Influence of sensor and actuator errors on impulsive satellite formation control methods

• Published in: Acta astronautica Vol. 94; no. 2; pp. 608 - 618
• Main Authors: de Bruijn, F.J., Gill, E.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier Ltd 01.02.2014
• Subjects: Actuator errors; Formation flying; Impulsive control; Linear programming; Model predictive control; Model uncertainty; Sensor errors; Spacecraft dynamics; Model predictive control; Sensor errors; Linear programming; Impulsive control; Actuator errors; Spacecraft dynamics; Model uncertainty; Formation flying
• ISSN: 0094-5765; 1879-2030
• DOI: 10.1016/j.actaastro.2013.08.015

This paper investigates how sensor and actuator errors are impacting formation control accuracy and propellant consumption of a two-satellite formation in a low Earth orbit. Realistic relative navigation errors are implemented, based on the results from the PRISMA mission, as well as realistic actuator uncertainty and actuator constraints. Two impulsive control methods are investigated. The first method is based on a controller that is implemented onboard PRISMA and the second method uses linear programming to arrive at a model predictive controller. The control methods are tested in a simulation environment and are subjected to orbital perturbations and realistic sensor errors and actuator errors. Both control methods are able to maintain the desired relative geometry of a projected circular orbit in the presence of the errors. The PRISMA control method demonstrates lower propellant consumption, while the model predictive controller shows better control accuracy. The results show that, based on the used scenario, sensor errors dominate both the formation control accuracy and propellant consumption. The versatility of the model predictive controller is demonstrated in a challenging formation control scenario including formation maintenance and formation reconfiguration tasks. •Impact of sensor and actuator errors on control accuracy and propellant consumption.•Realistic relative navigation errors based on flight data.•Comparison of two controllers with impulsive control schemes.•Versatility demonstrated through multiple formation reconfigurations.