0 views

Uploaded by m_zayan

Satellite Orbits Control Using 1Adaptive Neural Networks
Predictive Controllers (ANNPC)
By: Dr. Mohamed Zayan

save

- On the Estimated Precession of Mercury's Orbit. PMC Physics A-v2a
- 4
- What is Science
- Mars Direct Space Exploration
- Introduction of RINEX21
- Handout Eee Ete 412
- Feynman's Lost Lecture essay
- cmc-q bank
- R05322106-INTRODUCTIONTOSPACETECHNOLOGY
- SPH4U Centripetal Force Lab.pdf
- Collection Articles Book II Donate PROF FEUP
- taurus and gemini traits!
- 2006
- Physics Spacenotes
- EoKS Mock Paper 2 4-7
- Egg
- Bluetooth Notes
- Power Generation Operation y Control Allen Wood 013
- How to Do Research
- IAO-2009
- Face Recognition Pretam
- Circular Motion
- Co Po Mapping
- Stockpile and Cut-Off Optimization Module
- Lecture 1
- part_c
- Doc-1101-B.P.S.-XI-Physics-Worksheet.pdf
- 10.1016@j.compag.2005.08.005_2
- Sphere in Cone Paper
- m 142 f 06 Newton Kepler
- Optimization Techniques for Orbit Estimation and Determination to Control the Satellite Motion
- 6003298B Multi Dim Cal of Measurement While Drilling Tools w
- plc_3
- 20120705 Hongwei Security
- Satellite Orbits and Flight Dynamics_final
- Orbits Design for Remote Sensing Satellite
- Frances Cleveland
- 1 Market-update Kunstadter
- 02_SCADA (1)
- Satellite Orbits Guidance Using State Space Neural Network
- Lecture Two Orbits
- Satellite Orbits Guidance Using State Space Neural Network
- Esa Astro Zayan Experment Op-sat Technical Introduction
- Satellite Orbits Control Using 1Adaptive Neural Networks Predictive Controllers (ANNPC)
- CHAP6_rev
- Stela Release Note 2.4.2
- ISUs EMBA Brochure_Jun10
- CS Lecture VKI
- Cost
- LTU-EX-2011-32639631
- Space Law Certificate Course 2013
- Pan Jing Thesis 2011 (1)
- OPS SAT ExperimeterInformation and Questionnaire
- Space Law Certificate Course 2013
- 130225 Esnc13 International Kick-Off Programme
- Colt
- Structured Cabling New
- if1_4st
- Panel Maintenance
- GATOR 01 Libre

**Predictive Controllers (ANNPC)
**

1

2

**A. F. Aly, M. Naguib Aly, M. A. Zayan
**

Faculty of Engineering Alexandria University, Nilesat Company

Alexandria, Egypt

+2012-3942832

m_zayan@yahoo.com

Abstract—This paper develops an Adaptive Neural

Network Predictive Controller (ANNPC) to predict satellite

thruster force and control osculating orbital elements during

maneuvers. An adequate mathematical satellite model is

implemented to simulate the satellite orbit trajectory during

thrusting maneuver. When using Adaptive Neural Network

(ANN) for control, two steps, System Identification and

Control Design, are used. In The system identification

stage, an ANN model is developed to represent the forward

dynamics of the satellite. The prediction error between the

implemented satellite model output and the ANN output is

used as the ANN training signal. In the system control

stage, the ANN model is used to predict future satellite

responses to potential control signals. Using ANNPC in

orbit control will optimize the thrust forces and satellite

parameters due to its inherent characteristic. ANNPC will

be efficient in the autonomous satellite generations and can

change the way space segment and missions operate.

**has been placed in an operational orbit about the earth,
**

subsequent maneuvers will be required to correct the

satellite orbit [2]. In this paper, the Model Predictive

Control (MPC) and ANN [3, 4] techniques have been used

successfully to control the satellite orbits during thrusting

maneuvers. MPC was conceived in the 1970s primarily by

industry. Its popularity steadily increased throughout the

1980s. Model Predictive Control has developed

considerably over the last few years. At present, there are

many applications of predictive control successfully in use

not only in the process industry but also applications to the

control of a diversity of processes ranging from robot

manipulators [5, 6] to aerospace industry. The reason for

this success can be attributed to the fact that the MPC is the

most general way of posing the process control problem in

the time domain. MPC formulation integrates optimal

control, stochastic control, control of processes with dead

time, multi-variable control, and future references when

available. Another advantage of MPC is handling the finite

control horizon used constraints and in general non-linear

processes, which are frequently found in industry. The

capabilities of the multi-layer Neural Network (NN) [7, 3]

with non-linear function have been applied very

successfully in the identification and modeling of dynamic

systems. Combing both techniques of the MPC and ANN

[8, 9] makes it a popular choice for modeling non-linear

systems and for implementing general-purpose non-linear

controllers.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

…………………………………………………….

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................. 1

2. ORBITAL ELEMENTS VARIATION ..................... 1

3. SATELLITE MANEUVER SIMULATION .............. 5

4. SATELLITE ORBIT CONTROL USING NEURAL

NETWORK PREDICTIVE CONTROL....................... 9

5. CONCLUSION ................................................... 13

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ........................................ 13

REFERENCES ....................................................... 20

**2. ORBITAL ELEMENTS VARIATION
**

The satellite orbit is an ellipse, parabola or hyperbola if it is

influenced only by the gravitational filed of a point mass or

spherical body. The orbit elements can be calculated from

position and velocity vector at any time but these elements

will be invariant. Practically, the satellite motion is

perturbated by different forces and the calculation of the

orbit elements will yield a different set of values over an

interval of time. This orbit with varying parameters is called

an osculating orbit. The orbital elements can be treated as

the dependent variables of a set of first order differential

1. INTRODUCTION

The satellite motion is affected by different disturbance

forces depending on the satellite altitude, which lead to

change of the desired path and location. Aside from the

natural perturbation forces, the motion of a spacecraft is

also affected by the action of an onboard thruster system

[1]. Thrusters are frequently applied for orbit control,

attitude control, or combination of both. After a spacecraft

1

2

**0-7803-7651-X/03/$17.00 © 2003 IEEE
**

IEEEAC paper #1218

1

where p is the semi-latus rectum

**equations. Conversely, the position and velocity vectors can
**

be calculated directly from the set of evolving parameters at

any time. In the following analysis [1] let ∂ indicate a

change in an orbital variable due to the application of a

vector f of acceleration other than due to the spherically

symmetrical central gravitational field. The change in the

energy per unit mass over a time interval ∂ t is as follows:

1 2

v

2

−µ

E potentialper unit mass = (

)

r

−µ

Etotalper unit mass = (

)

2a

µ∂a

∂E = 2 = v.f∂t .

2a

E kinematicper unit mass =

p = h2 / µ

Now to calculate out- of -plan elements (i, Ω, ω)

sin i sin Ω

h = r × v = h − sin i cos Ω .

cos i

**Where i is the inclination, Ω is the right ascension of the
**

ascending node and ω is the argument of perigee.

Differentiate this equation and arrange the result in the form

(1)

(14)

**which is an orthogonal matrix, transpose equals the inverse.
**

Therefore

**h sin idΩ / dt
**

− hdi / dt = Γ T (r × f )

2

dh / dt

.

(15)

Note that the elements i and Ω refer to the same axes as the

vectors on the right hand side of the above equation in the

inertial Geocentric Equatorial Axes (i, j, k) [1, 10]. The

final form depends on the final axes in use. The rate of

change of the true anomaly θ and the rate of change due

(5)

h 2 = (r × v ).(r × v ) .

(6)

Where h is the angular momentum per unit mass and the

absolute value h= |h| is known as areal velocity. The rate of

change of angular momentum is

~

**only to f is ∂θ are derived by applying the perturbation to
**

the following equation

h2

r=

(7)

µ

1 + e cos θ

a = p /(1 − e 2 )

~

r∂e cos θ − re sin θ∂θ = 2h∂h / µ .

(8)

(9)

(16)

(17)

(18)

In the limit

In order to obtain the rate of change of eccentricity (e)

h = µa (1 − e ) .

(10)

de

1

=

[( pa − r 2 )( v.f ) + (r.v )(r.f ) ,

dt µae

(11)

2

**cos Ω − sin Ω cos i sin Ω sin i
**

Γ2 = sin Ω cos Ω cos i − cos Ω sin i ,

sin i

cos i

0

where

(4)

Since

2

(13)

(3)

2

dh

= (r × v ).(r × f ) / h

dt

= r × (f × r ).v / h

2

= [ r ( v.f ) − (r.v )(r.f )] / h .

h sin iΩ

r × f = Γ2 − hi ,

h

(2)

**Referring to the orbital plane axes (ir, iθ, iz) where:
**

• ir is along the radius vector, away from

the center of attraction.

• iθ is perpendicular to r in the plane of the

motion and in the direction of increasing

the true anomaly (θ).

• iz is the normal to the plane motion.

Where the satellite mass is m, velocity vector is v, position

vector is r, the ellipse major-axis of orbit is a, and the Earth

gravitational coefficient is µ. In the limit this gives the rate

of change of energy as

da 2a

=

( v.f ) .

dt

µ

(12)

~

dθ

de 2h dh

= r cos θ

−

re sin θ

dt

dt µ dt

h(r.v ) = rµe sin θ .

By differentiate

(19)

(20)

By differentiating

~

1 dh

dθ

de p

re cos θ

= − r sin θ

+ (r.f ) + (r.v )

dt

dt h

h dt

2

~

p

dh

dθ

2h

re

= ( p / h ) cosθ (r.f ) + 2 cosθ (r.v ) − sin θ

dt

µ

h

dt

v.f = µ / p [ef r sin θ + (1 + e cosθ ) fθ ]

=

p

2h

2 cos θ (r.v ) − sin θ = − sin θ [ p + r (1 + e cos θ ) − er cos θ ] / h

h

µ

µe

h

sin θf r +

The required transformation from i j k axes to r θ z axes

= − sin θ ( p + r ) / h ,

**h sin idΩ / dt
**

− hdi / dt = Γ T (r × f ) .

2

ijk

dh / dt

= Γ2T Γ2 Γ1 (r × f ) rθz

and finally

~

1

dh

dθ

=

p cos θ (r.f ) − ( p + r ) sin θ . (21)

dt

dt

reh

**The variation of the argument of perigee ω is obtained by
**

i x .r = [cos Ω sin Ω 0].r = r cos(θ + ω ) .

0

= Γ1 − rf z

rfθ

Differentiation results in

dΩ

[ − sin Ω cos Ω 0].r

dt

.

~

dθ dω

= − r sin(θ + ω )

+

dt

dt

**Use of Tangential and Normal Component (t, n, z) in orbital
**

plane

r

[ − sin Ω cos Ω 0].r = [− sin Ω cos Ω 0] Γ2 Γ1 0

0

= cos i sin(θ + ω )r

~

dω

dΩ dθ

= − cos i

−

.

dt

dt

dt

(1 + 2e cosθ + e 2 )

v cos γ =

µ

p

e sin θ

µ

(1 + e cosθ

p

r.f = r ( f t sin γ − f n cos γ )

=

(23)

µre

sin θf t −

vh

v.f = vf t

h

fn

v

by means of transformation from t n z axes to r θ z

(24)

sin γ

Γ3 = sin γ

0

− cos γ

sin γ

0

0

0 ,

1

since

**Tangential and Normal Components
**

From the orbital plane axes (ir, iθ, iz) then

r.f = rf r ,

and

r.v = rv sin γ ,

where γ is the angle between the velocity vector v and iθ

measured clockwise from the latter

Also

p

v sin γ =

**We now have the required equations for variations of the
**

orbital elements. The final form of the equations depends on

the axes in use.

tan γ =

µ

v=

where

or

(25)

(22)

Therefore

cos(θ + ω ) − sin(θ + ω ) 0

Γ1 = sin(θ + ω ) cos(θ + ω ) 0

0

0

1

~

dθ dω

dΩ

,

= −

+

cos i

dt

dt

dt

.

h

fθ

r

(r × f ) tnz

− rf z cos γ

,

=

− rf z sin γ

rf n sin γ + rf t cos γ

then

e sin θ

.

1 + e cos θ

0

h sin idΩ / dt

− hdi / dt = Γ r

.

