1 Global Spacecraft Attitude Control Using Magnetic Actuators

Marco Lovera and Alessandro Astol

Dipartimento di Elettronica e Informazione, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Imperial College, London, England

The problem of inertial pointing for a spacecraft with magnetic actuators is addressed. It is shown that a global solution to the problem can be obtained by means of (static) attitude and rate feedback and (dynamic) attitude feedback. Simulation results demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed approach.

1 INTRODUCTION The problem of (global) regulation of the attitude of rigid spacecraft, i.e., spacecraft modeled by the Eulers equations and by a suitable parameterization of the attitude, has been widely studied in the recent years. If the spacecraft is equipped with three independent actuators a complete solution to the set point and tracking control problems is available. In [5, 11] these problems have been solved by means of PD-like control laws, i.e., control laws that make use of the angular velocities and of the attitude, whereas [1], building on the general results developed in [3], has solved the same problems using dynamic output feedback control laws. It is worth noting that, if only two independent actuators are available, as discussed in detail in [4], the problem of attitude regulation is not solvable by means of continuous (static or dynamic) time-invariant control laws, whereas a time-varying control law, achieving local asymptotic (nonexponential) stability, has been proposed in [10]. The above results, however, are not directly applicable if the spacecraft is equipped with magnetic coils as attitude actuators. As a matter of fact, it is not possible by means of magnetic actuators to provide three independent torques at each time instant, yet as the control mechanism hinges on the variations of the Earths magnetic eld along the spacecraft orbit, on average the system possesses strong controllability properties. In [2, 7, 8, 13] the regulation problem has been addressed exploiting the (almost) periodic behavior of the system, hence resorting to classical tools of linear periodic systems, if local results are sought after, or to standard passivity arguments, if (global) asymptotic stabilization of open-loop stable equilibria is considered. However, several problems remain open. In particular, if only inertial pointing is considered, the global stabilization problems by means of full- (or partial-) state feedback is still theoretically unsolved. Note, however, that from a practical point of view these

2004 by CRC Press LLC

problems have an engineering solution, as demonstrated by the increasing number of applications of this approach to attitude control. The aim of this chapter is to show how control laws achieving global1 inertial pointing for magnetically actuated spacecraft can be designed by means of arguments similar to those in [1, 11], provided that time-varying feedback laws are used and that the control gains satisfy certain scaling properties. In particular, while previous work ([9]) dealt with the case of state feedback control for a magnetically actuated, isoinertial spacecraft, this chapter deals with the more general problems of full (attitude and rate) and partial (attitude only) state feedback for a generic magnetically actuated satellite. The chapter is organized as follows. In Section 2 the model of the system is presented, while in Section 3 the model of the geomagnetic eld used in this study is described. In Section 4 a general result on the stabilization of magnetically actuated spacecraft is presented. Namely, using the theory of generalized averaging, it is shown how stabilizing control laws designed for spacecraft with three independent control torques have to be modied to construct stabilizing laws in the presence of magnetic actuators. In Section 5 the general theory is used to design control laws using only attitude information, so avoiding the need for rate measurements in the control system. Finally, Sections 6 and 7 present some simulation results and concluding remarks.

THE MODEL

The model of a rigid spacecraft with magnetic actuation can be described in various reference frames [12]. For the purpose of the present analysis, the following reference systems are adopted. Earth Centered Inertial reference axes (ECI). The origin of these axes is in the Earths center. The X-axis is parallel to the line of nodes, that is the intersection between the Earths equatorial plane and the plane of the ecliptic, and is positive in the Vernal equinox direction (Aries point). The Z-axis is dened as being parallel to the Earths geographic northsouth axis and pointing north. The Y-axis completes the righthanded orthogonal triad. PitchRollYaw axes. The origin of these axes is in the satellite center of mass. The X-axis is dened as being parallel to the vector joining the actual satellite center of gravity to the Earths center and positive in the same direction. The Y-axis points in the direction of the orbital velocity vector. The Z-axis is normal to the satellite orbit plane and completes the right-handed orthogonal triad. Satellite body axes. The origin of these axes is in the satellite center of mass; the axes are assumed to coincide with the bodys principal inertia axes. The attitude dynamics can be expressed by the well-known Eulers equations: [12]: I = S()I + Tcoils + Tdist , (1)

1 To be precise, the control laws guarantee that almost all trajectories of the closed-loop system converge to the desired equilibrium.

