MAE 142 Homework #5 Due Friday, March 13, 2009

Similar documents
Quaternion-Based Tracking Control Law Design For Tracking Mode

Pointing Control for Low Altitude Triple Cubesat Space Darts

Generation X. Attitude Control Systems (ACS) Aprille Ericsson Dave Olney Josephine San. July 27, 2000

Lecture Module 5: Introduction to Attitude Stabilization and Control

Problem 1: Ship Path-Following Control System (35%)

Outline. Classical Control. Lecture 1

Mech 6091 Flight Control System Course Project. Team Member: Bai, Jing Cui, Yi Wang, Xiaoli

Lecture AC-1. Aircraft Dynamics. Copy right 2003 by Jon at h an H ow

MAE 143B - Homework 9

Attitude Control Strategy for HAUSAT-2 with Pitch Bias Momentum System

EE C128 / ME C134 Fall 2014 HW 9 Solutions. HW 9 Solutions. 10(s + 3) s(s + 2)(s + 5) G(s) =

EE5102/6102 Multivariable Control Systems

CDS 101/110a: Lecture 8-1 Frequency Domain Design

FIBER OPTIC GYRO-BASED ATTITUDE DETERMINATION FOR HIGH- PERFORMANCE TARGET TRACKING

Spacecraft Attitude Dynamics for Undergraduates

Attitude Control of a Bias Momentum Satellite Using Moment of Inertia

The basic principle to be used in mechanical systems to derive a mathematical model is Newton s law,

ECEn 483 / ME 431 Case Studies. Randal W. Beard Brigham Young University

AMME3500: System Dynamics & Control

Collocated versus non-collocated control [H04Q7]

SATELLITE ATTITUDE CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN WITH NONLINEAR DYNAMICS AND KINEMTICS OF QUATERNION USING REACTION WHEELS

Raktim Bhattacharya. . AERO 422: Active Controls for Aerospace Vehicles. Frequency Response-Design Method

CS491/691: Introduction to Aerial Robotics

3D Pendulum Experimental Setup for Earth-based Testing of the Attitude Dynamics of an Orbiting Spacecraft

Department of Aerospace Engineering and Mechanics University of Minnesota Written Preliminary Examination: Control Systems Friday, April 9, 2010

EECS C128/ ME C134 Final Wed. Dec. 15, am. Closed book. Two pages of formula sheets. No calculators.

FAULT DETECTION for SPACECRAFT ATTITUDE CONTROL SYSTEM. M. Amin Vahid D. Mechanical Engineering Department Concordia University December 19 th, 2010

ECSE 4962 Control Systems Design. A Brief Tutorial on Control Design

Design of Sliding Mode Attitude Control for Communication Spacecraft

Rigid bodies - general theory

MAE 142 Homework #2 (Design Project) SOLUTIONS. (a) The main body s kinematic relationship is: φ θ ψ. + C 3 (ψ) 0 + C 3 (ψ)c 1 (θ)

IMPLEMENTATION OF A DECOUPLED CONTROLLER ELECTROMAGNETS MOUNTED IN A PLANAR ARRAY. NASA Langley Research Center. Hampton, VA.

Mechatronics Modeling and Analysis of Dynamic Systems Case-Study Exercise

Mechatronics Assignment # 1

Command shaping for a flexible satellite platform controlled by advanced fly-wheels systems. 1 Introduction

Stability of CL System

Attitude Determination and. Attitude Control

Visual Feedback Attitude Control of a Bias Momentum Micro Satellite using Two Wheels

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Department of Mechanical Engineering Dynamics and Control II Fall 2007

Spacecraft Bus / Platform

Satellite Attitude Determination with Attitude Sensors and Gyros using Steady-state Kalman Filter

Robust and Optimal Control, Spring A: SISO Feedback Control A.1 Internal Stability and Youla Parameterization

Spinning Satellites Examples. ACS: Gravity Gradient. ACS: Single Spin

Implementation of a Communication Satellite Orbit Controller Design Using State Space Techniques

IAC-11-C1.5.9 INERTIA-FREE ATTITUDE CONTROL OF SPACECRAFT WITH UNKNOWN TIME-VARYING MASS DISTRIBUTION

9. Two-Degrees-of-Freedom Design

Dynamics and Control Preliminary Examination Topics

Adaptive Control of Space Station

Attitude control system for ROCSAT-3 microsatellite: a conceptual design

CDS 101/110a: Lecture 10-1 Robust Performance

MEM 355 Performance Enhancement of Dynamical Systems

Control Systems I Lecture 10: System Specifications

Classify a transfer function to see which order or ramp it can follow and with which expected error.

