Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T08:30:38.723Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

SYMMETRIC SOLUTIONS FOR TWO-BODY DYNAMICS IN A COLLISION PREVENTION MODEL

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 October 2011

DAVID J. GATES
DAVID J. GATES*
Affiliation:
Optimisation in Air Transport Management Team, Mathematics, Informatics and Statistics, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, GPO Box 664, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia (email: davidgates@grapevine.com.au)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This paper presents the first analytical solutions for the three-dimensional motion of two idealized mobiles controlled by a particular guidance law designed to avoid a collision with minimal path deviation. The mobiles can be regarded as particles, and guidance can be interpreted as complex forces of interaction between the particles. The motion is then a generalized form of two-body Newtonian dynamics. If the mobiles have equal speeds, the relative motion is determined through various transformations of the differential equations. Solvability relies on congruence and symmetries of the paths, which is exploited to reduce the original twelve first-order differential equations to three first-order equations for the relative motion. The resulting state space is partitioned into five invariant subsets, with various symmetries and stabilities. One of these sets describes planar motion, where simple explicit solutions are given. In nonplanar motion, the solution is formally reduced to quadrature. A numerical calculation gives the separation at the closest point of approach, which provides control over minimum separation. The results should be of interest because of their application, which includes, most importantly, the prevention of midair collisions between aircraft, but also potential application to land, water and space vehicles. The solutions should be of interest to mathematical specialists in dynamical systems, because of some novel constants of the motion, novel symmetries, and the associated reducibility of the equations.

Keywords

collision preventiontwo-body problemsymmetric solutions
Type
Research Article
Information
The ANZIAM Journal , Volume 52 , Issue 3 , January 2011 , pp. 263 - 288
Copyright
Copyright © Australian Mathematical Society 2011

References

[1]Alvarez, M. and Llibre, J., “Heteroclinic orbits and Bernoulli shift for the elliptic collision restricted three-body problem”, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 156 (2001) 317–357; doi:10.1007/s002050100116.Google Scholar
[2]Barutello, V., L Ferrario, D. and Terracini, S., “Symmetry groups of the planar three-body problem and action-minimizing trajectories”, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 190 (2008) 189–226; doi:10.1007/s00205-008-0131-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Bloch, A. M., Krishnaprasad, P. S., Marsden, J. E. and Murray, R. M., “Nonholonomic mechanical systems with symmetry”, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 136 (1996) 21–99; doi:10.1007/BF02199365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Brent, R. P., “A class of optimal-order zero-finding methods using derivative evaluations”, in: Analytic computational complexity (ed. Traub, J. F.), (Academic Press, New York, 1975) 59–73.Google Scholar
[5]Frazzoli, E., Dahleh, M. A. and Feron, E., “Real-time motion planning for agile autonomous vehicles”, J. Guid. Control Dyn. 25 (2002) 116–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Fusco, G. and Oliva, W. M., “Formation of symmetric structures in the dynamics of repelling particles”, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 151 (2000) 95–123; doi:10.1007/s002050050194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Gates, D. J., “Properties of a real-time guidance method for preventing a collision”, J. Guid. Control Dyn. 32 (2009) 705–716; doi:10.2514/1.41197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Gazit, R. Y. and Powell, J. D., “Aircraft collision avoidance based on GPS position broadcasts”, Proc. 15th AIAA/IEEE digital avionics systems conference, Atlanta, GA, 1996 (IEEE, New York, 1996) 393–399; doi:10.1109/DASC.1996.559189.Google Scholar
[9]Kuchar, J. K. and Yang, L. C., “A review of conflict detection and resolution modelling”, IEEE Trans. Intelligent Transport Systems 1 (2000) 179–189; doi:10.1109/6979.898217.Google Scholar
[10]LeFloch, P. G. and Shelukhin, V., “Symmetries and global solvability of the isothermal gas dynamics equations”, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 175 (2005) 389–430; doi:10.1007/s00205-004-0344-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11]Olver, P. J., Applications of Lie groups to differential equations, 2nd edn (Springer, New York, 1993).Google Scholar
[12]Patrick, G. W., Roberts, M. and Wulff, C., “Stability of Poisson equilibria and Hamiltonian relative equilibria by energy methods”, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 174 (2004) 301–344; doi:10.1007/s00205-004-0322-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13]Rand, D., “Dynamics and symmetry. Predictions for modulated waves in rotating fluids”, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 79 (1982) 1–37; doi:10.1007/BF02416564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]Sporrong, J. and Uhlin, P., “System and method for avoidance of collision between vehicles” (Patent WO 01/46933 A1, June 28, 2001).Google Scholar
[15]Struik, D. J., Lectures on classical differential geometry, 2nd edn (Dover, New York, 1988).Google Scholar
[16]Swihart, D. E., Brannstrom, B., Griffin, E., Rosengren, R. and Doane, P., “A sensor integration technique for preventing collisions between air vehicles”, SICE 2002, Proc. 41st SICE Annual Conf. 1, Osaka, 2002 (SICE, Piscataway, NJ, 2002) 625–629; doi:10.1109/SICE.2002.1195481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[17]Wang, L.-S., Chern, S.-J. and Shih, C.-W., “On the dynamics of a tethered satellite system”, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 127 (1994) 297–318; doi:10.1007/BF00375018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[18]Zeghal, K., “A comparison of different approaches based on force fields for coordination among multiple mobiles”, Proc. IEEE/RSJ Intl. Conf. Intelligent Robots and Systems, Victoria, BC, 1998 (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, 1998) 273–278; doi:10.1109/IROS.1998.724631.Google Scholar