Haizhou Pan,
Marcio S. de Queiroz,
, y
, z
}
is attached to the leader spacecraft with the y
axis pointing along the orbital angular momentum of the leader spacecraft,
and x
axis and z
(t) R is given by
L
=
0.5v
2
+

, (2.1)
where a
=
a
T
a, for an arbitrary ndimensional vector a, v
(t)
=
v
(t), with v
(t)
as dened in (2.4) below, is the Earth gravity constant, and

is the specicpotential
energy of the leader spacecraft. Similarly, the Lagrangian function for the follower space
craft L
f
(t) R is given by
L
f
=
0.5v
2
f
+
 + q
f

, (2.2)
where q
f
(t) R
3
is the position vector of the follower spacecraft relative to the leader
spacecraft, expressed in the coordinate frame {x
, y
, z
} as q
f
=
x
f
+ y
f
+ z
f
and
v
f
(t)
=
v
f
(t), with v
f
(t) as dened in (2.3) below.
Next, let v
(t) and v
f
(t) denote the absolute velocities (i.e., velocity relative to the
inertial coordinate system) of the leader spacecraft and the follower spacecraft, respectively,
expressed in the moving coordinate frame {x
, y
, z
}. In addition, let v
rel
f
(t) denote
the velocity of the follower spacecraft relative to the leader spacecraft, measured in the
coordinate frame {x
, y
, z
+v
rel
f
+
q
f
, (2.3)
where
v
= r
+ r
, (2.4)
v
rel
f
= x
f
+ y
f
+ z
f
, (2.5)
r(t) R denotes the instantaneous distance of the leader spacecraft from the center of the
earth and (t) R is the orbital angular speed of the leader spacecraft. In addition, (t)
in the moving coordinate frame {x
, y
, z
} can be expressed as = r
.
To obtain the leader spacecraft dynamics relative to the Earth, we use the conservative
form of the Lagranges equations [13] on the leader spacecraft given by
d
dt
_
L
= 0, (2.6)
where
{r, }, which denotes the set of polar orbital elements describing the motion
of the leader spacecraft. This yields a set of differential equations of motion for the leader
2004 by CRC Press LLC
spacecraft in the chosen coordinate system. Specically, substituting the magnitude of the
velocity vector of (2.4) into (2.1) yields
L
= 0.5r
2
2
+ 0.5 r
2
+
r
. (2.7)
For L
L
f
f
= 0, (2.11)
where
f
{x
f
, y
f
, z
f
}, which denotes the set of cartesian elements describing the mo
tion of the follower spacecraft relative to the leader spacecraft. Substituting the magnitude
of the velocity vector of (2.3) into (2.2) yields
L
f
= 0.5( x
f
r y
f
)
2
+ 0.5( r + y
f
+ x
f
)
2
+ 0.5 z
2
f
+
+ q
f
. (2.12)
For L
f
given by (2.12), an application of (2.11) results in
( r + 2r ) + x
f
2 y
f
_
y
f
+
2
x
f
_
+
x
f
+q
f
3
= 0,
_
r r
2
_
+ y
f
+ 2 x
f
+
_
x
f
2
y
f
_
+
(y
f
+r)
+q
f
3
= 0,
z
f
+
z
f
+q
f
3
= 0.
Substituting the leader planar dynamics of (2.8) and (2.10) into the above homogeneous
dynamics results in the thrust free dynamics of the follower spacecraft relative to the leader
spacecraft, expressed in the coordinate frame {x
, y
, z
}, given by
x
f
2 y
f
y
f
2
x
f
+
x
f
+q
f
3
= 0,
y
f
+ 2 x
f
+ x
f
2
y
f
+
(y
f
+r)
+q
f
3
r
3
= 0,
z
f
+
z
f
+q
f
3
= 0.
(2.13)
After premultiplying the nonlinear dynamics of (2.13) with the follower spacecraft
mass m
f
and using the method of virtual work for the insertion of external forcing terms
[13], e.g., disturbance and thrusting forces for the leader spacecraft and the follower space
craft, the nonlinear position dynamics of the follower spacecraft relative to the leader space
craft can be arranged in the following form [14, 15]:
m
f
q
f
+ C() q
f
+ N(q
f
, , , r, u
) + F
d
= u
f
, (2.14)
2004 by CRC Press LLC
where C is a Coriolislike matrix dened as
C
=
2m
f
_
_
0 1 0
1 0 0
0 0 0
_
_
, (2.15)
N is a nonlinear term consisting of gravitational effects and inertial forces
N
=
m
f
_
2
x
f
y
f
+
x
f
+q
f