Laboratory 11 Control Systems Laboratory ECE3557. State Feedback Controller for Position Control of a Flexible Joint

Autonomous Mobile Robot Design

UAV Coordinate Frames and Rigid Body Dynamics

Appendix A: Exercise Problems on Classical Feedback Control Theory (Chaps. 1 and 2)

] [ 200. ] 3 [ 10 4 s. [ ] s + 10 [ P = s [ 10 8 ] 3. s s (s 1)(s 2) series compensator ] 2. s command pre-filter [ 0.

Systems Analysis and Control

Jitter and Basic Requirements of the Reaction Wheel Assembly in the Attitude Control System

Dr Ian R. Manchester Dr Ian R. Manchester AMME 3500 : Review

Mixed Control Moment Gyro and Momentum Wheel Attitude Control Strategies

Linear State Feedback Controller Design

State Feedback Controller for Position Control of a Flexible Link

Mechanical Systems Part A: State-Space Systems Lecture AL12

WEIGHTING MATRICES DETERMINATION USING POLE PLACEMENT FOR TRACKING MANEUVERS

Spacecraft Attitude Control with RWs via LPV Control Theory: Comparison of Two Different Methods in One Framework

(a) Find the transfer function of the amplifier. Ans.: G(s) =

Systems Analysis and Control

Übersetzungshilfe / Translation aid (English) To be returned at the end of the exam!

Active Control? Contact : Website : Teaching

Simplified Filtering Estimator for Spacecraft Attitude Determination from Phase Information of GPS Signals

DESIGN PROJECT REPORT: Longitudinal and lateral-directional stability augmentation of Boeing 747 for cruise flight condition.

AS3010: Introduction to Space Technology

Lecture Module 2: Spherical Geometry, Various Axes Systems

Positioning Servo Design Example

Today (10/23/01) Today. Reading Assignment: 6.3. Gain/phase margin lead/lag compensator Ref. 6.4, 6.7, 6.10

EE C128 / ME C134 Final Exam Fall 2014

Topic # Feedback Control. State-Space Systems Closed-loop control using estimators and regulators. Dynamics output feedback

San José State University Aerospace Engineering Department AE168: Aerospace Vehicle Dynamics & Control Fall 2016

Intro to Frequency Domain Design

Topic # Feedback Control Systems

Raktim Bhattacharya. . AERO 632: Design of Advance Flight Control System. Preliminaries

Attitude Regulation About a Fixed Rotation Axis

LONGITUDINAL STABILITY AUGMENTATION DESIGN WITH TWO DEGREE OF FREEDOM CONTROL STRUCTURE AND HANDLING QUALITIES REQUIREMENTS

AFRL MACCCS Review. Adaptive Control of the Generic Hypersonic Vehicle

D(s) G(s) A control system design definition

AP Physics C! name I CM R 2. v cm K = m

Pitch Rate CAS Design Project

ANALYSIS OF AUTOPILOT SYSTEM BASED ON BANK ANGLE OF SMALL UAV

c 2009 John Gregory Warner

Spacecraft Subsystems Part 1 Fundamentals of Attitude Control

Frequency Domain System Identification for a Small, Low-Cost, Fixed-Wing UAV

8.012 Physics I: Classical Mechanics Fall 2008

Modeling and System Identification for a DC Servo

East West GEO Satellite Station-Keeping with Degraded Thruster Response

Return Difference Function and Closed-Loop Roots Single-Input/Single-Output Control Systems

3 Rigid Spacecraft Attitude Control

Attitude Determination System of Small Satellite

Fundamentals of High Accuracy Inertial Navigation Averil B. Chatfield Table of Contents

Transcription:

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. The problems are designed to be solved. Therefore, please do not hand in pages and pages of computer printouts without an answer. Figure 1: Spacecraft Coordinate Frame The body frame coordinates of the spacecraft are shown above. The roll axis (x 1 ) is nominally in the direction of the orbit s tangential linear velocity. The yaw axis (x 3 ) or nadir is always pointing toward the Earth s surface. This implies that the spacecraft is spinning about the pitch axis (x 2 ) with the angular velocity of ω o to maintain nadir pointing. If the Earth s equator lies within the spacecraft s orbital plane, then the pitch axis would be pointing in the same direction as the Earth s south pole. If there are no disturbances and the spacecraft spins purely about pitch, the spacecraft body frame will be perfectly aligned with the inertial frame once per orbit. 1

