Skip to main content
Log in

Analysis of analytical attitude propagators for spin-stabilized satellites

  • Published:
Computational and Applied Mathematics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, analytical attitude propagators for spin-stabilized satellites are analyzed. For this purpose, external torques are introduced in the motion equations such as solar radiation pressure torque, aerodynamic torque, gravity gradient torque, and magnetic residual and eddy current torques. For the magnetic torques, it used both the dipole and quadripole Earth’s magnetic field models. The obtained analytical solution is applied and compared with actual data for Brazilian data collection satellites SCD1 and SCD2. The results, when a daily data update is applied, based on the INPE-Brazilian Institute for Space Research supplied data, show a good agreement of all involved parameters with the actual deviations in the parameter values within the precision required for the satellite mission. This permits to conclude that the used theory is suitable for the studied problem. Thus, the propagators presented in this work can be applied to predict the rotational motion of spin-stabilized artificial satellites, particularly for SCD1 and SCD2 satellites over the considered time period.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Carrara V (2014) Environmental disturbance models for satellites. In: Proceedings of XXXV Iberian Latin America congress on computational methods in engineering, CILANCE2014

  • Carrara V (2015) An open source satellite attitude and orbit simulator for Matlab. In: Proceedings of XVII international symposium on dynamic problems of mechanics

  • da Fonseca IM, Bainum PM (2006) The Brazilian satellite program—a survey. Adv Astron Sci 122:505–532

    Google Scholar 

  • de Moraes RV, Zanardi MC (1999) Analytical and semi-analytical analysis an artificial satellite’s rotational motion. Cel Mech Dyn Astr 75:227–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia RV, Zanardi MC, Kuga HK (2009) Spin-stabilized spacecrafts: analytical attitude propagation using magnetic torques. Math Prob Eng 2009:1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hara M (1973) Effects of magnetic and gravitational torques in spinning satellite attitude. AIAA J II(12):1737–1742

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuga HK, Ferreira LDD, Guedes UTV (1987) Simulação de atitude e de manobras para o satélite brasileiro estabilizado por rotação. In: Anais do IX COBEM, pp 911–914

  • Kuga HK, Orlando V, Lopes RVF (1999) Flight dynamics operations during leop for the INPE’s second environmental data collecting satellite SCD2. Rev Bras de Ciênc Mec 21:339–344

    Google Scholar 

  • Lopes RVF, Rao KR (1994) SCD-1 Attitude follow-up: from initial idea to final facts. In: Proceedings of II Brazilian symposium on aerospace technology VvII, pp 281–284

  • Lopes RVF, Fabri SM, Ferreira LDD (1997) Attitude determination for spin stabilized satellites from GPS interferometry. Adv Astron Sci 95(2):783–802

    Google Scholar 

  • Maciejewski AJ, Przybylska M (2003) Non-integrability of the problem of a rigid satellite in gravitational and magnetic fields. Cel Mech Dyn Astron 87(4):317–351

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Motta GB, Zanardi MC (2014) Influence of the external torques in the angle between the spin axis and the Sun direction for spin stabilized satellite. J Phys: Conf Ser 641:012022

    Google Scholar 

  • Motta GB, Carvalho MV, Zanardi MC (2013) Analytical prediction of the spin stabilized satellite’s attitude using the solar radiation torque. J Phys Conf Ser V 465:012009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlando V, Lopes RVF, Kuga HK (1997) INPE’s flight dynamics team experience through four years of SCD1 in-orbit operation: main issues, improvements and trends. In: Proceedings of 12th international symposium on space flight dynamics, pp 433–437

  • Orlando V, Kuga HK, Guedes UTV (1998) Flight dynamics LEOP and routine operations for SCD2, the INPE’ second environmental data collecting satellite. Adv Astron Sci 100:1003–1013

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao KR, Lopes RVF (1995) Satellite Attitude Follow-up: a first-hand experience with the first Brazilian Satellite SCD-1. In: Proceedings of international symposium on space dynamics, pp 777–783

  • Sarychev VA, Guerman A, Paglione P (2003) Infuence of constant torque on equilibria of satellite in circular orbit. Celest Mech Dyn Astron 87(3):219–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sehnal L, Pospísilová L (1988) Thermospheric model TD88. Preprint no. 67 of the Astronomical Institute of Czechoslovakian Academy of Sciences