3
+
u
x
m
2
y
f
+ x
f
+
(y
f
+r)
+q
f

3
r

3
+
u
y
m
z
f
+q
f

3
+
u
z
m
_
, (2.16)
F
d
(t) R
3
is a composite disturbance force vector given by
F
d
=
F
d
f
m
f
m
F
d
, (2.17)
where u
(t) R
3
and u
f
(t) R
3
are the control inputs to the leader spacecraft and the
follower spacecraft, respectively, m
, and F
d
f
(t) R
3
and F
d
(t) R
3
are disturbance vectors for
the follower spacecraft and the leader spacecraft, respectively. In this chapter, we assume
that F
d
is a periodic disturbance with a known period > 0 such that F
d
(t + ) = F
d
(t),
t 0. Note that periodic disturbances in formation dynamics may arise due to, e.g., solar
pressure disturbance and gravitational disturbance, among others.
The following remarks further facilitate the subsequent control methodology and sta
bility analysis.
Remark 1 The Coriolis matrix C of (2.15) satises the skew symmetric property of
x
T
Cx = 0, x R
3
. (2.18)
Remark 2 The lefthand side of (2.14) produces an afne parameterization
m
f
+ C q
f
+ N = Y (, q
f
, q
f
, , , r, u
), (2.19)
where (t) R
3
is a dummy variable with components
x
,
y
, and
z
, Y R
32
is a
regression matrix, composed of known functions, dened as
Y
=
_
x
2 y
f
y
f
2
x
f
+
x
f
+q
f
3
u
y
+ 2 x
f
2
y
f
+ x
f
+
(y
f
+r)
+q
f
3
r
3
u
z
+
z
f
+q
f
3
u
z
_
_
, (2.20)
R
2
is the unknown, constant system parameter vector dened as
=
_
m
f
m
f
m
T
. (2.21)
Remark 3 In this chapter, we consider that the composite disturbance vector in the position
dynamics of the follower spacecraft relative to the leader spacecraft can be upper bounded
as follows
F
d
(t)
, t 0, (2.22)
where is a positive constant and
=
. (3.2)
In addition, we dene the composite disturbance error
F
d
(t) R
3
as the difference be
tween the composite disturbance vector F
d
and the disturbance estimate
F
d
(t) R
3
, i.e.,
F
d
=
F
d
F
d
. (3.3)
Finally, we dene the components of a saturation function sat
() R
3
as
sat
(s)
i
=
_
s
i
for s
i

