Acta Mechanica Solida Sinica

, Volume 19, Issue 4, pp 334–340 | Cite as

Optimal motion planning for a rigid spacecraft with two momentum wheels using quasi-Newton method

  • Xinsheng Ge
  • Qizhi Zhang
  • Li-Qun Chen
Article

Abstract

An optimal motion planning scheme based on the quasi-Newton method is proposed for a rigid spacecraft with two momentum wheels. A cost functional is introduced to incorporate the control energy, the final state errors and the constraints on states. The motion planning for determining control inputs to minimize the cost functional is formulated as a nonlinear optimal control problem. Using the control parametrization, one can transform the infinite dimensional optimal control problem to a finite dimensional one that is solved via the quasi-Newton methods for a feasible trajectory which satisfies the nonholonomic constraint. The optimal motion planning scheme was applied to a rigid spacecraft with two momentum wheels. The simulation results show the effectiveness of the proposed optimal motion planning scheme.

Key words

rigid spacecraft nonholonomic constraint motion planning quasi-Newton method 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Crouch P.E., Spacecraft attitude control and stabilization: application of geometric control theory to rigid body models, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, Vol.29, No.4, 1984, 321–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Byrnes C.E. and Isidori A., On the attitude stabilization of rigid spacecraft, Automatica, Vol.27, No.1, 1991, 87–95.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Brockett R.W., Asymptotic stability and feedback stabilization, in: R.W Brockett, R.S Millman, H.J Sussman (Eds.) Differential Geometric Control Theory, Birkhauser, Boston MA, 1983, 181–191.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Morin P. and Samson C., Time-varying exponential stabilization of a rigid spacecraft with two control torques, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, Vol.42, No.4, 1997, 528–534.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Murray R.M. and Sastry S.S., Nonholonomic Motion Planning: steering using sinusoids. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, Vol.38, No.5, 1993, 700–716.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Krishnan H., McClamroch N.H. and Reyhanoglu M., Attitude stabilization of a rigid spacecraft using two momentum wheel actuators, Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol.18, No.2, 1995, 256–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Walsh G. and Sastry S.S., On reorienting linked rigid bodies using internal motions. IEEE Trans. Robot. Automat, Vol.11, No.1, 1995, 139–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Tsiotrsa P. and Lou J., Stabilization and tracking of underactuated axisymmetric spacecraft with bounded control, Automatica, Vol.36, No.8, 2000, 1153–1169.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Fernandes,C., Gurvits,L. and Li,Z., A variational approach to optimal nonholonomic motion planning, in: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, California, 1991.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Yih,C.C. and Ro,P.I., Near-optimal motion planning for nonholonomic systems with state/input constraints via quasi-Newton method, in: Proc. IEEE Conf. Robotics and Automation, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 1997.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Urakubo T., Tsuchiya K. and Tsujita K., Attitude control of a spacecraft with two reaction wheels, Journal of Vibration and Control, Vol.10, 2004, 1291–1311.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Ge X.S. and Chen L.Q., Attitude control of a rigid spacecraft with two momentum wheel actuators using genetic algorithm, Acta Astronautics, Vol.55, No.1, 2004, 3–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Hughes,P.C., Spacecraft Attitude Dynamics, John Wily and Sons. 1986.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Block A.M., Reyhanoglu, M. and McClamroch N.H., Control and stabilization of nonholonomic dynamical systems, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, Vol.37, No.11, 1992, 1746–1757.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Fernandes C., Gurvits L. and Li Z., Near-optimal nonholonomic motion planning for a system of coupled rigid bodies, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, Vol.39, No.3, 1994, 450–463.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Yih,C.C. and Ro,P.I., Near-optimal motion planning for nonholonomic systems using multi- point shooting method, in: Proc. IEEE Conf. Robotics and Automation, Minneapolis, MN, 1996.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Joshi,M.C. and Moudgalya,K.M., Optimization-Theory and Practice, Alpha Science International Ltd. 2004.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Chinese Society of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics and Technology 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xinsheng Ge
    • 1
  • Qizhi Zhang
    • 1
  • Li-Qun Chen
    • 2
  1. 1.Basic Science Courses DepartmentBeijing Institute of MachineryBeijingChina
  2. 2.Department of MechanicsShanghai UniversityShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations