Optimal Deployment of Heterogeneous Microsatellite Constellation Based on Kuhn-Munkres and Simulated Annealing Algorithms
Publication: Journal of Aerospace Engineering
Volume 35, Issue 6
Abstract
Heterogeneous constellations are composed of satellites with different structures or satellites carrying payloads with different functions. Different appearances of satellites and changes in attitude lead to different area-to-mass ratios (AMRs), which is an adverse factor in the orbit control of low Earth orbit (LEO). Traditional deployment methods primarily apply to homogeneous constellations, and the overall fuel optimization of the constellation and the trajectory drift difference among heterogeneous satellites are not considered. In the present study, the deployment of microsatellites with different AMRs was explored, so as to deploy the satellites to the target semimajor axis and relative phase in the same plane. Such deployment applies to both heterogeneous and homogeneous constellations in which satellites change the attitude or appearance thereof dynamically and differentially in LEO. By introducing the influence of atmospheric drag and orbit maneuvers into the traditional method, an argument of latitude (AoL) and semimajor axis coordinated control strategy was established. A satellite AoL adjustment amount optimization algorithm based on the Kuhn-Munkres and simulated annealing algorithms was proposed, which enables satellites to complete the target configuration with the fuel close to the expected value. Compared with the traditional method, the cost, average fuel consumption, and fuel consumption balance of each satellite are significantly improved, being beneficial for maintaining the overall fuel balance of the constellation and extending the controllable life of the constellation.
Practical Applications
In the present study, the optimal deployment of heterogeneous microsatellite constellations in circular low Earth orbit was proposed, so as to deploy the satellites with different area-to-mass ratios to the target semimajor axis and relative phase in the same plane. To solve the conflict between fuel demand and availability of some satellites, collaborative reconfiguration was devised in which satellites with sufficient fuel were appropriately used more, helping those with insufficient fuel to save fuel. An AoL and semimajor axis coordinated control strategy was established, and a satellite AoL adjustment amount optimization algorithm based on the Kuhn-Munkres and simulated annealing algorithm was proposed, which enables satellites to complete the target configuration with the fuel close to the expected value. Compared with the traditional method, the cost, average fuel consumption, and fuel consumption balance of each satellite were significantly improved, being beneficial for maintaining the overall fuel balance of the constellation and extending the controllable life of the constellation. The proposed method also applies to the case of satellites changing the attitude or appearance thereof dynamically. Complete methods, formulas, and cases are shown, which can be referenced and adopted in practical projects.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
Some or all data, models, or code that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by Primary Research and Development Plan of Zhejiang Province, Key Technologies of Nano Remote Sensing Satellites (209C05004).
References
Bolandi, H., and S. Abrehdari. 2018. “Precise autonomous orbit maintenance of a low Earth orbit satellite.” J. Aerosp. Eng. 31 (4): 04018034. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)AS.1943-5525.0000823.
Burnett, E. R., and H. Schaub. 2021. “Spacecraft formation and orbit control using differential attitude-dependent solar radiation pressure.” Adv. Space Res. 67 (11): 3396–3408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2020.03.047.
Campbell, M. E. 2003. “Planning algorithm for multiple satellite clusters.” J. Guidance Control Dyn. 26 (5): 770–780. https://doi.org/10.2514/2.5111.
Chernick, M., and S. D’Amico. 2018. “New closed-form solutions for optimal impulsive control of spacecraft relative motion.” J. Guidance Control Dyn. 41 (2): 301–319. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.G002848.
Di Carlo, M., L. A. Ricciardi, and M. Vasile. 2016. “Multi-objective ptimization of constellation deployment using low-thrust propulsion.” In Proc., AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conf., 5577. Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2016-5577.
Finley, T., D. Rose, K. Nave, W. Wells, J. Redfern, R. Rose, and C. Ruf. 2014. “Techniques for leo constellation deployment and phasing utilizing differential aerodynamic drag.” Adv. Astronaut. Sci. 150 (Jan): 1397–1411.
Fong, C. J., et al. 2008. “Constellation deployment for the FORMOSAT-3/COSMIC mission.” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 46 (11): 3367–3379. https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.2008.2005202.
Foster, C., J. Mason, V. Vittaldev, L. Leung, V. Beukelaers, L. Stepan, and R. Zimmerman. 2018. “Constellation phasing with differential drag on planet labs satellites.” J. Spacecraft Rockets 55 (2): 473–483. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.A33927.
Huang, S. 2021. “Multi-phase mission analysis and design for satellite constellations with low-thrust propulsion.” Ph.D. thesis, Dept. of Aerospace Science and Technology, Politecnico di Milano.
Huang, X., Y. Yan, and Y. Zhou. 2017. “Underactuated spacecraft formation reconfiguration with collision avoidance.” Acta Astronaut. 131 (Feb): 166–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2016.11.037.
Huang, X., Y. Yan, Y. Zhou, and D. Hao. 2016. “Fast terminal sliding mode control of underactuated spacecraft formation reconfiguration.” J. Aerosp. Eng. 29 (5): 04016020. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)AS.1943-5525.0000610.
Ivanov, D., M. Kushniruk, and M. Ovchinnikov. 2018. “Study of satellite formation flying control using differential lift and drag.” Acta Astronaut. 152 (Nov): 88–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2018.07.047.
Jenkins, M. G., D. Krejci, and P. Lozano. 2018. “CubeSat constellation management using ionic liquid electrospray propulsion.” Acta Astronaut. 151 (Oct): 243–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2018.06.007.
Kirkpatrick, S., C. J. Gelatt, and M. P. Vecchi. 1983. “Optimization by simulated annealing.” Science 220 (4598): 671–680. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.220.4598.671.
Kuhn, H. W. 1955. “The Hungarian method for the assignment problem.” Naval Res. Logist. Q. 2 (1–2): 83–97. https://doi.org/10.1002/nav.3800020109.
Lafleur, T., and N. Apffel. 2021. “Low-earth-orbit constellation phasing using miniaturized low-thrust propulsion systems.” J. Spacecraft Rockets 58 (3): 628–642. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.A34905.
Lee, D. 2018. “Nonlinear disturbance observer-based robust control for spacecraft formation flying.” Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 76 (May): 82–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2018.01.027.
Magner, R. D., B. Cotten, and R. E. Zee. 2022. “Drag-based orbit phasing through attitude and articulation control.” Acta Astronaut. 193 (Apr): 627–634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2021.07.045.
Mahdisoozani, H., M. Bakhtiari, and K. Daneshjoo. 2021. “Developing novel multi-plane satellite constellation deployment methods using the concept of nodal precession.” Adv. Space Res. 68 (8): 3141–3158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2021.06.010.
Mohammadi, M. S., and A. Naghash. 2019. “Robust optimization of impulsive orbit transfers under actuation uncertainties.” Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 85 (Feb): 246–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2018.11.026.
Munkres, J. 1957. “Algorithms for the assignment and transportation problems.” J. Soc. Ind. Appl. Math. 5 (1): 32–38. https://doi.org/10.1137/0105003.
Niccolai, L., A. Caruso, A. A. Quarta, and G. Mengali. 2019. “Electric sail phasing maneuvers for constellation deployment.” Acta Astronaut. 177 (Dec): 853–861. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2019.12.003.
Pontani, M., and M. Pustorino. 2021. “Nonlinear Earth orbit control using low-thrust propulsion.” Acta Astronaut. 179 (Feb): 296–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2020.10.037.
Shao, X., M. Song, J. Wang, D. Zhang, and J. Chen. 2017. “Satellite formation keeping using differential lift and drag under J2 perturbation.” Aircraft Eng. Aerosp. Technol. 89 (1): 11–19. https://doi.org/10.1108/AEAT-06-2015-0168.
Sin, E., M. Arcak, and A. Packard. 2018. “Small satellite constellation separation using linear programming based differential drag commands.” In Proc., 2018 Annual American Control Conf., 4951–4956. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE. https://doi.org/10.23919/ACC.2018.8431408.
Smith, B., R. Abay, J. Abbey, S. Balage, M. Brown, and R. Boyce. 2021. “Propulsionless planar phasing of multiple satellites using deep reinforcement learning.” Adv. Space Res. 67 (11): 3667–3682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2020.09.025.
Yang, H., Y. Jiang, and H. Baoyin. 2016. “Fuel efficient control strategy for constellation orbital deployment.” Aircraft Eng. Aerosp. Technol. Int. J. 88 (1): 159–167. https://doi.org/10.1108/AEAT-02-2014-0023.
Yang, S., Y. Wang, and D. Wang. 2020. “Study on maneuver methods of satellites constellation with continual small-thrust propulsion.” [In Chinese.] Chin. Space Sci. Technol. 40 (4): 69–77.
Zhang, R. 1998. “Satellite orbit and attitude dynamics and control.” Chap. 2 in Perturbation of Satellite Orbit, 70–71. [In Chinese.] Beijing: Beihang University Press.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Aerospace Engineering
Volume 35 • Issue 6 • November 2022
Copyright
© 2022 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Sep 30, 2021
Accepted: Jun 13, 2022
Published online: Aug 27, 2022
Published in print: Nov 1, 2022
Discussion open until: Jan 27, 2023
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.