Inertia-Free Spacecraft Attitude Control Using. Reaction Wheels
|
|
- Arabella Bates
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Inertia-Free Spacecraft Attitude Control Using Reaction Wheels Avishai Weiss, Ilya Kolmanovsky, Dennis S. Bernstein, Department of Aerospace Engineering, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI and Amit Sanyal, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM This paper extends the continuous inertia-free control law for spacecraft attitude tracking derived in prior work to the case of three axisymmetric reaction wheels. The wheels are assumed to be mounted in a known and linearly independent, but not necessarily orthogonal, configuration with an arbitrary and unknown orientation relative to the unknown spacecraft principal axes. Simulation results for slew and spin maneuvers are presented with torque and momentum saturation. I. Introduction In spacecraft applications it is often expensive to determine the mass properties with a high degree of accuracy. To alleviate this requirement, the control algorithms given in refs. 3 are inertia-free in the sense that they require no prior modeling of the mass distribution. The control algorithms in refs., 3 incorporate internal states that can be viewed as estimates of the moments and products of inertia; however, these estimates need not converge to the true values, and in fact do not converge to the true values except under sufficiently persistent motion. The results of ref. 3 are based on rotation matrices 4, 5, 6 as an alternative to quaternions as used in refs. Quaternions provide a double cover of the rotation group SO(3), and thus, when used as the basis of a continuous control algorithm, cause unwinding, that is, unnecessary rotation away from and then back Graduate student. Professor, AIAA Member. Professor, AIAA Member. Assistant Professor, AIAA Member. of 3
2 to the desired physical attitude. 7 To avoid unwinding while using quaternions, it is thus necessary to resort to discontinuous control algorithms, which introduce the possibility of chatter due to noise as well as mathematical complications. 8 On the other hand, rotation matrices allow for continuous control laws but introduce multiple equilibria. Since the spurious equilibria of the closed-loop system are saddle points, the attitude of the spacecraft converges almost globally (but not globally) to the desired equilibrium. Although the derivation of the inertia-free controller in ref. 3 and the present paper is based on rotation matrices, the relevant attitude error given by the S-parameter (see (4)) can be computed from any attitude parameterization, such as quaternions or modified rodrigues parameters, and thus the continuous inertia-free controllers presented in ref. 3 are not confined to rotation matrices. The inertia-free control laws in refs. 3 assume that 3-axis input torques can be specified without onboard momentum storage, which implies implementation in terms of thrusters. However, attitude control laws are typically implemented with wheels, and thus the on-board stored momentum varies with time. To account for this effect, the contribution of this paper is the derivation of an inertia-free control law based on reaction-wheel actuation. Like the inertia-free control laws in refs., 3 the tuning of this control law requires no knowledge of the mass properties of the spacecraft, and this paper specifies the assumptions and modeling information concerning the reaction wheels and their placement relative to the bus. The paper is organized as follows. In Section II coordinate-free equations of motion for the spacecraft are derived, where, unlike ref., 5 the present paper does not assume that the wheels are aligned with the principal axes of the spacecraft bus, nor does it assume that the wheels are balanced with respect to the bus in order to preserve the location of its center of mass; in fact, the reaction wheels may be mounted at any location and in any linearly independent configuration. In Section III the control objectives are formulated, and in Section IV the controller is developed. Simulation results are reported in Section V, where robustness to variations in the spacecraft inertia is demonstrated and controller performance is examined under both torque and momentum saturation. Finally, concluding remarks are made in Section VI. II. Spacecraft Model with Reaction Wheels This section derives the equations of motion for a spacecraft with reaction wheels, while highlighting the underlying assumptions on wheel geometry, inertia, and attachment to the bus. Throughout the paper, the vector r q/p denotes the position of point q relative to point p, the vector v q/p/x = r q/p denotes the velocity of point q relative to point p with respect to frame F X, and the vector ω Y/X denotes the angular velocity of frame F Y relative to frame F X. Note that ( ) denotes a coordinate-free (unresolved) vector. All frames are orthogonal and right handed. X of 3
3 Def.. Let F X be a frame, let B be a collection of rigid bodies B,..., B l, and let p be a point. Then, the angular momentum of B relative to p with respect to F X is defined by H B/p/X = l H Bi/p/X, () where, for i =,..., l, the angular momentum H Bi/p/X of B i relative to p with respect to F X is defined by H Bi/p/X = r dm/p v dm/p/x dm. () B i The following properties of angular momentum are standard. Lemma. Let B be a rigid body, let F X and F Y be frames, and let p be a point. Then, H B/p/X = I B/p ω Y/X + H B/p/Y, (3) where the positive-definite, coordinate-free inertia tensor I B/p is defined by I B/p = B r dm/p U r dm/p r dm/p dm, (4) and where U denotes the second-order identity tensor. Lemma. Let B be a rigid body, let F X and F Y be frames, let F Y be a body-fixed frame, and let p be a point that is fixed in B. Then, H B/p/Y = (5) and H B/p/X = I B/p ω Y/X. (6) Lemma 3. Let F X be a frame, let p be a point, let B be a rigid body with mass m B, and let c be the center of mass of B. Then, H B/p/X = H B/c/X + r c/p m B v c/p/x. (7) Consider a spacecraft sc actuated by three axisymmetric wheels w, w, w 3 attached to a rigid bus b in a known and linearly independent, but not necessarily orthogonal, configuration. Although the spacecraft 3 of 3
4 is not a rigid body, the axial symmetry of the wheels implies that the center of mass c of the spacecraft is fixed in both the bus and the spacecraft. Since the inertia properties of the bus are assumed to be unknown, the principal axes of the bus are unknown and thus the wheel configuration has an arbitrary and unknown orientation relative to the principal axes of the bus. Each wheel is mounted so that it rotates about one of its own principal axes passing through its own center of mass. It is not assumed that the axis of rotation of each wheel passes through the center of mass of the bus, nor is it assumed that the wheels are balanced with respect to the bus in order to preserve the location of its center of mass. Thus the center of mass of the spacecraft and the center of mass of the bus may be distinct points, both of which are unknown. Assume a bus-fixed frame F B, three wheel-fixed frames F W, F W, F W3, whose x-axes are aligned with the rotation axes of w, w, w 3, respectively, and an Earth-centered inertial frame F E. The angular momentum of the spacecraft relative to its center of mass with respect to the inertial frame is given by H sc/c/e = H b/c/e + H wi/c/e, (Def. ) (8) where the angular momentum H b/c/e of the bus relative to c with respect to F E is given by H b/c/e = I b/c ω B/E, (Lemma ) (9) where I b/c is the positive-definite inertia tensor of the bus relative to the center of mass of the spacecraft, and ω B/E is the angular velocity of F B with respect to F E. The angular momentum H wi/c/e of wheel i relative to the center of mass of the spacecraft with respect to the inertial frame is given by H wi/c/e = I wi/c ω B/E + H wi/c/b (Lemma ) = I wi/c ω B/E + H wi/c i/b + r ci/c m wi v ci/c/b (Lemma 3) = I wi/c ω B/E + I wi/c i ω Wi/B, (Lemma ) () where I wi/c is the inertia tensor of wheel i relative to the center of mass of the spacecraft, I wi/c i is the inertia tensor of wheel i relative to the center of mass c i of the ith wheel, and ω Wi/B is the angular velocity of wheel i relative to the bus. Thus (8) is given by ( H sc/c/e = I b/c + I wi/c ) ω B/E + I wi/c i ω Wi/B. () 4 of 3
5 Resolving ω Wi/B in F Wi yields ω Wi/B = ψ i e, () Wi where e = [ ] T and ψ i is the angular rate relative to F B of the ith wheel about the x-axis of F Wi. Since F Wi is aligned with the principal axes of wheel i, it follows that I wi/c i Wi = diag(α i, β i, β i ). (3) Note that ω Wi/B is an eigenvector of I wi/c i with eigenvalue α i, that is, I wi/c i ω Wi/B = α i ω Wi/B. II.A. Spacecraft Equations of Motion The equations of motion for a spacecraft with reaction wheels as described above are now derived. It follows from Newton s second law for rotation that M sc/c = E H sc/c/e E E ({}} ) {{}}{ = I b/c + I wi/c ω B/E + I wi/c i ω Wi/B B {( }} ) { = I b/c + ω B/E + ω B/E + I wi/c B {}}{ I wi/c i ω Wi/B + ω B/E ( I b/c + I wi/c i ω Wi/B I wi/c ) ω B/E = ( I b/c + + ω B/E I wi/c) B ω B/E + (( I b/c + I wi/c α i B ω Wi/B ) ω B/E + ) α iω Wi/B. (4) 5 of 3