  • Shivastava SK, Modi VJ (1993) Satellite attitude dynamics and control in the presence of environmental torques—a brief survey. AIAA J 6(6):461–471

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas LC, Cappelari JO (1964) Attitude determination and prediction of spin stabilized satellites. Bell Syst Tech J 43:1654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkataraman NS, Carrara V (1983) The modelling of forces and torques on near Earth satellites. In: Proceedings of VII Congresso Brasileiro de Engenharia Mecânica—COBEM 83, vol B, pp 23–133

  • Wertz JR (1978) Spacecraft attitude determination and control. Reidel, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Yu EY (1963) Spin decay, spin-precession damping, and spin-axis drift of the telstar satellite. Bell Syst Tech J 42:2169–2193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zanardi MC, Quirelli IMP, Kuga HK (2003) Analytical attitude propagation of spin stabilized Earth artificial satellites. In: Proceedings of 17th international symposium on space flight dynamics.

  • Zanardi MC, Quirelli IMP, Kuga HK (2005) Analytical attitude prediction of spin stabilized spacecrafts perturbed by magnetic residual torques. Adv Sp Res 36:460–465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zanardi MC, Pereira A, Chiaradia JE (2011) Spin stabilizes satellite’s attitude analytical prediction. In: Proceedings of 22th international symposium on space flight dynamics, pp 1–14. http://issfd.org. Accessed Mar 2017

  • Zanardi MC, Orlando V, Motta GB, Pelosi T, Silva WR (2016) Numerical and analytical approach for the spin-stabilized satellite attitude propagation. Comp Appl Math 1:1–13

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This present work was supported by CAPES-PVNS and CNPq (Process no. 421672/2016-1).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. C. Zanardi.

Additional information

Communicated by Elbert Macau, Antônio Fernando Bertachini de Almeida Prado and Othon Cabo Winter.

Appendix: Mathematical model for the external torques for spin-stabilized satellite

Appendix: Mathematical model for the external torques for spin-stabilized satellite

1.1 Gravity gradient torque model

The GGT (Wertz 1978; Zanardi et al. 2011) for a spin-stabilized satellite in a body system (\( \hat{i},\,\,\hat{j},\,\,\hat{k}, \)) can be expressed by:

$$ \vec{N}_{\text{GG}} = N_{{{\text{GG}}x}} \,\hat{i} + N_{{{\text{GG}}y}} \,\hat{j} + N_{{{\text{GG}}z}} \,\hat{k}, $$

with

$$ N_{{{\text{GG}}x}} = 3\frac{\mu }{{r^{\prime 3} }}\left[ {a_{21} \,a_{31} \left( {I_{z} - I_{y} } \right)\,\cos \theta \, - \,a_{11} \,a_{31} \left( {I_{x} - I_{z} } \right){\text{sen}}\;\theta \,} \right], $$
$$ N_{{{\text{GG}}y}} = 3\frac{\mu }{{r^{\prime 3} }}\left[ {a_{21} {\mkern 1mu} a_{31} \left( {I_{z} - I_{y} } \right){\mkern 1mu} {\text{sen}}\;\theta {\mkern 1mu} + {\mkern 1mu} a_{11} {\mkern 1mu} a_{31} \left( {I_{x} - I_{z} } \right){\mkern 1mu} { \cos }\;\theta } \right], $$
$$ N_{{{\text{GG}}z}} = 3\frac{\mu }{{r^{3} }}\left[ {a_{11} \,a_{21} \left( {I_{y} - I_{x} } \right)} \right], $$

where µ (3.986 × 1014 m3/s2) is the Earth gravitational parameter, \( r^{{{\prime } }} \) is the satellite geocentric distance, a11, a21, and a31 are the direction cosines which relate the orbital system and the satellite fixed system, Ix, Iy, and Iz are the Principal Moments of Inertia of the satellite and θ is the angle between the satellite principal axis of inertia x′ and the satellite axis x, defined in each instance by the product of the spin velocity W and the time t. The elements a11, a21, and a31 depend on the orbital elements (orbit inclination, true anomaly, longitude of the ascending node, and argument of the perigee), the angle θ, the right ascension, and declination of the spin axis (Zanardi et al. 2003).

To compute the mean components of each considered torque in the satellite system, an average time in the fast varying orbit element, the mean anomaly, is used. This approach involves several rotation matrices, which are dependent on the orbit elements, right ascension, and declination of the satellite spin axis. The GGT mean components are presented in Zanardi et al. (2003).

