Upload
belinda-marchand
View
65
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Talk charts for 20th AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting presentation, held in San Diego, CA on February 14-17, 2010
Citation preview
INVESTIGATION OF ALTERNATIVE RETURN STRATEGIESFOR ORION TRANS-EARTH INJECTION DESIGN OPTIONS
Belinda G. Marchand and Sara K. Scarritt
The University of Texas at Austin
Thomas A. Pavlak and Kathleen C. HowellPurdue University
Michael W. Weeks
NASA Johnson Space Center
Autonomous Targeting Goals
• LLO EEI via 3 Deterministic ∆V’s – EEI Targets: ALT, FPA & AZ, LAT & LON
– Controls: Up to 3 Deterministic ∆V’s
– Feasible Total ∆V < 1.5 km/sec – Turn-key return capability required
• Targeting in Sun perturbed Earth-Moon 3BP– N-body regimes (for N > 2) Iterative Solution Process – Feasible or Optimal Algorithms Require Startup Arc
– Quality of startup arc is crucial for onboard determination• 2BP vs 3BP Startup Arcs
Precision Earth Entryfrom Polar LLO
Ephemeris (EPHEM) Model:Sun Perturbed Earth-Moon System
( ) ( ) ( )( )( )
( ) ( )( ) ( )
( )( )
1 1111 1 31 2
1 1 11
3
3 3 32
, , ,j js
s
js j js
P P P PP PPP P P PP P
PP P P P P PP Pj
r t r t r tf t x t x t x t
r t r t r t r t
µµ
=
− = − − + −
∑
( ) ( )1 31 2 , From JPL DE405 EphemeridesP PP Pr t r t ⇒
Moon (P2)
Earth (P1)
Sun (P3) Spacecraft (PS)
1 sP Pr1 2P Pr
1 3P Pr
( )2000ˆ
ECI JX γ
11
1
ss
s
P PP P
P PECI
rx
r
=
( ) ( ) ( )( )1
1 1 1 31 2
1, , ,
ss s
s
P PECIP P P P P PP PECI
P PECI
rx f t x t x t x t
r
= =
The Synodic Rotating Frame (SRF)
x
y
Lunar Orbit(Based on Planetary Ephemerides)
Moon (M)
Earth (E)
EMr
ECI = Earth Centered Inertial Frame (EME J2000)SRF = Synodic Rotating Frame
Ephemeris Model vs.The Circular Restricted 3-Body Problem
CR3BPEPHEM
x
y
( )a t
Spacecraft (PS)
1 sP Pr x
y
a
Spacecraft (PS)
1 sP Pr
The Hill Sphere in the Earth-Moon CR3BP
33
Moons
Earth
r a µµ
=
x
y
Comparison of Moon-to-Earth Transfers:CR3BP vs. EPHEM Models
Close-up View Near the Moon:(SRF View)
Targets: Altitude = 121.912 km, FPA = -5.86 deg, ∆V = 1.0 kps
Assessing Entry Constraint Couplingand it’s Impact on Startup Arc Selection
• For each Earth Entry Interface (EEI-k, for k=1,…,6) State1. Uk = set of sample perturbed states relative to EEI-k
2. Wk = set of trajectories generated by
Wk forms the dispersion manifold for EEI-k.
3. Ωk = [SRFCECI] Wk
4. Ωk’= Ωk * a / a(t)5. H = surface defined by Hill Sphere in the SRF of the CR3BP6. Identify Ωk’ H
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )( )1 1 1 1 31 2, , ,s s s
EEI
tP P P P P P P PP P
EEIt
x t x t f x x x dτ τ τ τ τ= + ∫
EEI-1 Dispersion Manifolds:Intersections w/ Hill Sphere (SRF View)
L5
L2
L4
Lat/Lon of Intersections Along Hill Sphere
Intersections with Hill Sphere
EEI-2 Dispersion Manifolds:Intersections w/ Hill Sphere (SRF View)
L3
L4 L1
L5
L3 L5
L4L1
EEI-3
L1
L4
L3
EEI-4
L5
L1
EEI-5
L5
L1
EEI-6
EEI-k (k=3,4,5,6) Dispersion Manifolds:Intersections w/ Hill Sphere (SRF View)
EEI Constraint Coupling CanBe Deduced From Hill Sphere Projections
Impact of Entry Longitude Errors30
Iter
atio
ns14
Iter
atio
ns
+135
-135
Targets: Altitude = 121.912 km, FPA = -5.86 deg, ∆V = 1.5 kpsInitial Longitude: 76.01 deg
Impact of Entry Latitude Errors
21 It
erat
ions
10 It
erat
ions
4 Ite
ratio
ns+1.5
+0.5
-0.5
Targets: Altitude = 121.912 km, FPA = -5.86 deg, ∆V = 1.5 kpsInitial Latitude: -1.29 deg
Impact of Entry Azimuth Errors24
Iter
atio
ns8
Itera
tions
-24
+24
Targets: Altitude = 121.912 km, FPA = -5.86 deg, ∆V = 1.5 kpsInitial Azimuth = 8.41 deg
Conclusions• Without loss of generality, the precision entry problem can be
studied within the context of the CR3BP and the results are easily transitioned and nearly identical to those in the EPHEM model.
• Intersections of EEI dispersion manifolds with Hill Sphere, in SRF, yields useful information regarding entry constraint coupling. This knowledge can be used in future studies to enhance startup arcs and, subsequently, targeting performance.
• Validated constraint coupling conjectures, from Hill sphere analysis, for FPA & LON, FPA & LAT, and FPA & AZ, by analyzing targeter performance in the presence of EEI errors in LON, LAT, and AZ, respectively.
• A multi-body analysis in the SRF of the Earth-Moon system offers a more representative set of startup arcs than those obtained from 2BP approximations. The resulting improved startup arcs facilitate an efficient onboard targeting process.