Robust Model Predictive Control with a Safety Mode: Applied to Small-Body Proximity Operations: Difference between revisions
From Murray Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
(Created page with "{{Paper |Title=Robust Model Predictive Control with a Safety Mode: Applied to Small-Body Proximity Operations |Authors=John Carson, Behcet Acikmese, Richard Murray, and Dougla...") |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|Authors=John Carson, Behcet Acikmese, Richard Murray, and Douglas MacMynowski | |Authors=John Carson, Behcet Acikmese, Richard Murray, and Douglas MacMynowski | ||
|Source=AIAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference and Exhibit, Guidance, Navigation, and Control and Co-located Conferences, 2008 | |Source=AIAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference and Exhibit, Guidance, Navigation, and Control and Co-located Conferences, 2008 | ||
|Abstract= | |Abstract= | ||
Safe and robust G&C (Guidance and Control) algorithms for onboard implementation are developed by augmenting a model predictive control technique with a safety mode. The application example herein is spacecraft small-body proximity operations where model and constraint uncertainty warrant G&C algorithms with a degree of autonomous, onboard decision capability. The algorithm enforces state and control constraints and merges two operational modes: (I) standard mode guides the spacecraft to the proximity of a target state in a robust and resolvable model-predictive manner; (II) safety mode, if activated, maintains the spacecraft near a safety reference for all time. The algorithm utilizes separate feedforward and feedback components. In standard mode, the feedforward guidance solutions come from a way-point generation algorithm that uses a discrete linear-time-varying dynamics model. This approach provides a convex formulation of the problem (solvable onboard as a second-order cone program) that includes control and state constraints; the safety-mode availability adds a constraint in this standard-mode formulation as well. The feedback guarantees standard-mode resolvability to update the guidance profile in a robust, model-predictive manner. In safety mode, an offline-designed feedforward policy with the added feedback maintains the spacecraft in a hovering state in the proximity of its position at safety-mode activation time; this provides robustness to unexpected state-constraint changes such as unexpected ground proximity during landing operations. A simulation demonstrating both the standard and safety modes is provided for a spacecraft autonomous-descent scenario toward a small asteroid with an uncertain gravity model and errors in the surface altitude constraint. | Safe and robust G&C (Guidance and Control) algorithms for onboard implementation are developed by augmenting a model predictive control technique with a safety mode. The application example herein is spacecraft small-body proximity operations where model and constraint uncertainty warrant G&C algorithms with a degree of autonomous, onboard decision capability. The algorithm enforces state and control constraints and merges two operational modes: (I) standard mode guides the spacecraft to the proximity of a target state in a robust and resolvable model-predictive manner; (II) safety mode, if activated, maintains the spacecraft near a safety reference for all time. The algorithm utilizes separate feedforward and feedback components. In standard mode, the feedforward guidance solutions come from a way-point generation algorithm that uses a discrete linear-time-varying dynamics model. This approach provides a convex formulation of the problem (solvable onboard as a second-order cone program) that includes control and state constraints; the safety-mode availability adds a constraint in this standard-mode formulation as well. The feedback guarantees standard-mode resolvability to update the guidance profile in a robust, model-predictive manner. In safety mode, an offline-designed feedforward policy with the added feedback maintains the spacecraft in a hovering state in the proximity of its position at safety-mode activation time; this provides robustness to unexpected state-constraint changes such as unexpected ground proximity during landing operations. A simulation demonstrating both the standard and safety modes is provided for a spacecraft autonomous-descent scenario toward a small asteroid with an uncertain gravity model and errors in the surface altitude constraint. | ||
|URL=http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2008-7243 | |URL=http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2008-7243 | ||
Latest revision as of 13:33, 17 May 2016
| Title | Robust Model Predictive Control with a Safety Mode: Applied to Small-Body Proximity Operations |
|---|---|
| Authors | John Carson, Behcet Acikmese, Richard Murray and and Douglas MacMynowski |
| Source | AIAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference and Exhibit, Guidance, Navigation, and Control and Co-located Conferences, 2008 |
| Abstract | Safe and robust G&C (Guidance and Control) algorithms for onboard implementation are developed by augmenting a model predictive control technique with a safety mode. The application example herein is spacecraft small-body proximity operations where model and constraint uncertainty warrant G&C algorithms with a degree of autonomous, onboard decision capability. The algorithm enforces state and control constraints and merges two operational modes: (I) standard mode guides the spacecraft to the proximity of a target state in a robust and resolvable model-predictive manner; (II) safety mode, if activated, maintains the spacecraft near a safety reference for all time. The algorithm utilizes separate feedforward and feedback components. In standard mode, the feedforward guidance solutions come from a way-point generation algorithm that uses a discrete linear-time-varying dynamics model. This approach provides a convex formulation of the problem (solvable onboard as a second-order cone program) that includes control and state constraints; the safety-mode availability adds a constraint in this standard-mode formulation as well. The feedback guarantees standard-mode resolvability to update the guidance profile in a robust, model-predictive manner. In safety mode, an offline-designed feedforward policy with the added feedback maintains the spacecraft in a hovering state in the proximity of its position at safety-mode activation time; this provides robustness to unexpected state-constraint changes such as unexpected ground proximity during landing operations. A simulation demonstrating both the standard and safety modes is provided for a spacecraft autonomous-descent scenario toward a small asteroid with an uncertain gravity model and errors in the surface altitude constraint. |
| Type | Conference paper |
| URL | http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2008-7243 |
| DOI | |
| Tag | camm08-aiaa |
| ID | 2008 |
| Funding | |
| Flags |
