Sie sind auf Seite 1von 26

INSTITUTUL NATIONAL DE CERCETARE - DEZVOLTARE AEROSPATIALA

“ELIE CARAFOLI” – I.N.C.A.S. Bucuresti


Cod: 18-027/2
Bucuresti, Bd. Iuliu Maniu 220, Sector 6, CP 061126, Tel: +40 21 434.00.83, Fax/Tel: +40 21 434.00.82,
CUI 434670 RO, Nr. Inregistrare la Registrul Comertului J 40/6492/1991 SOL
Cont RO34TREZ7005069XXX002851 Trezoreria Operativa a Municipiului Bucuresti
Cod IBAN RO86RNCB0290101344950001 Banca Comerciala Romana – BCR – Sucursala Iuliu Maniu
Cod SIRUES 401252193 Cod SIRUITA 179196 Cod CAEN 7219 (7310)
e-mail : incas@incas.ro

INSTITUTUL NATIONAL DE CERCETARE-


DEZVOLTARE AEROSPATIALA
“ELIE CARAFOLI” – I.N.C.A.S. BUCURESTI
Bd. Iuliu Maniu 220, Sector 6, CP 061126,
Tel: +40 21 434.00.83, Fax/Tel: +40 21 434.00.82,
e-mail : incas@incas.ro
I.N.C.A.S.

CONTECHSAT

Investigation and analysis of doking dynamics for


space vehicles on orbit

Activity: Background and definition of docking


dynamics. Model of general docking dynamics

Stage 1
30.04.2018
INSTITUTUL NATIONAL DE CERCETARE - DEZVOLTARE AEROSPATIALA
“ELIE CARAFOLI” – I.N.C.A.S. Bucuresti
Cod: 18-027/2
Bucuresti, Bd. Iuliu Maniu 220, Sector 6, CP 061126, Tel: +40 21 434.00.83, Fax/Tel: +40 21 434.00.82,
CUI 434670 RO, Nr. Inregistrare la Registrul Comertului J 40/6492/1991 SOL
Cont RO34TREZ7005069XXX002851 Trezoreria Operativa a Municipiului Bucuresti
Cod IBAN RO86RNCB0290101344950001 Banca Comerciala Romana – BCR – Sucursala Iuliu Maniu
Cod SIRUES 401252193 Cod SIRUITA 179196 Cod CAEN 7219 (7310)
e-mail : incas@incas.ro

Collaborative development

Name and surname Signature Date

Thien Van NGUYEN


30.04.2018
Ana-Maria BORDEI
30.04.2018
Verificat

Name and surname Signature Date

Head department
Ph. Eng. Dragoș Daniel ION- 30.04.2018
GUŢĂ

Project director
30.04.2018
Ph. Eng. Achim Ioniță
INSTITUTUL NATIONAL DE CERCETARE - DEZVOLTARE AEROSPATIALA
“ELIE CARAFOLI” – I.N.C.A.S. Bucuresti
Cod: 18-027/2
Bucuresti, Bd. Iuliu Maniu 220, Sector 6, CP 061126, Tel: +40 21 434.00.83, Fax/Tel: +40 21 434.00.82,
CUI 434670 RO, Nr. Inregistrare la Registrul Comertului J 40/6492/1991 SOL
Cont RO34TREZ7005069XXX002851 Trezoreria Operativa a Municipiului Bucuresti
Cod IBAN RO86RNCB0290101344950001 Banca Comerciala Romana – BCR – Sucursala Iuliu Maniu
Cod SIRUES 401252193 Cod SIRUITA 179196 Cod CAEN 7219 (7310)
e-mail : incas@incas.ro

Content

1 Introduction....................................................................................................................8
2 Background.....................................................................................................................9
2.1 Docking Mechanisms History........................................................................................10
2.2 Equations of Motion.......................................................................................................12
2.2.1 Modeling aspects........................................................................................................12
2.3 Hardware-In-the-Loop Simulation Techniques..............................................................13
3 Model of general docking dynamics...........................................................................16
3.1 General docking dynamics on-orbit of two satellites.....................................................16
3.2 Equations of motion for contact process of two rigid bodies.........................................18
3.3 Docking Interface Dynamics..........................................................................................20
4 Technical Description and Specification [13].............................................................25
5 References.....................................................................................................................27
INSTITUTUL NATIONAL DE CERCETARE - DEZVOLTARE AEROSPATIALA
“ELIE CARAFOLI” – I.N.C.A.S. Bucuresti
Cod: 18-027/2
Bucuresti, Bd. Iuliu Maniu 220, Sector 6, CP 061126, Tel: +40 21 434.00.83, Fax/Tel: +40 21 434.00.82,
CUI 434670 RO, Nr. Inregistrare la Registrul Comertului J 40/6492/1991 SOL
Cont RO34TREZ7005069XXX002851 Trezoreria Operativa a Municipiului Bucuresti
Cod IBAN RO86RNCB0290101344950001 Banca Comerciala Romana – BCR – Sucursala Iuliu Maniu
Cod SIRUES 401252193 Cod SIRUITA 179196 Cod CAEN 7219 (7310)
e-mail : incas@incas.ro

Summary
The purpose of the activity developed in this report, code 18-027/2, is to achieve a spatial
service development, namely: implementing the most advanced space robotic technologies for the
multidisciplinary conception of orbital mission and docking missions.
The specific object of this activity has as concrete results: the generation of dynamics for space
flight vehicles in the specific reference systems, considered as free systems or in missions, coupling /
disconnection with the definition of interaction between them, definition of model bookstores,
verifying and validating the algorithms to be implemented on space vehicles in compliance with
specific rules.
INSTITUTUL NATIONAL DE CERCETARE - DEZVOLTARE AEROSPATIALA
“ELIE CARAFOLI” – I.N.C.A.S. Bucuresti
Cod: 18-027/2
Bucuresti, Bd. Iuliu Maniu 220, Sector 6, CP 061126, Tel: +40 21 434.00.83, Fax/Tel: +40 21 434.00.82,
CUI 434670 RO, Nr. Inregistrare la Registrul Comertului J 40/6492/1991 SOL
Cont RO34TREZ7005069XXX002851 Trezoreria Operativa a Municipiului Bucuresti
Cod IBAN RO86RNCB0290101344950001 Banca Comerciala Romana – BCR – Sucursala Iuliu Maniu
Cod SIRUES 401252193 Cod SIRUITA 179196 Cod CAEN 7219 (7310)
e-mail : incas@incas.ro