1. Equations of Motion (20pts) (a) Recall the methodology of the second problem in the first homework assignment. Find the direction cosine matrix for an Euler 2-3-1 rotation sequence. Find the relationship between the angular velocities in body axis coordinates and the Euler 2-3-1 angular velocities (i.e. Ω = [ ] θ). (b) The equations of motion for a rigid spacecraft with n reaction wheels can be written directly from Euler s equations: J Ω + ḣ + Ω (JΩ + h) = τ dist where Ω IR 3 is the angular velocity in body frame coordinates, h IR 3 is the cumulative momentum of the reaction wheel cluster, and J = diag (J 1, J 2, J 3 ). As we are interested in controlling the body through the relative torque of the reaction wheels against the body, we can also write the equations in this form: J Ω + Ω JΩ = u + τ dist ḣ + Ω h = u Substitute the Euler angles and angular velocities for the body frame angular velocities (Ω) in the equations above. Linearize the system about θ 1 = 0, θ 2 = 0, θ 3 = 0, θ1 = 0, θ2 = ω o, θ3 = 0 in a similar fashion to the midterm/homework #3. You may have to make small angle approximations as well. You should get a system of equations in the following form: a 1 θ 1 + a 2 θ 1 + a 3 θ 3 = u 1 + τ dist1 a 4 θ 2 + a 5 θ 2 = u 2 + τ dist2 a 6 θ 3 + a 7 θ 3 + a 8 θ 1 = u 3 + τ dist3 ḣ 1 + a 9 h 3 = u 1 ḣ 2 = u 2 ḣ 3 + a 10 h 1 = u 3 We can now append some appendages to our linearized model through hybrid modal coordinates so that our final system is: 2

a 1 θ 1 + a 2 θ 1 + a 3 θ 3 + 2σ 1 q 1 = u 1 + τ dist1 a 4 θ 2 + a 5 θ 2 + 2σ 2 q 2 = u 2 + τ dist2 a 6 θ 3 + a 7 θ 3 + a 8 θ 1 + 2σ 3 q 3 = u 3 + τ dist3 ḣ 1 + a 9 h 3 = u 1 ḣ 2 = u 2 ḣ 3 + a 10 h 1 = u 3 q 1 + ω 2 1q 1 + 2σ 1 θ 1 = 0 q 2 + ω 2 2q 2 + 2σ 2 θ 2 = 0 q 3 + ω 2 3q 3 + 2σ 3 θ 3 = 0 This system is usually referred to as a linear flex model in industry. Notice that the structural modes have no damping. Aerospace structures are usually very stiff with little damping, especially structures on spacecraft as they are mostly carbon-fiber laminates. Therefore, damping is usually assumed to be 1% or neglected alltogether. For clarity, we will now drop the primed notation for the Euler angles in the rest of the homework. (c) Bonus points (+5): If the orbital angular velocity (ω o ) of the spacecraft is equal to 0.0012 rad/sec, what can you quantitatively say about the ephemeris of the spacecraft? 3

2. Classical Control (35pts) Note that the reaction wheel momentum is decoupled from the spacecraft body. This was done on purpose so that the controls design would be simplified as we can now ignore the momentum terms. (However, in reality momentum management schemes are needed so that the wheel momentum buildup is minimized and the scheme must also account for wheel momentum s effective stiffening of the inertia tensor.) Notice that in the equations of motion the pitch (θ 2 ) is decoupled from the roll (θ 1 ) and yaw (θ 3 ). For the aircraft aficionados, this might look like a familiar result. The pitch equation is similar to the short period longitudinal mode. The phugoid mode is missing as the air is rather thin at our spacecraft s altitude and lift is negligible. However, another new mode is now present in the longitudinal equation that is a consequence of the spinning body. Like the aircraft, the lateral roll/yaw equations are coupled a la the Dutch roll mode. (a) Using the Laplace transform, combine the pitch structural mode equation with the pitch equation and find the transfer function: G p (s) = Θ 2(s) U 2 (s) (b) Plug in the parameters that are in the appendix. Is G p (s) stable? Look at the Bode plot for G p (s) in the frequency range of 0.0001 to 50 rad/sec. What do each of the features represent? (c) Using classical loop shaping (lead/lag/notch/etc.), design a controller that meets the following criteria: i. Stability: 6dB GM and 45deg PM ii. Tracking Performance: Step response rise time 1.5sec, max overshoot 1%, and settling time 2.5sec iii. Disturbance Rejection: Maximum excursion of θ 2 1rad due to a unit impulse at the input (d) Write down your final control law, clearly mark the stability margins, and plot the step and impulse responses. 4