2004 by CRC Press LLC

where R3 is the vector of spacecraft angular rates, expressed in body frame, I R33 is the inertia matrix, S() is given by 0 z y 0 x , S() = z (2) y x 0 Tcoils R3 is the vector of external torques induced by the magnetic coils and Tdist R3 is the vector of external disturbance torques, which will be neglected in what follows. In turn, the attitude kinematics can be described by means of a number of possible parameterizations (see, e.g., [12]). The most common parameterization is given by the four Euler parameters (or quaternions), which lead to the following representation for the attitude kinematics: q = W ()q, (3) where q = q1 and q2 q3 q4
T T = qr

q4

0 1 z W () = 2 y x

is the vector of unit norm Euler parameters z y x 0 x y . (4) x 0 z y z 0

It is useful to point out that Eq. (3) can be equivalently written as q = W (q), where q4 1 q3 W (q) = 2 q2 q1 q3 q4 q1 q2 q2 q1 . q4 q3 (5)

(6)

Note that the attitude of inertially pointing spacecraft is usually referred to the ECI reference frame. The magnetic attitude control torques are generated by a set of three magnetic coils, aligned with the spacecraft principal inertia axes, which generate torques according to the law: Tcoils = mcoils b(t), where mcoils R3 is the vector of magnetic dipoles for the three coils (which represent the actual control variables for the coils) and b(t) R3 is the vector formed with the components of the Earths magnetic eld in the body frame of reference. Note that the vector b(t) can be expressed in terms of the attitude matrix A(q) (see [12] for details) and of the magnetic eld vector expressed in the ECI coordinates, namely b0 (t), as b(t) = A(q)b0 (t). The dynamics of the magnetic coils reduce to a very short electrical transient and can be neglected. The cross-product in the above equation can be expressed more simply as a matrix-vector product as Tcoils = B(b(t))mcoils , (7)

2004 by CRC Press LLC

where

0 bz (t) by (t) 0 bx (t) B(b(t)) = bz (t) by (t) bx (t) 0

(8)

is a skew symmetric matrix, the elements of which are constituted by instantaneous measurements of the magnetic eld vector. As a result, the overall dynamics, after application of the preliminary feedback, mcoils = B T (b(t))u, can be written as q I = W (q) = S()I + (t)u,

(9)

where (t) = B(b(t))B T (b(t)) 0. 3 MAGNETIC FIELD MODEL A time history of the International Geomagnetic Reference Field (IGRF) model for the Earths magnetic eld [12] along ve orbits in PitchRollYaw coordinates for a near-polar orbit (87 inclination) is shown in Fig. 1. As can be seen, bx (t), by (t) have a very regular and almost periodic behavior, while the bz (t) component is much less regular. This behavior can be easily interpreted by noticing that the x and y axes of the Pitch-Roll-Yaw coordinate frame lie in the orbit plane while the z axis is normal to it. As a consequence, the x and y components of b(t) are affected only by the variation of the magnetic eld due to the orbital motion of the coordinate frame (period equal to the orbit period) while the z component is affected by the variation of b(t) due to the rotation of the Earth (period of 24 h). When one deals with the problem of inertial pointing, however, it is more appropriate to consider a representation of the magnetic eld vector in Earth centered inertial coordinates to be more convenient, as shown in Fig. 2.

4 STATE FEEDBACK STABILIZATION In this section, a general stabilization result for a spacecraft with magnetic actuators is T given, in the case of full-state feedback (attitude and rate). For, let q = 0 0 0 1 and consider the system q = W (q) (10) I = S()I + and the control law = kp qr kv . (11) In the light of Theorem 1 in [11], the control law (11) guarantees that qr 0 and 0 as t for the closed-loop system (10) and (11). Also, an analysis of the Lyapunov function used in the same reference shows that the equilibrium (, 0) of the closed-loop q system (10) and (11) is asymptotically stable, while the other possible equilibrium (, 0) q is unstable.