sgn(s
i
) for s
i
 >
s R
3
, (3.4)
where i {x, y, z} and s
x
, s
y
, s
z
are the components of the vector s.
To facilitate the subsequent stability analysis, we dene the saturated disturbance
estimation error variable R
3
as ()
=
sat
_
F
d
()
_
sat
F
d
()
_
.
Remark 4 The saturation function (3.4) satises the following useful property:
_
sat
(a) sat
(b)
_
T
_
sat
(a) sat
(b)
_
(a b)
T
(a b), a, b R
3
. (3.5)
4 ADAPTIVE LEARNING CONTROLLER
In this section we develop an adaptive learning controller based on the system model of
(2.14) such that the tracking error variable e exhibits asymptotic stability. Before we begin
the control design, we dene an auxiliary lter tracking error variable (t) R
3
as
=
e + e, (4.1)
where R
33
is a constant, diagonal, positive denite, control gain matrix.
2004 by CRC Press LLC
4.1 Controller Design
To initiate the control design, we take the time derivative of (4.1) and premultiply the
resulting equation by m
f
to obtain
m
f
= m
f
( q
df
q
f
) + m
f
e, (4.2)
where the second time derivative of (3.1) has been used. Substituting (2.14) into (4.2)
results in
m
f
= m
f
( q
df
+ e) + C q
f
+ N + F
d
u
f
. (4.3)
Simplifying (4.3) into a more advantageous form, we obtain
m
f
= Y ( q
df
+ e, q
f
, q
f
, , , r, u
) + F
d
u
f
, (4.4)
where (2.19) has been used with = q
df
+ e in the denition of (2.20). Equation (4.4)
characterizes the openloop dynamics of and is used as the foundation for the synthesis
of the adaptive learning controller.
Based on the form of the openloop dynamics of (4.4), we design the control law u
f
as
u
f
= Y
+ K +
F
d
, (4.5)
where K R
33
is a constant, diagonal, positive denite, control gain matrix. Guided
by the subsequent Lyapunov stability analysis, the parameter update law for
in (4.5) is
selected as
= Y
T
, (4.6)
where R
22
is a constant, diagonal, positive denite, adaptation gain matrix. Finally,
the disturbance estimate vector
F
d
is updated according to
F
d
(t) = sat
F
d
(t )
_
+ k
L
(t), (4.7)
where k
L
R is a constant, positive, learning gain.
Using the control law of (4.5) in the openloop error dynamics of (4.4) results in the
following closedloop dynamics for :
m
f
= Y
K +
F
d
. (4.8)
In addition, computing the time derivative of (3.2), using the fact that the parameter vector
is constant, and the parameter update law of (4.6), the closedloop dynamics for the
parameter estimation error is given by
= Y
T
. (4.9)
4.2 Stability Analysis
The proposed control law of (4.5)(4.7) provides a stability result for the position and
velocity tracking errors as illustrated by the following theorem. In order to state the main
result of this section, we dene
=
min
_
K +
1
2
k
L
I
3
_
, (4.10)
2004 by CRC Press LLC
where I
3
is the 3 3 identity matrix and
min
() denotes the smallest eigenvalue of a
matrix.
The adaptive learning control law described by (4.5)(4.7) ensures asymptotic con
vergence of the position and velocity tracking errors as delineated by
lim
t
e(t), e(t) = 0. (4.11)
Proof. We dene a nonnegative function as follows:
V (t)
=
1
2
m
f
T
+
1
2
+
1
2k
L
t
_
t
()
T
()d. (4.12)
Taking the time derivative of (4.12) along the closedloop dynamics of (4.8) and (4.9)
results in
V (t) =
T
_
F
d
(t) K
_
+
1
2k
L
T
(t)(t)
1
2k
L
T
(t )(t ). (4.13)
Substituting the composite disturbance estimate of (4.7), noting that sat
_
F
d
(t )
_
=
F
d
(t) due to (2.22), and utilizing the denition of (3.3) into (4.13) produces
V (t) =
T
_
F
d
(t) K
_
+
1
2k
L
T
(t)(t)
1
2k
L
_
F
d
(t) + k
L
_
T
_
F
d
(t) + k
L
_
. (4.14)
Expanding (4.14) and combining like terms produces
V (t) =
T
_
K +
1
2
k
L
I
3
_
1
2k
L
_
F
T
d
(t)
F
d
(t)
T
(t)(t)
_
. (4.15)
Utilizing the inequality of (3.5) and denitions of
F
d
and , we can upperbound (4.15) as
follows:
V (t)
T
_
K +
1
2
k
L
I
3
_
. (4.16)
Taking the norm of the righthand side of (4.16) and using the denition of (4.10) results in
V (t)
2
. (4.17)
Since V is a nonnegative function and
V is a negative semidenite function, V is a non
increasing function. Thus V (t) L
as described by
V ((t),
(t), (t)) V ((0),
(0), (0)), t 0. (4.18)
Using standard signal chasing arguments, all signals in the closedloop system can now be
shown to be bounded. Using (4.8) along with the boundedness of all signals in the closed
loop system, we now conclude that (t) L
_
0
(t)
2
dt. (4.19)
2004 by CRC Press LLC
Figure 2 Actual trajectory of follower spacecraft relative to leader spacecraft.
Since V (t) is bounded, t 0, we conclude that (t) L
L
2
, t 0. Finally, using
Barbalats Lemma [16, 17], we conclude that
lim
t
(t) = 0. (4.20)
Using the denition of in (4.1), the limit statement of (4.20), and Lemma 1.6 of [16],
yield the result of (4.11).
5 SIMULATION RESULTS
The illustrative numerical example considered here utilizes orbital elements to propagate
the leader spacecraft in a lowaltitude orbit similar to the TechSat 21 mission specications
[1]. The adaptive learning control law described in (4.5) is simulated for the dynamics of
the follower spacecraft relative to the leader spacecraft. The leader spacecraft is assumed
to have the following orbital parameters a = 7200 km, e = 0.001, (0) = 0 rad,
T =
= 1.6889 hr, where a is the semimajor axis of the elliptical orbit of the leader spacecraft,
e is the orbital eccentricity of the leader spacecraft, (t) R is the timevarying true
anomaly of the planar dynamics of the leader spacecraft, and
