You are on page 1of 12

See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267935728

Robust Attitude Control Using mu-synthesis


for the Large Flexible Satellite ETS-VIII

Article

CITATIONS READS

6 98

8 authors, including:

Shinji Mitani
Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency
34 PUBLICATIONS 69 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

attitude control View project

formation flying View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Shinji Mitani on 28 May 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


GNC 2008
7th International ESA Conference on Guidance, Navigation & Control Systems
2-5 June 2008, Tralee, County Kerry, Ireland
Robust Attitude Control Using mu-synthesis for the Large Flexible Satellite ETS-VIII
Takashi OHTANI1, Yoshiro HAMADA1, Tomoyuki NAGASHIO2, Takashi KIDA2,
Shinji MITANI1, Isao YAMAGUCHI1, Tokio KASAI1, Hirotaka IGAWA1,
1
Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), 2-1-1, Sengen, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 305-8505 Japan
2
University of Electro-Communications, 1-5-1, Chofugaoka, Chofu, Tokyo, 182-8585 Japan
ohtani.takashi@jaxa.jp

ABSTRACT
This paper reports results of a preliminary study of an on-orbit advanced robust attitude control experiment using a
Japanese large flexible communication satellite: the Engineering Test Satellite VIII (ETS-VIII). The on-orbit attitude
control experiment is designed to develop a baseline technology for a class of future large flexible spacecraft and earth
observation satellites which require attitude maneuvers using advanced control technology. An important issue is the
design of a reduced-order multi-input multi-output (MIMO) robust controller for a linear parameter varying (LPV)
spacecraft system. We therefore prepared three control laws after tradeoff studies. Among them, in this paper, a linear
time invariant (LTI)-μ controller is presented; it is designed parametrically by decomposing the s/c model into control
modes and residual modes. In μ-synthesis, the varying parameters are treated as structured uncertainty that is stabilized
robustly with unstructured uncertainty by setting the μ-value to less than one. The final controller is LTI-designed
through D-K iteration. The candidate experiment controllers were evaluated using preliminary MATLAB-based
laboratory design and synthesis and full software simulation of onboard algorithms with emulation of the AOCS
hardware. This report presents the outline of this experiment and some spacecraft model features, along with a case
study of the proposed method for ETS-VIII and numerical simulation results.

1. INTRODUCTION

The Engineering Test Satellite VIII (ETS-VIII), a three ton class, three-axis stabilized geosynchronous
communications satellite, was launched by JAXA in December, 2006. It has a pair of large antenna reflectors for mobile
communications and large solar paddles, as illustrated in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1. Overview of ETS-VIII

Advanced on-orbit attitude control experiments using the ETS-VIII are scheduled at the end of its mission life.
The experiment is intended to apply highly advanced control theories to develop a baseline for future controller design
technology for this class of satellite. Regarding attitude control, classical control theory, e.g. PID control is still used,
since ETS-III was developed a half-century ago. However, the present three-axis satellite attitude control technology
has already become much too advanced to be described in terms of classical control theory.
From such a background, the effectiveness of the LTI H-infinity controller has been demonstrated through on-orbit
experiments using ETS-VI (Fig. 2) [1]. Large spacecrafts for communications and earth observation recently developed
by JAXA commonly have large flexible solar paddles that rotate slowly around the pitch axis at the rate of orbit to
enhance the electric power generation efficiency. Therefore, the dynamics equation includes varying inertia and
coupling matrices between the attitude motion and the structural vibration, depending on the paddle angle. This class of
spacecraft is a time-dependent or parameter-dependent multi-input multi-output linear system; the controller must be
designed while taking these features into consideration. To resolve this problem, we investigated certain approaches
such as H-infinity with constant scaling and μ-synthesis in the LTI robust control framework. However, fixed
controllers of these types have been inapplicable to the problem because the norms of the perturbations are too large.
GNC 2008
7th International ESA Conference on Guidance, Navigation & Control Systems
2-5 June 2008, Tralee, County Kerry, Ireland

Fig. 2. Overview of ETS-VI Fig. 3. Overview of ASTRO-G

Moreover, the requirement for attitude control accuracy to enhance the attitude decision accuracy and the stability
level has arisen in the advanced earth observation satellites and other scientific satellites in recent years. It is indeed
possible to meet the new needs to some degree by making attitude sensors more efficient, but there remains a problem
of suppressing high-frequency disturbances outside the control band. Along with the demand for attitude determination
accuracy for improved stability, however, no strong relationship was shown with the controller, and stability in the low-
frequency range has been achieved using classical control theory. Consequently, an up-to-date, advanced control theory
has not yet been introduced into the field of spacecraft development in Japan. For the case of ETS-VIII, the attitude
control specification is satisfied using classical-type design method under the assumptions that the dynamic interference
between the roll, pitch, and yaw axes is comparatively small. However, such a design method is fundamentally
applicable only to an single-input and single-output (SISO) system. Moreover, a classical approach is certain to
confront limitations sooner or later. The ASTRO-G (Fig. 3) spacecraft has been proposed by the Space VLBI Working
Group in Japan. Actually, ASTRO-G is a radio telescope satellite with the same large-scale antenna structure as that of
ETS-VIII. In ASTRO-G, a high-speed switching maneuver function is necessary to make the phase correction
observation. The requirement for attitude maneuvers in recent years and the desire to solve the remaining problems
from control experiments with ETS-VI provide the motivation to execute the ETS-VIII advanced attitude control
experiment.
For those reasons, the authors study the application of μ-synthesis [2]-[3]: a control system design method for
treating both the mode of vibration in the high frequency domain and the change in the value of modal parameters in the
low-frequency domain by paddle rotation. The residual mode and the change of its parameters are assumed to be a
margin of the model error for the LPV system. This method is intended to localize the influence of the varying
parameter using the descriptor form. Consequently, less-conservative design and the frequency-shaping technique can
be incorporated. As a result of our proposed method, we can improve the control performance easily. Moreover, the
controller that we design as a LTI controller is more computationally efficient than the LPV controller. Simultaneously,
we study the design method that incorporates model change based on differences of mass properties between Beginning
Of mission Life (BOL) and End Of mission life (EOL). We can therefore guarantee robust stability of the system for
whole its mission life.

2. SPACECRAFT MODEL

Figure 4 depicts the ETS-VIII configuration. It has two solar array paddles and two large deployable antenna
reflectors. The solar paddles are deployed in the pitch direction and rotate 360 degrees per day so that each paddle
constantly faces the Sun.

Fig. 4. Spacecraft Configuration


GNC 2008
7th International ESA Conference on Guidance, Navigation & Control Systems
2-5 June 2008, Tralee, County Kerry, Ireland

In general, the equation of motion for the flexible spacecraft is described as the following hybrid equation
incorporating rigid-body rotation and the vibration equation of flexible components (solar paddles and antenna
reflectors) by the FEM numerical analysis.
J (γ )θ + ∑ Pi (γ )η(i ) = u
i . (1)
Pi (γ )θ +η + Λiη + Σi2 η (i ) = 0
T (i ) (i )

In those equations, θ ∈ R3 is the attitude angle, η ( i ) ∈ R fi is the modal coordinate of the i-th appendage, and u ∈ R 3 is
the torque control input around three axes. The inertia matrix J (γ ) ∈ R 3× 3 and coupling Pi (γ ) ∈ R 3× fi vary depending on
the paddle angle γ . In addition, Σ i2 = diag [σ 12i "σ 2fi ] is the modal stiffness matrix, where σ ji denotes the modal
frequency. The modal damping matrix Λ i ∈ R fi × fi is presumed as Λ i = diag [ 2ζ 1iσ i1 " 2ζ fiσ fi ] using the modal damping
ratio ζ ji , which is proportional to σ ji .
The measurement output is described as

⎡ y ⎤ ⎡θ ⎤
y = ⎢ 1 ⎥ = ⎢ ⎥ , (2)
⎣ y 2 ⎦ ⎣θ ⎦

by the attitude determination logic based on gyros and earth/sun/star sensors, the estimated attitude angles and their
rates.
Equations (1) and (2) are described compactly as

M (γ ) q + D q + Kq = Fu , (3)
⎡ y ⎤ ⎡F q⎤ T
y = ⎢ 1⎥ = ⎢ T ⎥
⎣ y2 ⎦ ⎣ F q ⎦
where q = [θ T η T ]T .

3. ROBUST ATTITUDE CONTROL USING μ-SYNTHESIS

We have proposed controllers of three types as control algorithms of this experiment. The first type is a reduced-
order H-infinity gain-scheduling controller that achieves robust stability and high disturbance-attenuation capability
[4]–[5]. The second method is controller synthesis based on the dynamics properties, utilizing sensor and actuator
collocation conditions [6]–[7]. The third type is a robust controller using μ-synthesis. In this section, we present case
study results of the LTI-μ robust controller design for ETS-VIII attitude control.