6 To resolve (4) in F B, the following notation is used: B J b = I b/c, J wi = I wi/c, B J w = I wi/c, J sc = Jb + J w, B ω = ω B/E B, ω = B ω B/E B, ν i = ω Wi/B, B ν i = B ω Wi/B, B τ dist = M sc/c B. The vector τ dist represents disturbance torques, that is, all external torques applied to the spacecraft aside from control torques. Disturbance torques may be due to gravity gradients, solar pressure, atmospheric drag, or the ambient magnetic field. As in (), the angular acceleration ν i of each wheel has one degree of freedom. In F Wi, B ω Wi/B = Wi W i ω Wi/B = ψ i e. (5) Wi Thus, ν i = B ω Wi/B = O B/Wi B B ω Wi/B = O B/Wi ψ i e, (6) Wi where the proper orthogonal matrix O B/Wi R 3 3 is the orientation matrix that transforms components of a vector resolved in F Wi into the components of the same vector resolved in F B. With the above notation, resolving (4) in F B yields ( ) τ dist = (J b + J w ) ω + α i ν i + ω (J b + J w ) ω + α i ν i 6 of 3
7 ( ) = J sc ω + α i O B/W ψ i e + ω J sc ω + α i O B/W ψ i e = J sc ω + J α ν + ω (J sc ω + J α ν), (7) where J α = [ α O B/W e α O B/W e α 3 O B/W3 e ], (8) ν = [ψ ψ ψ 3 ] T, and ν = [ ψ ψ ψ 3 ] T. Rearranging (7) and choosing the control input u to be ν yields the equations of motion for a spacecraft with reaction wheels, which have the form J sc ω = (J sc ω + J α ν) ω J α u + τ dist, (9) ν = u. () In practice, a servo loop is closed around each reaction wheel in order to produce the desired wheel angular accelerations given in (). Instead of commanding wheel angular accelerations by implementing servo loops, motor torque commands can be used. To determine the relationship between the desired angular acceleration and the required motor torque, the dynamic equations for each wheel must be derived. It follows that M wi/c i = E H wi/c i/e = E {}}{ I wi/c i ω Wi/E = I wi/c i W ω Wi/E + ω Wi/E I wi/c i ω Wi/E ( ) = B B I wi/c i ω B/E + ω Wi/B ω Wi/B ω B/E ( ω ) + B/E + ω Wi/B ( ω ) I wi/c i B/E + ω Wi/B. () 7 of 3
8 Resolving () in F B and projecting it along each motor axis yields τ motor,i = e T i [ Jwi/c i ( ω + ν i ν i ω) + (ω + ν i ) J wi/c i (ω + ν i ) ], () where J wi/c i = I wi/c i B. Although () can be used for torque control, the measurements of ω, ω, ν i, and ν i needed to implement it demonstrate why reaction wheels are typically angular-acceleration commanded and feedback-controlled rather than torque-commanded. II.B. Specialization: principal-axis alignment As in ref., 5 the equations of motion (9), () are now specialized by assuming that the principal axes of the bus are aligned with the rotational axes of the wheels, that the wheels are mass-balanced relative to the center of mass of the bus so that the center of mass of the spacecraft coincides with the center of mass of the bus, and, finally, that the moments of inertia β, β, β 3 of the wheels are lumped into the bus inertia J b = diag(j b, J b, J b3 ), where J b = Jb + β + β 3, J b = Jb + β + β 3, and J b3 = Jb3 + β + β. In this configuration, O B/W e =, O B/W e =, O B/W3 e =. (3) Therefore, J α = J w = diag(α, α, α 3 ). Rewriting the equations of motion (9), () as J b ω = ((J b + J α )ω + J α ν) ω + u + τ dist, (4) u = J α ( ω + ν), (5) and simplifying, yields J b ω = (J b J b3 ) ω ω 3 + α ω 3 (ω + ν ) α 3 ω (ω 3 + ν 3 ) + u + τ dist, (6) J b ω = (J b3 J b ) ω 3 ω + α 3 ω (ω 3 + ν 3 ) α ω 3 (ω + ν ) + u + τ dist, (7) J b3 ω 3 = (J b J b ) ω ω + α ω (ω + ν ) α ω (ω + ν ) + u 3 + τ dist3, (8) u = α ( ω + ν ), (9) u = α ( ω + ν ), (3) u 3 = α 3 ( ω 3 + ν 3 ), (3) 8 of 3
9 which are equations (7.59) and (7.6) of ref. 5 III. Spacecraft Model, Assumptions, and Control Objectives For the control laws (44) and (53) given below, the assumptions presented in Section II.B are not invoked. The kinematics of the spacecraft are given by Poisson s equation Ṙ = Rω, (3) which complements (9) and (). In (3), ω denotes the skew-symmetric matrix of ω, and R = O E/B R 3 3. Both rate (inertial) and attitude (noninertial) measurements are assumed to be available. Compared to the case of thrusters treated in ref., 3 reaction-wheel actuation complicates the dynamic equations due to the term J α ν in (9), as well as the integrators () augmented to the system. The kinematic relation (3) remains unchanged. The torque inputs applied to each reaction wheel are constrained by current limitations on the electric motors and amplifiers as well as angular-velocity constraints on the wheels. These constraints are addressed indirectly in Section V. The objective of the attitude control problem is to determine control inputs such that the spacecraft attitude given by R follows a commanded attitude trajectory given by a possibly time-varying C rotation matrix R d (t). For t, R d (t) is given by Ṙ d (t) = R d (t)ω d (t), (33) R d () = R d, (34) where ω d is the desired, possibly time-varying angular velocity. The error between R(t) and R d (t) is given in terms of the attitude-error rotation matrix R = R T d R, (35) which satisfies the differential equation R = R ω, (36) where the angular velocity error ω is defined by ω = ω R T ω d. (37) 9 of 3
10 Rewrite (9) in terms of ω as J sc ω = [J sc ( ω + R T ω d ) + J α ν] ( ω + R T ω d ) + J sc ( ω R T ω d R T ω d ) J α u + τ dist. (38) III.A. Attitude Error A scalar measure of attitude error is given by the eigenaxis attitude error, which is the rotation angle θ(t) about the eigenaxis needed to rotate the spacecraft from its attitude R(t) to the desired attitude R d (t). This angle is given by 7 θ(t) = cos ( [tr R(t) ]). (39) III.B. Spacecraft Inertia Since the control laws in this paper require no inertia modeling, examples that span a range of possible inertia matrices are considered. The inertia of a rigid body is determined by its principal moments of inertia, that is, the diagonal entries of the inertia tensor resolved in a principal body-fixed frame, in which case the inertia matrix is a diagonal matrix. If the inertia tensor is resolved in a non-principal body-fixed frame, then the diagonal entries are the moments of inertia and the off-diagonal entries are the products of inertia. The off-diagonal entries of the inertia matrix are thus a consequence of an unknown rotation between a principal body-fixed frame and the chosen body-fixed frame. Figure shows the triangular region of feasible principal moments of inertia of a rigid body. There are five cases that are highlighted for the principal moments of inertia λ λ λ 3 >, where λ, λ, λ 3 satisfy the triangle inequality λ < λ + λ 3. Let m denote the mass of the rigid body. The point λ = λ = λ 3 5λ corresponds to a sphere of radius r = m, a cube whose sides have length l = 6λ m, and a cylinder of length l and radius r, where l/r = 3 and r = length l and radius r, where l/r = 3 and r = λ m. The point λ = λ = λ 3 corresponds to a cylinder of λ triangular region, corresponds to a solid rectangular body with sides l = m. The point λ = 6 5 λ = λ 3, located at the centroid of the 8λ m > l 4λ = m > l λ 3 = m. The remaining cases in Figure are nonphysical, limiting cases. The point λ = λ = λ 3 corresponds to a thin disk of radius r = λ m cylinder of radius r = and length l = and length l =. The point λ = λ and λ 3 = corresponds to a thin λ m. Finally, each point along the line segment λ = λ + λ 3, λ m > l λ = 3 m. where λ > λ 3, corresponds to a thin rectangular plate with sides of length l = For all simulations of the inertia-free control laws, the principal axes are viewed as the nominal bodyfixed axes, and thus the nominal inertia matrix is a diagonal matrix whose diagonal entries are the principal moments of inertia. To demonstrate robustness, the principal moments as well as the orientation of the of 3
11 λ 3 Sphere λ = λ = λ 3 λ Thin disk λ = λ = λ 3 λ = λ λ = 6 5 λ = λ 3 λ = λ = λ 3 λ λ Thin cylinder λ = λ, λ 3 = Figure : Feasible region of the principal moments of inertia λ, λ, λ 3 of a rigid body satisfying < λ 3 λ λ, where λ < λ + λ 3. The shaded region shows all feasible values of λ and λ 3 in terms of the largest principal moment of inertia λ. The open dots and dashed line segment indicate nonphysical, limiting cases. body-fixed frame relative to the principal axes is varied. For convenience, λ is normalized to kg-m, and the inertia matrices J, J, J 3, J 4, J 5 are chosen to correspond to the points noted in Figure. These matrices, which correspond to the sphere, cylinder with l/r = 3, centroid, thin disk, and thin cylinder, respectively, are defined as J = diag(,, ), J = diag(,, 5), J 3 = diag(, 5/3, 5), J 4 = diag(, 5, 5), J 5 = diag(,,.). (4) The inertia matrix J 3 corresponding to the centroid of the inertia region serves as the nominal inertia matrix, while the inertia matrices J, J, J 4, J 5 are used as perturbations to demonstrate robustness of the control laws. A perturbation J(λ) of J i in the direction of J j thus has the form J(λ) = ( λ)j i + λj j, (4) where λ [, ]. Finally, in order to facilitate numerical integration of Euler s equation, note that J 5 is of 3
12 chosen to be a nonsingular approximation of the limiting inertia of a thin cylinder. IV. Controller Design Let I denote the identity matrix, whose dimensions are determined by context, and let M ij denote the i, j entry of the matrix M. The following result is given in ref. 3 Lemma. Let A R 3 3 be a diagonal positive-definite matrix, and let R R 3 3 be a rotation matrix. Then the following statements hold: i) For all i, j =,, 3, R ij [, ]. ii) tr (A AR). iii) tr (A AR) = if and only if R = I. For convenience note that, if R is a rotation matrix and x, y R 3, then (Rx) = Rx R T, and, therefore, R(x y) = (Rx) Ry. Next, introduce the notation J sc ω = L(ω)γ, where γ R 6 is defined by [ γ = J J J 33 J 3 J 3 J ] T and L(ω) = ω ω 3 ω ω ω 3 ω ω 3 ω ω. Next, let Ĵsc R 3 3 denote an estimate of J sc, and define the inertia-estimation error J sc = Jsc Ĵsc. of 3