− fz

1

dh / dt

f n sin γ + f t cos γ

3

(26)

f(u )

1

x1

fn

f(u )

2

x2

ft

f(u )

3

x3

fz

f(u )

x4

f(u )

x5

f(u )

x6

f(u )

x7

f(u )

x8

f(u )

x9

M ux

SysM u x

1 /s

In te g 1

1 /s

In te g 2

1 /s

In te g 3

1 /s

In te g 4

1 /s

In te g 5

1 /s

In te g 6

1 /s

In te g 7

1 /s

In te g 8

1 /s

In te g 9

u (4 )

1

y1

a

u (5 )

2

y2

e

u (6 )

3

y3

h

f(u )

4

y4

T HET A

f(u )

5

y5

theta

f(u )

6

y6

OMEGA

f(u )

7

y7

i

f(u )

8

y8

omega

f(u )

9

y9

T HET A+OMEGA

Figure 1- Satellite Orbits Trajectory Model during Thrusting Maneuver (Satellite Plant Model) Using SIMULINK

~

dθ

r

1

= − [2 sin θf t + ( 2e + cosθ ) f n ]

dt

ev

a

dΩ r sin(ω + θ )

=

fz

dt

h sin i

di r cos(ω + θ )

=

fz

dt

h

~

dω

dΩ dθ

= − cos i

−

dt

dt

dt

**Summary Of Equations In Tangential-Normal (t, n, z) Axes
**

2

da 2a v

=

f

dt

µ t

de 1

r

= [2( e + cos θ ) f t − sin θf n ]

dt v

a

dh rh p

=

[ f t + e sin θf n ]

dt pv r

θ∗ =θ +ω

~

dθ * dθ dθ dω

dΩ

=

+

+

= h / r 2 − cos i

dt

dt

dt

dt

dt

(27)

(28)

(29)

(30)

(31)

4

(32)

(33)

(34)

(35)

**A substantial amount of propellant is consumed during a
**

single maneuver, which results in continuous change of the

spacecraft mass along the burn. Despite the variety of the

spacecraft propulsion systems, a simple, constant thrust

model is sufficient to describe the motion of a spacecraft

during thrust. The propulsion system eject a mass of

propellant per time interval dt at a velocity ve.

**3. SATELLITE MANEUVER SIMULATION
**

Numerical Integration Methods

The high accuracy, which is required in computation of

satellite orbit, can only be achieved by using numerical

methods for the solution of the equation of motion. A

variety of methods have been developed for the numerical

integration of ordinary differential equations. Multi-step

methods with the availability of variable-order and step-size

are suited for the satellite orbits from near circular orbits to

high eccentricity orbits without any precautions. Due to

their flexibility, variable order and step-size multi-step

methods are ideal candidates for use in general satellite orbit

prediction and determination systems.

dm = m dt .

A space craft mass m experiences a thrust

F = m v e .

And the acceleration

f=

F m

=

ve .

m m

**Integration over the burn time ∆t, the total velocity
**

increment is given by

Satellite Orbits Correction

t 0 + ∆t

**The three component of a corrective velocity (vn, vt, vz)
**

maneuver affect the 6 orbital elements, and therefore, it is

not common to require the adjustment of all the orbital

elements. Geostationary satellite orbits [11] are assumed to

be equatorial orbits with a period equal to the sidereal day

(86164.1 s), i.e. corresponding to the daily rotation of the

Earth relative to the stars. A satellite of a circular orbit with

radius of approximately 42164 km will appear stationary to

an observer on the earth. Although the perturbations on

satellites in geostationary orbits are very small, they become

important due to the tight tolerance arising from the mission

requirements. Station keeping, therefore has to be

performed, and the spacecraft is maneuvered in order to

keep it within strict latitude and longitude limit defining a

dead-zone. The magnitude of the dead-zone depends upon

the characteristics of the communication antennas and

transponders. It is common with modern communication

satellites to require that the satellite remains stationary

relative to the ground within ± 0.1 degree in both latitude

and longitude due to narrow antenna beam width of the

ground transmitter. If the inclination of the orbits drifts

away from the Equator then the satellite will appear to have

a daily oscillation in latitude equal to the magnitude of the

non-zero inclination. The changes in the inclination of a

geostationary orbit arise from the effects of the gravitational

attraction of the Moon and the Sun. The perturbations

caused by the Sun and the Moon are predominantly out-ofplane effects causing a change in the inclination and in the

right ascension of the orbit’s ascending node. In-plane

perturbations also occur, but these are second order effects

and need to be considered when extremely tight tolerance,

i.e. about ± 0.03 degree, is required.

∆v =

∫ f (t )dt = − v e

t0

∆v = −

m ( t 0 + ∆t )

1

m

m0

∫

dm = − v e ln

m(t 0 + ∆t )

m0

m ∆t

F

.

ln(1 −

m

m0

**Assuming that a mass has a constant flow rate and making
**

use of the total velocity increment ∆v, the acceleration may

be expressed [10] as

f (t ) =

m

1

m(t )

m ∆t

− ln1 −

m 0

≈

∆v

∆t

(37)

**Satellite Maneuver Modeling
**

An adequate mathematical satellite orbit trajectory model

during thrusting maneuver is implemented by treating the

orbital elements as the dependent variables of a set of first

order differential equations in (t, n, z) axes using numerical

integration methods. Due to very small interval time of the

propulsion system burning required for the satellite

maneuver the equations of Tangential-Normal axes are

applicable to simulate the satellite maneuver during

thrusting period. A model is implemented, using SIMULINK

[12], to simulate the satellite maneuver. There are three

inputs, which represent the three corrective acceleration

vectors samples in Tangential-Normal axes (fn, ft, fz), and

nine outputs, which describe the orbital elements states (a,

~

**e, h, θ*(THETA), θ (theta), Ω (OMEGA), ω (omega), i, and
**

θ*+Ω (THETA+OMEGA) ) as shown in Figure 1.

Thrust Forces

Case Study (Satellite Maneuver Simulation)

**The maneuver may conveniently be treated as instantaneous
**

velocity increments ∆v occurring at the impulsive maneuver

time tm whenever the thrust duration is small as compared to

the orbital period.

**The following case study contains the information of the
**

typical satellite data history in geostationary orbit, which is

used in the implementing of the North-South maneuvers.

The main object of the simulated maneuver is to correct the

non-zero inclination of a geostationary satellite, which is

v(t m+ ) = v(t m− ) + ∆v(t m ) .

(36)

5

**Table 1 - Orbit Bulletin Epoch, Before Maneuver
**

in Adaptive Keplerian Elements at 16/3/2002

12:06:40 UTC with m=1083.255 kg

42166.35× 103 meter

a

e_x

0.00036276

e_y

-0.000007898

i_x

-0.00049069 degree

i_y

0.00026083 degree

353.006504 degree

L

Table 2 - The Velocity Increment Vectors in

Tangential Normal Axes during Pre-Maneuver

with 50 s Pulse Duration

-0.00119 m/s

vn pre-maneuver

vt pre-maneuver

-0.00146 m/s

vz pre-maneuver

-0.25767 m/s

Table 3 - The Velocity Increment Vectors in

Tangential Normal Axes during Maneuver with

57.094 s Pulse Duration

-0.00644 m/s

vn maneuver

vt maneuver

-0.00794 m/s

vz maneuver

-1.39760 m/s

-4

0

x 10

fn

-0.5

-1

-1.5

0

-4

x 10

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

20

40

60

80

100

120

20

40

60

80

100

120

ft

-0.5

-1

-1.5

0

-0.005

-0.01

fz

-0.015

-0.02

-0.025

0

time in sec

**Figure 2- Acceleration Vectors in Tangential-Normal
**

Axes (fn, ft, and fz) in m/s2

**called North-South maneuver. North-South maneuver is
**

defined also as the main Station-Keeping maneuver, which

is accomplished by firing one or several thrusters for the

period of time required to achieve the change in orbital

velocity. The main maneuver is occurring in routine

schedule to compensate the perturbation forces. Premaneuver is applied to the satellite in advance of the