The control specifications of the ETS-VIII spacecraft are as follows.

(a) Robust stability for all paddle angles.


(b) Robust stability against higher vibration modes; “spillover” supuression.
(c) Steady state attitude control error less than 0.05[deg] under East-West orbit control thruster firing.
(d) Attitude tracking maneuver capability to plus/minus 0.05[deg] step command for antenna calibration.

The ETS-VIII AOCS has the limitations of control torque input level ( u ≤ 0.04 [Nm]) by reaction wheel and onboard
CPU sampling rate is 16[Hz].

3.1 Perturbation

First, this chapter presents a description of the handling of the perturbation, which is an important point in our
study of μ-synthesis application.
GNC 2008
7th International ESA Conference on Guidance, Navigation & Control Systems
2-5 June 2008, Tralee, County Kerry, Ireland
In the constrained mode model of Eq. (3), the coefficient matrix that varies depending on the paddle angle is only
M (γ ) ; its influence is localized. Then, because we can use this feature to advantage in robust control system design,
we use the descriptor form in μ-synthesis.
First, we reduce the order of Eq. (3). Its purpose is to design the reduced-order controller that guarantees robust
stability against higher vibration mode as unstructured uncertainty.
We divide the flexible vibration mode where η = [η cT η r T ]T ; therefore, the coefficient matrix of Eq. (1) is divisible
as follows.
P (γ ) = [ Pc (γ ) Pr (γ )]
Λ = diag [ Λ c Λ r ] (4)
Σ = diag [ ∑ ∑ ] 2
c
2
r

We express qc = [θ T η cT ]T as the control mode and qr = η r as the residual mode: Eqs. (1) and (2) can be described as
follows in the frequency domain.
yˆ ( s ) = G ( s )uˆ ( s ) = (Gc ( s ) + Gr ( s )) −1 uˆ ( s ) (5)

In fact, G(s) of Eq. (5) is equivalent to the following.

G ( s ) = Gc ( s ) − 1 + G Δ ( s ) (6)

Here, we design the weighting function W(s) that is stable and proper for the additive model error margin GΔ (s ) as
follows.

GΔ ( s ) = Δ w ( s )W ( s ) , Δ w ∞
<1 (7)

Furthermore, we describe the influence of unstructured uncertainty Δ w (s ) as

ww = Δ w ( s ) z w , w w , z w ∈ R 6 . (8)

Consequently, we can treat the influence of the residual mode in the high frequency domain as a virtual disturbance.
Here, for making the generalized plant, we describe the state space realization of this weight function W(s) as

x w = Aw x w + Bw u
. (9)
z w = C w x w + Dw u

Next, to handle the parameter change of the control mode as structured uncertainty, we describe Gc ( s ) −1 using the
descriptor form as the following.

Ec (γ )x = (Ec + EΔ (γ ))x = Ac x + Bc u


(10)
y = Cc x

In those equations, x = [ q cT q cT ] T ∈ R n = 2 ( 3 + g ) are descriptor variables. The matrix Ec (γ ) is divided into the nominal
model Ec and the additive model error margin EΔ (γ ) in the specific angle. They are given as

[I M c ]
Ec = diag 
, (11)
EΔ (γ ) = diag [0 M Δ (γ )]

where

⎡ J Pc ⎤ ⎡ J (γ ) PcΔ (γ )⎤
MC = ⎢ T M Δ (γ ) = ⎢ ΔT (12)
I ⎥⎦ 0 ⎥⎦
,
⎣ Pc ⎣ PcΔ (γ )
GNC 2008
7th International ESA Conference on Guidance, Navigation & Control Systems
2-5 June 2008, Tralee, County Kerry, Ireland

Then, the matrices Ac, Bc, and Cc are given as

⎡ 0 I ⎤ ⎡0⎤ ⎡FcT 0⎤
AC = ⎢ ⎥, BC = ⎢F ⎥, CC = ⎢ ⎥, (13)
⎣− K c − Dc ⎦ ⎣ c⎦ ⎣0 FcT ⎦
where the followings hold.
D c = diag [0 Λc ]
K c = diag [0 ∑ c2 ] (14)

Fc = [ I
T
0]

Then, we describe EΔ (γ ) using the following equation with scalar parameter δ i (γ ) depending on γ

k
EΔ (γ ) = ∑ δ i (γ ) Ei , (15)
i =1

where δ i (γ ) < 1 for all γ . We obtain Eq. (16) using full rank decomposition, noting that Ec is a regular matrix, and

Ec
−1
[0
E Δ = diag   M c
−1
]
M Δ (γ ) = L Δ E R ΔE ∞
< 1, (16)

where

Δ E = diag [δ 1 I 1 ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ δ k I k ] rank I i = hi
L = [ L1 ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ L k ] L i ∈ R n × hi . (17)
hi × n
R = [ R1T ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ R kT ] T Ri ∈ R

Here, we describe the input and output of structured uncertainty Δ E as

w E = Δ E z E = − Δ E Rx . (18)

Therefore, we can express the expansion system incorporating the influence of parameter variation as follows.

x = Ec−1 Ac x + Ec−1Bcu + LwE


z E = − REc−1 Ac x − REc−1Bu − RLwE (19)
y = Cc x

In addition, to reduce sensitivity and achieve robust performance, we define controlled output z λ ∈ R 3 as

⎡1 0 ⎤ ⎡ed ⎤
zλ = ⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ , ed = λ ( s ) ed
⎣0 λ D ⎦ ⎣ e v ⎦ (20)
wλ = Δ λ z λ wλ ∈ R 3 Δ λ ∞ < 1

where the control error e as

⎡e ⎤ ⎡ d ⎤ ⎡ y ⎤
e = ⎢ d ⎥ = ⎢ d ⎥ − ⎢ 1⎥ = d − y (21)
⎣ ev ⎦ ⎣ 0 ⎦ ⎣ y 2 ⎦

and d is target value for the attitude angle. We express these perturbations described separately above as follows.
GNC 2008
7th International ESA Conference on Guidance, Navigation & Control Systems
2-5 June 2008, Tralee, County Kerry, Ireland

Δ = diag [ Δ E Δ w Δ λ ] (22)

Here, in practical case, we show some singular value plots about full order plant (Fig.5), control mode (Fig.6), and
residual mode with weighting functions (Fig.7~8) of ETS-VIII spacecraft every 5[deg] during 0 to 90[deg] are shown.
The number of control modes is four (3 rigid modes and 1 elastic mode). The weighting functions are selected to satisfy
robust stability for all γ .

Fig.5. Singular value plot of full order plant Fig.6. Singular value plot of control mode

Fig.7. Singular value plot of residual mode Fig.8. Singular value plot of residual mode
and the weighting function for attitude angle and the weighting function for attitude rate

3.2 Control System Design

During the control system design process, we define the nominal model of γ = 45 [deg] as nominal and we treat
only γ ∈ [ 0 , 90 ] [deg] as a range of the paddle rotation angle, using the symmetry of spacecraft structure. Moreover,
the symmetric vibration modes in the body frame is uncontrollable using attitude control systems because that vibration
GNC 2008
7th International ESA Conference on Guidance, Navigation & Control Systems
2-5 June 2008, Tralee, County Kerry, Ireland
mode couples only with transitional motion of spacecraft [8]. Therefore, to exclude this uncontrollable mode, we take
twice of the coupling matrix Pc (γ ) . Then we describe the central rigid-body rotation equation and the vibration
equation of flexible components using the south paddle coordinate system (Eq. (24)). We perform coordinate
transformation using the direction cosine matrix (DCM) Q (γ ) , which expresses the relationship between the central
rigid-body frame and the south paddle frame. However, the system input and output are expressed in the central rigid-
body frame.
After performing coordinate transformation, the estimated attitude angle θ becomes Eq. (23).

⎡ sin γ 0 cos γ ⎤
θ = Q(γ )θ = ⎢⎢ 0 1 0 ⎥⎥θ (23)
⎢⎣− cos γ 0 sin γ ⎥⎦

We describe the equation of the control mode as follows.

Q (γ ) J (γ ) Q(γ )T θ + 2 Q (γ ) Pc (γ )ηcS = Q(γ ) u


(24)
PcT (γ ) QT (γ )θ +ηcS + Λ c ηcS + Σ c2 ηcS = 0

⎡Q T (γ ) θ ⎤ ⎡θ ⎤
y=y=⎢ T  ⎥ = ⎢ ⎥ (25)
⎣Q (γ ) θ ⎦ ⎣θ ⎦

We perform μ-synthesis with D-K iteration over the generalized plant G made using Eqs. (24) and (25). From the
discussion presented in Sec. 3.1, the state space expression of the generalized plant G is given as

⎡d⎤
⎢u⎥
⎡ x ⎤ ⎡ AC 08×6 ⎤ ⎡ x ⎤ ⎡08×3 BC L 08×6 BC ⎤ ⎢ ⎥ and (26)
⎢x ⎥ = ⎢0 ⎥⎢ ⎥ + ⎢ ⎢w E ⎥
⎣ w ⎦ ⎣ 6×8 Aw ⎦ ⎣xw ⎦ ⎣06×3 Bw 06×4 06×6 Bw ⎥⎦ ⎢ ⎥
⎢w w ⎥
⎢⎣wλ ⎥⎦
⎡ e ⎤ ⎡ −CC2 03×6 ⎤ ⎡03×3 03×3 03×4 [03×3 −I3]03×3 ⎤ ⎡ d ⎤
⎢ e ⎥ ⎢ −C ⎥
03×6 ⎥ ⎢I 03×3 03×4 [−I3 03×3] 03×3 ⎥⎥ ⎢⎢ u ⎥⎥
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ C1 ⎡ x⎤ ⎢
3
, (27)
⎢zλ ⎥ =⎢−λCC1 03×6 ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ +⎢λI3 03×3 03×4 λ[−I3 03×3] 03×3 ⎥ ⎢wE ⎥
⎢ ⎥ ⎢ ⎥ xw ⎢ ⎥⎢ ⎥
⎢zE ⎥ ⎢−RAC 04×6 ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎢04×3 −RBC −RL 04×6 −RBC⎥ ⎢ww⎥
⎢⎣zw⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ 06×8 Cw ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣06×3 Dw 06×4 06×6 Dw ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣wλ ⎥⎦

where

⎡ 0 4× 4
AC = ⎢ −1
I4
−1

⎥ , BC = ⎢
⎡ 0 4×3 ⎤
−1 ⎥ , CC1 = H C
T
[ ]
03× 4 , CC 2 = 03× 4 H C
T
[ ]
⎣− M C K C − M C DC ⎦ ⎣M C H C ⎦
⎡Q(γ ) J (γ ) Q T (γ ) 2 Q(γ ) Pc (γ )⎤
MC = ⎢ T ⎥ , H C = Q (γ ) 03×1 .
T T
[ ]
⎣ Pc (γ ) Q (γ )
T
I1 ⎦

If the control algorithm uˆ = K(s) yˆ is derived that satisfies the following inequality of structured singular value μ,

sup μΔ (Fl (G( jω), K ( jω)) < 1 , (28)


ω

then the algorithm guarantees robust stability for all perturbations.


GNC 2008
7th International ESA Conference on Guidance, Navigation & Control Systems
2-5 June 2008, Tralee, County Kerry, Ireland
wE Δ zE
E 0 0
ww zw
wE Δ zE 0 Δw 0
0 0 zλ
ww
E
zw wλ 0 0 Δλ
0 Δw 0 zλ
wλ zλ
0 0 Δλ λ D

d
λD
G
G
fu
f

e
e
u K e
K e u M

Fig. 9. μ-synthesis Fig. 10. μ-analysis

To this generalized plant, the controller K is designed by the μ-synthesis using D-K iteration. However, generally,
it is known that the μ-synthesis designs the controller with conservative control performances. Therefore, we also apply
the μ-analysis after the μ-synthesis as shown in Fig.9, 10. Here, λD is the weighting function to reduce sensitivity for the
error margin of attitude rates, and f is the weighting function for control inputs.
In this scheme, the weighting functions λD and f are modified through the result of μ-analysis. The designed final
controller in this paper is selected as being the best control performance controller among the controllers for which the
μ-value obtained by μ-analysis is less than one. The obtained structured singular value is depicted in Fig. 11

1.8

μ-synthesis

1.6

1.4

1.2

μ 1

0.8

0.6
μ-analysis

0.4

0.2

0
-2 -1 0 1
10 10 10 10

Frequency [rad/sec]

