Comparison of space launch vehicle tracking using different types of multiple models

Since an instantaneous impact point and impact dispersion area of the space launch vehicle (SLV) are determined from estimated state information (i.e., position and velocity) of the SLV, a precise tracking of the SLV plays an important role in the flight safety operation. To contribute this problem,...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in2016 19th International Conference on Information Fusion (FUSION) pp. 209 - 216
Main Authors Haryong Song, Yoosoo Han
Format Conference Proceeding
LanguageEnglish
Published ISIF 01.07.2016
Subjects
Acceleration
Adaptation models
Atmospheric modeling
Heuristic algorithms
Mathematical model
Projectiles
Propulsion
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Since an instantaneous impact point and impact dispersion area of the space launch vehicle (SLV) are determined from estimated state information (i.e., position and velocity) of the SLV, a precise tracking of the SLV plays an important role in the flight safety operation. To contribute this problem, in this paper, we present comparison of two distinct interacting multiple model (IMM) algorithms which incorporate different types of multiple models, to describe dynamic models of SLV. Here, to design multiple motion models of SLV, we separate the flight phase of a SLV into propelled flight mode and coast (non-propelled) flight mode. The first one is represented by the Singer's linear model with ternary uniform mixtures and the other one is depicted by a nonlinear model with a state vector considering drag and thrust of SLV. To compare the performance of both IMM for SLV, we make use of nominal trajectory of Korea space launch vehicle-1 (KSLV-1) which is the first SLV of Republic of Korea and had launched successfully in 2013. The nominal flight trajectory includes propelled and non-propelled flight modes based on variation of thrust. Through Monte Carlo simulations, we demonstrate the tracking performance of both IMM algorithms in an aspect of RMS error.