OTS Talk Topputo PDF
OTS Talk Topputo PDF
OTS Talk Topputo PDF
DINAMICA srl!
Registered office
Rembrandt,
69 !
Piazza della Repubblica, 10 Via
- 20121
- Milan (Italy)
20147 - Milano
(Italy)!
Head office
Phone
02- 40091584!
Via Morghen,
13 - +39
20158
Milan (Italy)
Phone:
+39-02-8342-2930
Fax +39
02 4816277 !
Fax: +39-02-3206-6679
e-mail: dinamica@dinamicatech.com
e-mail: dinamica@dinamicatech.com
website:
www.dinamicatech.com
website: www.dinamicatech.com
The Company
?D7C?97
INNOVATING TECHNOLOGY
Keywords
Analysis
Design
System engineering
Mission analysis
Simulation
Control
Optimization
Optimization
Autonomy
The mission
Italian SME, founded in 2008
The mission: ... to carry on developing methods and
advanced solutions within the Space field and to
transfer their use in other industrial sectors ...
?D7C?97
INNOVATING TECHNOLOGY
Space field
Technology transfer
Industrial sector
A Tangible Example
?D7C?97
INNOVATING TECHNOLOGY
Hubble
Used to reconstruct
unmodeled structural
dynamics
Used to reduce
vibrations in large
telescope satellites
Pharmaceutical industry
System
identification
Used to reconstruct a
pharmaceutical process
dynamics
Predictive
control
!
where:
, as well as
r+u
3
r
r =
Minimize:
v1
v2
rM
vM
max
vE
rE
Minimize:!
Subject to:
and
where
yields:
and
State vector
and control vector!
Lagrange multipliers and costate variables ,
Unknown components of the initial state
,!
Final state and time
and
and!
Constraints
Note: For the sake of a more compact notation, define the Hamiltonian
given or
Simple
Optimal
subject
to system
equationsControl
Problem
J = x2 (1)
=
u
+
x
u
+
x
2
2
1
to theaboundary
conditions
sand
section,
simple optimal
control problem is solved with HermiteSimpson
4 1 method, and certai
Given the simple optimal control problem (Problem #1)
are set to speed-up the computation time and ximproving
accuracy. Consider the problem of findin
and to the boundary conditions 1 (0) = 1
(
with fixed initial
the cost
! and final time [0, 1] to minimize
x
(0)
=
0
2
x 1 = 0.5x1 + u
x1 (0) = 1
!
(69)
J = x2 (1)
(68
5of 2state and control
2
with the following
bound
box
variables
x
(0)
=
0
x 2 = u + x1 u + x1
2
4
!
ct to system equations
10 of
state
x1 (t) and
10control variables
(
with the following bound box
ons
Assignment #1
! Dynamics
init., final time
Obj.
fcn.
b. c.
1 x+
2 (t)
x 1 =10
0.5x
u 10
10 x1 (t) 10
! x1 (0) = 1
10
u(t)
10
5 2
(70)
2
10
x
(t)
10
x
=
u
+
x
u
+
x
2
x2 (0) = 0
2
1
1
4
Write the necessary conditions for10
optimality
u(t) 10and show that
of state
and the
control
variablessolution is
optimal
oxThe
the
boundary
conditions
analytical
solution
of this problem is
(
(69(
10 x1 (t) 10
(71)
x1 (0)
cosh(1
=
t) 1 is
The analytical solution
of
this
problem
(70
Optimal
10 x2 (t) 10 x1 (t) = cosh(1)
(72)
x2 (0) = 0
(
cosh(1
t) t)(73)
solution
10 u(t) 10
(tanh(1
t)
+
0.5)
cosh(1
x1 (t) =
the following bound box of state u(t)
and =
control variables
cosh(1)
(74)
cosh(1)
(tanh(1 t) + 0.5) cosh(1 t)
u(t)
=
10 x1 (t) 10
(71
his
problem
is
cosh(1)
3.1
Solution
by HermiteSimpson
method
10 x2 (t) 10
(72
cosh(1
t)
Thisx1problem
is solved by using the MATLAB function fmincon with interior-point algorithm. T
(t) =
u(t) 10
(73
3.1 Solution by10
HermiteSimpson
method
Transfer the s/c from a given orbit (GTO raising) to a Halo orbit
around L1 of the Earth-Moon system
Dynamics:
Constraints: fixed
Euler-Lagrange equations:
and
and!
(u0 , ... , uN )
III.
End-to-end Tooptimization
finite
model the controlledw/
motion
of P thrust
under the gra
3
Switching fcn
Control
Ty TO
@!3 Tx
@!MINGOTTI,
3
% ;
y" % 2x_ #
%
x" $ 2y_ #
@x
m
@y
m
B. Optimal Control Problem Denition
@!3 Tz
T
_ # $ the guidance law
z" #control
% aims
; at nding
m
The optimal
Isp g0
@z
m
! 2 #t ; t $, that minimizes
0
q!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Z !t
2
2
2 f T!!"
where T # Tx % TyJ %
% Tz is thed! present thrust m
t0 Ispacecraft
sp g0
Continuous variations of the
mass m are t
account through the last of Eqs. (7). This causes a singular
Itwhen
is easymto!
verify
through
the
last ofsolution
Eqs.singularities
(11) that J is given
the prob
Optimal
0 beside
the
well-known
mass;
is, J % m0 & mf , where m0 and mf are the initial an
of Pthat
3 with P1 or P2 (r1;2 ! 0). The guidance la
spacecraft masses. The thrust magnitude must not exc
!Tx !t"; Ty !t"; Tz !t"", t 2 't0 ; tf (, in Eqs. (7) is not given; r
maximum
threshold given by technological constraints. T
found through an optimal control step where objective fun
imposed along the whole transfer through
boundary conditions are specied (see Sec. IV). However,
construct a rst-guess solution,
the prole of T ove
T!t" ' Tmax
prescribed at this stage. Using tangential thrust, attainable
dened
in the
fashion asavailable
reachablethrust.
sets dened
in [3
where
Tmax
is same
the maximum
In additio
!x0constraints
; t0 ; t" be the
of system
(7)impacts
at time wt
Let #T!$"
following
path
are ow
imposed
to avoid
Earth
and moon
guidance
law along
T!$",the$ transfer:
2 't0 ; t(, and starting from !x0
_ 0 ; y_ 0 ; z_0 ; m0 ". p
The
generic point of a !
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
px!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
0 # !x0 ; y0 ; z0 ; x
y2 ( z2 >
!x ( " & 1"2 ( y2 ( z2
!x ( ""2 (
low-thrust
trajectory
is RE ;
J = x2 (1)
Assignment #2
Example 1: A Simple Optimal Control Problem
5
J = x2 (1)
x 2 = u2 + x1 u(68)
+ x21
s section, a Given
simple optimal
control
method, and certai
4
Problem
#1 problem is solved with HermiteSimpson
are set to speed-up the computation time and improving accuracy. Consider the problem of findin
to the boundary conditions
! and
with fixed initial
and final time [0, 1] to minimize the cost
x1 (0) = 1
!x 1 = 0.5x1 + u
(69)
J
=
x
(1)
(68
5 2
2
2
x2 (0) = 0
!x 2 = u + x1 u + 4 x1
ct to system equations
ons
! with the following bound box of state and control variables
x
(t)
10
x
=
u
+
x
u
+
x
2
x
(0)
=
0
2
1
1
2
!
4
!
10 u(t) 10
x
of
state
and
control
variables
o the boundary conditions
Solve the TPBVP associated
10 x1 (t) 10
(71)
x
(0)
=
1
1
The
Matlab
built-in
bvp4c,
bvp5c
analytical solution of this problem is
10 x2 (t) 10
(72)
x2 (0) = 0
10Sixth-order
cosh(1 t)
u(t) 10 method bvp_h6
(73)
x1 (t) =
the following bound
box of state
and control variables cosh(1)
(74)
available
at http://www.astrodynamics.eu/Astrodynamics.eu/Software.html
(69
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
1a
x1
0.9
cosh(1 t)
x1 (t) =
3.1 Solution
cosh(1)
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
0
(tanh(1
t) + 0.5) cosh(1 t)
5
u(t)
=
10 x1 (t) 10
10
cosh(1)
15
10 x2 (t) 10 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
u(t) 10
by10
HermiteSimpson
method
(d)
reintegrate dynamics with discrete control solution
r))
his problem is
log10(abs(error))
(70
ua
x1 error
u error
0.9
(71
(72
(73
Main Difficulties:!
Given a function!
Minimize:!
f (x)
ck (x) = 0, k = 1, ..., K
gj (x)
!
where
can exceed
0, j = 1, ..., J
(K
v)
Minimize: f (x)
The necessary condition for the identification of the
optimum is:
x
f =0
x Hf x > 0,
F (x) = 0
F (x) F (
x) + F (
x) (x
x
) = 0
x = (x
x
) =
[F (
x)]
F (
x)
Graphical interpretation:
F
x
x2 x1
x0
x
x
Line Search:!
Instead of updating the current iterate using!
xnew = x +
xnew = x +
!
where
:!
||F (
xnew )||
||F (
x)||
Trust region:!
The direction of the computed
is slightly modified
Solve:
f =0
Newton algorithm:!
!
where
Hf
x f
! f =
Hf is the Hessian of f : H
x+
2
x
!
!
1
xT Hf x +
2
T
f
x
x
Hf
x+
f =0
Hf
x=
x f
Use
x with a
x0
x1
x2 ...
f (x1 , x2 ) =
1 2
(x1 + x22 )
2
example1.m
f (x1 , x2 ) = 5 x1 + e
(x1 +5)
+ x22
example2.m
example3.m
Assignment #3
Numerically re-compute the three unconstrained
optimizations in the previous slide; i.e.,
!
!
!
1 2
2
!
f
(x
,
x
)
=
(x
+
x
1
2
1
2)
!
2
!
!
!
(x1 +5)
2
!
f
(x
,
x
)
=
5
x
+
e
+
x
1
2
1
2
!
!
!
!
!
Advice
Use Matlab built-in fminunc
Code a SQP solver
Objective function:
V =
V1 +
V2
Minimize: f (x) =
x=
Hf
x f
where Hf is:
2
2t
0
2
V
ttof t0
V (x) =
t0 ttof
2
2t
tof
V (t0 , ttof )
x
f =0
ttof }:
Search space:
t0 [0, 1460] M JD2000 = 4 years
ttof [100, 600] day
objective function
exampleEM.m
Minimize:!
f (x)
Subject to:
ck (x) = 0, k = 1, ..., K
(K
v)
L(x, ) = f (x)
where L is a function of the
Lagrange multipliers
c(x)
variables
and the K
=0
! HL
! C
C
0
x f
c
Karush-KuhnTucker (KKT)
where ! HL = 2xx f
k=1
2
k xx ck
(x, )
(x +
x, +
!
!
1
xT HL x + (
2
C x=
T
f
)
x
x
Lagrange function:
1
xT HL x + (x f )T x
2
(C x + c)
HL x + x f
C x+c=0
HL
C
C
0
CT
x f
c
=0
Karush-KuhnTucker (KKT)
f (x)
Subject to:
gj (x)
0, j = 1, ..., J
A possible approach!
f(x) = f (x) +
j e
gj (x)
j=1
Assignment #4
1. Consider the following NLP problem:
!!
!!
!!
!!
xIR
(*)
of the objective function and constraints (ask fmincon to check for the gradi
the optimization in this latter case);
Make sure that the solver terminated successfully in each case.
Direct Methods
Collocation !
Multiple Shooting
Parameterization
Discretize the states and the controls over the previous mesh
by defining xk = x(tk ) and! uk = u(tk )
x(t)
u(t)
{x1 , x2 , ..., xN }
{u1 , u2 , ..., uN }
X = {tf , x1 , u1 , ..., xN , uN }
But
x i,e
ti )
xi
, then:
xi+1 = xi + h f(xi , ui , ti )
x i+1
Solution is approximated
using a linear expansion
i ) (ti+1
xi+1 = xi + x(t
i) h
= xi + x(t
ti
h i = xi+1
xi
h f(xi , ui , ti ) = 0
t i+1
Runge-Kutta schemes:
h i = xi+1
xi
j fij
hi
=0
j=1
x(t)
and
Minimize:
Dynamics:
u(t)
ciao
X = {tf , x1 , u1 , ..., xN , uN }
ciao
ciao
Minimize:
J(X)
Within each time interval, splines are used to model the control
profile u(t)
each time interval contains M 1 subintervals,
where M is the number of points defining the splines
xi
xi
RK integration
u2i
u1i 1
ti
u...
i 1
xci
xi
RK integration
u1i
u...
i
1
uM
i 1
ti
xi+1
u i
2
iu
uM
i
ti+1
Within a generic time interval, the splines are used to map the
u(t)
1
discrete values {u1i , ..., uM
into
continuous
functions
}
i
c
Numerical integration can be used to compute xi+1
hi = xci
xi = 0
X = {tf , X1 , ..., XN }
xi
xi
RK integration
u2i
u1i 1
ti
u...
i 1
xci
xi
RK integration
u1i
u...
i
1
uM
i 1
ti
xi+1
u i
2
iu
uM
i
ti+1
Assignment #5
Example 1: A Simple Optimal Control Problem
5
J = x2 (1)
x 2 = u2 + x1 u(68)
+ x21
s section, a simple optimal control problem is solved with HermiteSimpson
method, and certai
4
are set to speed-up
the computation
time direct
and improving
accuracy.
Consider
the problem of findin
Solve
#1 conditions
with
transcription
and
collocation
(a) discrete solution and analytical time history of x1
and toProblem
the boundary
with fixed initial and final time [0, 1] to minimize the cost
0.9
x
1a
x 1 = 0.5x1 + u
0.8
x
x
(0)
=
1
1
1
0.7
(69)
J
=
x
(1)
(68
5
2
0
0.1x2 (0)
0.2 =
0.30 0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
x 2 = u2 + x1 u + x21
4
(b) discrete solution and analytical time history of u
ct to system equations
0
with the following bound box of state and control variables
ons
u
Dynamics
Obj.1 +
fcn.
x 1 = 0.5x
u
b. c.
log10(abs(error))
log10(abs(error))
10
x1 (t) 10
2
0
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
(69
5 2 0.1 0.2 0.3(70)
2
x2 (t)
of10
x 2 = u + x1 u + x10
x2 (0)
= 0 method
(c) error
x and u located at discrete points
Use
Euler
for direct 4 01
10 u(t) 10
x error
transcription
5
x
of
state
and
control
variables
u error
o the boundary conditions
10
Provide analytic gradients and zero
15
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
10initial
x1 (t)
10
(71)
guess
x
(0)
=
1
The analytical solution of this1 problem is
(d) reintegrate dynamics with discrete control solution
(70
x2 (t) numerical
10
(72)
0
10Compare
vs analytical
x2 (0) = 0
x error
5
cosh(1
t)
solution
10
u(t) 10
(73)
x1 (t) = 10
15cosh(1)
the followingbound
of statebetween
and control
Makebox
trade-off
CPUvariables
time
0
0.1
0.2
0.3(74)
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
time
and solution accuracy
(tanh(1 t) + 0.5) cosh(1 t)
u(t)
=
10
x
(t)
10
1
Figure 11: Simulation results of Example 1, 100 points.(71
his problem is
cosh(1)
10 x2 (t) 10
(72
cosh(1 t)
half of the CPU time (17.2 s vs 8.7 s). In case 3, providing analytical Jacobin and Hes
x1 (t) =
u(t)
10of iterations and
(73
3.1 Solution by10
HermiteSimpson
method
both
the number
the computational time, which drops dramatically
cosh(1)
The structure of Jacobian is shown in Figure 3.2(a), where the rows are constraints
x1 (0) = 1
r =
Minimize:
Subject to:
r+u
3
r
Transcription technique:
Simple shooting
v1
v2
rM
vM
vE
rE
Optimization variables:
M =4
Earths ephemerides are used to set i.c. for the integration of the
shooting method
constraints on x0 automatically satisfied
t0, tf , u1 , ..., u4
( dim(X) = 14 )
first guess
solution
Minimize:
Subject to:
2ny 3n2 x
y + 2nx
z + n2 z
=
=
=
0
0
0
r(t0 ) = r0
r(tf ) = rf
v(t0 ) = v0
v(tf ) = vf
Formation depl.
Formation reconf.
Docking
M =6
Reference orbit:!
a = 26570 km
Gravity assist
Aero-Gravity Assist
Dynamics:
Bank angle!
=
=
=
=
Planar maneuver
= CL /CL((L/D)max)
Control parameters:!
R =
V sin
V cos cos
R cos
V cos sin
R
D
G sin
m
L cos
V 2 cos
G cos +
m
R
V 2 tan cos cos
L sin
m cos
R
Find the optimal control law, (t), the free atmospheric entry
conditions and the final time tf to!
Maximize: !
Vs+
Subject
to:!
Convective heating at
stagnation point
qw0 = 1.35e 8
rn
"1/2
!
"
hw
max
3.04
q
V
1
< w0
H
100
! dim(X)
N = 11 , M = 4
Cubic splines!
RK integration
x
First
guess
using
simple
u
i 1
2
i 1
u1i 1
ti
120
100
2
Soln 1
Soln 2
xi
xci
xi
u1i
2
iu
u...
i
80
Soln 2
40
100
200
300
Time [s]
400
500
600
20
0
Soln 1
100
200
uM
i
ti+1
60
xi+1
u i
1
uM
i 1
Soln 3
5
0
RK integration
ti
Soln 3
u...
i 1
h [km]
300
Time [s]
400
500
GTOC II (1/3)
r+u
3
r
r =
Visit four given asteroids
Maximize: J = mf /(tf
Subject to:!
t0 ) , mf = m0 e
1
Isp g0
R tf
t0
|u|d
! dep,P ) = rP (tdep,P )
- r(t
v(tdep,P ) = vP (tdep,P )
!r(tarr,P ) = rP (tarr,P )
v(tarr,P ) = vP (tarr,P )
!
- u
- tdep,Pi
umax
tarr,Pi
90 days
GTOC II (2/3)
Optimization variables:!
Control parameters
deriving from transcription!
dim(X)
1000
GTOC II (3/3)
Identified solution:
Collocation methods
can better describe
discontinuities
Approximate methods!
minimizing
u(t),
[ti , tf ],
J = (x(tf ), tf ) +
u = (u1 , u2 , . . . , um )
tf
L(x, u, t) dt
ti
with dynamics
and boundary conditions
x = f (x, u, t),
x(ti ) = xi
x = (x1 , x2 , . . . , xn )
(x(tf ), u(tf ), tf ) = 0
(t), u(t),
H(x, , u, t) = L(x, u, t) +
f (x, u, t)
H
x
H
=0
u
T
under
x(ti ) = xi
(tf ) =
(1)
(x(tf ), u(tf ), tf ) = 0
t=tf
Examples
Direct transcription [Hargraves&Paris 1987, Enright&Conway, Betts 1998]
Generating function [Park&Scheeres, 2006]
SDRE [Pearson 1962, Wernli&Cook 1975, Mracek&Cloutier 1998]
ASRE [Cimen&Banks 2004]
...
x = A(t)x + B(t)u,
Objective function:
Initial condition:
1 T
1
J = x (tf )S(tf )x(tf ) +
2
2
tf
x(ti ) = xi
ti
= A(t)x + B(t)u,
Q(t)x
AT (t) ,
0 = R(t)u + B T (t) ,
A(t)
Q(t)
u=
B(t)R
AT (t)
(t)B T (t)
(t)B T (t)
(2)
(t) =
STM subject to
with
xx (ti , ti )
If
xx
= In
x
n,
n,
x (ti , t)xi +
xx (ti , t)
(ti , t) =
A(t)
Q(t)
(ti , ti ) = 0n
xx (ti , t)xi
x (ti , t)
(t)B T (t)
B(t)R
AT (t)
x (ti , ti )
= 0n
(ti , t)
i,
(ti , t)
i,
(3)
(ti , t)
(ti , t)
xx
x
n,
(ti , ti ) = In
(t)
i computed
1
J=
2
tf
x(ti ) = xi
x(tf ) = xf
ti
Statement of HCP
; i.e.,
xf =
xx (ti , tf )xi
i (xi , xf , ti , tf )
1
x
(ti , tf )
(ti , tf ) [xf
n matrix
i,
xx (ti , tf )xi ]
x(ti ) = xi ,
1
1
J = xT (tf )S(tf )x(tf ) +
2
2
tf
xT Q(t)x + uT R(t)u dt
ti
Statement of SCP
Write (3) at t = tf ,
and solve for
i (xi , ti , tf )
x(tf )
xx (ti , tf )xi
S(tf )x(tf )
x (ti , tf )xi
(ti , tf )
i,
(ti , tf )
; i.e.,
=[
(ti , tf )
S(tf )
(ti , tf )]
[S(tf )
xx (ti , tf )
n matrix [
x (ti , tf )] xi
(ti , tf )
S(tf )
(ti , tf )]
1
1
J = xTj (tf )S(tf )xj (tf ) +
2
2
Statement of MCP (
tf
,j (ti , tf )
S(tf )
xT Q(t)x + uT R(t)u dt
ti
xgiven,
i
j (tf )
free)
xj
i,i using
xi,f (HCP)
[S(tf )
xx,j (ti , tf )
,j (ti , tf )]
factorized dynamics
x = f (x, u, t),
J = (x(tf ), tf ) +
tf
L(x, u, t) dt
ti
J=
1 T
1
x (tf )S(x(tf ), tf )x(tf ) +
2
2
tf
ti
such that for given arguments x(t), u(t) they depend on time only; i.e.,
A(x(t), t), B(x(t), u(t), t), Q(x(t), t), R(x(t), t)
x = xi , u = 0
tf
ti
x = x(i
1)
1
1)
(i)
(tf ), tf )x (tf )+
2
tf
ti
1)
x(i)TQ(x(i
(t), u(i
1)
1)
1)
, u = u(i
1)
(t), t)u(i) ,
(t), t)x(i)+u(i)TR(x(i
1)
(t), t)u(i) dt
||x(i)
x(i
1)
||
(i)
(i 1)
xj
(t)|, j = 1, . . . , n}
Numerical examples
!
Rotating frame
x 1
x 2
x 3
x 4
= x3 ,
= x4 ,
= 2x4
= 2x3
with
r=
x1 radial displacement
x2 transversal displacement
(1 + x1 )(1/r3 1) + u1 ,
x2 (1/r3 1) + u2 ,
(x1 + 1)2 + x22
State
Control
x = (x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 )
u = (u1 , u2 )
Normalized units
time unit = 1/
Initial condition
Factorization (dynamics)
x 1
x 2
x 3
x 4
0
0
0
0
0
f (x1 , x2 )(1 + 1/x1 )
0
f (x1 , x2 )
1
0
0
2
0
1
2
0
A(x)
with
f (x1 , x2 ) =
x1
x2
x3
x4
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
B
u1
u2
tf
SCP
1 T
1
J = x (tf )Sx(tf ) +
2
2
u u dt
T
ti
xf = (0, 0, 0, 0), ti = 0, tf = 1
tf
uT u dt
ti
1
1
J = xT (tf )S(tf )x(tf ) +
2
2
tf
ti
Termination tolerance
(valid for all examples show)
xT Q(t)x + uT R(t)u dt
= 10
Q = 04
4,
R = I2
+ 1)2 + x22]3/2 + 1. Thus, the problem is put into the pseudo-LQR form
and B as in (41), and by setting in Q = 044 and R = I22 .