maneuver with 10% of the full thrust capacity (offmodulation thrust) in order to estimate disturbing torques

variations. After fluids of the propulsion system have been

relocated and the estimator has converged, the open loop

compensation is modified according to estimations done and

then full thrust is used. Orbit bulletin before maneuver in

adaptive Keplerian elements are shown in Table 1 where

**Applying the velocity increment at 19/03/2000 9:08:57
**

UTC and propagating the orbital parameters starting from

the last orbital determination process to get the epoch of the

orbital elements at the thrusting time [13]. Using the

implemented model in SIMULINK with sampling time =

0.57094 s and plotting the orbital elements during premaneuver and maneuver, Figure 2 shows the acceleration

samples of the pre-maneuver and maneuver respectively.

Figures 3, 4, and 5 describe the variation in the orbital

elements due to the thrusting forces. It is shown that

influence of the thrusting forces decrease the inclination and

semi-major axis values. Also, it is clear that the direction of

the velocity increment is very important in adjusting the

orbital elements. Reviewing the previous differential

equations (27~35), it is seen that the value of the inclination

will be very sensitive to sign value of the cos(θ*). Increasing

the value of the velocity increment in -z direction is not

sufficient to guarantee the decreasing in the inclination

angle because it is important to supervise and predict all

other parameters related to the satellite orbit during

maneuver. Tables 4 and 5 contain the initial and final values

of orbital elements during pre-maneuver and total maneuver

(pre-maneuver + maneuver). It is shown that small changes

in inclination leads to large amount changes in the perigee

location and the right ascension of the ascending node. The

simulated satellite plant model has succeeded to achieve the

main object of the maneuver and produces a typical

scenario of the satellite maneuver.

e x = e cos(Ω + ω )

e y = e sin(Ω + ω )

i x = sin i cos Ω

i y = sin i sin Ω

L ≈ Ω + ω + θ − GMST = True-Longitude.

**Where GMST=Greenwich Mean Sidereal Time which
**

denotes the angles between the mean Vernal equinox of

date and the Greenwich meridian. The velocity increments

vectors in Tangential-Normal axes during pre-maneuver

with 50 s pulse duration are shown in Table 2. The velocity

increment vectors in Tangential-Normal axes during

maneuver with 57.094 s pulse duration are shown in Table

3.

Results of Maneuver Simulation

6

x 10

7

x 10

4 .2 1 6 6

-4

x 10

3.72

11

1.29 64

4 .2 1 6 6

1.29 64

4 .2 1 6 6

h

1.29 64

e

3 .715

a

4 .2 1 6 6

1.29 64

40

60

310

THE TA

305

300

1.29 64

0

20

40

60

0.2

160

0.15

158

0.1

156

0.05

295

154

0

0

20

40

60

0.032

20

40

60

om ega

i

0

98.3

192

0.03

98.2

190

20

40

60

60

20

40

60

20

40

60

98.1

188

0

40

98.4

194

0.029

20

152

0

196

0.031

0

THE TA + O M E G A

20

OMEGA

3.71

0

theta

4 .2 1 6 6

0

20

t im e

40

60

0

**Figure 3 - Satellite Orbital Variation during Pre-maneuver (a in m, h in m2/s, angles in degree, and time in s)
**

7

x 10

4 .2 1 6 6

x 10

11

1.29 64

1.29 64

3.74

1.29 64

e

a

4 .2 1 6 6

-4

3.76

h

x 10

4 .2 1 6 6

3.72

1.29 64

150

280

260

THE TA

300

3.7

50

100

150

0.8

220

0.6

200

0.4

180

0.2

240

50

100

150

0.03

1.29 64

50

160

0

50

100

150

200

140

50

0.026

0.024

50

98.5

om ega

i

160

98.4

140

100

150

120

50

150

100

150

100

150

98.6

180

0.028

100

100

150

98.3

50

THE TA + O M E G A

100

theta

4 .2 1 6 6

50

OM EGA

4 .2 1 6 6

t im e

Figure 4 - Satellite Orbital Variation during Maneuver (a in m, h m2/s, angles in degree, and time in s)

7

7

x 10

4 .2 1 6 6

x 10

1 .2 9 6 4

3 .7 4

1 .2 9 6 4

3 .7 2

1 .2 9 6 4

3 .7

0

50

100

150

0

50

100

150

1 .2 9 6 4

0

220

300

0 .6

200

280

theta

0 .8

THE TA

320

0 .4

260

180

0 .2

160

0

0

50

100

150

200

0 .0 3

180

0 .0 2 8

160

i

0 .0 3 2

0 .0 2 6

50

100

150

0

9 8 .4

9 8 .2

50

100

150

50

100

150

50

100

150

98

120

0

150

9 8 .6

140

0 .0 2 4

100

140

0

om ega

240

50

OM EGA

4 .2 1 6 6

4 .2 1 6 6

11

h

e

a

4 .2 1 6 6

-4

3 .7 6

THE TA O M E G A

x 10

4 .2 1 6 6

0

50

100

150

0

t im e

**Figure 5 - Satellite Orbital Variation during Total Maneuver Period (Pre-Maneuver + Maneuver) (a in m, h m2/s, angles in
**

degree, and time in s)

Satellite Orbit Elements

**Table 4 – Satellite Orbital Variation during Pre-maneuver
**

Initial Value at t=0

Final Value at t= 50

Amount of Change

a in meter

42166.35×103

42166310.21

-39.78

e

0.00037125

0.00037195

0.00000069

2

11

11

h in m /s

1.296438395×10

1.2964377831994×10

-61180.057

THETA in degree

306.2

298.85

-7.34

theta in degree

0

0.11526

0.11526

OMEGA in degree

152.00

159.55

7.54

i in degree

0.03183960

0.02926856

-0.00257103

Omega in degree

195.71

188.04

-7.66

THETA+OMEGA in degree

98.12

98.33

0.20

Table 5 - Satellite Orbital Variation during Total Maneuver Period (Pre-Maneuver + Maneuver)

Satellite Orbit Elements

Initial Value at t=0

Final Value at t= 50

Amount of Change

a in meter

42166.35×103

42166.0935837467×103

-256.41

e

0.00037125

0.00037575

0.00000449

h in m2/s

1.29643839500×1011

1.2964344514864×1011

-394351.35

THETA in deg

306.2

245.50

-60.69

theta in deg

0

0.73377979

0.73377979

OMEGA in deg

152.0067823

213.152167139785

61.14

i in deg

0.03183960

0.02816396

-0.00367563

Omega in deg

195.7104787

133.831320930936

-61.87

THETA+OMEGA in deg

98.1295

98.57543008

0.44593008

8

**process as close as possible to the reference
**

trajectory. This criterion usually takes the

form of a quadratic of the errors between the

predicted output signal and the predicted

reference trajectory. An explicit solution can

be obtained if the criterion is quadratic, the

model is linear and there are no constraints,

otherwise an iterative optimization method

has to be used.