Fig. 11. μ Upper and Lower Bounds

3.3 Robust Stability on All Mission Life

In general, the model parameters of spacecraft representing mass properties vary according to the decrease of fuel
used for orbit control. In this paper, our controller is designed using the BOL model. Moreover, we obtain the EOL
model simultaneously, so we verified the varying width of EOL and BOL model (Fig. 12). Both EOL and BOL
parameters width change is calculated from the nominal values at 45 [deg] model.
As a result, the difference between BOL and EOL models is small, but the varying width of EOL model is not
fully included in that of BOL. For that reason, we redesigned the controller adding a 3% error margin to the varying
GNC 2008
7th International ESA Conference on Guidance, Navigation & Control Systems
2-5 June 2008, Tralee, County Kerry, Ireland
width of the BOL model to include the error margin of the EOL model into that of BOL model. Thereby, we can
guarantee its robust stability for its entire mission life.
4 4
x 10 x 10
2 200 0.5

1.5 150 0

100
1 -0.5
50
MΔ(1,1) [ND] 0.5 MΔ(1,2) [ND] -1
0 MΔ(1,3) [ND]
0 -1.5
-50
-0.5 -2
-100

-1 -150 -2.5

-1.5 -200 -3
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
gamma [deg] gamma [deg] gamma [deg]

-14
x 10
4 50 50

2 0 0

0 -50
-50
-2 MΔ(2,2) [ND] -100
MΔ(1,4) [ND] -100 MΔ(2,3) [ND]
-4 -150
-150
-6 -200
-200
-8 -250

-10 -250 -300

-12 -300 -350


0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
gamma [deg] gamma [deg] gamma [deg]

4 -14
x 10 x 10
10 1.5 3

0 1 2

0.5
-10 1
MΔ(2,4) [ND] MΔ(3,3) [ND]
0 MΔ(3,4) [ND]
-20 0
-0.5
-30 -1
-1

-40 -1.5 -2

-50 -2 -3
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
gamma [deg] gamma [deg] gamma [deg]

Fig. 12. Varying width M Δ (γ ) from nominal M c of M c (γ ) (Blue lines:BOL, Red lines:EOL)

4 SIMULATION RESULTS

We now apply the designed LTI-μ controller to the attitude control problem of the ETS-VIII. For this paper, we
use two simulation conditions that are set according to actual on-orbit experiment sequences. The first case is the bias
response by the step reference attitude angle added to each axis for 600 [s], the second case is the impulse disturbance
response by reaction wheels. This disturbance causes 0.04 [Nm] torque during 30 [s] added to each axis for 600 [s]. The
initial paddle angle is set to 45 [deg]; a conventional PD controller is also used in each case for comparison. These
simulation results are presented in Figs. 13 and 14.
Control input : Black PD / Red mu
Attitude angle : Black PD / Red mu 0.04

0.05 0.02
R oll [Nm]
R oll [deg]

0
0
-0.02
-0.05
-0.04
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 time [sec]
time [sec]
0.04

0.05 0.02
Pitch [Nm]
Pitch [deg]

0
0
-0.02
-0.05
-0.04
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
time [sec]
time [sec] -4
x 10
6
0.05 4
Yaw [Nm]
Yaw [deg]

2
0
0

-0.05 -2

-4
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
time [sec] time [sec]

Fig. 13. Step responses and corresponding input signals


GNC 2008
7th International ESA Conference on Guidance, Navigation & Control Systems
2-5 June 2008, Tralee, County Kerry, Ireland

Attitude angle : Black PD / Red mu Control input : Black PD / Red mu


0.04 0.01

0
0.02

Roll [Nm]
Roll [deg]

-0.01

-0.02
0
-0.03

-0.02 -0.04
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
time [sec] time [sec]

0.06 0.02

0.04
0

Pitch [Nm]
Pitch [deg]

0.02
-0.02
0

-0.02 -0.04
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
time [sec] time [sec]

0.04 0.01

0
0.02

Yaw [Nm]
Yaw [deg]

-0.01
0
-0.02

-0.02 -0.03
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
time [sec] time [sec]

Fig. 14. Impulse responses to disturbance input and corresponding input signals

Results show that the closed-loop systems are stable and that our proposed LTI controller using μ-synthesis
achieved better control performance than the conventional PD controller. The control input signals remain within the
limitation of ( u ≤ 0.04 [Nm]) in each case.
And, we show cases of this on-orbit attitude control experiments. The following figures show each experimental
case.

