Evaluation and Comparison of Three Fuel Optimal Impulsive Control Strategies for Satellite Formation Reconfiguration

Lu Bai, Chengxi Zhang, Jihe Wang
{"title":"Evaluation and Comparison of Three Fuel Optimal Impulsive Control Strategies for Satellite Formation Reconfiguration","authors":"Lu Bai, Chengxi Zhang, Jihe Wang","doi":"10.1109/ICPS58381.2023.10128106","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The evaluation and comparison of three formation impulsive control schemes for satellite formation reconfiguration are researched by numerical simulations with the same conditions. These formation reconfiguration control strategies are Standard formation reconfiguration scheme using asynchronous method (SFRA), extended formation reconfiguration scheme using asynchronous method (EFRA), and Standard formation reconfiguration with synchronous way (SFRS). The total fuel consumptions and reconfiguration times of three reconfiguration algorithms are compared by numerical simulations. Through the evaluation and comparison of the three methods, the results show that both the SFRA and EFRA strategies have analytical solutions, as a result their calculation amount is relatively small, and they are simple and efficient for on board application. However, SFRS adopts numerical optimization method, which requires a large amount of calculation. By comparing the reconstruction times of the three methods, the conclusion is as follows: SFRA and EFRA have the same reconfiguration time, while the reconfiguration time of SFRS is the shortest. The comparison of fuel consumption shows that the fuel consumption of EFRA is the least; SFRA has the less fuel consumption, and SFRS has the most fuel consumption.","PeriodicalId":426122,"journal":{"name":"2023 IEEE 6th International Conference on Industrial Cyber-Physical Systems (ICPS)","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2023 IEEE 6th International Conference on Industrial Cyber-Physical Systems (ICPS)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ICPS58381.2023.10128106","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The evaluation and comparison of three formation impulsive control schemes for satellite formation reconfiguration are researched by numerical simulations with the same conditions. These formation reconfiguration control strategies are Standard formation reconfiguration scheme using asynchronous method (SFRA), extended formation reconfiguration scheme using asynchronous method (EFRA), and Standard formation reconfiguration with synchronous way (SFRS). The total fuel consumptions and reconfiguration times of three reconfiguration algorithms are compared by numerical simulations. Through the evaluation and comparison of the three methods, the results show that both the SFRA and EFRA strategies have analytical solutions, as a result their calculation amount is relatively small, and they are simple and efficient for on board application. However, SFRS adopts numerical optimization method, which requires a large amount of calculation. By comparing the reconstruction times of the three methods, the conclusion is as follows: SFRA and EFRA have the same reconfiguration time, while the reconfiguration time of SFRS is the shortest. The comparison of fuel consumption shows that the fuel consumption of EFRA is the least; SFRA has the less fuel consumption, and SFRS has the most fuel consumption.
卫星编队重构中三种燃料最优脉冲控制策略的评价与比较
在相同条件下,通过数值模拟研究了卫星编队重构中3种编队脉冲控制方案的评价与比较。这些地层重新配置控制策略包括异步方法的标准地层重新配置方案(SFRA)、异步方法的扩展地层重新配置方案(EFRA)和同步方法的标准地层重新配置方案(SFRS)。通过数值仿真比较了三种重构算法的总油耗和重构次数。通过对三种方法的评价和比较,结果表明,SFRA和EFRA策略都有解析解,计算量相对较小,且简单高效,便于车载应用。然而,SFRS采用数值优化方法,需要大量的计算。通过对比三种方法的重构时间,得出结论:SFRA与EFRA重构时间相同,而SFRS重构时间最短。油耗比较表明,EFRA的油耗最小;SFRA的油耗最小,SFRS的油耗最大。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信