13 Letting ˆγ, γ R 6 represent Ĵsc, J sc, respectively, it follows that γ = γ ˆγ. Likewise, let ˆτ dist R 3 denote an estimate of τ dist, and define the disturbance-estimation error τ dist = τdist ˆτ dist. The assumptions upon which the following development is based are now stated. Assumption. J sc is constant but unknown. Assumption. J α defined by (8) is constant, nonsingular, and known. That is, the spacecraft has three linearly independent, axisymmetric wheels, with known moments of inertia about their spin axes and known configuration relative to the bus. The controllers presented in ref. 3 are now extended to the case of reaction-wheel actuation. IV.A. Control Law for Slew Maneuvers When no disturbances are present, the inertia-free control law given by (38) of ref. 3 achieves almost global stabilization of a constant desired attitude R d, that is, a slew maneuver that brings the spacecraft to rest. The initial conditions of the slew maneuver may be arbitrary, that is, the spacecraft may have nonzero initial velocity. Given a, a, a 3 R, define the vector measure of attitude error S = a i ( R T e i ) e i, (4) where, for i =,, 3, e i denotes the ith column of the 3 3 identity matrix. When attitude measurements are given in terms of an alternative representation, such as quaternions, the corresponding attitude-error R defined by (35) can be computed, and thus (4) can be evaluated and used by the controller given in Theorem below. Consequently, S can be computed from any attitude parameterization. Theorem. Let K p be a positive number and let A = diag(a, a, a 3 ) be a diagonal positive-definite matrix. Then the function V (ω, R) = ωt J sc ω + K p tr(a A R), (43) is positive definite, that is, V is nonnegative, and V = if and only if ω = and R = I. 3 of 3
14 Proof. It follows from statement of Lemma that tr (A A R) is nonnegative. Hence V is nonnegative. Now suppose that V =. Then, ω =, and it follows from iii) of Lemma that R = I. Theorem. Let K p be a positive number, let K v R 3 3 be a positive-definite matrix, let A = diag(a, a, a 3 ) be a diagonal positive-definite matrix with distinct diagonal entries, let R d be constant, define S as in (4), and define V as in Theorem. Consider the control law u = J α (K p S + K v ω). (44) Then, V (ω, R) = ω T K v ω (45) is negative semidefinite. Furthermore, the closed-loop system consisting of (9), (), (36), and (44) is almost globally asymptotically stable, 8 and for all initial conditions not in an embedded submanifold of R 3 SO(3) R 6 R 3 (see ref. 3 ), ω and R I as t. Proof. Noting that d dt tr (A A R) = tr A R = tr A( Rω ω d R) = = = = = a i e T i ( Rω ω R)e d i a i e T R(ω i R T ω R)e d i a i e T R(ω i R T ω d ) e i a i e T Re i i ω [ ] T a i e i R T e i ω [ ] T = a i ( R T e i ) e i ω = ω T S, 4 of 3
15 then V (ω, R) = ω T J sc ω + K p ω T S = ω T [(J sc ω + J α ν) ω J α u] + K p ω T S = ω T ( K p S K v ω) + K p ω T S = ω T K v ω. The proof of the final statement follows from invariant set arguments that are similar to those used in ref. 3 Note that J α is substituted for the input matrix B used in the inertia-free control law (38) of ref., 3 but otherwise the controller requires no modification for the case of reaction-wheel actuation in order to achieve almost global stabilization of a constant desired attitude R d. IV.B. Control Law for Attitude Tracking A control law that tracks a desired attitude trajectory in the presence of disturbances is given by () of ref. 3 This controller is based on an additional assumption. Assumption 3. Each component of τ dist is a linear combination of constant and harmonic signals, whose frequencies are known but whose amplitudes and phases are unknown. Assumption 3 implies that τ dist can be modeled as the output of the autonomous system d = A d d, (46) τ dist = C d d, (47) where d is the disturbance state, A d R n d n d and C d R 3 n d are known matrices, and the eigenvalues of A d are nonrepeated on the imaginary axis. In this model, d() is unknown, which is equivalent to the assumption that the amplitude and phase of each harmonic component of the disturbance is unknown. The eigenvalues of A d are chosen to represent all frequency components that may be present in the disturbance signal, where the zero eigenvalue corresponds to a constant disturbance. By providing infinite gain at the disturbance frequencies, the controller asymptotically rejects the harmonic disturbances. In particular, an integral controller provides infinite gain at DC in order to reject constant disturbances. In the case of orbitdependent disturbances, the frequencies can be estimated from the orbital parameters. Likewise, in the case of disturbances originating from on-board devices, the spectral content of the disturbances may be known. In other cases, it may be possible to estimate the spectrum of the disturbances through signal processing. 5 of 3
16 Assumption 3 implies that A d can be chosen to be skew symmetric, which is henceforth done. Let ˆd R n d denote an estimate of d, and define the disturbance-state estimation error d = d ˆd. The attitude tracking controller in the presence of disturbances given in ref. 3 is modified below for reaction-wheel actuators. Theorem 3. Let K p be a positive number, let K R 3 3, let Q R 6 6 and D R n d n d be positivedefinite matrices, let A = diag(a, a, a 3 ) be a diagonal positive-definite matrix, and define S as in (4). Then the function V ( ω, R, γ, d) = ( ω + K S) T J sc ( ω + K S) + K p tr (A A R) + γt Q γ + d T D d (48) is positive definite, that is, V is nonnegative, and V = if and only if ω =, R = I, γ =, and d =. Proof. It follows from statement of Lemma that tr (A A R) is nonnegative. Hence V is nonnegative. Now suppose that V =. Then, ω + K S =, γ =, and d =, and it follows from iii) of Lemma that R = I, and thus S =. Therefore, ω =. The following result concerns attitude tracking without knowledge of the spacecraft inertia. This control law does not regulate the speed of the wheels. Consequently, the function V defined by (48), which is used as a Lyapunov function in the proof of Theorem 4 below, is not a positive-definite function of the angular rates of the wheels relative to the bus. Theorem 4. Let K p be a positive number, let K v R 3 3, K R 3 3, Q R 6 6, and D R n d n d be positive-definite matrices, assume that A T d D + DA d is negative semidefinite, let A = diag(a, a, a 3 ) be a diagonal positive-definite matrix with distinct diagonal entries, define S and V as in Theorem 3, and let ˆγ and ˆd satisfy ˆγ = Q [L T (ω)ω + L T (K Ṡ + ω ω R T ω d )]( ω + K S), (49) where Ṡ = a i [( R T e i ) ω] e i (5) 6 of 3
17 and ˆd = A d ˆd + D C T d ( ω + K S), (5) ˆτ dist = C d ˆd, (5) so that ˆτ dist is the disturbance-torque estimate. Consider the control law u = J α (v + v + v 3 ), (53) where v = ( Ĵ sc ω + J α ν) ω Ĵsc(K Ṡ + ω ω R T ω d ), (54) v = ˆτdist, (55) and v 3 = Kv ( ω + K S) K p S. (56) Then, V ( ω, R, γ, d) = ( ω + K S) T K v ( ω + K S) K p S T K S + d T (A T d D + DA d ) d (57) is negative semidefinite. Furthermore, the closed-loop system consisting of Eqs. (), (36), (38), and (53) is almost globally asymptotically stable, and for all initial conditions not in an embedded submanifold of R 3 SO(3) R 6 R 3 (see ref. 3 ), ω and R I as t. 7 of 3
18 Proof. V ( ω, R, γ, d) = ( ω + K S) T (J sc ω + J sc K Ṡ) K p tr A R γ T Q ˆγ + d T D d = ( ω + K S) T [(J sc ω + J α ν) ω + J sc ( ω ω R T ω d ) J α u + τ dist + J sc K Ṡ] + K p ω T S γ T Q ˆγ + d T D d = ( ω + K S) T [(J sc ω + J α ν) ω + J sc (K Ṡ + ω ω R T ω d ) + v + v + v 3 + τ dist ] + K p ω T S γ T Q ˆγ + d T D d = ( ω + K S) T [( J sc ω) ω + J sc (K Ṡ + ω ω R T ω d )] + ( ω + K S) T τ dist ( ω + K S) T K v ( ω + K S) K p ( ω + K S) T S + K p ω T S γ T Q ˆγ + d T D d = ( ω + K S) T [L(ω) γ ω + L(K Ṡ + ω ω R T ω d ) γ] ( ω + K S) T K v ( ω + K S) K p S T K S γ T Q ˆγ + d T Cd T ( ω + K S) + d T D[A d d D Cd T ( ω + K S)] = ( ω + K S) T K v ( ω + K S) K p S T K S γ T Q ˆγ + ( ω + K S) T [ ω L(ω) + L(K Ṡ + ω ω R T ω d )] γ + d T (A T d D + DA d ) d = ( ω + K S) T K v ( ω + K S) K p S T K S + γ T [ Q ˆγ + (L T (ω)ω + L T (K Ṡ + ω ω R T ω d ))( ω + K S)] + d T (A T d D + DA d ) d = ( ω + K S) T K v ( ω + K S) K p S T K S + d T (A T d D + DA d ) d. The closed-loop spacecraft attitude dynamics (38) and the control law (53)-(56) can be expressed as J ω = [L(ω) γ] ω + L( ω R T ω d R T ω d ) γ L(K Ṡ)ˆγ + z d K v ( ω + K S) K p S. (58) From Lemma 3 and Lemma 4 of ref., 3 the closed-loop system consisting of (49)-(5) and (58) has four disjoint equilibrium manifolds. These equilibrium manifolds in R 3 SO(3) R 6 R 3 are given by E i = {( ω, R, γ, d) R 3 SO(3) R 6 R 3 : R = R i, ω, ( γ, d) Q i }, (59) 8 of 3
