Advertisement

Two ASRE Approaches with Application to Spacecraft Coulomb Formations

Conference paper
  • 567 Downloads
Part of the Astrophysics and Space Science Proceedings book series (ASSSP, volume 44)

Abstract

Suboptimal solutions of nonlinear optimal control problems are addressed in the present work. These suboptimal approaches are known as Approximating Sequence of Riccati Equations (ASRE) methods. In the ASRE methods, the nonlinear problem is reduced to a sequence of linear-quadratic and time-varying approximating problems. For this purpose, the nonlinear equations are written in State Dependent Coefficient (SDC) factorization form. Two different ASRE approaches are discussed and their implementation procedures will be explained. To implement and compare these two techniques, spacecraft Coulomb formations are considered. Suboptimal trajectories of formation attitude and relative position of a two-craft formation utilizing coulomb forces as well as thrusters is discussed. The effectiveness of the approaches as well as their comparison is demonstrated through numerical simulations.

Keywords

Riccati Equation Suboptimal Solution State Transition Matrix Differential Riccati Equation Suboptimal Algorithm 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Berryman, J., Schaub, H.: Static equilibrium configurations in geo Coulomb spacecraft formations. In: Paper AAS 05-104, AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, Copper Mountain (2005)Google Scholar
  2. Betts, J.T.: Survey of numerical methods for trajectory optimization. J. Guid. Control Dyn. 21, 193–207 (1998)ADSCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Bogdanov, A., Wan, E.A.: State-dependent riccati equation control for small autonomous helicopters. J. Guid. Control Dyn. 30, 47–60 (2007)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bracci, A., Innocenti, M., Pollini, L.: Estimation of the region of attraction for state-dependent riccati equation controllers. J. Guid. Control Dyn 29, 1427–1430 (2006)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bryson, A.E., Ho, Y.C.: Applied Optimal Control, pp. 65–69, 150–151. Wiley, New York (1975)Google Scholar
  6. Çimen, T.: Survey of state-dependent riccati equation in nonlinear optimal feedback control synthesis. J. Guid. Control Dyn. 35, 1025–1047 (2012)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Çimen, T., Banks, S.P.: Global optimal feedback control for general non linear system with non-quadratic performance criteria. Syst. Control Lett. 53, 327–346 (2004a)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Çimen, T., Banks, S.P.: Global optimal feedback control for general non linear system with non-quadratic performance criteria. Automatica 40, 1845–1863 (2004b)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Cloutier, R., D’Souza, C.A., Mracek, C.P.: Nonlinear regulation and nonlinear h-infinity control via the state-dependent riccati equation technique: part 1, theory; part 2, examples, pp. 117–141. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Nonlinear Problems in Aviation and Aerospace (1996)Google Scholar
  10. Conway, B.: Spacecraft Trajectory Optimization, pp. 37–78. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2010)Google Scholar
  11. Gomroki, M.M., Tekinalp, O.: Relative position control of a two-satellite formation using the SDRE control method. In: Paper AAS 14-217, 24th AAS/AIAA SpaceFlight Mechanics Meeting, pp. 235–254, Santa Fe, 26–30 January 2014aGoogle Scholar
  12. Gomroki, M. M., Tekinalp, O.: Maneuvering of two-craft coulomb formation using ASRE method. In: Paper AIAA 2014-4164, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, San Diego, 4–7 August 2014bGoogle Scholar
  13. Harman, R.R., Bar-Itzhack, I.Y.: Pseudolinear and state-dependent riccati equation filters for angular rate estimation. J. Guid. Control Dyn. 22, 723–725 (1999)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kim, C.-J., Park, S.H., Sung, S.K., Jung, S.-N.: Nonlinear optimal control analysis using state-dependent matrix exponential and its integrals. J. Guid. Control Dyn 32, 309–313 (2009)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mracek, C.P., Cloutier, J.R.: Control designs for the nonlinear benchmark problem via the state-dependent riccati equation method. Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control 8, 401–433 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Mullen, E.G., Gussenhoven, M.S., Hardy, D.A.: SCATHA survey of high-voltage spacecraft charging in sunlight. J. Geophys. Sci. 91, 1074–1090 (1986)Google Scholar
  17. Pearson, J.D.: Approximation methods in optimal control. J. Electron. Control 13, 453–469 (1962)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ratnoo, A., Ghose, D.: Study of interspacecraft coulomb forces and implications for formation flying. J. Propuls. Power 19, 497–505 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ratnoo, A., Ghose, D.: State-dependent riccati-equation-based guidance law for impact-angle-constrained trajectories. J. Guid. Control Dyn. 32, 320–325 (2009)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Schaub, H., Kim, M.: Orbit element difference constraints for Coulomb satellite formations. In: Paper AIAA 04-5213, AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, Providence (2004)Google Scholar
  21. Topputo, F., Bernelli-Zazzera, F.: A method to solve nonlinear optimal control problems in astrodynamics. Adv. Astronaut. Sci. 145, 1531–1544 (2012)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. Topputo, F., Bernelli-Zazzera, F.: Approximate solutions to nonlinear optimal control problems in astrodynamic. ISRN Aerosp. Eng. 2013, 1–7 (2013)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. Wernli, A., Cook, G.: Suboptimal control for the nonlinear quadratic regulator problem. Automatica 11, 75–84 (1975)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dept. Aerospace EngineeringMiddle East Technical UniversityAnkaraTurkey
  2. 2.Dept. Aerospace Science and TechnologyPolitecnico di MilanoMilanoItaly

Personalised recommendations