Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T04:53:15.572Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Gimbaled-thruster based nonlinear attitude control of a small spacecraft during thrusting manoeuvre

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2017

Farhad Fani Saberi ,
Mansour Kabganian ,
Hamed Kouhi  and
Morteza Shahravi
Farhad Fani Saberi*
Affiliation:
Space Science and Technology Institute, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
Mansour Kabganian
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
Hamed Kouhi
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
Morteza Shahravi
Affiliation:
Space Research Institute, Tehran, Iran
*
f.sabery@aut.ac.ir
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper, a novel thrusting manoeuvre control scheme is proposed for a small spacecraft which is based only on the gimbaled thrust vector control (TVC) system. The spacecraft structure is composed of a body and a gimbaled thruster where common attitude control systems such as reaction control system (RCS) and spin stabilisation are not employed. A nonlinear two-body model is considered for the characterisation of the gimbaled-nozzle spacecraft where the gimbal actuator provides the only active control input. The spacecraft attitude is affected by a large exogenous disturbance torque which is generated by a thrust vector misalignment from the centre of mass (CM). To achieve some performance goals in the both transient and steady-state modes, a new control scheme is derived based on the combination of two linear and nonlinear controllers. The proposed method ensures the attitude and thrust vector stability during an impulsive orbital manoeuvre while eliminating and rejecting an exogenous disturbance torque. The numerical simulations illustrate the applicability of this method for using in a small spacecraft and its efficiency in sustained operation.