19 where, for all i {,,, 3}, Q i is the closed subset of R 6 R 3 defined by Q i = {( γ, d) R 6 R 3 : [L(R T i ω d ) γ] (R T i ω d ) L(R T i ω d ) γ + C d d =, γ =, d = A d d}. Furthermore, the equilibrium manifold ( ω, R, ( γ, d)) = (, I, Q ) of the closed-loop system given by (49)-(5) and (58) is locally asymptotically stable, and the remaining equilibrium manifolds given by (, R i, Q i ) for i {,, 3} are unstable. Finally, the set of all initial conditions converging to these equilibrium manifolds forms a lower dimensional submanifold of R 3 SO(3) R 6 R 3. V. Examples Simulations are now provided to illustrate the inertia-free control laws (44) and (53). To simulate slew and spin maneuvers, the following spacecraft parameters are assumed. The bus inertia matrix J b is nominally given by J 3, which corresponds to the centroid of the inertia region shown in Figure with the body-fixed frame assumed to be a principal body-fixed frame. The quantity J b is unknown to the controller. The axes of rotation of the reaction wheels are aligned with the spacecraft body-fixed frame unit vectors, and the wheel inertias are given by J w = diag(α, β, β ) kg-m, J w = diag(β, α, β ) kg-m, and J w3 = diag(β 3, β 3, α 3 ) kg-m, where α = α = α 3 =.5 and β = β = β 3 =.375. The values of β i are unknown to the controller. Let K p be given by K p = γ tr A, (6) and, as in ref., 3 let K v = K v (ω) be given by K v = η + ω + ω + ω 3. (6) Alternative choices of K v are given in ref. 9 V.A. Slew Maneuver Using Control Law (44) with No Disturbance Controller (44) is used for an aggressive slew maneuver, where the objective is to bring the spacecraft from the initial attitude R = I 3 and initial angular velocity [ ω() =.5 ] T rad/sec 9 of 3
20 to rest (ω d = ) at the desired final orientation R d = diag(,, ), which represents a rotation of 8 deg about the x-axis. The reaction wheels are initially not spinning relative to the spacecraft, that is, [ ν() = ] T rad/sec. No disturbance is present, and the parameters γ = η = 5 are used in (6) and (6). Figures (a)-(d) show, respectively, the attitude error, angular-velocity components, angular rates of the wheels, and the control inputs, which are the angular accelerations of the wheels. The spacecraft attitude and angular-velocity components reach the commanded values in about sec. The angular rates of the wheels approach constant values that are consistent with the initial, nonzero angular momentum. Eigenaxis Attitude Error (rad) S Angular Velocity Components (rad/sec) ω ω ω (a) Top: Eigenaxis attitude error. Bottom: Norm of the S parameter (b) Spacecraft angular-velocity components 4 ν u 3 ν ν 3 u u 3 Wheel Angular Velocity Components (rad/sec) Angular Acceleration Components (rad/sec ) (c) Angular rates of the reaction wheels (d) Angular accelerations of the reaction wheels Figure : Slew maneuver using the control law (44) with no disturbance. In practice, reaction wheels have a maximum instantaneous acceleration. Angular-acceleration saturation is enforced in Figures 3 and 4, where convergence is slower than in Figure, although stability is maintained. Additionally, reaction wheels have a maximum rotational rate. Figure 5 shows the effect of wheel-rate saturation at 5 rad/sec, corresponding to about 4 rpm. The reaction-wheel rates are saturated for up of 3
21 to 5 seconds, although this does not impact the control objective. Figure 6 shows plots for wheel-rate saturation at rad/sec, or about 9 rpm. Although this constraint on the rotation rate is too stringent to obtain zero steady-state error for the desired maneuver, the performance of the controller degrades gracefully by achieving zero spacecraft angular velocity at an offset attitude ω 3 ω ω 3 Eigenaxis Attitude Error (rad).5.5 Angular Velocity Components (rad/sec) (a) Eigenaxis attitude error (b) Spacecraft angular-velocity components 4 4 ν u 3 ν ν 3 3 u u 3 Wheel Angular Velocity Components (rad/sec) Angular Acceleration Components (rad/sec ) (c) Angular rates of the reaction wheels (d) Angular accelerations of the reaction wheels Figure 3: Slew maneuver using the control law (44) with no disturbance. The acceleration of the reaction wheels is saturated at 4 rad/sec. V.A.. Inertia Robustness To evaluate performance for slew maneuvers, define the settling-time metric k = min k> {k : for all i {,..., }, θ((k i)t s) <.5 rad}, (6) where k is the simulation step, T s is the integration step size, and θ(kt s ) is the eigenaxis attitude error (39) at the kth simulation step. The metric k is thus the minimum time such that the eigenaxis attitude error is less than.5 rad during the most recent simulation steps. To illustrate the inertia-free property of the control laws (44) and (53), the inertia of the spacecraft is of 3
22 3.5.5 ω 3 ω ω 3 Eigenaxis Attitude Error (rad).5.5 Angular Velocity Components (rad/sec) (a) Eigenaxis attitude error (b) Spacecraft angular-velocity components 4 ν u ν u 3 ν 3.5 u 3 Wheel Angular Velocity Components (rad/sec) Angular Acceleration Components (rad/sec ) (c) Angular rates of the reaction wheels 5 5 (d) Angular accelerations of the reaction wheels Figure 4: Slew maneuver using the control law (44) with no disturbance. The acceleration of the reaction wheels is saturated at rad/sec. varied using J b (λ) = ( λ)j 3 + λj i, (63) where λ [, ] and i =, 4, 5. Figure 7 shows how the settling time depends on λ. Next, the robustness to misalignment of the reaction wheels relative to the principal axes is investigated. Here, the inertia matrix is rotated by an angle φ about one of the axes of frame F b. For a rotation about the x axis of F b, the inertia of the spacecraft is varied using J b (φ) = O (φ)j 3 O T (φ), (64) where the proper orthogonal matrix O (φ) rotates vectors about the x axis by the angle φ. Similar relations exist for rotations about the y and z axes. Figure 8 shows how a thruster misalignment angle φ affects the settling time, where φ is varied from 8 deg to +8 deg. of 3
23 3.5.5 ω 3 ω ω 3 Eigenaxis Attitude Error (rad).5.5 Angular Velocity Components (rad/sec) (a) Eigenaxis attitude error (b) Spacecraft angular-velocity components 3 ν u 5 ν ν 3 u u 3 Wheel Angular Velocity Components (rad/sec) 5 5 Angular Acceleration Components (rad/sec ) (c) Angular rates of the reaction wheels (d) Angular accelerations of the reaction wheels Figure 5: Slew maneuver using the control law (44) with no disturbance. The maximum rotation rate of each wheel is saturated at 5 rad/sec. V.B. Slew Maneuver Using Control Law (53) under Constant Disturbance The unknown constant disturbance torque τ dist = [.7.3 ] T is now considered. Note that the controller (53) is used in place of the controller (44), which lacks an integrator, and thus has a constant steady-state error bias due to the persistent disturbance. The parameters of the controller (53) are chosen to be K = I 3, A = diag(,, 3), γ = η =, D = I 3, and Q = I 6. Figures 9(a)-(f) show, respectively, the attitude error, angular velocity components, angular rates of the wheels, angular momentum, disturbance-estimate errors, and inertia-estimate errors. The spacecraft attitude and angular velocity components reach the commanded values in about 8 sec. Figure 9c indicates that the reaction-wheel rotational speed grows unbounded. Figure 9d shows that the total angular momentum of the spacecraft increases, which is consistent with the constant disturbance torque acting on the spacecraft. In practice, the spacecraft needs a method to dump the stored angular momentum so that the reaction wheel rates do not grow unbounded. Figure repeats the maneuver with maximum wheel saturation at rad/sec, corresponding to roughly 3 of 3
24 3.5.5 ω 3 ω ω 3 Eigenaxis Attitude Error (rad).5.5 Angular Velocity Components (rad/sec) (a) Eigenaxis attitude error (b) Spacecraft angular-velocity components 5 ν u ν ν 3 u u 3 Wheel Angular Velocity Components (rad/sec) 5 5 Angular Acceleration Components (rad/sec ) (c) Angular rates of the reaction wheels (d) Angular accelerations of the reaction wheels Figure 6: Slew maneuver using the control law (44) with no disturbance. The maximum rotation rate of each wheel is saturated at rad/sec. rpm. The controller brings the spacecraft to the desired orientation in about 6 sec at which time one of the angular rates of the reaction wheels reaches rad/sec, disturbance and inertia estimates diverge, and the system is destabilized. V.C. Spin Maneuver Using Using Control Law (53) Consider a spin maneuver with the spacecraft initially at rest and R() = I 3. The desired attitude is determined by R d () = I 3, and the commanded constant angular velocity is [ ω d = ] T rad/sec. Assume no disturbance. Figures (a)-(f) show, respectively, the attitude errors, angular-velocity components, angular rates of the wheels, the control inputs, which are the angular accelerations of the wheels, angular momentum, and inertia-estimate errors. For this maneuver, the spin command consists of a specified time history of rotation about a specified body axis aligned in a specified inertial direction. The controller 4 of 3
25 Centroid to Thin Disk Centroid to Sphere Centroid to Thin Cylinder 65 Centroid to Thin Disk Centroid to Sphere Centroid to Thin Cylinder Settling 7 65 Settling λ (a) λ Figure 7: Settling time as a function of λ for various combinations (4) of inertia matrices resolved in principal frames. Convergence is achieved for (a) control law (44), and (b) control law (53). Each controller is implemented in all cases with a single tuning. In all cases, the bus inertia J 3 is unknown. (b) 85 8 x y z 65 x y z 6 75 Settling 7 65 Settling φ (deg) (a) φ (deg) Figure 8: Settling time as a function of principal-frame/body-frame rotation angle φ for rotations about each of the three principal axes of J 3. Convergence is achieved for (a) control law (44), and (b) control law (53). (b) achieves the commanded spin within about sec. VI. Conclusion Almost global stabilizability (that is, Lyapunov stability with almost global convergence) of spacecraft tracking is feasible without inertia information and with continuous feedback using three linearly independent reaction wheels, whose axes of rotation are not necessarily aligned with the principal axes of the spacecraft bus, do not necessarily pass through the spacecraft s center of mass, and are not necessarily mass balanced in order to preserve the location of the spacecraft s center of mass. In addition, asymptotic rejection of harmonic disturbances (including constant disturbances as a special case) is possible with knowledge of the disturbance spectrum but without knowledge of either the amplitude or phase. 5 of 3