3. The control signal u(t|t) is sent to the process

whilst the next control signals calculated are

rejected, because at the next sampling instant

(t+1) is already known and step 1 is repeated

with this new value and all the sequences are

brought up to date. Thus, the u(t+1|t+1) is

calculated which in principle will be different

to the u(t+1|t) because of the new

information available) using the receding

horizon concept.

In order to implement this strategy, a model is used to

predict the future plant outputs, based on past and current

values and on the proposed optimal future control actions.

**4. SATELLITE ORBIT CONTROL USING NEURAL
**

NETWORK PREDICTIVE CONTROL

Model Predictive Control (MPC)

The term MPC does not designate a specific control strategy

but a very wide range of control methods, which make an

explicit use of a model of the process to obtain the control

signal by minimizing an objective function. These design

methods lead to linear controllers, which have practically

the same structure and present adequate degrees of freedom.

The ideas appearing in greater or lesser degree in all the

predictive control family are basically defined in the

following points:

• Explicit use of a model to predict the process output

at future time instants (horizon).

• Calculation of a control sequence minimizing an

objective function.

• Receding strategy, so that at each instant the horizon

is displaced towards the future, which involves the

application of the first control signal of the sequence

calculated at each step.

While MPC is suitable for almost any kind of problem, it

displays its main strength when applied to problems with a

large number of manipulated and controlled variables. The

various MPC algorithms only differ amongst themselves in

the model used to represent the process and the noises and

the cost function to be minimized. This type of control is of

an open nature within which many works have been

developed, being widely received by the academic world

and by industry. The good performance of these

applications shows the capacity of the MPC to achieve

highly efficient control systems able to operate during long

periods of time with hardly any intervention

Object Function

The general aim is that the future output (y) on the

considered horizon should follow a determined reference

signal (w) and, at the same time, the control effort (∆u)

necessary for applying. The general expression for such an

object function will be:

J ( N1 , N 2 , N u ) =

N2

∑ δ ( j )[ yˆ (t + j t ) − w(t + j )]

2

+

. (38)

j = N1

Nu

∑ λ ( j )[∆u(t + j − 1)]

MPC Methodology and Schema

2

j =1

**Where N1 and N2 are the minimum and maximum cost
**

horizons and Nu is the control horizon. The weighting

factors δ(j) and λ(j) are sequences that consider the future

behavior, usually constant values or exponential sequences

are considered.

**The following strategy represents the methodology of all the
**

controllers’ characteristics belonging to the MPC [14]

family:

1. The future outputs for a determined horizon

N, called the prediction horizon, are predicted

at each instant t using the process model.

These predicted outputs y(t+k|t) for k = 1...

N, which indicate the value of the variable at

the instant (t+k) calculated at time t, depend

on the known values up to instant t (past

inputs and outputs) and on the future control

signals u(t + k|t), k = 0... N - 1, which are

those to be sent to the system and to be

calculated.

2. To keep the process as close as possible to

the reference trajectory w(t + k), which can

be the set point itself or a close

approximation of it, the set of future control

signals is calculated by optimizing a

determined criterion in order to keep the

δ ( j) = α N

2−

j

.

If the parameter α is a value between 0 and 1, the errors

farthest from instant t are penalized more than those nearest

to it, giving rise to smoother control with less effort. If α>1

the first errors are more penalized and a tighter control is

occurred. The weighting factor λ acts as a damper on the

predicted control. Normally bounds in the amplitude and in

the slew rate of the control signal and limits in the output

will be considered and adding these constrained to the

objective function to be minimized. The control law is

imposed by the use of the control horizon Nu, which

consists of considering that after a certain interval Nu<N2

there is no variation in the proposed control signals. When

the condition that the output attains the reference value at a

determined instant, stability results are guaranteed.

9

MPC Algorithm

The MPC algorithm has the following important steps.

1. Generate a reference trajectory.

2. Start with the previous calculated control

input vector, and predict the performance of

the plant using the model.

3. Calculate a new control input that minimizes

the object function,

4. Repeat steps 2 and 3 until desired

minimization is achieved,

5. Send the first control input, to the plant,

6. Repeat entire process for each time step.

There are several minimization algorithms that have been

implemented in MPC such as Non-gradient, Simplex, and

Successive Quadratic Programming. The quality of the

plant’s model affects the accuracy of a prediction. A

reasonable model of the plant is required to implement

MPC. With a linear plant there are tools and

techniques available to make modeling easier, but when the

plant is non-linear this task is more difficult. For non-linear

plant, the ability of the MPC to make accurate predictions

can be enhanced if a neural network is used to learn the

dynamics of the plant instead of standard modeling

techniques. Improved predictions affect rise time, overshoot, and the energy content of the control signal.

**Figure 6 - Multi-Layer Feed-Forward neural Network
**

with a time-delayed structure

**Adaptive Neural Network Predictive Control (ANNPC)
**

Since a neural network will be used to model the plant, the

configuration of the network architecture should be

considered. Figure 6, depicts a multi-layer feed-forward

neural network with a time delayed structure. The inputs to

this network consist of external inputs, u(n) and y(n-l), and

their corresponding delay nodes, u(n-l),…, u(n-nd), and y(n2), …, y(n-dd). The parameters nd and dd represent the

number of delay nodes associated with their respective input

node. The second input could instead have been the

estimated output yn(n-l) and it's delayed values. The

network as shown in Figure 6 has one hidden layer

containing several hidden nodes that use a general output

function. The output node uses a linear output function with

a slope of one for scaling the output.

**Figure 7 – Network Prediction
**

network feedback is displayed as one network feeding

another.

Prediction Using A Neural Network

Designing Adaptive Neural Predictive Controllers to

**The ANNPC algorithm uses the output of the plant’s model
**

to predict the plant’s dynamics to an arbitrary input from the

current time n, to some future time, n+k. Consider a

network with two hidden nodes, one output node, one input

consisting of u(n) and two previous inputs, and of three

previous outputs. To produce the output yn(n+2), input

u(n+1) and u(n+2) are needed. The prediction is started at

time n, with the initial conditions of [u(n) u(n-1)] and [y(n)

y(n-1) y(n-2)] and the estimated input u(n+1). The output of

this process is yn(n+1), which is fed back to the network

and the process is repeated to produce the predicted plant’s

output yn(n+2). This process is shown in Figure 7. The

**Control Satellite Orbits
**

The main object of the controllers is to control the satellite

orbits parameters during thrusting maneuver. There are

typically two steps involved when using neural networks for

control, system identification and control design. The first

stage of model predictive control is to train a neural network

to represent the forward dynamics of the plant. The neural

network plant model is trained off-line, in batch form, using

any of the training algorithms [7, 12]. The prediction error

between the plant output and the neural network output is

used as the neural network training signal. The neural

10

o p ti m i z a te r b l o c k

C o n t ro l S i g n a l

si g n a l 4

si g n a l 3

si g n a l 2

1

si g n a l 1

R e f e re n c e

o p ti m i z e r

1

u

y hat

y

y h a t1

N N m o d e l

2

P la n t o u tp u t

**Figure 8 – Neural Network Predictive Control Process
**

Figure 9 – Model Predictive Control (MPC) Block-set

network plant model uses previous inputs and previous

plant outputs to predict future values of the plant output. In

the controller design phase, the ANN model is used to

predict future plant responses to potential control signals.

An optimization algorithm then computes the control

signals that optimize future plant performance. The

optimization uses a technique of backtracking tracking

algorithm, which from searches in a given direction to

locate the minimum of the performance function in that

direction. The backtracking algorithm is a linear search

routine that begins with a step multiplier of 1 and then

backtracks until an acceptable reduction in the performance

is obtained. The structure of the Neural Network Predictive

Control is given in Figure 8. The ANNPC is implemented

using MPC (SIMULINK block), which is contained in the

Neural Network Toolbox block-set of the MATLAB V.6

[12]. The MPC block-set, as shown in Figure 9, is based on

the receding horizon technique and the optimization is

based on Newton’s (sometimes called Newton-Raphson)

algorithm [8, 12]. The MATLAB functions PREDOPT [12] and

CSRCHBAC [12] have been used.

Three SISO models are designed by using ANNPC to

predict the acceleration vectors (fn, ft, fz) increment in (t, n,

z) axes required to control the angular momentum per unit

mass (h), the major axis (a), and the inclination (i)

respectively. The MPC block-set is used to implement the

ANNPC controllers and guide the satellite orbits parameters

during maneuvers. The first step in model predictive control

is to determine the ANN model for the satellite orbit

trajectory during thrusting maneuver (system identification).

Next, the controller uses this ANN model to predict future

performance. Satellite orbit trajectory model during

thrusting maneuver (satellite plant model), which has been

simulated in the previous section, is used to develop the

ANN model by generating training data. This network is

trained off-line in batch mode. In Figure 9 the controller

consists of the ANN model for the satellite trajectory during

thrusting maneuver and the optimization block. The

optimization block determines the value of the acceleration

vectors that minimize the object function of the predictive

**Figure 10 – Structure of Neural Network Model
**

control algorithm and then the optimal signal is input to the

satellite plant model as shown in Figure 10. The ANNPC

uses the ANN model to predict the future performance of

the satellite. The controller then calculates the control inputs

that will optimize satellite parameters over a specified future

time horizon. Any poor performance and instability due to

the interactions between processes variables can be avoided

thanks to the setting constraints of the input and the output.

The variation of the perturbation forces depends on the time

of the year and therefore the velocity increment will be

varied according to this change and is limited by the thruster

characteristics. The input and output constraints are

depending on the satellite application and thruster

characteristics.

Training data for pre maneuver phase

A set of collective cycles from typical history data of

implemented North-South maneuvers for a current

operating geostationary satellite is used to the set constraints

of the ANNPCs system. The maximum and minimum input

samples of the acceleration vector fn minimum input during

pre maneuver are set to value 2.618×10-5 and 2.142×10-5

m/s2 respectively. The maximum and minimum inputs

samples of the acceleration vector ft during pre maneuver

are set to value 3.212×10-5 and 2.628×10-5 m/s2

respectively. The maximum and minimum input samples of

the acceleration vector fz during pre maneuver are set to

value 0.0056687 and 0.0046381 m/s2 respectively. The

parameters and characteristic of the controllers are as

follows:

11

NN Predictive Controller of h (ANNPC1)

1

Reference

Optim.

h ref.

**satellite orbit trajectory model during thrusting maneuver
**

Control

Signal

Plant

Output

-1

NN

Model

Gain

satellite model

f n ANNPC

h

NN Predictive Controller of a (ANNPC 2)

2

Reference

Optim.

a

a ref.

Control

Signal

Plant

Output

NN

Model

i

-1

Gain1

f t ANNPC

NN Predictive Controller of i (ANNPC 3)

3

Reference

Optim.

i ref.

Control

Signal

Plant

Output

NN

Model

-1

Gain2

f z ANNPC

Neural Network Predictive Control of satellite orbit trajectory during maneuver

Figure 11 – Maneuver Simulation Using ANNPCs to Control satellite Orbit

•

•

•

**Two layers feed-forward neural networks with a time
**

delayed structure as shown in Figure 10. The inputs

to the networks consists of external inputs fn(n), ft(n),

fz(n), and h(n-1), a(n-1), i(n-1) and their

corresponding two delay nodes. The networks have

one hidden layer containing 10 hidden nodes that use

a tan-sigmoid transfer function. The output node uses

a linear output function with a slope of one for

scaling the output.

Training function is trainlm, which is a network

training function that updates weight and bias

values according to Levenberg-Marquardt

optimization [12].

**The cost horizon is 7, the control horizon is 2, the
**

control weighting factor. The backtracking algorithm

iteration number is set to two iterations. The search

parameter of the, which determines when the line

search stops is 1.0e-8. The sampling time = 0.57094

s.

The simulated satellite plant model, which has been

developed before, is used to generate training data for the

NN models. The training data is generated by applying a

series of constrained step inputs to the SIMULINK plant

model as shown in Figures 12, 13, and 14. The response of

the plant is compared to the response of the trained network

and the corresponding error between the plant and the

network are shown in Figure 12, 13, and 14.

12

**minimize the fuel consumption because of its optimization
**

technique. Nonlinear optimizations are computationally

expensive processes. The use of Newton-Raphson is

intended to produce a computationally efficient process.

The Newton-Raphson optimization has been used and it has

been found to converge to a good result within two

iterations. Increasing the available training data will refine

and enhanced the ANN model. The flexibility and inherent

characteristics of the ANNs in representing non-linear and

dynamic models permit realizing high efficiency maneuver

and improve the performance of the controllers. Using ANN

with MPC technique is a very good solution due to its

strength in dealing with non-linearity system. The ANNPC

has applied the required rehearsal of the satellite maneuver

with stable and good performance. The ANNPCs can be

tuned easily to satisfy satellite application and operation

requirements.

**Training data for maneuver phase:
**

Repeat the same steps as shown in the previous section but

with the maneuver parameters. The maximum and minimum

inputs samples of the acceleration vector fn during pre

maneuver are set to value 0.00012408 and 0.00010152 m/s2

respectively. The maximum and minimum input samples of

the acceleration vector ft during pre-maneuver are set to

value 0.00015298 and 0.00012516 m/s2 respectively. The

maximum and minimum input samples of the acceleration

vector fz during pre maneuver are set to value 0.0269 and

0.022 m/s2 respectively.

The Simulated Satellite Plant model is used to generate

training data for the NN models as shown in Figures 15, 16,

and 17.

Maneuver Simulation using ANNPC

Using SIMULINK to simulate the maneuver, using the

implemented ANNPCs, the simulated output data available

from the previous implemented maneuver is used to drive

(the reference simulate signals of (a, h, i)) the ANNPCs.

Numerical integration methods (ode113 function [12]) is

used in the simulation with variable step-size and sampling

time = 0.57094 s. The ANNPCs calculate and optimize the

acceleration vectors samples (fn, ft, fz) in (t, n, z) axes and

input to the satellite plant model as shown in Figure11. The

simulation is performed over the time of the pre-maneuver

and maneuver, which is set to 50, and 57.094 s respectively.

5. CONCLUSION

Using ANNPC in satellite orbits control will optimize the

satellite orbits parameters and the thrust forces and due to

its main strength when applied to problems with a large

number of manipulated and controlled multi-variable. Also,

the ANNPC have the ability to impose the constraints on

both the manipulated and controlled variables. It is very

efficient when future references are known, as in case of the

satellite maneuver. The fuel consumption can be minimized,

which is the main issue during satellite lifetime, because of

the ANNPC optimization technique. Using Kalman filters

for on-line parameters estimation [13], the ANNPCs can be

used on-board, which will handle the maneuver in

autonomous way, eliminating the need of human

calculations and introduce a robustness controller. It can be

used to control any kind of earth satellite orbits including

geostationary because it is ability to handle a great variety

of processes, from those with relatively simple dynamics to

other more complex ones, including systems with long

delay times or of non-minimum phase or unstable ones.

ANNPC permits on-board maneuver planning, calculation,

and introduces safety condition when the Earth Control

Stations (ECS) is out of order, which will recover the

absence of ECS and subsequently downgrade the operation

costs. The open methodology of the ANNPC based on

certain basic principles, which allow for future extensions.

ANNPC is a major element in introducing the philosophy of

"robustness, better, faster, safety, cheaper" to next

generations of ECS and spacecraft operation.

**ANNPCs Simulation Results
**

As shown in Figures 18, 19, 20, 24, 25, and 26, which

represent the outputs of the satellite plant model using

ANNPCs with the references simulated signals, the

ANNPCs can follow and trace the reference simulated

signals (or the output constrained) required for controlling

the satellite orbit parameters. Comparing among the final

states samples of a, h, and i of the reference simulated

maneuver and the simulated maneuver using the ANNPCs

at t = +107.094 s and calculating the percentage errors as

shown in Table 6. It indicates that the high efficiency that

the ANNPC could achieve during maneuver simulation.

Figures 21, 22, 23, 27, 28, and 29 represent the acceleration

vectors samples of the reference simulated maneuver in

comparison with the output of the ANNPCs. ANNPC can

Table 6 – ANNPCs Maneuver Output Verses

Reference Simulated Maneuver a in meter, h in m2/s,

i in degree

Reference

ANNPCs

Error

Simulated

Maneuver Output %

Maneuver Output

a

42166.090×103

6×10-6

42166.093×103

h

i

1.29643445×1011

0.02816396

1.29643440×1011

0.02840392

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to thank the Egyptian Satellite company Nilesat

(one of the Egyptian Radio and TV Union companies) for

providing working and training in the field of aerospace.

3×10-6

0.85

13

Input

-5

x 10

2.6

Plant Output

11

x 10

1.2964

2.55

1.2964

2.5

f

1.2964

n

2.45

2.4

2.35

h

1.2964

1.2964

1.2964

0

10

20

30

40

0

Error

10

30

40

NN Output

11

x 10

1

20

1.2964

0.5

1.2964

0

1.2964

-0.5

h

1.2964

-1

1.2964

1.2964

-1.5

0

10

20

30

40

0

10

20

30

40

time (s)

**Figure 12 – Pre-Maneuver Training Data for ANNPC of (h) in m2/s
**

-5

Plant Output

7

x 10

3.014

4.2166

3.012

x 10

4.2166

3.01

f

4.2166

t

a

3.008

4.2166

3.006

3.004

4.2166

0

10

20

40

0

Error

-6

x 10

10

30

10

30

40

NN Output

7

4.2166

20

x 10

8

4.2166

6

a

4.2166

4

2

4.2166

0

-2

4.2166

0

10

20

30

40

0

10

20

30

40

time (s)

**Figure 13 – Pre-Maneuver Training Data for ANNPC of (a) in meter
**

Input

-3

x 10

5.4

Plant Output

0.0315

5.35

f

z

5.3

0.031

5.25

0.0305

5.2

i

0.03

5.15

0.0295

5.1

0

10

-7

30

40

0

10

20

30

40

NN Output

Error

x 10

1.5

20

0.0315

1

0.031

0.5

i

0.0305

0

0.03

- 0.5

0.0295

-1

0

10

20

i

30

(

40

0

)

10

20

30

time ( s)

Figure14 – Pre-Maneuver Training Data for ANNPC of (i) in degree

14

40

Input

-4

x 10

1.18

1.178

1.2964

1.176

f

1.2964

1.174

n

h

1.2964

1.172

1.17

1.2964

1.168

1.2964

1.166

Plant Output

11

x 10

1.2964

1.2964

0

10

20

30

40

50

0

Error

10

30

40

50

40

50

NN Output

11

x 10

0.4

20

1.2964

0.3

1.2964

0.2

1.2964

0.1

h

1.2964

0

-0.1

1.2964

-0.2

1.2964

1.2964

-0.3

0

10

20

30

40

50

0

10

20

30

time (s)

Figure 15 - Maneuver Training Data for ANNPC of (h) in m2/s

Plant Output

7

-4

x 10

x 10

1.395

4.2166

Input

1.39

4.2166

1.385

f

t

1.38

a

4.2166

1.375

4.2166

1.37

1.365

4.2166

0

10

20

40

50

0

20

30

40

50

40

50

40

50

40

50

NN Output

x 10

4.2166

0.5

4.2166

0

4.2166

-0.5

4.2166

-1

10

7

Error

-3

x 10

1

30

a

4.2166

0

10

20

30

40

50

0

10

20

time (s)

30

time (s)

**Figure 16 - Maneuver Training Data for ANNPC of (a) in meter
**

Input

Plant Output

0.026

0.029

0.0259

f

z

0.0285

0.0258

0.028

0.0257

0.0275

i

0.027

0.0256

0.0265

0.0255

0.026

0.0254

0

10

20

-7

40

50

0

10

Error

x 10

1

30

20

30

NN Output

0.029

0.0285

0.5

0.028

0.0275

0

i

0.027

-0.5

0.0265

0.026

-1

0

10

20

30

40

50

0

time (s)

10

20

30

time (s)

**Figure 17 - Maneuver Training Data for ANNPC of (i) in degree
**

15

11

x 10

ref

ANNPC

1.2964

1.2964

1.2964

h

1.2964

1.2964

1.2964

1.2964

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

time

**Figure 18 – Reference Simulated Trajectory of (h) in Comparison With (h) Output of Satellite Plant Model Using ANNPC
**

during Pre-Maneuver (h) in m/s2, time in s

7

x 10

4.2166

ref

ANNPC

4.2166

4.2166

a

4.2166

4.2166

4.2166

4.2166

4.2166

4.2166

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

time

**Figure 19 – Reference Simulated Trajectory of (a) in Comparison With (a) Output of Satellite Plant Model Using ANNPC
**

during Pre-Maneuver (a) in m, time in s

0.04

ref

ANNPC

0.035

0.03

i

0.025

0.02

0.015

0.01

0.005

0

0

5

10

15

20

25

time

30

35

40

45

50

**Figure20 – Reference Simulated Trajectory of (i) in Comparison With (i) Output of Satellite Plant Model Using ANNPC
**

during Pre- Maneuver (i) in degree, time in s

16

-5

x 10

0

ref

ANNPC

-0.5

n

f

-1

-1.5

-2

-2.5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

time

**Figure 21 – Acceleration Vector Samples in m/s2 (fn) of Reference Simulated Pre-Maneuver in Comparison with Output of
**

ANNPC1, time in s

-5

x 10

0

ref

ANNPC

-0.5

t

f

-1

-1.5

-2

-2.5

-3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

time

**Figure 22 – Acceleration Vector Samples in m/s2 (ft) of Reference Simulated Pre-Maneuver in Comparison with Output of
**

ANNPC2, time in s

-3

x 10

0

ref

ANNPC

-0.5

-1

-1.5

z

f

-2

-2.5

-3

-3.5

-4

-4.5

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

time

2

**Figure 23 – Acceleration Vector Samples in m/s (fz) of Reference Simulated Pre-Maneuver in Comparison with Output of
**

ANNPC3, time in s

17

11

x 10

1.2964

ref

ANNPC

1.2964

1.2964

h

1.2964

1.2964

1.2964

1.2964

1.2964

10

20

30

40

50

60

time

**Figure 24 – Reference Simulated Trajectory of (h) in Comparison With (h) Output of Satellite Plant Model Using ANNPC
**

during Maneuver (h) in m2/s, time in s

7

x 10

4.2166

ref

ANNPC

4.2166

4.2166

4.2166

4.2166

a

4.2166

4.2166

4.2166

4.2166

4.2166

4.2166

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

time

**Figure 25 – Reference Simulated Trajectory of (a) in Comparison With (a) Output of Satellite Plant Model Using ANNPC
**

during Maneuver (a) in m, time in s

ref

ANNPC

0.029

0.0285

i

0.028

0.0275

0.027

0.0265

0.026

10

20

30

40

50

60

time

**Figure 26 – Reference Simulated Trajectory of (i) in Comparison With (i) Output of Satellite Plant Model Using ANNPC
**

during Maneuver (i) in degree, time in s

18

-4

x 10

0

ref

ANNPC

-0.2

n

f

-0.4

-0.6

-0.8

-1

-1.2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

time

2

**Figure 27 – Acceleration Vector Samples in m/s (fn) of Reference Simulated Maneuver in Comparison with Output of
**

ANNPC1, time in s

-4

x 10

0

ref

ANNPC

t

f

-0.5

-1

-1.5

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

time

**Figure 28 – Acceleration Vector Samples in m/s2 (ft) of Reference Simulated Maneuver in Comparison with Output of
**

ANNPC2, time in s

0

ref

ANNPC

-0.005

z

f

-0.01

-0.015

-0.02

-0.025

0

10

20

30

time

40

50

60

**Figure 29 – Acceleration Vector Samples in m/s2 (fz) of Reference Simulated Maneuver in Comparison with Output of
**

ANNPC3, time in s

19

**Determination to Control the Satellite Motion “, paper #164,
**

Volume 5 Track 7.07 page 2231-2248, IEEE AC, 2002.

REFERENCES

[1] Maxwell Noton; Space Craft Navigation and Guidance

,”Advances in Industrial Control Series”, Springer-Verlage

London Limited, 1998.

**[14] Eduardo F. Camacho and Carlos Bordons; ”Model
**

Predictive Control”, Springer Verlag, London, 1999.

**[2] Gwynne Gurevich, Robert Bell, James R. Wertz;
**

Autonomous On Board Orbit Control, ” Flight Results and

Applications”, American Institute of Aeronautics and

Astronautics (AIAA), pp 5226-52644, 2000.

**[15] D.W. Clarke and C. Mohatadi; “Properties of
**

Generalized Predictive Control”, Automatica, 25(6): 1989.

[16] Long A.C.; Mathematical Theory of the Goddard

Trajectory Determination System, Goddar Space Flight

Center; Greenbelt, Maryland (1989).

**[3] Narendra, K. S. and S. Mukhopadhyay; “Adaptive
**

Control Using Neural Networks and Approximate Models”,

IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks Vol. 8, pp. 475-485,

1997.

**[17] Allgowe E. L., George K.; Numerical Continuation
**

Methods, SMC13, Springer Verlag, New York (1990).

**[4] Hagan, M.T. and H.B. Demuth, “Neural Networks for
**

Control”, