As space missions grow more complex, engineers must rely increasingly on multi-satellite operations to accomplish various mission objectives. Several concepts have emerged for autonomous robotic servicing and assembly of orbiting assets which rely on close proximity operation of independently controlled elements. These architectures are inherently associated with increased levels of mission risk. Consequently, mission architects often rely on pre-flight testing for risk mitigation. Unfortunately, this process historically has led to the development of dedicated testbeds that provide risk reduction for a limited number of mission architectures. This paper describes an extension to the Synchronized Position Hold Engage Reorient Experimental Satellites (SPHERES) facility that allows for unprecedented reconfigurability. This SPHERES extension incorporates hardware and software that can enable TRL6 verification of control algorithms for classes of missions through ground, simulation, and flight testing. The SPHERES facility, consisting of two sets of three identical satellites located at both the MIT Space Systems Laboratory and on the International Space Station (ISS), is being upgraded to include six SPHERES Docking Ports (SDPs) and two SPHERES Halo multi-port expansion structures. The docking ports allow two SDP-equipped elements to dock with each other, and the Halo structures allow for a Halo-equipped satellite to operate up to six peripherals simultaneously through the inclusion of six identical electromechanical expansion ports. This hardware is available for testing on the ground with 3-DOF air carriage systems and aboard the ISS in its 6-DOF long duration microgravity environment. The SPHERES simulation environment, a high-fidelity model of the satellites in 6-DOF, is also being upgraded to include these hardware expansions. This paper describes the design of the hardware and software upgrades, and the expected testbed capabilities they will create. It details how this unique facility enables comprehensive testing to determine the behavior characteristics of future robotic servicing and assembly missions and the interactions between multiple satellites operating in close proximity. A sequence of planned, incremental test sessions aboard the ISS is also described to demonstrate the process by which ground, simulation, and flight testing can be combined constructively to reduce risks associated with these multi-satellite architectures. Results from ground, simulation, and reduced gravity aircraft environments are shown in support of the planned ISS operations.
[1]
Cheng Fang,et al.
Resource Aggregated Reconfigurable Control and Risk-Allocative Path Planning for On-orbit Assembly and Servicing of Satellites
,
2013
.
[2]
Douglas J. Zimpfer,et al.
Autonomous Rendezvous, Capture and In-Space Assembly: Past, Present and Future
,
2005
.
[3]
Ed Benowitz,et al.
Formation Algorithms and Simulation Testbed
,
2003
.
[4]
M. Aung,et al.
The formation control testbed
,
2004,
2004 IEEE Aerospace Conference Proceedings (IEEE Cat. No.04TH8720).
[5]
Panagiotis Tsiotras.
AAS 14-114 ASTROS: A 5DOF EXPERIMENTAL FACILITY FOR RESEARCH IN SPACE PROXIMITY OPERATIONS
,
2014
.
[6]
Duncan Lee Miller,et al.
Development of resource-constrained sensors and actuators for in-space satellite docking and servicing
,
2015
.
[7]
Gerd Hirzinger,et al.
Generating feasible trajectories for autonomous on-orbit grasping of spinning debris in a useful time
,
2013,
2013 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.
[8]
Kazuo Machida,et al.
Autonomous Assembly of Cellular Satellite by Robot...
,
2005
.
[9]
Bruno Alvisio.
Development and validation of an Electromagnetic Formation Flight simulation as a platform for control algorithm design
,
2015
.
[10]
Lorenzo Olivieri.
Development and characterization of a standardized docking system for small spacecraft
,
2015
.
[11]
Bryan Patrick McCarthy,et al.
Flight hardware development for a space-based robotic assembly and servicing testbed
,
2014
.
[12]
Edward A. LeMaster,et al.
Experimental Demonstration of Technologies for Autonomous On-Orbit Robotic Assembly
,
2006
.
[13]
David W. Miller,et al.
Definition and testing of an architectural tradespace for on-orbit assemblers and servicers
,
2014
.
[14]
Felix Huber,et al.
On-Orbit Servicing Missions: Challenges and Solutions for Spacecraft Operations
,
2010
.
[15]
Cheng Fang,et al.
Resource Aggregated Reconfigurable Control and Risk-Allocative Path Planning for On-orbit Servicing and Assembly of Satellites
,
2014
.