26 Under these assumptions, the adaptive control laws presented in this paper provide an alternative to previous controllers that ) require exact or approximate inertia information or ) are based on attitude parameterizations such as quaternions that require discontinuous control laws or fail to be physically consistent (that is, specify different control torques for the same physical orientation). A future extension will address spacecraft actuation using control moment gyroscopes (CMGs). Acknowledgments The authors wish to thank Marc Camblor for generating Figure, and the reviewers for their helpful comments. References Junkins, J. L., Akella, M. R., and Robinett, R. D., Nonlinear Adaptive Control of Spacecraft Maneuvers, AIAA Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol., pp. 4, 997. Ahmed, J., Coppola, V. T., and Bernstein, D. S., Asymptotic Tracking of Spacecraft Attitude Motion with Inertia Matrix Identification, AIAA Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol., pp , Sanyal A., Fosbury A., Chaturvedi N., and Bernstein D. S., Inertia-Free Spacecraft Attitude Tracking with Disturbance Rejection and Almost Global Stabilization, AIAA J. Guid. Contr. Dyn., Vol. 3, pp , 9. 4 Chaturvedi N., Sanyal A., and McClamroch, N. H., Rigid Body Attitude Control: Using rotation matrices for continuous, singularity-free control laws, IEEE Control Systems Magazine, Vol. 3(3), pp. 3-5,. 5 Wie, B., and Barba, P. M., Quaternion Feedback for Spacecraft Large Angle Maneuvers, AIAA Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 8, pp , Joshi, S. M., Kelkar, A. G., and Wen, J. T., Robust Attitude Stabilization using Nonlinear Quaternion Feedback, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, Vol. 4, pp. 48 6, Bhat, S. P., and Bernstein, D. S., A Topological Obstruction to Continuous Global Stabilization of Rotational Motion and the Unwinding Phenomenon, Systems and Control Letters, Vol. 39, pp. 63 7,. 8 Crassidis, J. L., Vadali, S. R., and Markley, F. L., Optimal Variable-Structure Control Tracking of Spacecraft Maneuvers, AIAA Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 3, pp ,. 9 Mayhew, C. G., Sanfelice, R. G., and Teel, A. R., Quaternion-Based Hybrid Control for Robust Global Attitude Tracking, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, Vol. 56, No., pp ,. Cortes, J., Discontinuous Dynamic Systems, IEEE Control Systems Magazine, Vol. 8, pp. 36-7, June 8. Kasdin, N. J. and Paley, D.A., Engineering Dynamics, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA,. Arambel, P. O., Manikonda, V., and Mehra, R. K., Spacecraft Attitude Tracking in the Presence of Input Magnitude Constraints, Proceedings of the American Control Conference, pp , June. 3 Boskovic, J. D., Li, S.-M., and Mehra, R. K., Robust Adaptive Variable Structure Control of Spacecraft Under Control Input Saturation, AIAA Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol. 4, pp. 4,. 4 Banga, H., Tahka, M.-J., and Choib, H.-D., Large Angle Attitude Control of Spacecraft with Actuator Saturation, Control Engineering Practice, Vol., pp , 3. 5 Levine, W. S., Control Systems Applications, CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, FL, USA, 999, page 3. 6 of 3
27 6 Sanyal, A. K., Lee, T., Leok, M., and McClamroch, N. H., Global Optimal Attitude Estimation Using Uncertainty Ellipsoids, Systems and Control Letters, Vol. 57, pp , 8. 7 Hughes, P. C., Spacecraft Attitude Dynamics, Wiley, 986; reprinted by Dover, 8, page 7. 8 Koditschek, D. E., The Application of Total Energy as a Lyapunov function for Mechanical Control Systems, Proc. of AMS-IMS-SIAM Joint Summer Research Conf., Bowdin College, ME, pp. 3 57, G. Cruz, X. Yang, A. Weiss, I. Kolmanovsky, and D. S. Bernstein, Torque-saturated, Inertia-free Spacecraft Attitude Control, AIAA Guid. Nav. Contr. Conf., Portland, OR, August, AIAA of 3
28 3.5.5 ω 3 ω ω 3.5 Eigenaxis Attitude Error (rad).5.5 Angular Velocity Components (rad/sec) (a) Eigenaxis attitude error (b) Spacecraft angular-velocity components. Wheel Angular Velocity Components (rad/sec) (c) Angular rates of the reaction wheels. The spin rate grows unbounded due to the constant disturbance torque. ν ν ν 3 Angular momentum, X Angular momentum, Y Angular momentum, Z 5 Total, x Bus, x Wheels, x Total, y Bus, y Wheels, y Total, z Bus, z Wheels, z (d) Angular momentum of the spacecraft relative to its center of mass with respect to the inertial frame resolved in the inertial frame. The total angular momentum is not conserved due to the constant disturbance torque in the bus-fixed frame. Disturbance Estimate Errors (N m) (e) Disturbance-estimate errors. Inertia Estimate Errors (kg m ) Inertia Estimate Errors (kg m ) Jtilde Jtilde Jtilde Jtilde 3 Jtilde 3 Jtilde (f) Inertia-estimate errors. Figure 9: Slew maneuver using the control law (53) under a disturbance that is constant with respect to the bus-fixed frame. 8 of 3
29 ω ω ω 3 Eigenaxis Attitude Error (rad).5.5 Angular Velocity Components (rad/sec) (a) Eigenaxis attitude error (b) Spacecraft angular-velocity components. 5 ν 4 u ν ν 3 3 u u 3 Wheel Angular Velocity Components (rad/sec) 5 5 Angular Acceleration Components (rad/sec ) (c) Angular rates of the reaction wheels. The spin rate grows until reaching the saturation limit of rad/sec (d) Angular accelerations of the reaction wheels. Disturbance Estimate Errors (N m) (e) Disturbance-estimate errors. Inertia Estimate Errors (kg m ) Inertia Estimate Errors (kg m ) Jtilde Jtilde Jtilde Jtilde 3 Jtilde 3 Jtilde (f) Inertia-estimate errors. Figure : Slew maneuver using the control law (53) under a disturbance that is constant with respect to the bus-fixed frame.. The maximum rotation rate of each wheel is saturated at rad/sec. 9 of 3
30 .5 ω.9.8 ω ω 3 Eigenaxis Attitude Error, rad Angular Velocity Components, rad/sec Time, sec (a) Eigenaxis attitude error Time, sec (b) Spacecraft angular-velocity components. 5 3 ν u ν u ν 3 u 3 5 Wheel Angular Velocity Components, rad/sec Angular Acceleration Components (rad/sec ) Time, sec (c) Angular rates of the reaction wheels Time, sec (d) Angular accelerations of the reaction wheels. Angular momentum, X Angular momentum, Y Angular momentum, Z Total, x Bus, x Wheels, x Time, sec Total, y Bus, y Wheels, y Time, sec Total, z Bus, z Wheels, z Time, sec (e) Angular momentum of the spacecraft relative to its center of mass with respect to the inertial frame resolved in the inertial frame. Inertia Estimate Errors, kg m Inertia Estimate Errors, kg m Jtilde Jtilde Jtilde Time, sec Jtilde 3 Jtilde 3 Jtilde Time, sec (f) Inertia-estimate errors. Figure : Spin maneuver using the control law (53). 3 of 3
IAC-11-C1.5.9 INERTIA-FREE ATTITUDE CONTROL OF SPACECRAFT WITH UNKNOWN TIME-VARYING MASS DISTRIBUTION
6nd International Astronautical Congress, Cape Town, SA. Copyright by the International Astronautical Federation. All rights reserved IAC--C.5.9 INERTIA-FREE ATTITUDE CONTROL OF SPACECRAFT WITH UNKNOWN
More informationAlmost Global Robust Attitude Tracking Control of Spacecraft in Gravity
Almost Global Robust Attitude Tracking Control of Spacecraft in Gravity Amit K. Sanyal Nalin A. Chaturvedi In this paper, we treat the practical problem of tracking the attitude and angular velocity of
More informationIN SPACECRAFT applications, it is often expensive to determine
JOURNAL OF GUIDANCE, CONTROL, AND DYNAMICS Vol. 6, No., Septeber October Inertia-Free Spacecraft Attitude Control Using Reaction Wheels Downloaded by UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN on Septeber 8, http://arc.aiaa.org
More informationStabilization of a Specified Equilibrium in the Inverted Equilibrium Manifold of the 3D Pendulum
Proceedings of the 27 American Control Conference Marriott Marquis Hotel at Times Square New York City, USA, July 11-13, 27 ThA11.6 Stabilization of a Specified Equilibrium in the Inverted Equilibrium
More informationAttitude Tracking Control of a Small Satellite in Low Earth Orbit
AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference 10-13 August 2009, Chicago, Illinois AIAA 2009-5902 Attitude Tracking Control of a Small Satellite in Low Earth Orbit Amit K. Sanyal Zachary Lee-Ho In
More informationMixed Control Moment Gyro and Momentum Wheel Attitude Control Strategies
AAS03-558 Mixed Control Moment Gyro and Momentum Wheel Attitude Control Strategies C. Eugene Skelton II and Christopher D. Hall Department of Aerospace & Ocean Engineering Virginia Polytechnic Institute
More information3D Pendulum Experimental Setup for Earth-based Testing of the Attitude Dynamics of an Orbiting Spacecraft
3D Pendulum Experimental Setup for Earth-based Testing of the Attitude Dynamics of an Orbiting Spacecraft Mario A. Santillo, Nalin A. Chaturvedi, N. Harris McClamroch, Dennis S. Bernstein Department of
More informationUnit quaternion observer based attitude stabilization of a rigid spacecraft without velocity measurement
Proceedings of the 45th IEEE Conference on Decision & Control Manchester Grand Hyatt Hotel San Diego, CA, USA, December 3-5, 6 Unit quaternion observer based attitude stabilization of a rigid spacecraft