1.2 Aerodynamic torque model

For this paper is adopted the following model to represent the AT (Wertz 1978; Zanardi et al. 2011):

$$ \vec{N}_{\text{A}} = \left[ {D_{z} m_{ey} \, - \,D_{y} m_{ez} } \right]\,\hat{i} + \left[ {D_{x} m_{ez} \, - \,D_{z} m_{ex} } \right]\,\hat{j} + \left[ {D_{y} \,m_{ex} \, - D_{x} \,m_{ey} } \right]\,\hat{k}, $$

where mex, mey, mez and Dx, Dy, Dz are the components of the position vector between the center of pressure and the center of mass of the satellite and the drag force in a satellite system. In this paper, the influence of the lift force in the AT is neglected and

$$ D_{x} = - D\left[ {a_{11} \cos \,\gamma_{\text{S}} + a_{21} \,{\text{sen}}\,\gamma_{\text{S}} } \right], $$
$$ D_{y} = - D\left[ {a_{12} \cos \,\gamma_{\text{S}} + a_{22} \,{\text{sen}}\,\gamma_{\text{S}} } \right], $$
$$ D_{z} = - D\left[ {a_{13}^{{}} \cos \gamma_{\text{S}} + a_{32} {\text{sen}}\,\gamma_{\text{S}} } \right], $$
$$ D = \tfrac{1}{2}\rho \,v^{2} \,S\,C_{\text{D}} , $$

where ρ is the local density, v represents the magnitude of the satellite’s velocity relative to the atmosphere, S is a reference section area of the satellite, CD is the drag coefficient, \( \gamma_{S} \) is the angle between the position vector and the orbital velocity vector, and \( a \)ij, i = 1, 2, 3, j = 1, 2, are the direction cosines which relate the orbital system and the satellite system (Zanardi et al. 2011).

To estimate the influence of the AT magnitude in the rotational motion, in this paper, the thermosphere model TD-88 is used for the atmospheric density (Sehnal and Pospísilová 1988) and some simplifications are done. The velocity v is assumed equal to the orbit velocity; the drag coefficient is fixed (equal to 2.2). In the applications for the SDC1 and SCD2 and by the analyses development in Zanardi et al. (2011), it also assumed that \( m_{ex} = m_{ey } = 0 \) and \( m_{ez} = 0.1\;{\text{m}} \). Then in that case the z-component of AT is null. By the same way of the GGT, the AT mean components are presented by Zanardi et al. (2011).

1.3 Residual magnetic torque

The spacecraft’s magnetic moment is usually the dominant source between the disturbances torques. If \( \vec{m} \) is the magnetic moment of the spacecraft and \( \vec{B} \) is the geocentric magnetic field, the RMT is given by de Moraes and Zanardi (1999):

$$ \vec{N}_{\text{RM}} \, = \,\,\vec{m}\, \times \,\vec{B}\,. $$

Here the magnetic torque is developed only for a spin-stabilized satellite. In this case, the spacecraft’s spin velocity vector and the satellite magnetic moment are along z-axis and the RMT can be expressed in the satellite fixed system by Zanardi et al. (2005):

$$ \vec{N}_{\text{RM}} = \, - \,\,m\,B_{y\,\,} \hat{i} + \,m\,B_{x\,\,} \hat{j}, $$

where Bx, By, and Bz are the components of the geomagnetic field in the satellite fixed system (Wertz 1978). These components are obtained in terms of the geocentric inertial components of the geomagnetic field and the attitude angles of the satellite. To describe the geomagnetic field, the dipole model and quadripole model (Garcia et al. 2009) are used.

The mean components of this torque are presented in Garcia et al. (2009) and Zanardi et al. (2005).

1.4 Eddy current torque

The torque induced by eddy currents is caused by the spacecraft spinning motion. It is known (Wertz 1978) that the eddy currents produce a torque which causes the precession in the spin axis and causes an exponential decay of the spin rate. If \( \vec{W} \) is the spacecraft’s spin velocity vector and p is a constant coefficient which depends on the spacecraft geometry and conductivity, this torque is given by Wertz (1978):

$$ \vec{N}_{\text{EC}} \, = \,p\,\,\vec{B}\, \times (\,\vec{B}\, \times \,\vec{W})\,. $$

For the spin-stabilized satellite the spin velocity vector and is along z-axis and the ECT can the expressed in the body system by Zanardi et al. (2003):

$$ \vec{N}_{\text{EC}} = pW\left( {B_{x} B_{z\,\,} \hat{i} + B{}_{y\,}B_{z\,\,} \hat{j}\, - (B_{x}^{2} + B_{y}^{2} )\hat{k}} \right). $$

The mean components of this torque are presented in Zanardi et al. (2011).