2004 by CRC Press LLC

Figure 1 Geomagnetic eld in PitchRollYaw coordinates, 87 inclination orbit, 450 km altitude.

Proposition 1 Consider the system (9) and the control law u = 2 kp qr kv . (12) Then, there exists > 0 such that for any 0 < < the control law (12) ensures that (, 0) is a locally exponentially stable equilibrium of the closed-loop system (912). q Moreover, almost all trajectories of (912) converge to (, 0). q Proof. In order to prove the rst claim, introduce the coordinates transformation z1 = q z2 = . In the new coordinates, the system (9) is described by the equations: z1 I z2 = W (z1 )z2 = S(z2 )Iz2 + (t)(kp z1r kv z2 ).

(13)

(14)

System (14) satises all the hypotheses for the application of generalized averaging theory ([6, Theorem 7.5]). Moreover, using the Lyapunov function of Theorem 1 in [11] one can conclude that the system obtained applying the generalized averaging procedure has (, 0) q as locally asymptotically stable equilibrium provided that 1 = lim T T
T

B(t)B T (t)dt > 0.

0

2004 by CRC Press LLC

Figure 2 Geomagnetic eld in Earth-centered inertial coordinates, 87 inclination orbit.

To conclude the proof of the second claim it is necessary to prove that the matrix is generically positive denite. For, note that the matrix is obtained by integration of a threeby-three square (symmetric) matrix of rank two, namely the matrix B(t)B T (t). However, the kernel of the matrix B(t)B T (t) is not generically a constant vector, which implies > 0 generically. The set of bad trajectories, i.e., the trajectories for which the matrix is singular, is described by the simple relation K = Ker(B(t)) = Im( b), for some constant vector However, by a trivial property of the vector product one has b. K = Im(b(t)) = Im(A(q)b0 (t)), hence all bad trajectories are such that, for all t, A(q)b0 (t) = (t) b, for some scalar function (t), which is obviously a nongeneric condition. 5 STABILIZATION WITHOUT RATE FEEDBACK

The ability of ensuring attitude tracking without rate feedback is of great importance from a practical point of view. The problem of attitude stabilization without rate feedback has

2004 by CRC Press LLC

been recently given an interesting solution in [1] for the case of a fully actuated spacecraft. In this section a similar approach is followed in the development of a dynamic control law that solves the problem for a magnetically actuated satellite. First, notice that the system (10) and the control law (which is similar in spirit to the one proposed in [1]): z = q z = kp qr W T (q)(q z), (15)

(where > 0 and > 0) give rise to a closed-loop system having (, 0, q /) as a locally q asymptotically stable equilibrium and qr 0 and 0 as t . On the basis of this consideration, which can be proved by means of the Lyapunov function 1 1 T V = kp [(q4 1)2 + qr qr ] + T I + (q z)T (q z), 2 2 (16)

it is possible to give a solution to the magnetic attitude control problem without rate feedback. Proposition 2 Consider the system (9) and the control law z u = q z = 2 (kp qr + W T (q)(q z)). (17)

Then there exists > 0 such that for any 0 < < the control law renders the equilibrium (, 0, q /) of the closed-loop system (917) locally asymptotically stable. Moreover, q almost all trajectories of the closed-loop system converge to this equilibrium. Proof. As in the case of the state feedback control law we now introduce the coordinates transformation 1 = q 2 = (18) 3 = z . In the new coordinates, the system (9) is described by the equations: 1 I 2 3 = W (1 )2 = S(2 )I2 (t)(kp 1r + W T (1 )(1 3 )) = (1 3 ).