More informationStabilization of a 3D Rigid Pendulum
25 American Control Conference June 8-, 25. Portland, OR, USA ThC5.6 Stabilization of a 3D Rigid Pendulum Nalin A. Chaturvedi, Fabio Bacconi, Amit K. Sanyal, Dennis Bernstein, N. Harris McClamroch Department
More information*School of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN
NEW CONTROL LAWS FOR THE ATTITUDE STABILIZATION OF RIGID BODIES PANAGIOTIS TSIOTRAS *School of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 7907. Abstract. This paper introduces
More informationQuaternion-Based Tracking Control Law Design For Tracking Mode
A. M. Elbeltagy Egyptian Armed forces Conference on small satellites. 2016 Logan, Utah, USA Paper objectives Introduction Presentation Agenda Spacecraft combined nonlinear model Proposed RW nonlinear attitude
More informationStable Manifolds of Saddle Equilibria for Pendulum Dynamics on S 2 and SO(3)
2011 50th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control and European Control Conference (CDC-ECC) Orlando, FL, USA, December 12-15, 2011 Stable Manifolds of Saddle Equilibria for Pendulum Dynamics on S 2 and
More informationWEIGHTING MATRICES DETERMINATION USING POLE PLACEMENT FOR TRACKING MANEUVERS
U.P.B. Sci. Bull., Series D, Vol. 75, Iss. 2, 2013 ISSN 1454-2358 WEIGHTING MATRICES DETERMINATION USING POLE PLACEMENT FOR TRACKING MANEUVERS Raluca M. STEFANESCU 1, Claudiu L. PRIOROC 2, Adrian M. STOICA
More informationTracking Rigid Body Motion Using Thrusters and Momentum. Wheels
JAS 199 Tracking Rigid Body Motion Using Thrusters and Momentum Wheels Christopher D. Hall, Panagiotis Tsiotras, and Haijun Shen Abstract Tracking control laws are developed for a rigid spacecraft using
More informationSpacecraft Attitude Control using CMGs: Singularities and Global Controllability
1 / 28 Spacecraft Attitude Control using CMGs: Singularities and Global Controllability Sanjay Bhat TCS Innovation Labs Hyderabad International Workshop on Perspectives in Dynamical Systems and Control
More informationAttitude Regulation About a Fixed Rotation Axis
AIAA Journal of Guidance, Control, & Dynamics Revised Submission, December, 22 Attitude Regulation About a Fixed Rotation Axis Jonathan Lawton Raytheon Systems Inc. Tucson, Arizona 85734 Randal W. Beard
More informationStabilization of Angular Velocity of Asymmetrical Rigid Body. Using Two Constant Torques
Stabilization of Angular Velocity of Asymmetrical Rigid Body Using Two Constant Torques Hirohisa Kojima Associate Professor Department of Aerospace Engineering Tokyo Metropolitan University 6-6, Asahigaoka,
More informationLinear Feedback Control Using Quasi Velocities
Linear Feedback Control Using Quasi Velocities Andrew J Sinclair Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama 36849 John E Hurtado and John L Junkins Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843 A novel approach
More informationControllability Analysis of A Two Degree of Freedom Nonlinear Attitude Control System
Controllability Analysis of A Two Degree of Freedom Nonlinear Attitude Control System Jinglai Shen, Amit K Sanyal, and N Harris McClamroch Department of Aerospace Engineering The University of Michigan
More informationDesign of Sliding Mode Attitude Control for Communication Spacecraft
Design of Sliding Mode Attitude Control for Communication Spacecraft Erkan Abdulhamitbilal 1 and Elbrous M. Jafarov 1 ISTAVIA Engineering, Istanbul Aeronautics and Astronautics Engineering, Istanbul Technical
More informationRigid-Body Attitude Control USING ROTATION MATRICES FOR CONTINUOUS, SINGULARITY-FREE CONTROL LAWS
Rigid-Body Attitude Control USING ROTATION MATRICES FOR CONTINUOUS, SINGULARITY-FREE CONTROL LAWS 3 IEEE CONTROL SYSTEMS MAGAZINE» JUNE -33X//$. IEEE SHANNON MASH Rigid-body attitude control is motivated
More informationExperimental Results for Almost Global Asymptotic and Locally Exponential Stabilization of the Natural Equilibria of a 3D Pendulum
Proceedings of the 26 American Control Conference Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA, June 4-6, 26 WeC2. Experimental Results for Almost Global Asymptotic and Locally Exponential Stabilization of the Natural
More information3 Rigid Spacecraft Attitude Control
1 3 Rigid Spacecraft Attitude Control Consider a rigid spacecraft with body-fixed frame F b with origin O at the mass centre. Let ω denote the angular velocity of F b with respect to an inertial frame
More informationQUATERNION FEEDBACK ATTITUDE CONTROL DESIGN: A NONLINEAR H APPROACH
Asian Journal of Control, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 406-4, September 003 406 Brief Paper QUAERNION FEEDBACK AIUDE CONROL DESIGN: A NONLINEAR H APPROACH Long-Life Show, Jyh-Ching Juang, Ying-Wen Jan, and Chen-zung
More informationSatellite Attitude Control by Quaternion-Based Backstepping
25 American Control Conference June 8-1, 25. Portland, OR, USA WeB11.4 Satellite Attitude Control by Quaternion-Based Backstepping Raymond Kristiansen* and Per J. Nicklasson** Department of Computer Science,
More informationKINEMATIC EQUATIONS OF NONNOMINAL EULER AXIS/ANGLE ROTATION
IAA-AAS-DyCoSS -14-10-01 KINEMATIC EQUATIONS OF NONNOMINAL EULER AXIS/ANGLE ROTATION Emanuele L. de Angelis and Fabrizio Giulietti INTRODUCTION Euler axis/angle is a useful representation in many attitude
More informationAn Intrinsic Robust PID Controller on Lie Groups
53rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control December 15-17, 2014. Los Angeles, California, USA An Intrinsic Robust PID Controller on Lie Groups D.H.S. Maithripala and J. M. Berg Abstract This paper presents
More informationMathematical Models for the Triaxial Attitude Control Testbed
Draft Article (For Engineering Journals) Mathematical Models for the Triaxial Attitude Control Testbed Sangbum Cho, Jinglai Shen, N. Harris McClamroch Department of Aerospace Engineering University of
More informationSATELLITE ATTITUDE TRACKING BY QUATERNION-BASED BACKSTEPPING. Raymond Kristiansen,1 Per Johan Nicklasson,2 Jan Tommy Gravdahl,3
SATELLITE ATTITUDE TRACKING BY QUATERNION-BASED BACKSTEPPING Raymond Kristiansen,1 Per Johan Nicklasson,2 Jan Tommy Gravdahl,3 Department of Space Technology Narvik University College, Norway Department
More informationVelocity-Free Hybrid Attitude Stabilization Using Inertial Vector Measurements
016 American Control Conference (ACC) Boston Marriott Copley Place July 6-8, 016. Boston, MA, USA Velocity-Free Hybrid Attitude Stabilization Using Inertial Vector Measurements Soulaimane Berkane and Abdelhamid
More informationExperiments on Stabilization of the Hanging Equilibrium of a 3D Asymmetric Rigid Pendulum
Proceedings of the 25 IEEE Conference on Control Applications Toronto, Canada, August 28-3, 25 MB4.5 Experiments on Stabilization of the Hanging Equilibrium of a 3D Asymmetric Rigid Pendulum Mario A. Santillo,
More informationLow-Thrust Attitude Control for Nano-Satellite with Micro-Cathode Thrusters
Low-Thrust Attitude Control for Nano-Satellite with Micro-Cathode Thrusters IEPC-3-366 Presented at the 33 rd International Electric Propulsion Conference, The George Washington University, Washington,
More informationIAA-CU A Simulator for Robust Attitude Control of Cubesat Deploying Satellites
A Simulator for Robust Attitude Control of Cubesat Deploying Satellites Giovanni Mattei, George Georgiou, Angelo Pignatelli, Salvatore Monaco Abstract The paper deals with the development and testing of
More informationAsymptotic Smooth Stabilization of the Inverted 3D Pendulum
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AUTOMATIC CONTROL 1 Asymptotic Smooth Stabilization of the Inverted 3D Pendulum Nalin A. Chaturvedi, N. Harris McClamroch, Fellow, IEEE, and Dennis S. Bernstein, Fellow, IEEE Abstract
More informationRotational & Rigid-Body Mechanics. Lectures 3+4
Rotational & Rigid-Body Mechanics Lectures 3+4 Rotational Motion So far: point objects moving through a trajectory. Next: moving actual dimensional objects and rotating them. 2 Circular Motion - Definitions
More informationNonlinear Robust Tracking Control of a Quadrotor UAV on SE(3)
22 American Control Conference Fairmont Queen Elizabeth Montréal Canada June 27-June 29 22 Nonlinear Robust Tracking Control of a Quadrotor UAV on SE(3) Taeyoung Lee Melvin Leok and N. Harris McClamroch
More informationCOUPLED ORBITAL AND ATTITUDE CONTROL SIMULATION
COUPLED ORBITAL AND ATTITUDE CONTROL SIMULATION Scott E. Lennox AOE 5984: Advanced Attitude Spacecraft Dynamics and Control December 12, 23 INTRODUCTION In the last few years the space industry has started
More informationKeywords: Kinematics; Principal planes; Special orthogonal matrices; Trajectory optimization
Editorial Manager(tm) for Nonlinear Dynamics Manuscript Draft Manuscript Number: Title: Minimum Distance and Optimal Transformations on SO(N) Article Type: Original research Section/Category: Keywords:
More informationNomenclature. = the local vertical and local horizontal reference frame. = angular velocity vector of spacecraft (rad/s)
Adaptive Fault-Tolerant Control of Spacecraft Attitude Dynamics with Actuator Failures Yu Han 1 Harbin Institude of Technology, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China, 151 James D. Biggs 2 University of Strathclyde,
More informationVisual Feedback Attitude Control of a Bias Momentum Micro Satellite using Two Wheels
Visual Feedback Attitude Control of a Bias Momentum Micro Satellite using Two Wheels Fuyuto Terui a, Nobutada Sako b, Keisuke Yoshihara c, Toru Yamamoto c, Shinichi Nakasuka b a National Aerospace Laboratory