1.5 Solar radiation torque

A solar radiation torque model was developed in de Moraes and Zanardi (1999) for the case which the illuminated surfaces of the satellite are a circular flat surface S1, and a portion of the cylindrical surface S2. It is given by:

$$ \vec{N}_{\text{SR}} = N_{{{\text{SR}}x }} \hat{i} + N_{{{\text{SR}}y}} \hat{j}, $$
$$ N_{{{\text{SR}}x}} = - \frac{{\bar{K}}}{{R^{4} }}\left( {\beta_{1} \gamma_{1} - \beta_{2} \gamma_{2} } \right)\frac{h}{2}\pi \sigma^{2} u_{z}^{*} \left( {u_{y}^{*} {\text{cos }}\theta + u_{x}^{*} {\text{sin }}\theta } \right), $$
$$ N_{{{\text{SR}}y}} = - \frac{{\bar{K}}}{{R^{4} }}\left( {\beta_{1} \gamma_{1} - \beta_{2} \gamma_{2} } \right)\frac{h}{2}\pi \sigma^{2} u_{z}^{*} \left( {u_{y}^{*} \sin \theta - u_{x}^{*} \cos \theta } \right), $$

with

$$ u_{x}^{*} = \left( {a_{\text{s}} R_{x} + r^{{\prime }} a_{11} } \right), $$
$$ u_{y}^{*} = \left( {a_{\text{s}} R_{y} + r^{{\prime }} a_{12} } \right), $$
$$ u_{z}^{*} = \left( {a_{\text{s}} R_{z} + r^{{\prime }} a_{13} } \right), $$

where \( \bar{K} \) is a solar parameter with assumed value given by 1.01 × 1017 kgm/s2, as is Sun–Earth distance and here assume the value 1.49597870 × 1011 m, r′ is the satellite geocentric distance, R is the Sun satellite distance, βi, γi, i = 1, 2, are specular and total reflection coefficients, respectively, for each satellite surface (which assume constant values), a11, a12, and a13 are direction cosines which relate the Orbital System and the principal system, given in Motta et al. (2013) and Rx, Ry, and Rz give the Sun direction in the body and are obtained by:

$$ R_{x} = b_{1} \cos \delta_{s} \cos \alpha_{s} + b_{2} \cos \delta_{\text{s}} { \sin } \,\alpha_{\text{s}} + b_{3} \sin \delta_{\text{s}}, $$
$$ R_{y} = b_{4} \cos \delta_{\text{s}} \cos \alpha_{\text{s}} + b_{5} \cos \delta_{\text{s}} { \sin }\, \alpha_{\text{s}} + b_{6} \sin \delta_{\text{s}}, $$
$$ R_{z} = b_{7} \cos \delta_{\text{s}} { \cos }\,\alpha_{\text{s}} + b_{8} \cos \delta_{s} {\text{sen}} \,\alpha_{\text{s}} + b_{9}\, {\text{sen }}\delta_{\text{s}}, $$

with being b1, b2,…, b9 the direction cosines which relate the Equatorial System and satellite system (given in terms of satellite’s rotation angle, right ascension, and declination of the spin axis (Motta et al. 2013).

The Sun–satellite distance can be obtained by de Moraes and Zanardi (1999):

$$ R^{2} = a_{\text{s}}^{2} + r^{\prime 2} + 2r^{\prime } {\text{a}}_{\text{s}} \left( {a_{1} R_{x} + a_{2} R_{y} + a_{3} R_{z} } \right). $$

The mean components of SRT are presented in Motta et al. (2013).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zanardi, M.C., Celestino, C.C., Borderes Motta, G. et al. Analysis of analytical attitude propagators for spin-stabilized satellites. Comp. Appl. Math. 37 (Suppl 1), 96–109 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40314-018-0644-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40314-018-0644-0

Keywords

Mathematics Subject Classification

Navigation