(19)

Again, system (19) satises all the hypotheses for the application of [6, Theorem 7.5] and using the Lyapunov function given in Eq. (16) one can conclude that the system obtained applying the generalized averaging procedure has (, 0, q /) as a locally asymptotically q stable equilibrium provided that 1 = lim T T
T

B(t)B T (t)dt > 0,

0

and this holds nongenerically as demonstrated in the proof of Proposition 1.

2004 by CRC Press LLC

Figure 3 Quaternion and angular rates for the attitude acquisition: state feedback controller.

2004 by CRC Press LLC

Figure 4 Quaternion and angular rates for the attitude acquisition: output feedback controller.

2004 by CRC Press LLC

Figure 5 Quaternion and angular rates for the attitude maneuver: state feedback controller.

2004 by CRC Press LLC

Figure 6 Quaternion and angular rates for the attitude maneuver: output feedback controller.

2004 by CRC Press LLC

6 SIMULATION RESULTS To assess the performance of the proposed control laws the following simulation test case has been analyzed. The considered spacecraft has an inertia matrix given by I = diag[27, 17, 25] kg m2 and it is operating in a near-polar (87 inclination) orbit with an altitude of 450 km and a corresponding orbit period of about 5600 s. For such a spacecraft, two sets of simulations have been carried out; the rst is related to the acquisition of the target attitude T q = 0 0 0 1 from an initial condition characterized by a high initial angular rate; the second is related to a point-to-point attitude maneuver from the initial attitude given by T T 1 q0 = 0 0 0 1 to the target attitude q = 2 1 0 0 1 . In all cases, both the full-state feedback control law and the control law without rate feedback have been applied. The results of the simulations are displayed in Figs. 3 and 4 for the attitude acquisition, and Figs. 5 and 6 for the attitude maneuver, from which the good performance of the proposed control laws can be seen.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The problem of inertial attitude regulation for a small spacecraft using only magnetic coils as actuators has been analyzed and it has been shown that a nonlinear low-gain PD-like control law yields (almost) global asymptotic attitude regulation even in the absence of additional active or passive attitude control actuators such as momentum wheels or gravity gradient booms.

Acknowledgments The work for this chapter was partially supported by the European network Nonlinear and Adaptive Control and by the MURST project, Identication and Control of Industrial Systems.

REFERENCES 1. M.R. Akella. Rigid body attitude tracking without angular velocity feedback. Systems and Control Letters, 42:321326, 2001. 2. C. Arduini and P. Baiocco. Active magnetic damping attitude control for gravity gradient stabilised spacecraft. Journal of Guidance and Control, 20(1):117122, 1997. 3. S. Battilotti. Global output regulation and disturbance attenuation with global stability via measurement feedback for a class of nonlinear systems. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 41(3):315327, 1996. 4. C. I. Byrnes and A. Isidori. On the attitude stabilization of rigid spacecraft. Automatica, 27(1):8795, 1991. 5. O.E. Fjellstad and T.I. Fossen. Comments on the attitude control problem. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 39(3):699700, 1994. 6. H.K. Khalil. Nonlinear Systems. Macmillan, New York, 1992.

2004 by CRC Press LLC

7. M. Lovera. Periodic H attitude control for satellites with magnetic actuators. In 3rd IFAC Symposium on Robust Control Design, Prague, Czech Republic, 2000. 8. M. Lovera. Optimal magnetic momentum control for inertially pointing spacecraft. European Journal of Control, 7(1):3039, 2001. 9. M. Lovera and A. Astol. Global attitude regulation using magnetic control. In IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Orlando, Florida, 2001. 10. P. Morin, C. Samson, J.-B. Pomet, and Z.-P. Jiang. Time-varying feedback stabilization of the attitude of a rigid spacecraft with two controls. Systems and Control Letters, 25:375385, 1995. 11. J. T.-Y. Wen and K. Kreutz-Delgado. The attitude control problem. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 36(10):11481162, 1991. 12. J. Wertz. Spacecraft Attitude Determination and Control. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, 1978. 13. R. Wisniewski and M. Blanke. Fully magnetic attitude control for spacecraft subject to gravity gradient. Automatica, 35(7):12011214, 1999.

2004 by CRC Press LLC