T is the orbital period of the
leader spacecraft. The relative trajectory between the follower spacecraft and the leader
spacecraft was generated by numerically solving the thrustfree dynamics given by (2.13).
The initial conditions for the relative position and velocity between the follower spacecraft
and the leader spacecraft were obtained in the same manner as in [15] and are given by
q
df
(0) = [0 20 1] m, q
df
(0) = [149.1374 0 0]
m
hr
. (5.1)
2004 by CRC Press LLC
Figure 3 Tracking error of follower spacecraft relative to leader spacecraft.
Additional parameters used for simulation within the spacecraft formation ying sys
temare as follows = 5.1658624810
21 m
3
hr
2
, m
= 100 kg, m
f
= 100 kg, u
= [0 0 0]
T
N, F
d
= [1.9106 1.906 1.517]
T
sin
_
2
t
_
10
5
N. Finally, in the following sim
ulation, the parameter and disturbance estimates were all initialized to zero.
The control, adaptation, and learning gains, in the control law of (4.5)(4.7), are
obtained through trial and error in order to obtain good performance for the tracking error
response. The following resulting gains were used in this simulation K = diag (3, 3, 3)
10
3
, = diag (1, 1, 1), = diag (1, 1) 10
2
, and k
L
= 1000. The actual trajectory q
f
,
shown in Fig. 2, is initialized to be the same as the desired trajectory in (5.1). Figures 3
and 4 show the tracking error e and velocity tracking error e, respectively. The control
input u
f
and the disturbance estimate
F
d
are shown in Figs. 5 and 6, respectively. Finally,
since we assume the leader is in a thrust free orbit about the earth, the second component
in the parameter estimate is neglected while the rst component of the parameter estimate
is shown in Fig. 7.
6 CONCLUSION
In this paper, we designed an adaptive learning control algorithm for the position dynamics
of the follower spacecraft relative to the leader spacecraft. A Lyapunovtype design was
used to construct a fullstate feedback control law and parameter and disturbance estimates
that facilitate the tracking of reference trajectories with global asymptotic convergence.
Simulation results were given to illustrate the efcacy of the control design in the presence
of unknown periodic disturbance forces.
2004 by CRC Press LLC
Figure 4 Velocity tracking error of follower spacecraft relative to leader spacecraft.
Figure 5 Control effort for follower spacecraft.
Acknowledgments
Research was supported in part by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Goddard Space Flight Center under Grant NAG511365; AFRL/VACA, WPAFB, OH; and
the New York Space Grant Consortium under Grant 395556519.
2004 by CRC Press LLC
Figure 6 Disturbance estimate for follower spacecraft.
Figure 7 Parameter estimate for follower spacecraft.
H.W. and V.K. are grateful to the Air Force Research Laboratory/VACA, Wright
Patterson Air Force Base, OH, for their hospitality during the summer of 2001.
2004 by CRC Press LLC
REFERENCES
1. http://www.vs.afrl.af.mil/factsheets/TechSat21.html.
2. F. Y. Hadaegh, W. M. Lu, and P. C. Wang, Adaptive control of formation ying space
craft for interferometry, IFAC Conference on Large Scale Systems, pp. 97102, 1998.
3. V. Kapila, A. G. Sparks, J. Bufngton, and Q. Yan, Spacecraft formation ying: Dy
namics and control, AIAA J. GCD., vol. 23, pp. 561564, 2000.
4. C. Sabol, R. Burns, and C. McLaughlin, Formation ying design and evolution, Proc.
of the AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, Paper No. AAS99121, 1999.
5. H. Schaub, S. R. Vadali, J. L. Junkins, and K. T. Alfriend, Spacecraft formation ying
control using mean orbit elements, AAS G. Contr. Conf., pp. 97102, 1999.
6. R. J. Sedwick, E. M. C. Kong, and D. W. Miller, Exploiting orbital dynamics and mi
cropropulsion for aperture synthesis using distributed satellite systems: Applications
to Techsat 21, D.C.P. Conf., AIAA Paper No. 985289, 1998.
7. M. S. de Queiroz, V. Kapila, and Q. Yan, Adaptive nonlinear control of multiple
spacecraft formation ying, AIAA J. GCD., vol. 23, pp. 385390, 2000.
8. R. H. Vassar and R. B. Sherwood, Formation keeping for a pair of satellites in a
circular orbit, AIAA J. GCD., vol. 8, pp. 235242, 1985.
9. H. Wong, V. Kapila, and A. G. Sparks, Adaptive output feedback tracking control of
multiple spacecraft, Proc. ACC, 2001.
10. H.H. Yeh and A. G. Sparks, Geometry and control of satellite formations, Proc.
ACC., pp. 384388, 2000.
11. R. R. Bate, D. D. Mueller, and J. E. White, Fundamentals of Astrodynamics. New
York: Dover, 1971.
12. B. Costic, M. de Queiroz, and D. Dawson, A new learning control approach to the
magnetic bearing benchmark system, Proc. ACC, pp. 26392643, 2000.
13. H. L. Langhaar, Energy Methods in Applied Mechanics. New York: John Wiley and
Sons, 1962.
14. M. de Queiroz, V. Kapila, , and Q. Yan, Adaptive nonlinear control of multiple space
craft formation ying, J. GCD., vol. 23, pp. 385390, 2000.
15. Q. Yan, G. Yang, V. Kapila, and M. S. de Queiroz, Nonlinear dynamics, trajectory
generation, and adaptive control of multiple spacecraft in periodic relative orbits, AAS
G. Contr. Conf., Paper No. 00013, 2000.
16. D. M. Dawson, J. Hu, and T. C. Burg, Nonlinear Control of Electric Machinery. New
York: Marcel Dekker, 1998.
17. J.J. E. Slotine and W. Li, Applied Nonlinear Control. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
Hall, 1991.
2004 by CRC Press LLC