More informationRobust Hybrid Global Asymptotic Stabilization of Rigid Body Dynamics using Dual Quaternions
Robust Hybrid Global Asymptotic Stabilization of Rigid Body Dynamics using Dual Quaternions Bharani P. Malladi and Eric A. Butcher, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, 872, USA Ricardo G. Sanfelice University
More informationNonlinear Tracking Control of Underactuated Surface Vessel
American Control Conference June -. Portland OR USA FrB. Nonlinear Tracking Control of Underactuated Surface Vessel Wenjie Dong and Yi Guo Abstract We consider in this paper the tracking control problem
More informationPerturbed Feedback Linearization of Attitude Dynamics
008 American Control Conference Westin Seattle Hotel, Seattle, Washington, USA June -3, 008 FrC6.5 Perturbed Feedback Linearization of Attitude Dynamics Abdulrahman H. Bajodah* Abstract The paper introduces
More informationOptimal Fault-Tolerant Configurations of Thrusters
Optimal Fault-Tolerant Configurations of Thrusters By Yasuhiro YOSHIMURA ) and Hirohisa KOJIMA, ) ) Aerospace Engineering, Tokyo Metropolitan University, Hino, Japan (Received June st, 7) Fault tolerance
More informationUnit Quaternion-Based Output Feedback for the Attitude Tracking Problem
56 IEEE RANSACIONS ON AUOMAIC CONROL, VOL. 53, NO. 6, JULY 008 Unit Quaternion-Based Output Feedback for the Attitude racking Problem Abdelhamid ayebi, Senior Member, IEEE Abstract In this note, we propose
More informationRobust Global Asymptotic Attitude Stabilization of a Rigid Body by Quaternion-based Hybrid Feedback
Robust Global Asymptotic Attitude Stabilization of a Rigid Body by Quaternion-based Hybrid Feedback Christopher G. Mayhew, Ricardo G. Sanfelice, and Andrew R. Teel Abstract Global asymptotic stabilization
More informationMAE 142 Homework #5 Due Friday, March 13, 2009
MAE 142 Homework #5 Due Friday, March 13, 2009 Please read through the entire homework set before beginning. Also, please label clearly your answers and summarize your findings as concisely as possible.
More informationNonlinear Predictive Control of Spacecraft
Nonlinear Predictive Control of Spacecraft John L. Crassidis 1 F. Landis Markley obin C. Anthony 3 Stephen F. Andrews 3 Abstract. A new approach for the control of a spacecraft with large angle maneuvers
More informationAttitude Control and Stabilization of Spacecraft with a Captured Asteroid
AIAA SciTech -9 January 0, Kissimmee, Florida AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference AIAA 0-09 Attitude Control and Stabilization of Spacecraft with a Captured Asteroid Downloaded by UNIVERSITY
More informationSliding Mode Control Strategies for Spacecraft Rendezvous Maneuvers
Osaka University March 15, 2018 Sliding Mode Control Strategies for Spacecraft Rendezvous Maneuvers Elisabetta Punta CNR-IEIIT, Italy Problem Statement First Case Spacecraft Model Position Dynamics Attitude
More informationLecture Module 5: Introduction to Attitude Stabilization and Control
1 Lecture Module 5: Introduction to Attitude Stabilization and Control Lectures 1-3 Stability is referred to as a system s behaviour to external/internal disturbances (small) in/from equilibrium states.
More informationStable Limit Cycle Generation for Underactuated Mechanical Systems, Application: Inertia Wheel Inverted Pendulum
Stable Limit Cycle Generation for Underactuated Mechanical Systems, Application: Inertia Wheel Inverted Pendulum Sébastien Andary Ahmed Chemori Sébastien Krut LIRMM, Univ. Montpellier - CNRS, 6, rue Ada
More informationGeometric Mechanics and Global Nonlinear Control for Multi-Body Dynamics
Geometric Mechanics and Global Nonlinear Control for Multi-Body Dynamics Harris McClamroch Aerospace Engineering, University of Michigan Joint work with Taeyoung Lee (George Washington University) Melvin
More information9 Kinetics of 3D rigid bodies - rotating frames
9 Kinetics of 3D rigid bodies - rotating frames 9. Consider the two gears depicted in the figure. The gear B of radius R B is fixed to the ground, while the gear A of mass m A and radius R A turns freely
More informationSatellite Attitude Control System Design Using Reaction Wheels Bhanu Gouda Brian Fast Dan Simon
Satellite Attitude Control System Design Using Reaction Wheels Bhanu Gouda Brian Fast Dan Simon Outline 1. Overview of Attitude Determination and Control system. Problem formulation 3. Control schemes
More informationAttitude Control of a Bias Momentum Satellite Using Moment of Inertia
I. INTRODUCTION Attitude Control of a Bias Momentum Satellite Using Moment of Inertia HYOCHOONG BANG Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology HYUNG DON CHOI Korea Aerospace Research Institute
More informationPosition Control for a Class of Vehicles in SE(3)
Position Control for a Class of Vehicles in SE(3) Ashton Roza, Manfredi Maggiore Abstract A hierarchical design framework is presented to control the position of a class of vehicles in SE(3) that are propelled
More information12. Rigid Body Dynamics I
University of Rhode Island DigitalCommons@URI Classical Dynamics Physics Course Materials 015 1. Rigid Body Dynamics I Gerhard Müller University of Rhode Island, gmuller@uri.edu Creative Commons License
More informationMoving Mass Control for Underwater Vehicles
Moving Mass Control for Underwater Vehicles C. A. Woolsey 1 & N. E. Leonard 2 1 Aerospace & Ocean Engineering Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA 2461 cwoolsey@vt.edu 2 Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering Princeton
More information6. 3D Kinematics DE2-EA 2.1: M4DE. Dr Connor Myant
DE2-EA 2.1: M4DE Dr Connor Myant 6. 3D Kinematics Comments and corrections to connor.myant@imperial.ac.uk Lecture resources may be found on Blackboard and at http://connormyant.com Contents Three-Dimensional
More informationAdaptive Control of a Quadrotor UAV Transporting a Cable-Suspended Load with Unknown Mass
rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control December -7,. Los Angeles, California, USA Adaptive Control of a Quadrotor UAV Transporting a Cable-Suspended Load with Unknown Mass Shicong Dai, Taeyoung Lee,
More informationAdaptive Backstepping Control for Optimal Descent with Embedded Autonomy
Adaptive Backstepping Control for Optimal Descent with Embedded Autonomy Maodeng Li, Wuxing Jing Department of Aerospace Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, Heilongjiang, 150001, China
More informationFast Seek Control for Flexible Disk Drive Systems
Fast Seek Control for Flexible Disk Drive Systems with Back EMF and Inductance Chanat La-orpacharapan and Lucy Y. Pao Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering niversity of Colorado, Boulder, CO
More information1/30. Rigid Body Rotations. Dave Frank
. 1/3 Rigid Body Rotations Dave Frank A Point Particle and Fundamental Quantities z 2/3 m v ω r y x Angular Velocity v = dr dt = ω r Kinetic Energy K = 1 2 mv2 Momentum p = mv Rigid Bodies We treat a rigid
More informationarxiv:math/ v1 [math.oc] 17 Sep 2006
Global Attitude Estimation using Single Direction Measurements Taeyoung Lee, Melvin Leok, N. Harris McClamroch, and Amit Sanyal arxiv:math/0609481v1 [math.oc] 17 Sep 2006 Abstract A deterministic attitude
More informationH 2 Adaptive Control. Tansel Yucelen, Anthony J. Calise, and Rajeev Chandramohan. WeA03.4
1 American Control Conference Marriott Waterfront, Baltimore, MD, USA June 3-July, 1 WeA3. H Adaptive Control Tansel Yucelen, Anthony J. Calise, and Rajeev Chandramohan Abstract Model reference adaptive
More informationDYNAMICS OF SERIAL ROBOTIC MANIPULATORS
DYNAMICS OF SERIAL ROBOTIC MANIPULATORS NOMENCLATURE AND BASIC DEFINITION We consider here a mechanical system composed of r rigid bodies and denote: M i 6x6 inertia dyads of the ith body. Wi 6 x 6 angular-velocity
More informationRobust Adaptive Attitude Control of a Spacecraft
Robust Adaptive Attitude Control of a Spacecraft AER1503 Spacecraft Dynamics and Controls II April 24, 2015 Christopher Au Agenda Introduction Model Formulation Controller Designs Simulation Results 2
More informationSpacecraft Attitude Control with RWs via LPV Control Theory: Comparison of Two Different Methods in One Framework
Trans. JSASS Aerospace Tech. Japan Vol. 4, No. ists3, pp. Pd_5-Pd_, 6 Spacecraft Attitude Control with RWs via LPV Control Theory: Comparison of Two Different Methods in One Framework y Takahiro SASAKI,),
More informationSATELLITE ATTITUDE CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN WITH NONLINEAR DYNAMICS AND KINEMTICS OF QUATERNION USING REACTION WHEELS
SATELLITE ATTITUDE CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN WITH NONLINEAR DYNAMICS AND KINEMTICS OF QUATERNION USING REACTION WHEELS Breno Braga Galvao Maria Cristina Mendes Faustino Luiz Carlos Gadelha de Souza breno.braga.galvao@gmail.com
More informationKinematics. Chapter Multi-Body Systems
Chapter 2 Kinematics This chapter first introduces multi-body systems in conceptual terms. It then describes the concept of a Euclidean frame in the material world, following the concept of a Euclidean
More informationROTATIONAL STABILITY OF A CHARGED DIELEC- TRIC RIGID BODY IN A UNIFORM MAGNETIC FIELD
Progress In Electromagnetics Research Letters, Vol. 11, 103 11, 009 ROTATIONAL STABILITY OF A CHARGED DIELEC- TRIC RIGID BODY IN A UNIFORM MAGNETIC FIELD G.-Q. Zhou Department of Physics Wuhan University
More informationIf the symmetry axes of a uniform symmetric body coincide with the coordinate axes, the products of inertia (Ixy etc.