Abbreviations
ISS Internatinal Space Station
LEO Low Earth Orbit
OOS On-Orbit Servicing
HIL Hardware-In-the-Loop
CSA Canadian Space Agency
ESA European Space Agency
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration
APAS Androgynous Peipheral Assembly System
ROS Russian Orbital Segment
NDS NASA Docking System
IDSS International Docking System Standard
IBDM International Berthing and Docking Mechanism
EPOS European Proximity and Operations Simulator
DEOS DEutsche Orbitale and Servicing Mission
DOF Degrees Of Freedom
w.r.t. With Respect To
CoM Center of Mass
MOI Moment Of Inertia
ODE Ordinary Defferential Equation
INSTITUTUL NATIONAL DE CERCETARE - DEZVOLTARE AEROSPATIALA
“ELIE CARAFOLI” – I.N.C.A.S. Bucuresti
Cod: 18-027/2
Bucuresti, Bd. Iuliu Maniu 220, Sector 6, CP 061126, Tel: +40 21 434.00.83, Fax/Tel: +40 21 434.00.82,
CUI 434670 RO, Nr. Inregistrare la Registrul Comertului J 40/6492/1991 SOL
Cont RO34TREZ7005069XXX002851 Trezoreria Operativa a Municipiului Bucuresti
Cod IBAN RO86RNCB0290101344950001 Banca Comerciala Romana – BCR – Sucursala Iuliu Maniu
Cod SIRUES 401252193 Cod SIRUITA 179196 Cod CAEN 7219 (7310)
e-mail : incas@incas.ro

Symbols

μ0−¿ gravitational constant of Earth


μ−¿ friction coefficient
ω−¿ mean motion
Fi −¿ thrust force
F f −¿ friction force
M f −¿ friction torque
m−¿ mass
r−¿ radius, orbit radius
V −¿ velocity
∆ V −¿ velocityincrement
ν −¿ true anomaly
INSTITUTUL NATIONAL DE CERCETARE - DEZVOLTARE AEROSPATIALA
“ELIE CARAFOLI” – I.N.C.A.S. Bucuresti
Cod: 18-027/2
Bucuresti, Bd. Iuliu Maniu 220, Sector 6, CP 061126, Tel: +40 21 434.00.83, Fax/Tel: +40 21 434.00.82,
CUI 434670 RO, Nr. Inregistrare la Registrul Comertului J 40/6492/1991 SOL
Cont RO34TREZ7005069XXX002851 Trezoreria Operativa a Municipiului Bucuresti
Cod IBAN RO86RNCB0290101344950001 Banca Comerciala Romana – BCR – Sucursala Iuliu Maniu
Cod SIRUES 401252193 Cod SIRUITA 179196 Cod CAEN 7219 (7310)
e-mail : incas@incas.ro

Tabel of figures
Figure 2-1 The ISS robotic arm while capturing the Orbital Sciences' Cygnus cargo craft, and
preparing it for docking. [1]. The next figure depicts the cargo craft after it has been docked. [2]........8
Figure 2-2 Family tree of the different docking mechanisms.[3]............................................................9
Figure 2-3 The Gemini-Agena docking mechanism and the probe and drogue mechanism [4].............9
Figure 2-4 Approach of the ATV to the International Space Station (courtesyESA)[5]........................11
Figure 2-5 The Russian-American docking simulator based on two 6-DOF Stewart platforms, the right
figure shows the Chinese docking simulator.[6]....................................................................................12
Figure 2-6 HIL Simulation using Air-Bearing [7]..................................................................................13
Figure 2-7 European Proximity Operations Simulator (EPOS 2.0).......................................................13
Figure 2-8 HIL Simulation of the International Berthing and................................................................14
Figure 3-1 General model for two on-orbit docking satellites. [9].......................................................15
Figure 3-2 General model for contact process. [10].............................................................................17
Figure 3-3 Schematic cross section of Docking Assembly. [10]..........................................................20
Figure 3-4 Docking translational motion. [10].....................................................................................20
Figure 3-5 Docking rotational motion. [10]..........................................................................................22
1 Introduction

This report presents a “Background and definition of docking dynamics”and a “Model of


general docking dynamics” - project code 18-027/2 SOL.
Satellite docking is the most critical system in the servicing of an on-orbit satellite. On-Orbit
Servicing (OOS) is an important research topic that has already been put into action, and lately has
become realistic and promising for the space missions. Although spacecraft servicing has been totally
neglected as its technology has been too expensive or has not been feasible, the interest of the space
programs of US, Japan, Canada, Europe, Germany and China increased as they realized its importance
for the future of space. ISS (International Space Station) is the best example for docking
and on-orbit servicing. It often undergoes docking by the modules that are regularly sent to it to
supply the astronauts and the station with the required supplies, materials and experiments. It also
undergoes on-orbit servicing by the astronauts on board.
This veri_cation shall be demonstrated by software numerical simulation and a real-time
Hardware-in-The-Loop (HIL) simulation. In the software numerical simulation, the multi-bodies
dynamic parameters of both satellites are calculated due to the external forces acting on them. The
results of the software model act as a guideline for the type of the hardware that will be used in the
HIL simulation. Also, it acts as a reference for the results of the hardware model. On the other hand,
the HIL simulation will be used to validate and verify the proposed docking mechanism in a real time
simulation.
This paper consists of five chapters. Chapter 2 provides the related work of the previous work
that are done by other researchers in the same area of the research. Also, it contains a review of the
latest literature of docking mechanisms,multi-bodies dynamics and HIL simulations. Chapter 3
presents the model of general docking dynamics. Chapter 4 presents Technical Description and
Specification of EPOS 2.0. In the end is presented a chapter of bibliographical references.
2 Background
Rendezvous and docking (RVD) is a key operational technology, which is
required for many missions involving more than one spacecraft. RVD technology
and techniques are key elements in missions such as
 Assembly in orbit of larger units;
 re-supply of orbital platforms and stations;
 exchange of crew in orbital stations;
 repair of spacecraft in orbit;
 retrieval, i.e. capture and return to ground, of spacecraft;
 re-joining an orbiting vehicle using a lander in the case of lunar and
planetary return missions.

Docking Process
In an On-Orbit Servicing mission are involved two satellites: Chaser and Target. Target is the one
which is already in space and needs maintenance or disposal. While the Chaser is the one which
performs the necessary actions on the Target. Before carrying out any actions on the Target satellite, a
rigid connection between both satellites has to be ensured. This is done by the on-orbit docking. The
docking takes place at the end of the approach scenario, in which the two satellites start to approach
each others in space. Figure 2 -1depicts a docking example. Since this process is very critical for the
whole mission, an end-to-end veri_cation has to be performed on the docking mechanism that is
proposed to verify the success of the process before carrying it out in space. This verification shall be
demonstrated by software numerical simulation and a real-time Hardware-in-The-Loop (HIL)
simulation. In the software numerical simulation, the multi-bodies dynamic parameters of both
satellites are calculated due to the external forces acting on them. The results of the software model
act as a guideline for the type of the hardware that will be used in the HIL simulation. Also, it acts as a
reference for the results of the hardware model. On the other hand, the HIL simulation will be used to
validate and verify the proposed docking mechanism in a real time simulation.

Figure 2-1 The ISS robotic arm while capturing the Orbital Sciences' Cygnus cargo craft, and preparing it
for docking. [1]. The next figure depicts the cargo craft after it has been docked. [2]

2.1 Docking Mechanisms History


The mechanism of Docking is of interest since 1964. By the years new mechanisms and
conceptual designs are proposed by the different space programs of the world. The different docking
developments and designs are listed chronologically in Figure 2 -2,
Figure 2-2 Family tree of the different docking mechanisms.[3]

Figure 2-3 The Gemini-Agena docking mechanism and the probe and drogue mechanism [4]
When Neil Armstrong and Dave Scott manually performed rendezvous in a Gemini
vehicle and then docked with an unmanned Agena target vehicle on 16 March
1966, was the first rendezvous and docking between two spacecraft. On 30
October 1967, when the Soviet vehicles Cosmos 186 and 188 docked took place
the first automatic RVD.
After that, RVD operations have regularly been performed by the Russian
(Soviet) and US space programmes; e.g. in the following:

 US Apollo (1968–1972) and Skylab programmes (1973–1974);


 Russian (Soviet) Salyut and Mir Space Station programmes (1971–1999)
with docking of the manned Soyuz and unmanned Progress spaceships;
 US/Soviet Apollo–Soyuz docking mission (Apollo–Soyuz Test Project, ASTP,
1975);
 US Space Shuttle retrieval and servicing missions (starting in 1984 with
the retrieval and repair of the Solar Max satellite);
 US Space Shuttle missions to the Russian space station Mir in the 1990s in
preparation for the ISS programme;
 Assembly, crew exchange and re-supply of the International Space Station
(ISS) (begun in November 1998).

Since the beginning of the 1980s RVD techniques and technology have been
studied and developed in Western Europe by the European Space Agency (ESA),
first as ‘enabling technology’ and, from the mid-1980s onwards, for the
Columbus Man-Tended Free-Flyer (MTFF), which was intended to dock with the
American Space Station Freedom, and for the European spaceplane Hermes,
which was intended to visit the MTFF (Pairot, Fehse & Getzschmann 1992).
After the cancellation of the MTFF and Hermes projects (as a result of the political changes in
Europe) and after the merger of the eastern and western space station programmes into the
International Space Station (ISS) Programme (NASA 1998a), the Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV)
has become part of the western European contribution
(Cornier et al. 1999). The ATV will participate in the re-boost and re-supply missions to the ISS. The
total fleet of vehicles, which will perform RVD/B operations with the ISS, includes the US Space
Shuttle (manned), the Russian Soyuz (manned) and Progress (unmanned) vehicles, the European ATV
(unmanned) and the Japanese H-II Transfer Vehicle (HTV, unmanned; (Kawasaki et al. 2000)). In
addition to these transport vehicles it can be expected that, in future, inspection vehicles will be
attached to the ISS.
The different docking developments and designs are listed chronologically in Figure 2 -4.
If required, they will fly around the station to inspect problem areas and to identify the nature of
problems (Wilde & Sytin 1999). In the far future, such vehicles may also be used for maintenance and
repair tasks. RVD/B technologywill be required for the departure and re-attachment of such vehicles
as well as for their operational tasks.
Although the ISS will probably be the most important application of RVD/B technology and
techniques for the first two decades of the twenty-first century, there have been and will be other
rendezvous missions, e.g. servicing of spacecraft in orbit (Hubble Space Telescope for example),
spacecraft retrieval (EURECA, SPAS for example) and lunar/planetaryreturn missions. Rendezvous
and docking operations in geo-synchronous orbit for the servicing of communication satellites have
been studied in the past in some depth; however, no such mission has yet been realised.[11]
Figure 2-4 Approach of the ATV to the International Space Station (courtesyESA)[5].

2.2 Equations of Motion


For the modeling of many docking mechanisms are used the Newton-Euler Dynamics
equations. For the European Proximity Operations Simulator (EPOS) the researchers, used Newton
Euler differential equations to model the two satellites as rigid bodies in space. They have been widely
used by the other docking mechanisms researchers, such as: Canadian Space Agency, Chinese
Docking system. Although Newton-Euler is a fundamental method for dynamics, it is not very
efficient in the heavy programming tasks. Other methods that are used: Lagrange-Euler method, or
Kane method. Chinese researchers used Lagrange analytical mechanical theory while studying the
probe and drogue docking mechanism. Afterwards, the same Chinese researchers used the Kane
method to represent their problem. However, Newton-Euler method is still enough for the modeling of
a docking mechanism, which is not a very computationally heavy problem.

2.2.1 Modeling aspects


Stiffness and damping are some of the aspects that are considered by researchers of the docking
mechanisms of the contact dynamics. Stiffness depends on the materials used in the process of the
docking. It plays a very important role, as it affects the reaction of the bodies when they collide. For
example, in the probe and drogue docking mechanism, the material of the probe and its stiffness affect
the docking process. The stiffer the probe, the more impact force will be applied during the collision.
While, a probe made of a less stiff material decreases the impact force on the spacecraft, due to the
bending of the probe. Because of the high stiffness, simulations can easily become unstable unless the
calculations are fast and accurate enough. This was achieved by the Canadian Space Agency (CSA),
by using an external contact dynamics tool for their modeling and simulations.
Another method was used by researchers who worked on European Proximity Operations
Simulator (EPOS). The ordinary contact dynamics equation was used in the contact model, which is
called "spring dashpot" model. This method was used due to its simplicity. In addition to that model, a
virtual contact compliance model was added to facilitate the HIL simulation, and to avoid any high
impact, which is very dangerous for the hardware. This device is represented in different springs and
dampers. The stiffness of these models can be altered by changing the stiffness and damping
coefficients in the impact force equation. The aim is to have a softer impact by having more impact
time.

2.3 Hardware-In-the-Loop Simulation Techniques


Verification of the docking mechanism is an essential step before the docking process takes place in
space. Hardware-In-the-Loop simulation has many objectives, above all, the following are the most
important:

1. End-to-end verification of the whole system.


2. Ensures system's reliability in space.
3. Determines the dynamic parameters of the docking mechanism.

In fact, simulating a space system or a space experiment on Earth is not an easy task. Different
approaches are used in the HIL simulations. The first approach ever was done by NASA in Langley
Research Center (LaRC); a manned simulation using two huge vehicles was carried out in 1964.
American and Russian scientists developed another simulator using two 6 DOF table (Hexapod), also
known as Stewart-Gough platform. Each hexapod system represents a spacecraft which moves to
represent the motion of the spacecraft during docking. Figure 2.8, shows the docking system
simulator. Also, NASA developed another HIL Simulator using the 6 DOF simulators recently.
Followed by Chinese researchers
Figure 2-5 The Russian-American docking simulator based on two 6-DOF Stewart platforms, the right figure shows
the Chinese docking simulator.[6]

who also built a docking simulator using Hexapods as seen in Figure 2 -5. However, the size of the 6-
DOF hexapods used in both cases was very big. Other researchers used air bearing technique to
simulate the friction-less motion, on Earth as it is in space, as seen in Figure 2 -6.

Figure 2-6 HIL Simulation using Air-Bearing [7].

Moreover, industrial robots are recently involved in the HIL rendezvous, berthing and docking
simulations. US Naval Research Lab used two industrial robots to carry out the HIL rendezvous
simulation [14]. Canadian Space Agency (CSA) developed a facility for the testing of Special Purpose
Dexterous Manipulator (SPDM) for the contact operations with the ISS [15]. Also, Chinese
researchers developed simulation of free-oating robots, to simulate the on-orbit servicing of a satellite
[16].
Figure 2-7 European Proximity Operations Simulator (EPOS 2.0)

European Space Agency (ESA) and German Aerospace Center (DLR) developed a huge facility
called "EPOS 2.0", Figure 2 -7, which is an improved version of the former facility called EPOS
(European Proximity Operations Simulator). EPOS uses two industrial KUKA robots to simulate the
rendezvous, berthing and the docking of the satellites.
Also, ESA developed a validation docking test for the new International Berthing and Docking
Mechanism (IBDM) by using a single KUKA robot, as shown inFigure 2 -8. In this facility, they used
the industrial robot to represent the motion of the spacecraft during the docking process in order to
validate the docking mechanism. However, this test has many limitations. In the test, there is no
feedback response of the forces or the torques, which makes it only realistic for very heavy satellites.
Therefore, it is very difficult to test docking mechanisms of light satellites using this facility.

Figure 2-8 HIL Simulation of the International Berthing and


Docking Mechanism (IBDM) by ESA [8]
All existing HIL simulations for docking mechanisms (e.g., SDS (CSA), IBDM Testing (ESA)
and EPOS (DLR)) have limitations. The shortcomings arise from the use of highly rigid industrial
hardware for the generation of the multi-body dynamics combined with a dampening element that
isolates the simulator hardware from the hardware under test. Such setups are satisfactory for the
simulation of very high mass spacecraft as used in human space-ight, in which the contact dynamics
leads to negligible backreaction on the multi-body dynamics. However, for small spacecraft, the back-
reaction of the contact on the relative trajectory is significant and many contact parameters
(in particular, material friction, damping and stiffness) need to be considered in the simulation at high
fidelity in order to represent the true behaviour.

3 Model of general docking dynamics


3.1 General docking dynamics on-orbit of two satellites
To study docking dynamics, firstly we have to define coordinate systems. As shown in Figure 3
-9, two satellites are undergoing docking process, and coordinate systems are described as following:
OXYZ is the inertial reference frame attached to mass center of the Earth,
O1X1Y1Z1, O2X2Y2Z2 are body reference frames attached rigidly to mass centers of target and
chaser vehicles, respectively,
O3X3Y3Z3 is body reference frame attached to base of the target vehicle’s drogue,
O4X4Y4Z4 is body reference frame attached to the tip center of probe on the chaser vehicle.
Z2
T2 F2
Y2
Z1
Y3 O2
Z4
Y4 X2
O1 Y1 T3 F3
X1
T4

T 1 Z3 O3
X3 O4 Chaser Vehicle
F1
F 4
X4
Target Vehicle D2
D1 Z

O Y
X
Figure 3-9 General model for two on-orbit docking satellites. [9]

The dynamic models of two satellites undergoing the docking process can be expressed using
Newton-Euler equations of motion. With forces, and torques acting upon the two vehicles as seen,
equations of motion are established:
- For target vehicle:
r r (0) 2 r r&
d &
F1 + F3 = m1 D1 = m1D1
dt (1)
r r uuuuu r r (0)
d r r r
T1 + T3 + O1O3 �F3 = [ J1 ] w1 + w1 �[ J1 ] w1
dt (2)
- For chaser vehicle:
r r (0) 2 r r&
d &
F2 + F4 = m2 D2 = m2 D2
dt (3)
r r uuuuur r (0)
d r r r
T2 + T4 + O2O4 �F4 = [ J 2 ] w2 + w2 �[ J 2 ] w2
dt (4)
r r r r
F,F ,F ,F
In there, 1 2 3 4 are sum of forces acting on the target, and chaser vehicles,
r r r r
T1, T2 , T3 , T4
are sum of torques acting on the target, and chaser vehicles,
r r
D1, D2
are position vectors giving the distances from origin of inertial reference frame to mass
centers of target and chaser vehicles, respectively,
r r
w1, w2 are angular velocity vectors of reference frames O X Y Z , O X Y Z with respect to
1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2
inertial reference frame OXYZ,
m1, m2 are masses of the target and chaser vehicles,
[ J1 ] , [ J 2 ] are moment of inertia matrices of target and chaser about their mass centers,
(0)
d
(...)
and d t indicates that derivative is carried out in inertial reference frame.
As known, while docking process taking place, the relative motion between two vehicles is
considered. Commonly, these quantities are measured in the reference frame attached to the mass
center of target vehicle. As we know that
(0) uuuuu r (1) d uuuuur r uuuuur
d
O1O2 = O1O2 + w1 �O1O2
dt dt (5)
2
d uuuuur (1) d uuuuur (1) d r uuuuur
(0) 2
r (1) d uuuuur r r uuuuur
d t2
O1O2 =
d t2
O1O2 +
dt
w 1 �O1O2 + 2w 1 �
dt
O1O2 + w1 �w1 �O1O2 ( )
(6)
(1) (1) 2
d d
(...) (...)
2
With d t , d t indicate the first and second order of derivatives are carried out in the
reference frame O1X1Y1Z1.
By using Eqs. (1) (3), the expression for relative linear acceleration between two vehicles
measured in reference frame O1X1Y1Z1 is written:
(1) 2 2
d uuuuur (0) d uuuuur (1) d r uuuuur r (1) d uuuuur r r uuuuur
d t2
O1O2 =
d t2
O1O2 -
dt
w 1 �O1O2 - 2w 1 �
dt
O1O2 - w1 �w1 �O1O2 ( )
(7)
Or
(1) 2
r r r r
d uuuuur F1 + F3 F2 + F4 (1) d r uuuuur r (1) d uuuuur r r uuuuur
d t2
O1O2 =
m1
-
m2
-
dt
w 1 �O O
1 2 - 2w 1 �
dt
O O
1 2 - w1 �w 1 �O1O2 ( )
(8)
r r
w w
And by solving differential equations (2)(4), we will receive angular velocities 1 , 2 . Based
on that, relative angular velocity between two vehicles measured in the reference frame O 1X1Y1Z1 is
computed as:
r (1) � r r
w21 = 10 R �
� �
( w2 - w1 )
(9)
� 0 �
1R
Where � �is transformation matrix giving orientation of reference frame O1X1Y1Z1 with respect to
inertial reference frame OXYZ.
3.2 Equations of motion for contact process of two rigid bodies
Suppose to have two rigid bodies as shown in Figure 3 -10, both external and internal forces acting on
the two bodies are considered. Here we only consider that the internal forces are arisen due to the
contact between two bodies at the mating interfaces. For simplicity, let use the subscript “j” to indicate
for point j subjected to internal force, and use subscript “k” to indicate for point k subjected to
external force for both the two rigid bodies; use superscript “i” to indicate quantities relate to internal
forces; and superscript “e” relate to external forces. As forces acting on the two bodies, the Newton-
Euler equations of motion are written as following:

w1 F1ji F2ji
V1 w2
d1ji d2ji
V2
T1i T1e r1 r2
d1ke
d2ke T 2i T 2e
1 Z
e D 2
F
1k F2ke

Inertial reference frame


O Y

X
Figure 3-10 General model for contact process. [10]

- For the body 1:

�F1ek + �F1ij = m1V&1 = m1 ( D&&+ r&1&)


r r r r r
k j (10)
re r e ri ri r&
� 1k 1k � 1 j 1 j 1
d �F + d �F = K
k j (11)
re r
Fi
Where F1k , 1 j are respectively external and internal forces acting on point k and point j,
r ri
d1ek d1 j
, are position vectors from the mass center of the body 1 to points k, and j,
r
D is the position vector giving the distance from the origin of inertial reference frame to the
mass center of system, which lying on the line connecting the mass center 1 and mass center 2,
r
r1 is the position vector giving the distance from the mass center of system to the mass center
of the body 1,
r
K1
is the angular momentum of the body 1, and is written
r r
K1 = [ J1 ] .w1
(12)
With [ J1 ] is the moment of inertia matrix about the mass center of the body 1,
r
w1 is angular velocity of the reference frame rigidly attached to the body 1 measured in the
inertial reference frame.
Taking derivative Eq. (12), and using Poisson’s relations, obtained:
r& (0)
d r r r
K1 = [ J1 ] w1 + w1 �[ J1 ] w1
dt (13)
(0)
d r
w1 r
In there, the term d t w
indicates that taking derivative 1 with respect to time in the inertial
r
w&
reference frame OXYZ, i.e angular acceleration 1 is measured in reference frame OXYZ.
Replacing Eq. (13) into Eq. (11), received
( )
r r r& r
&
F e + F i = m D + r&
1 1
&
1 1
(14)
r r (0)
d r r r
T1e + T1i = [ J1 ] w1 + w1 �[ J1 ] w1
dt (15)
In Equations above, we used some denotations to get short forms of equations
r r r r
F1e = �F1ek ; F1i = �F1ij ;
k j
r r r r r r
T1e = �d1ek �F1ek ; T1i = �d1i j �F1ij
k j (16)
Process analogously, equations of motion for the body 2 are established as:

2)
�F2ek + �F2i j = m2V&2 = m2 ( D&&+ r&&
r r r r r
k j (17)
re re ri r r
� 2k 2k � 2 j �F2i j = K&2
d �F + d
k j (18)
Or in short form
( )
r r r& r
&
F2e + F2i = m2 D + r&
&
2
(19)
r r (0)
d r r r
T2e + T2i = [ J 2 ]
w2 + w2 �[ J 2 ] w2
dt (20)
* For the further purposes, we will establish some kinematic and kinetic relations between the
two bodies.
r
Let denote r be the vector giving the distance between the mass center of body 1 and mass
r r r
center of body 2. In some cases, it may be more convenient to express r1 , r2 in terms of r . From the
obvious relations
r r
� m1r1 + m2 r2 = 0
�r r r
� r2 - r1 = r
(21)
Then we received
r m2 r r m1 r
r1 = - r ; r2 = r
m1 + m2 m1 + m2 (22)
And recall the assumption that internal forces arisen due to the contact between the two bodies,
it follows that

( )
r r r r
F2i = �F2i j = � - F1ij = - F1i
j j (23)
r r r
( ) ( )
r r r r r r
T2i = �d2i j �F2i j = � -r + d1i j � - F1ij = r �F1i - T1i
j j (24)
Taking derivative Eq. (22) then substituting into Eqs. (14)  (19), yielded
r r �&r& m2 & r�
F1e + F1i = m1 �D - r&�
� m1 + m2 � (25)
r r r r r&
�& m1 & r�
F2e + F2i = F2e - F1i = m2 �D+ r&�
� m1 + m2 � (26)
And from Eqs. (25)  (26), one can be deduced easily
re re
r& F F
r&= 2 - 1 - 1
( m + m2 ) Fr i
1
m2 m1 m1m2 (27)
r&
&
Note that r in Eq. (27) is the linear acceleration of the mass center of body 2 relative to the
body 1, and it is measured in the inertial reference frame OXYZ. However, in rendezvous and docking
process we usually consider quantities measured in LVLH (Local vertical local horizontal frame)
attached to the target vehicle. At that time, we have to use transformation matrix to transform
coordinates between two reference frames. This issue will be examine and interpret more details in the
further task.

3.3 Docking Interface Dynamics


Clearly that after docking, two vehicles are joined as a single body and move together, so their
docking interfaces must designed to fit with each other. There are a lot of types of docking
mechanisms. However, in general a docking mechanism consists of three main parts: mating surface,
latching mechanism, and shock absorber mechanism as shown in Figure 3 -11.
Target Vehicle Chaser Vehicle

Mating Surface

Latching mechanism

Shock Absorber
Figure 3-11 Schematic cross section of Docking Assembly. [10]
In docking process, following initial contact, rotational and translational motion would take
place simultaneously when chaser penetrates into target vehicle. So analyzing docking process with
complex model as shown in Figure 3 -11 will face difficulties. To make this problem easier, it is
considered in two simpler problems: analyzing translational motion and rotational motion separately.
Besides, some assumptions following are used when considering the problem:
- The two satellites are assumed to be floating in space (i.e, the effect of the Earth’s gravity is
neglected),
- The effect of celestial mechanics is ignored when compared to the contact forces between the
two satellites,
- The orbital dynamics are ignored during the docking of the two satellites (or the orbital frame
is assumed to be initial frame during the docking), because the two satellites are assumed to be in the
same orbit when they are relatively close to each other, right before docking.
X

X1 X2

k S

FS FS

m
1
m 2
M V21
FD FD

k D

Target Vehicle Chaser Vehicle


Figure 3-12 Docking translational motion. [10]

As indicated in Figure 3 -12, the system has only one degree of freedom. Prior to contact, the
target vehicle is assumed to be moving at a constant velocity and carrying a plate connected to its
main body through a spring and viscous damper. The chaser vehicle is also moving at a constant
r
V21
velocity at a relative closing velocity , and has just contacted the target damper plate at t=0.
The equation of motion of chaser and target vehicles centers of mass relative to the system
center of mass is
r r r&
& r&
&
FS + FD = m1 X1 = m2 X 2
(28)
m , m
Where 1 2 are the masses of target and chaser vehicles, respectively,
r r
FS FD
, are spring force and damping force acting on both the two vehicles, and are written
r r r
(
FS = kS X 0 - X ) (29)
r r&
FD = -k D X (30)
With kS , k D are spring constant, and damping constant respectively, and
r r r
X = X 2 - X1
(31)
r
Likely the section above, it is desired to write equation of motion in terms of relative motion X
r r
X1 X 2
rather than in , . After taking some steps analogously in previous section, we have
r m1 r
X2 = X
m1 + m2 (32)
Substituting Eqs. (29), (30) (32) into (28), received
r&
& r& r r
MX + k D X + kS X = kS X 0 (33)
m1
M=
Where m1 + m2 is equivalent mass of system
However, for more convenient when solving the differential equation with second order, it is
r
necessary to define new variable Y (the penetration distance vector) between two vehicles to transfer
to the differential equation with the right side equal to zero, as following
r r r
Y = X - X0
(34)
Replacing Eq. (34) into Eq. (33), obtained
r&
& r& r
MY + k DY + k S Y = 0
(35)
With the initial conditions are given as
Y0 = 0, Y&
0 = -V21 (36)
After solving equation above, the solutions for penetration distance and velocity are
V
Y = - 21 e -a t sin b t
b (37)
� a �
Y&= -V21e-a t �
cos b t - sin b t �
� b � (38)
With
2 �
k k � kD
a= D , b= S� 1- �
2M M� � 4Mk S �

(39)
For analyzing rotational motion in docking process as shown in Figure 3 -13, the chaser and
target vehicles have contacted and latched in such a way that a common hinge point has been
established between two vehicles. The equations of angular motion are not easy to find. Firstly, the
total angular momentum about the hinge point as
r r
( ) ( )
r r& r r r&
K = [ I1 ] w1 + d1 � m1d1 + [ I 2 ] w2 + d 2 � m2 d 2
(40)
r & r &
Where w1 = q1, w2 = q 2 are angular velocities of target and chaser vehicles about hinge point from an
r
inertial frame (axis y ),
r r
d1, d 2
are distance vector from the hinge point to mass center of target and chaser vehicles.
By define the relative position vector
r r r
d = d1 - d 2
(41)
Analogously previous section, we desire to write the expression in term of relative position
vector, then it is easy to obtain
r r r m m r r&
K = [ I1 ] w1 + [ I 2 ] w2 + 1 2 d �d
m1 + m2 (42)
With the assumption during docking process there has no external forces acting on the system,
so by using conservation of angular to carry out derivative Eq. (42), received

( )
r r mm r r r r r
[ I1 ] w&1 + [ I 2 ] w&2 + 1 2 d&�d&+ d �d&& = 0
m1 + m2 (43)
Or taking projection Eq. (43) on the coordinate frame attached to mass center of system as seen,
received
Hinge point

Target Vehicle x Chaser Vehicle


z
d y
m 1 m
d1 d2 2
q1 q2

Figure 3-13 Docking rotational motion. [10]

( )
r r r& & r&
( [ I1 ] q&& ) & r m1m2 d - d � d&
1 - [ I2 ] q2 z +
&
m1 + m2
1 2 ( )
1 - d2 = 0
(44)
And continue with the conservation of linear momentum calculated about the mass center of
system and using result from Eq. (27), obtained

( )
m1m2 & r& & r& r
d1 - d 2 = - F
m1 + m2 (45)
r
Where F is the hinge point reaction force acting on the target vehicle
r
Assume the torque acting on the target vehicle is due to the force F and due to the spring
damper assembly (assumed to produce a pure couple proportional to the relative angular displacement
and angular velocity of the two vehicles), is expressed as
r r r
T = d1 �F - � RS ( q1 + q 2 ) + RD q& & zr = [ I ] q&
( &r
)
� 1 + q2 � � 1 1z
(46)
R , R
With S D are spring constant and damping constant corresponding to rotational rotation
Substituting Eq. (45) into Eq. (46), yielded
mm r
( )
r r& & r&
&
T = 1 2 d1 � d 2 - d1 - � Rs ( q1 + q 2 ) + RD q& & zr = [ I ] q&
( &r )
� 1 + q2 �
� 1 1z
m1 + m2 (47)
And due to restraintr of the hinge for small angular motion
r r r r r
d1 = d1 ( y - q1x ) , d 2 = d 2 ( - y - q R x )
(48)
By performing differentiations of Eq. (48) to expand the cross product indicated in Eqs.
(44)(47), then received
q&&= [ I 2 ] + Md 2 ( d1 + d 2 ) q&
&
1
[ I1 ] + Md1 ( d1 + d2 ) 2 (49)
RS ( q1 + q2 ) + RD q& (& ) 2
(
1 + q 2 = - [ I1 ] + Md1 q1 + Md1d 2q 2
&& &&
) (50)
In there we denote
mm
M= 1 2
m1 + m2 (51)
Let define the relative angular
q = q1 + q 2 (52)
Using Eqs. (49) and (52) to obtain q1 , q 2 in terms of q , then substituting the result into Eq.
(50), received
Jq&
&+ R q&+ R q = 0
D S (53)
With
[ I1 ] [ I 2 ] + M ( [ I1 ] d 22 + [ I 2 ] d12 )
J=
[ I1 ] + [ I 2 ] + M ( d1 + d2 ) 2 (54)
This equation has the form similar to the equation for the case of translational motion. If the
initial conditions are
q0 = q10 + q 20 = 0, q& & &
0 = q10 + q 20 (55)
Then the solutions obtained by solving differential equation is
q -a t � a �
q = 0 e-a t sin b t , q&= q&0e cos b t - sin b t �

b � b � (56)
With
2
R RS � RD �
a= D, b= 1-
� �
2J J �
� 4 JRS

� (57)

4 Technical Description and Specification [13]


The requarments that EPOS facility have to meets are [14]:
• Increased positioning accuracy (factor 10 compared to EPOS 1.0),
• Capability to perform the 6D relative dynamic motion between two spacecrafts during the close
range rendezvous phase ranging from 25m to 0m,
• Dynamical capabilities such as high commanding rate necessary to simulate the 6D contact dynamic
behavior during the docking process,
• Nearly space-representative lightning conditions,
• Capability to mount and move large client mockups and RvD sensors and equipment,
• Capability to integrate on-board computers,
• Capability to connect the facility with a control room (TM/TC exchange with RvD consoles) and
• Capability to command the entire facility in real-time.

EPOS facility consists of the following hardware elements:


• A rail system KUKA KL1500 on the floor to move an industrial robot up to a distance of 25m,
• A KUKA KR100HA (HA = High Accuracy) robot (robot 1) mounted on the rail system for
simulation of the 6 degree of freedom motion of one spacecraft,
• A KUKA KR240-2 robot (robot 2) mounted at one end of the rail system for simulation of the 6
degree of freedom motion of a second spacecraft,
•Aan ARRI Max 12/18 used as Sun simulator,
• A PC based monitoring and control system.

