

[20]  Yasushi Ohkawa,et al.  Development Status of Electrodynamic Tethers for Debris De-Orbiting , 2009 .

[21]  Gerd Hirzinger,et al.  On-line parameter adaptation for a momentum control in the post-grasping of a tumbling target with model uncertainty , 2007, 2007 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[22]  Scott J.I. Walker,et al.  Earth’s gravity gradient and eddy currents effects on the rotational dynamics of space debris objects: Envisat case study , 2015 .

[23]  Farhad Aghili,et al.  Optimal control of a space manipulator for detumbling of a target satellite , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[24]  Inna Sharf,et al.  Ground-based experiments towards the interception of non-cooperative space debris with a robotic manipulator , 2015, 2015 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS).

[25]  L. Kerstein,et al.  ROGER - Robotic Geostationary Orbit Restorer , 2003 .