Prof. O. B. Wright, Autumn 007 Mechanics Lecture 9 More on rigid bodies, coupled vibrations Principal axes of the inertia tensor If the symmetry axes of a uniform symmetric body coincide with the coordinate
More informationStabilization and Passivity-Based Control
DISC Systems and Control Theory of Nonlinear Systems, 2010 1 Stabilization and Passivity-Based Control Lecture 8 Nonlinear Dynamical Control Systems, Chapter 10, plus handout from R. Sepulchre, Constructive
More informationResearch Article Shorter Path Design and Control for an Underactuated Satellite
Hindawi International Journal of Aerospace Engineering Volume 27 Article ID 8536732 9 pages https://doi.org/.55/27/8536732 Research Article Shorter Path Design and Control for an Underactuated Satellite
More informationA note on stability of spacecrafts and underwater vehicles
A note on stability of spacecrafts and underwater vehicles arxiv:1603.00343v1 [math-ph] 1 Mar 2016 Dan Comănescu Department of Mathematics, West University of Timişoara Bd. V. Pârvan, No 4, 300223 Timişoara,
More informationRegenerative Power Optimal Reaction Wheel Attitude Control
University of Colorado, Boulder CU Scholar Aerospace Engineering Sciences Graduate Theses & Dissertations Aerospace Engineering Sciences Spring 1-1-211 Regenerative Power Optimal Reaction Wheel Attitude
More informationDYNAMICS AND CONTROL OF THE REACTION MASS PENDULUM (RMP) AS A 3D MULTIBODY SYSTEM: APPLICATION TO HUMANOID MODELING
DYNAMICS AND CONTROL OF THE REACTION MASS PENDULUM (RMP AS A D MULTIBODY SYSTEM: APPLICATION TO HUMANOID MODELING Amit K. Sanyal Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering New Mexico State University Las Cruces,
More informationQUATERNION BASED OPTIMAL SPACECRAFT REORIENTATION UNDER COMPLEX ATTITUDE CONSTRAINED ZONES
AAS 13-836 QUATERNION BASED OPTIMAL SPACECRAFT REORIENTATION UNDER COMPLEX ATTITUDE CONSTRAINED ZONES Unsik Lee and Mehran Mesbahi INTRODUCTION The paper addresses quaternion-based energy and time optimal
More informationRobot Control Basics CS 685
Robot Control Basics CS 685 Control basics Use some concepts from control theory to understand and learn how to control robots Control Theory general field studies control and understanding of behavior
More informationRigid bodies - general theory
Rigid bodies - general theory Kinetic Energy: based on FW-26 Consider a system on N particles with all their relative separations fixed: it has 3 translational and 3 rotational degrees of freedom. Motion
More informationATTITUDE CONTROL MECHANIZATION TO DE-ORBIT SATELLITES USING SOLAR SAILS
IAA-AAS-DyCoSS2-14-07-02 ATTITUDE CONTROL MECHANIZATION TO DE-ORBIT SATELLITES USING SOLAR SAILS Ozan Tekinalp, * Omer Atas INTRODUCTION Utilization of solar sails for the de-orbiting of satellites is
More informationSpacecraft Attitude and Power Control Using Variable Speed Control Moment Gyros. Hyungjoo Yoon
Spacecraft Attitude and Power Control Using Variable Speed Control Moment Gyros A Thesis Presented to The Academic Faculty by Hyungjoo Yoon In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor
More informationDynamics and Control of the GyroPTO Wave Energy Point Absorber under Sea Waves
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect Procedia Engineering 99 (7) 88 8 X International Conference on Structural Dynamics, EURODYN 7 Dynamics and Control of the GyroPTO Wave Energy Point
More informationRigid body simulation. Once we consider an object with spatial extent, particle system simulation is no longer sufficient
Rigid body dynamics Rigid body simulation Once we consider an object with spatial extent, particle system simulation is no longer sufficient Rigid body simulation Unconstrained system no contact Constrained
More informationNonlinear Control of a Spacecraft with Multiple Fuel Slosh Modes
11 5th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control and European Control Conference (CDC-ECC) Orlando, FL, USA, December 1-15, 11 onlinear Control of a Spacecraft with Multiple Fuel Slosh Modes Mahmut Reyhanoglu
More informationAttitude Determination for NPS Three-Axis Spacecraft Simulator
AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference and Exhibit 6-9 August 4, Providence, Rhode Island AIAA 4-5386 Attitude Determination for NPS Three-Axis Spacecraft Simulator Jong-Woo Kim, Roberto Cristi and
More informationTrajectory-tracking control of a planar 3-RRR parallel manipulator
Trajectory-tracking control of a planar 3-RRR parallel manipulator Chaman Nasa and Sandipan Bandyopadhyay Department of Engineering Design Indian Institute of Technology Madras Chennai, India Abstract
More informationAS3010: Introduction to Space Technology
AS3010: Introduction to Space Technology L E C T U R E 22 Part B, Lecture 22 19 April, 2017 C O N T E N T S Attitude stabilization passive and active. Actuators for three axis or active stabilization.
More informationDynamics. 1 Copyright c 2015 Roderic Grupen
Dynamics The branch of physics that treats the action of force on bodies in motion or at rest; kinetics, kinematics, and statics, collectively. Websters dictionary Outline Conservation of Momentum Inertia
More informationAnalytical Mechanics. of Space Systems. tfa AA. Hanspeter Schaub. College Station, Texas. University of Colorado Boulder, Colorado.
Analytical Mechanics of Space Systems Third Edition Hanspeter Schaub University of Colorado Boulder, Colorado John L. Junkins Texas A&M University College Station, Texas AIM EDUCATION SERIES Joseph A.
More informationComputational Geometric Uncertainty Propagation for Hamiltonian Systems on a Lie Group
Computational Geometric Uncertainty Propagation for Hamiltonian Systems on a Lie Group Melvin Leok Mathematics, University of California, San Diego Foundations of Dynamics Session, CDS@20 Workshop Caltech,
More informationAdaptive Dynamic Inversion Control of a Linear Scalar Plant with Constrained Control Inputs
5 American Control Conference June 8-, 5. Portland, OR, USA ThA. Adaptive Dynamic Inversion Control of a Linear Scalar Plant with Constrained Control Inputs Monish D. Tandale and John Valasek Abstract
More informationAdaptive Trim and Trajectory Following for a Tilt-Rotor Tricopter Ahmad Ansari, Anna Prach, and Dennis S. Bernstein
7 American Control Conference Sheraton Seattle Hotel May 4 6, 7, Seattle, USA Adaptive Trim and Trajectory Following for a Tilt-Rotor Tricopter Ahmad Ansari, Anna Prach, and Dennis S. Bernstein Abstract
More informationNew Results for Time-Optimal Three-Axis. Reorientation of a Rigid Spacecraft
New Results for Time-Optimal Three-Axis Reorientation of a Rigid Spacecraft Xiaoli Bai, John L. Junkins Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843 Abstract Some new results for a classical minimum,
More informationDynamics and Control Preliminary Examination Topics
Dynamics and Control Preliminary Examination Topics 1. Particle and Rigid Body Dynamics Meirovitch, Leonard; Methods of Analytical Dynamics, McGraw-Hill, Inc New York, NY, 1970 Chapters 1-5 2. Atmospheric
More informationAutonomous Underwater Vehicles: Equations of Motion
Autonomous Underwater Vehicles: Equations of Motion Monique Chyba - November 18, 2015 Departments of Mathematics, University of Hawai i at Mānoa Elective in Robotics 2015/2016 - Control of Unmanned Vehicles
More informationControl of industrial robots. Centralized control
Control of industrial robots Centralized control Prof. Paolo Rocco (paolo.rocco@polimi.it) Politecnico di Milano ipartimento di Elettronica, Informazione e Bioingegneria Introduction Centralized control
More informationATTITUDE CONTROL INVESTIGATION USING SPACECRAFT HARDWARE-IN-THE-LOOP SIMULATOR
ATTITUDE CONTROL INVESTIGATION USING SPACECRAFT HARDWARE-IN-THE-LOOP SIMULATOR Scott A. Kowalchuk Advisor: Dr. Christopher D. Hall Department of Aerospace and Ocean Engineering Virginia Polytechnic Institute
More informationMinimum-Parameter Representations of N-Dimensional Principal Rotations
Minimum-Parameter Representations of N-Dimensional Principal Rotations Andrew J. Sinclair and John E. Hurtado Department of Aerospace Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA Abstract
More information