Further Results Towards a Location-Scheduled Control Methodology

This paper presents a new strategy for the design of the attitude determination and control system (ADCS) of reconfigurable spacecraft. Assuming that the major components of a given spacecraft can be easily rearranged between missions (e.g. science payload, controller location), it is desirable to develop controller designs that are tuned for each possible configuration. Our strategy for obtaining these controller designs is referred to as location-scheduled control (LSC). The objective of this strategy is to reduce the amount of time required to develop the spacecraft ADCS during a mission life cycle by creating a family of ADCS designs a priori. Under LSC, a certain combination of sensors and actuators is paired with an appropriate control law, and then both controller gains and controller physical location are tuned for operation in multiple spacecraft configurations using a genetic algorithm. In this work the validity of the LSC approach is demonstrated through the study of a representative control problem concerning nanosatellites, a popular current example of reconfigurable spacecraft. By applying LSC, controller designs for a nanosatellite subject to actuator saturation are obtained for a large angle detumble maneuver using a nonlinear control law with previously reported stability properties.

[1]  A. D. Lewis,et al.  Geometric Control of Mechanical Systems , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[2]  Christopher Beasley,et al.  Small Class-D spacecraft thermal design, test and analysis - PharmaSat biological experiment , 2009, 2009 IEEE Aerospace conference.

[3]  Marcello Romano,et al.  Laboratory Experimentation of Autonomous Spacecraft Approach and Docking to a Collaborative Target , 2007 .

[4]  Frederick A. Leve,et al.  Three-Axis Attitude Control Design for On-Orbit Robotics , 2007 .

[5]  J. Puig-Suari,et al.  Development of the standard CubeSat deployer and a CubeSat class PicoSatellite , 2001, 2001 IEEE Aerospace Conference Proceedings (Cat. No.01TH8542).

[6]  Murray Anderson,et al.  Weapon drag coefficient determination using genetic algorithm , 1994 .

[7]  B. Jackson,et al.  A reconfigurable multifunctional architecture approach for next-generation nanosatellite design , 2000, 2000 IEEE Aerospace Conference. Proceedings (Cat. No.00TH8484).

[8]  Rush D. Robinett,et al.  Lyapunov optimal saturated control for nonlinear systems , 1997 .

[9]  David E. Goldberg,et al.  Control system optimization using genetic algorithms , 1992 .

[10]  James R. Wertz,et al.  Three-Axis Attitude Determination Methods , 1978 .

[11]  Kalmanje Krishnakumar,et al.  A Plug and Play GNC Architecture Using FPGA Components , 2005 .

[12]  P. Cage,et al.  Interplanetary trajectory optimization using a genetic algorithm , 1994 .

[13]  Robert Zee,et al.  The Design and Test of a Compact Propulsion System for CanX Nanosatellite Formation Flying , 2005 .

[14]  Michael Negnevitsky,et al.  Artificial Intelligence: A Guide to Intelligent Systems , 2001 .

[15]  James R. Wertz,et al.  Spacecraft attitude determination and control , 1978 .

[16]  William D. Nadir,et al.  Modular Structures for Manned Space Exploration: The Truncated Octahedron as a Building Block , 2005 .

[17]  Mason A. Peck,et al.  Demonstration of a Magnetic Locking Flux-Pinned Revolute Joint for Use on CubeSat-Standard Spacecraft , 2009 .

[18]  John W. Hines,et al.  Towards a Location-Scheduled Controller for Nanosatellites , 2010 .

[19]  Jordi Puig-Suari,et al.  The CubeSat: The Picosatellite Standard for Research and Education , 2008 .

[20]  Amit K. Sanyal,et al.  Attitude Tracking Control of a Small Satellite in Low Earth Orbit , 2009 .

[21]  N. McClamroch,et al.  A lie group variational integrator for the attitude dynamics of a rigid body with applications to the 3D pendulum , 2005, Proceedings of 2005 IEEE Conference on Control Applications, 2005. CCA 2005..

[22]  Olivier de Weck,et al.  Self-Similar Modular Architectures for Reconfigurable Space Systems , 2006 .