(1) Step response


Start Roll Axis 0.05deg Pitch Axis 0.05deg END

Roll Axis -0.05deg Pitch Axis -0.05deg

600 sec 600 sec 600 sec 600 sec 600 sec 600 sec 600 sec

(2) Impulse response (Small rectangular disturbance by wheels)


Roll Axis Pitch Axis Yaw Axis
0.04Nm, 30sec 0.04Nm, 30sec 0.04Nm, 30sec
Start END

600 sec 600 sec 600 sec 600 sec 600 sec

(3) Impulse response (Middle scale disturbance by the east-west station keeping thrusters firing)
Roll Axis -2.00Nm, 62.5ms Roll Axis -1.98Nm, 62.5ms
Pitch Axis 2.00Nm, 62.5ms Pitch Axis -1.40Nm, 62.5ms
Yaw Axis 2.00Nm, 62.5ms Yaw Axis -1.99Nm, 62.5ms
Start END

600 sec 600 sec 600 sec

(4) Impulse response (Large-scale disturbance by thrusters firing)


Roll Axis Pitch Axis Yaw Axis
35.5Nm, 62.5msec 65.5Nm, 62.5msec 20.4Nm, 62.5msec
Start END

600 sec 600 sec 600 sec 600 sec 600 sec
GNC 2008
7th International ESA Conference on Guidance, Navigation & Control Systems
2-5 June 2008, Tralee, County Kerry, Ireland

(5) Wheel Random disturbance (Simultaneous)


All Axes
Random Disturbance
Start END

600 sec 600 sec 600 sec

(6) Wheel Random disturbance (Sequential)


Roll Axis Pitch Axis Yaw Axis
Random Disturbance Random Disturbance Random Disturbance
Start END

600 sec 600 sec 600 sec 600 sec 600 sec

5 CONCLUSION

In this paper, we presented an LTI controller using μ-synthesis for the MIMO-LPV system depending on the
paddle rotation. Our proposed method can incorporate the frequency-shaping technique, thereby easily improving the
control performance. Moreover, our controller uses less computational capacity than the LPV controller. The model
incorporates variation based on the difference of the mass properties between BOL and EOL. Thereby, we can
guarantee its robust stability for its entire mission life. Numerical simulation results were presented to demonstrate that
capability.
This advanced control experiment using ETS-VIII is intended to establish a control system design method for
extremely precise attitude control and maneuvering of large-scale flexible spacecraft. Our ultimate goal is an advanced
control theory developed in the control engineering field including the proposed method. That theory can become a
standard approach for attitude control systems, and can serve as the baseline technology used in next-generation
satellites. That is an important step in the development of future sophisticated spacecraft attitude control technology.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author expresses his great appreciation to Mitsubishi Electric Corporation and Mitsubishi Space Software
Corporation for their support for simulations in these experiments.

REFERENCES
[1] T. Kida, I. Yamaguchi, Y. Chida, T. Sekiguchi, “On-Orbit Robust Control Experiment of Flexible Spacecraft
ETS-VI”, Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Vol.20, No.5, pp. 865-872, 1997.
[2] J.C Doyle, A.Packard, K.Zhou, “Review of LFTs, LMIs, and μ” , Proc. 30th IEEE CDC, pp.1227-1232,1991.
[3] G. E. Dullerud, F. Paganini, “A Course in Robust Control Theory -A Convex Approach-”, Springer,1999.
[4] Y. Hamada, T. Ohtani, T. Kida, T. Nagashio, “A New Gain Scheduling Controller Synthesis and Its Application to
Attitude Control Syetems of a Large Flexible Satellites”, Proc. of IEEE International Conference on Control
Applications, Munich, Germany, 2006.
[5] Y. Hamada, T. Ohtani, T. Kida, T. Nagashio, “Gain-Scheduling Controller Design for Engineering Test Satellite-
VIII”, Proc. of 17th IFAC Symposium in Aerospace, Toulouse, France, 2007.
[6] T. Nagashio, T. Kida, Y. Hamada, T.Ohtani, “Robust Attitude Control of Large Flexible Spacecraft by Utilizing
Symmetric Property of Control System”, Proc. of IEEE CDC, San Diego, USA, 2006.
[7] T. Nagashio, T. Kida, T. Ohtani, Y. Hamada, “Robust Attitude Control of ETS-VIII Spacecraft via Symmetric
Controller”, Proc. of 17th IFAC Symposium on Automatic Control in Aerospace, Toulouse, France, 2007.
[8] P.W.Likins, Dynamics and Control of Flexible Space Vehicles, JPL Technical Report, 32-1239, 1970.

View publication stats