Keywords

impulsive orbital manoeuvrethrust vector misalignmentgimbaled thrusterdisturbance rejectionnonlinear attitude control
Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 121 , Issue 1241 , July 2017 , pp. 983 - 1004
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Orr, J.S. and Shtessel, Y.B. Lunar spacecraft powered descent control using higher-order sliding mode techniques, J Franklin Institute, 2012, 349, (2), pp 476-492.Google Scholar
2. Souza, M. et al. A discussion on the effects of thrust misalignments on orbit transfers, Proceedings of the XXI Congresso Nacional de Matem tica Aplicada e Computacional, 1998, Caxambu, MG, Brazil.Google Scholar
3. Noll, R. Spacecraft attitude control during thrusting maneuvers, NASA SP-8059, 1971.Google Scholar
4. Kouhi, H. et al. Retrofiring control method via combination of a 1DoF gimbaled thrust vector control and spin-stabilisation, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 2016. doi: 10.1177/0954410016650909.Google Scholar
5. Oldenburg, J.A. and Tragesser, S.G. Minimizing the effects of transverse torques during thrusting for spin-stabilized spacecraft, J Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2002, 25, (3), pp 591-595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Thienel, J.K. and Markley, F.L. Comparison of angular velocity estimation methods for spinning spacecraft, Advances in Astronautical Science,” AAS/AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference, 2011, Portland, Oregon.Google Scholar
7. Hu, X. and Gong, S. Flexibility influence on passive stability of a spinning solar sail, Aerospace Science and Technology, 2016, 58, pp 60-70.Google Scholar
8. Meyer, R. Coning instability of spacecraft during periods of thrust, J Spacecraft and Rockets, 1996, 33, (6), pp 781-788.Google Scholar
9. Janssens, F.L. and Van Der Ha, J.C. Stability of spinning satellite under axial thrust and internal mass motion, Acta Astronautica, 2014, 94, (1), pp 502-514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Martin, K.M. and Longuski, J.M. Velocity pointing error reduction for spinning, thrusting spacecraft via heuristic thrust profiles, J Spacecraft and Rockets, 2015, 52, (4), pp 1268-1272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Cloutier, G. Resonances of a two-DOF system on a spin-stabilized spacecraft, AIAA J, 1976, 14, (1), pp 107-109.Google Scholar
12. Meehan, P. and Asokanthan, S. Control of chaotic motion in a spinning spacecraft with a circumferential nutational damper, Nonlinear Dynamics, 1998, 17, (3), pp 269-284.Google Scholar
13. Cloutier, G.J. Nutation damper instability on spin-stabilized spacecraft, AIAA J, 1969, 7, (11), pp 2110-2115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Tsiotras, P. and Longuski, J.M. Spin-axis stabilization of symmetric spacecraft with two control torques, Systems & Control Letters, 1994, 23, (6), pp 395-402.Google Scholar
15. Childs, D.W. Fuel-optimal direction-cosine attitude control for spin-stabilized axisymmetric spacecraft. J Spacecraft and Rockets, 1970, 7, (12), pp 1481-1483.Google Scholar
16. Childs, D.W., Tapley, B.D. and Fowler, W.T. Suboptimal attitude control of a spin-stabilized axisymmetric spacecraft. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 1969, 14, (6), pp 736-740.Google Scholar
17. Gui, H. and Vukovich, G. Robust adaptive spin-axis stabilization of a symmetric spacecraft using two bounded torques, Advances in Space Research, 2015, 56, (11), pp 2495-2507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18. Reyhanoglu, M. and Hervas, J.R. Nonlinear dynamics and control of space vehicles with multiple fuel slosh modes, Control Engineering Practice, 2012, 20, (9), pp 912-918.Google Scholar
19. Bandyopadhyay, B., Kurode, S. and Gandhi, P. Sliding mode control for slosh-free motion-A class of underactuated system. Int J Advanced Mechatronic Systems, 2009, 1, (3), pp 203-213.Google Scholar
20. Peterson, L.D., Crawley, E.F. and Hansman, R.J. Nonlinear fluid slosh coupled to the dynamics of a spacecraft, AIAA J, 1989, 27, (9), pp 1230-1240.Google Scholar
21. Shekhawat, A., Nichkawde, C. and Ananthkrishnan, N. modelling and stability analysis of coupled slosh-vehicle dynamics in planar atmospheric flight, Proceedings of the 44th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, 2006, Reno, Nevada, US.Google Scholar
22. Hervas, J.R. and Reyhanoglu, M. Thrust-vector control of a three-axis stabilized upper-stage rocket with fuel slosh dynamics, Acta Astronautica, 2014, 98, pp 120-127.Google Scholar
23. Rubio Hervas, J. and Reyhanoglu, M. Thrust-vector control of a three-axis stabilized upper-stage rocket with fuel slosh dynamics, Acta Astronautica, 2014, 98, pp 120-127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24. Kishore, W.A. et al. Control allocation for an over-actuated satellite launch vehicle, Aerospace Science and Technology, 2013, 28, (1), pp 56-71.Google Scholar
25. Hall, R.A. et al. Design and stability of an on-orbit attitude control system using reaction control thrusters, AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference, San Diego, California, US, 2016.Google Scholar
26. Yeh, F.-K. Sliding-mode-based contour-following controller for guidance and autopilot systems of launch vehicles, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 2013, 227, (2), pp 285-302.Google Scholar
27. Widnall, W.S. The minimum-time thrust-vector control law in the Apollo lunar-module autopilot, Automatica, 1970, 6, (5), pp 661-672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28. Wang, Z. et al. Thrust vector control of upper stage with a gimbaled thruster during orbit transfer. Acta Astronautica, 2016.Google Scholar
29. Rizvi, F. and Weitl, R.M. Characterizing limit cycles in the cassini thrust vector control system, J Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2013, 36, (5), pp 1490-1500.Google Scholar
30. Millard, J. and Reed, B. Implementation of the orbital maneuvering system engine and thrust vector control for the European service module, 50th AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference, Cleveland, Ohio, US, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31. Kong, F., Jin, Y. and Kim, H.D. Thrust vector control of supersonic nozzle flow using a moving plate, J Mechanical Science and Technology, 2016, 30, (3), pp 1209-1216.Google Scholar
32. Sperber, E., Fu, B. and Eke, F. Large angle reorientation of a solar sail using gimballed mass control, J Astronautical Sciences, 2016, pp 1-21.Google Scholar
33. Kouhi, H., Mansour, K., Fani Saberi, F., and Shahravi, M. Robust control of a spin-stabilized spacecraft via a 1DoF gimbaled-thruster and two reaction wheels, ISA Transactions, 2017, 66, 310–324.Google Scholar
34. Felicetti, L. et al. Adaptive thrust vector control during on-orbit servicing, Proceedings of AIAA SPACE 2014 Conference and Exposition, paper AIAA-2014-4341, 2014, San Diego, California, US.Google Scholar
35. Van Der Ha, J.C. and Janssens, F.L. Jet-damping and misalignment effects during solid-rocket-motor burn, J Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2005, 28, (3), pp 412-420.Google Scholar
36. van der Ha, J.C. Lessons learned from the dynamical behaviour of orbiting satellites, Acta Astronautica, 2015, 115, pp 121-137.Google Scholar
37. Chen, W.-H. Nonlinear disturbance observer-enhanced dynamic inversion control of missiles, J Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2003, 26, (1), pp 161-166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
38. Wu, G. and Meng, X. Nonlinear disturbance observer based robust backstepping control for a flexible air-breathing hypersonic vehicle, Aerospace Science and Technology, 2016, 54, pp 174-182.Google Scholar