0.3
0.9586
0.5660
0.447
0.492
0.968
0.966
2
error
log
10
HCP
SCP
0.964
0.962
2.5
2
0.4
0.96
0.958
1
uu1
JJ
0.2
results (HCP)
uu 2
x4
xx 2
x4
e have been successfully solved with the ASRE method described above.Rendez-vous:
s of the
0.5
0.3 HCP and SCP, whose solutions are shown
0.3 in Figures 1 and 2,
J is0.25
the objective function associated
solution, Iter is x
xi to the optimal
0.2
0
i
arried0.2out to converge to the optimal solution, and0.1the CPU Time x
(comf
0.5
an Intel
Core
2
Duo
2
GHz
with
4
GB
RAM
running
Mac
OS
X
10.6.
0.15
0
1
9 . (The machine specifications and the termination
in (14)
0.1 is set to 10
0.1
1.5
other0.05twoxproblems
presented next, too).
f
0.2
4
6
8
3
iter
iter
10
1
3
iter
iter
SolveNL.m
+ 1)2 + x22]3/2 + 1. Thus, the problem is put into the pseudo-LQR form
and B as in (41), and by setting in Q = 044 and R = I22 .
results (SCP)
uu 2
x4
xx 2
x4
e have been successfully solved with the ASRE method described above.Rendez-vous:
s of0.25the HCP and SCP, whose solutions are shown
0.5
0.1 in Figures 1 and 2,
xi
J is the objective function associated
to the optimal
solution, Iter is xi
0.05
0
x(tf )
0.2 out to converge to the optimal solution, and the CPU Time (comarried
0
0.5
an Intel Core 2 Duo 2 GHz with 4 GB RAM running
Mac OS X 10.6.
0.05
0.15
in (14) is set to 109 . (The machine specifications
0.1 and the termination
1
other0.1two problems presented next, too).
0.15
x(tf )
1.5
0.2
ound replicate those already know in literature,9, 10 so indicating the ef2
0.05
0.25
1.5
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0.1
0.2
ed method.
xx 1
xx 3
1
0.569
0.5685
0.9586
0.5660
5
6
0.447
0.492
log
error 10
HCP
SCP
0.5695
0.568
JJ
Problem
0.5675
0.5
0.5
4
6
8
0.567
10
0.5665
0.566
1
u1
u1
iter
iter
12
1
iter
iter
SolveNL.m
= x3 ,
= x4 ,
= x1 x24 1/x21 + u1 ,
= 2x3 x4 /x1 + u2 /x1 .
State
Control
x = (x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 )
u = (u1 , u2 )
x2 angular phase
Normalized units
Objective function
time unit = 1/
(initial orbit)
Initial condition
1
J=
2
tf
uT u dt
ti
ti = 0
tf =
xi = (1, 0, 0, 1)
Final conditions
Problem A
xf = (1.52, , 0,
1/1.52)
Problem B
xf = (1.52, 1.5 , 0,
1/1.52)
The two HPC have been solved with the ASRE method. The solution
Table 2 whose columns have the same meaning as in Table 1. It can be seen
transfer:
results
an increasedOrbital
computational burden
is required to solve
this problem, esp
x2,f = 1.5. The two solutions reported in Table 2 are shown in Figures 3
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0x1 x4
2x4 /x1 0
90
, B(x) =
90
30
180
150
210
Problem A
270
u1
120
1
30
60
30
210
240
300
270
330
210
control
Contol
-0.5
300
240
270
-1
0
1
u2
0.5
330
180
u
0.5
90 2
150
300
47.865
60
180
330
240
Contol
control
120
,A Qx2,f==04 40.5298
, R=
2.
22 I2 6.262
60
150
Problem
120
Results
0
0
0
0
1
0
0 1/x1
Problem B
A(x) =
0
0
1/x31
0
Contol
Factorization
2
Time
(b) Control pr
0.5
2
1
0
2
Time
time
3
0
Time
time
Stationkeeping: statement
x 1
x 2
x 3
x 4
x 5
x 6
= x4 ,
State
Dynamics
= x5 ,
x = (x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 , x5 , x6 )
= x6 ,
Control
1
2
2
+ x1 x6 + x1 (x5 + 1) cos x3 + a1 (x1 , x2 , x3 ) + u1 ,
=
2
u = (u1 , u2 , u3 )
x1
x4
a2 (x1 , x2 , x3 )
u2
= 2x6 (x5 + 1) tan x3 2 (x5 + 1) +
+
,
x1
x1 cos x3
x1 cos x3
a3 (x1 , x2 , x3 ) u3
x4
+ ,
= 2 x6 (x5 + 1)2 sin x3 cos x3 +
x1
x1
x1
Initial condition
xi = (1, 0.05
180/ , 0.05
x1 radial distance
x2 longitude deviation
x3 latitude
180/ , 0, 0, 0) ti = 0
Final condition
xf,1 = 1
xf,j free j = 2, . . . , 6
tf =
Objective function
Q = diag(0, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1),
R = diag(1, 1, 1),
S = 100 diag(1, 1, 1, 1, 1)
Normalized units
Reference longitude = 60 E
Perturbations
a1 , a2 , a3
Stationkeeping: factorization
Factorization
033
A(x) =
a41
0
a61
0
0
0
033
I33
0 0
0 a54
0 a64
a45
a55
a65
a46
a56
a66
B(x) =
1
0
0
0
r2
1
cos2
0
0
1
r2
with
a41
a45
a46
a54
a55
2,
3,
1,
2,
1free parameters
= [2 + 2(1
1 )x5 ] tan x3 ,
= 2x1 1 sin 2x3 ,
1
= 2(1
1 ) x1 x6 ,
= [ 12 x5 1] sin 2x3 ,
= 2 1 xx41
[Topputo&Bernelli-Zazzera 2011]
Stationkeeping: results
RESULTS
Manoeuver
Free drift
TC
TFD
TSK
x 10
uu 2
uu 3
xx 3
0.5
0.5
1 month simulation
uu 1
1.5
Control cycle
1.5
10
xx 2
2
5
x 10
x 10
2
1
0
0
x 10
1
0
1
0
x 10
5
0
5
0
10
15
20
25
10
15
20
25
10
15
20
25
time
Time
Final Remarks
Direct methods
Indirect methods
Approx methods
Selected references
Direct Methods:!
Enright, P.J., and Conway, B.A., Discrete Approximation to Optimal Trajectories Using Direct
Transcription and Nonlinear Programming, J. of Guid., Contr., and Dyn., 15, 9941001, 1992!
Betts, J.T., Survey of Numerical Methods for Trajectory Optimization, J. of Guid., Contr., and Dyn., 21,
193207, 1998!
Betts, J. T., Practical Methods for Optimal Control Using Nonlinear Programming, Society for Industrial
and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, PA, 2001!
Conway, B.A., Space Trajectory Optimization, Cambridge University Press, 2010
Indirect Methods:!
Bryson, A.E., Ho, Y.C., Applied Optimal Control, Hemisphere Publishing Co., Washigton, 1975
ASRE Method:!
Cimen, T. and Banks, S.P., Global optimal feedback control for general nonlinear systems with
nonquadratic performance criteria, Systems and Control Letters, vol. 53, no. 5, pp. 327346, 2004.