3. Modern Control (35pts) As a spacecraft orbits the Earth, the line of sight to the sun is blocked once per orbit (depending on season). These eclipses cause the spacecraft to undergo drastic and rapid thermal changes. A control problem that arises from this is called the thermal snap of the solar arrays. As each solar panel is a laminate of multiple materials with different coefficients of thermal expansion, the solar array warps as the different materials cool at different rates during eclipse. Once the spacecraft is out of eclipse, the array snaps back as it quickly warms. The control problem is to maintain accurate pointing during this phenomenon. (a) Arrange the coupled roll/yaw equations into state-space form where the two inputs are u 1, u 2 and the two outputs are θ 1, θ 3. Hint, recall from your Diff Eq/FEM/vibrations classes that: M and for ẋ = Ax + Bu: θ 1 θ 3 q 1 q 3 + C θ 1 θ 3 q 1 q 3 + K θ 1 θ 3 q 1 q 3 [ ] 0 I A = M 1 K M 1 C 0 [ 4 2 ] B = M 1 I2 2 0 2 2 = x = ( ) T θ 1 θ 3 q 1 q 3 θ1 θ3 q 1 q 3 ( ) u1 u = u 3 (b) We can model the thermal snap as a unit impulse disturbance to the spacecraft roll/yaw inputs. Design a LQR full state feedback controller for the roll/yaw equations that meets the following criteria: i. θ 1 3milliradians, θ 3 5milliradians in response to a unit impulse applied simultaneously to u 1 and u 2. ii. θ 1 0.1milliradians, θ 3 0.1milliradians within 10 seconds in response to a unit impulse applied simultaneously to u 1 and u 2. iii. All modes of the closed loop system (A + BK) should be less than 10 Hz (magnitudes of all eigenvalues less than 20πrad/sec) iv. Minimize the wiggles that result from the structural flexibility. u 1 u 3 0 0 5

You will have to dial in the Q x and Q u to meet the performance requirements. Some good initial guesses for Q x and Q u are: Q x = 1/x 2 1 max 0 0 0 1/x 2 2 max 0 0 Q u = 0 0 0 1/x 2 8 [ ] max 1/u 2 1max 0 0 1/u 2 2 max where x 1max is approximately the maximum excursion in state x 1 expected in the system response to a unit impulse input and similarly u 1max is the maximum control effort expected for u 1. (c) Write down your final control law and plot the impulse responses. 6

4. Systems Engineering (10pts) The analysis so far as been strictly in the continuous time domain. In reality, the actual plant dynamics are in the continuous time domain and the control law is implemented digitally based on feedback from digital sensors. For the problems above, the sensor necessary for feedback would be an IMU (inertial measuring unit), which is essentially a 3-axis angular rate gyroscope. Recall that the response of a gyroscope is similar to a first order low pass filter. To meet all of the requirements of the controllers above, which IMU from the choices below is best suited for the application and why? What are the advantages/disadvantages of each IMU? (a) IMU 1: 120 Hz bandwidth, 1 khz sampling rate, 0.001 milliradians RMS noise, $1 million (b) IMU 2: 50 Hz bandwidth, 100 Hz sampling rate, 0.01 milliradians RMS noise, $100,000 (c) IMU 3: 50 Hz bandwidth, 50 Hz sampling rate, 0.02 milliradians RMS noise, $75,000 (d) IMU 4: 1 khz bandwidth, 10 khz sampling rate, 100 milliradians RMS noise, $1000 (Note: The gyro output is actually an angular rate. However, the RMS noise listed is the residual noise in the angle estimate after going through an attitude estimator/kalman filter) 7

Parameters J 1 = 110kg m 2 J 2 = 10kg m 2 J 3 = 100kg m 2 ω o = 0.0012rad/sec ω 1 = 13rad/sec ω 2 = 10rad/sec ω 3 = 8rad/sec σ 1 = 0.1 kg m 2 σ 2 = 0.01 kg m 2 σ 3 = 0.1 kg m 2 If you can not obtain the expression in problem 1, use the following values for the a i parameters: a 1 = 110 a 2 = 4.8739e 4 a 3 = 0.2327 a 4 = 10 a 5 = 4.0616e 5 a 6 = 100 a 7 = 1.3539e 4 a 8 = 0.2327 a 9 = 0.0012 a 10 = 0.0012 8