Technical data of the rail - KUKA KL1500 are:


-Type: Linear axis with rack-and-pinion drive
-Payload mass maximum: 3000 kg
-Rail mass (without robot): ca. 13500 kg
-Repeatability: ± 0.02mm (ISO 9283)

The technical data of the robots are:

Parameter KUKA KR100HA KUKA KR240-2


Type 6-axis articulated robot 6-axis articulated robot
Payload mass maximum 100 kg 240 kg
Robot mass (without control part) 1200 kg 1267 kg
Reach (approx.) 2600 mm 2700 mm
Repeatability ± 0.12 mm (ISO 9283) ± 0.12 mm (ISO 9283)
Mounting Rail Floor
Table 1: Robots-Technical data. [13]
Mechanical interfaces
EPOS robots are equipped with an adapter plate where the user can mount test equipment to the simulator. The
specifications are given in Table 2. Before mounting any hardware to the tooling adapter plates, the overall
mass and inertia properties have to be calculated and checked according to the KUKA manual, cf. KUKA
Documentation. The parameters have to be entered in the KUKA controller via the KCP.
KR 100 HA Tooling Adapter KR 240-2 Tooling Adapter
Size 700 mm ×700 mm 1000 mm ×1000 mm
Maximum Payload 60 kg 200 kg
Pattern Threaded hole pattern M 6, 70 mm Threaded hole pattern M 6, 70 mm
pitch pitch
Mass 47 kg 54 kg
2
Moments of Inertia 19.7 kg m 19.5 kg m 2
I xx 1.0 kg m
2
2.5 kg m
2

Moments of inertia 20.3 kg m2 21.3 kg m 2


I yy
Moments of inertia
I zz
Table 2 The specifications of KUKA KR100 and KR240-2 Tooling Adapter Plate. [13]

Capabilities and Performances


The axes 4 and 6 of the KUKA KR240-2 Robot have been configured as endless axes.
Simulation of tumbling satellites often results in several hundred complete rotations around the roll
axis of the body. These rotations can be realized with the two endless axes 4 and 6. The motion of the
linear rail KUKA KL1500 has a motion range from 0 to 25 m with a maximum translational velocity
of 1.45m/s.
Simulation with true-size mockups is possible up to a distance of approximately 25 m. For some
applications also larger distances with downscaled mockups can be realized.
The facility of the positioning accuracy is required to be in the millimeter range. The
measurements have been carried out with a Leica laser tracker by the company Robo Technology
GmbH (http://www.robotechnology.de/robo/de/), allowing 3D precision measurements with micron-
accuracy (absolute distance meter) and absolute angle detection with 0.5arcsec accuracy (ISO17123-
3) with 0.07arcsec resolution. These measurements were used to determine the parameters of a static
model of the facility which is running in real-time during commanding the facility. Based on this
calibration the overall positioning accuracy is 1.56 mm (position, 3s) and 0.2 deg (orientation, 3s).

Parameter Robot KUKA KR240-2 Robot KUKA KR100HA


(from/to) (from/to)
Position
x [m] -2.5 / +2.5 -2.5 / +24.5
y [m] -1.0 / +4.0 -2.5 / +2.5
z [m] -0.5 / +1.5 -0.5 / +1.2
Roll [deg] Endless -300 / +300
Pitch [deg] -90 / +90 -90 / +90
Yaw [deg] -90 / +90 -90 / +90
Velocity
Translational [m/s] 2 2
Rotational [deg/s] 180 180
Table 3 EPOS facility[13]

5 References
[1] NASA. The orbital sciences' cygnus cargo craft attached to the end of the canadarm2 robotic arm
of the international space station, preparing for the berthing. https://www.flickr.com/photos/nasa2
explore/14675089401/in/photostream/, 2014. Accessed 2018-05-08.
[2] NASA. The orbital sciences' cygnus cargo craft attached to the end of the canadarm2 robotic arm
of the international space station, and birthed to the iss. https://www.flickr.com/photos/nasa2explore/
14656683276/in/ photostream/, 2014. Accessed 2014-07-29.
[3] John Cook, Valery Aksamentov, Thomas Hoffman, and Wes Bruner. Iss interface mechanisms and
their heritage
[4] David SF Portree and Lyndon B Johnson Space Center. Mir hardware heritage, volume 1357.
Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, 1995.
[5] W. Fehse, Automated Rendezvous and Docking of Spacecraft, Cambridge University Press, 2003,
ISBN-978-511-06240-7.
[6] Han Junwei, Huang Qitao, and Chang Tongli. Research on space docking hil simulation system
based on stewart 6-dof motion system. 7th JFPS International Symposiumon Fluid Power, 2008.
[7] Xiang Zhang, Yiyong Huang, Xiaoqian Chen, and Wei Han. modeling of a space exible
probe{cone docking system based on the kane method. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics,
27(2):248{258, 2014.
[8] QinetiQ. European berthing and docking mechanism. http://www.esa.int/var/esa/storage/images/
esa_multimedia/images/2014/06/berthing_and_docking_mechanism/14562140-1-eng-GB/Berthing
_and_Docking_Mechanism.jpg, 2014. Accessed 2018-05-08.
[9] Han Junwei, Huang Qitao, Chang Tongli, Research on Space Docking HIL simulation
System Based on Stewart 6-DOF Motion System
[10] D. Chiarappa, Analysis and Design of Space Vehicle Flight Control Systems, NASA Contractor Report,
National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington D. C., 1967.
[11] W. Fehse, Automated Rendezvous and Docking of Spacecraft, Cambridge University Press, 2003,
ISBN-978-511-06240-7.
[12] F. Ankersen, Guidance, Navigation, Control and Relative Dynamics for Spacecraft Proximity
Maneuvers, Ph.D. thesis, Aalborg University, 2010, ISBN 978-87-92328-72-4.
[13] H. Benninghoff, F. Remes, E.-A. Risse, C. Mietner, European Proximity Operations Simulator
2.0 (EPOS)- A Robotic- Based Rendezvous and Docking Simulator, Journal of large-scale research
facilities, A107 (2017). http://dx.doi.org/jlsrf-3-155-6
[14] Boge, T., Wimmer, T., Ma, O., & Tzschichholz, T. (2010). EPOS - Using Robotics for RvD
Simulation of On-Orbit Servicing Missions. In Proc. AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control
Conference. Toronto, Canada.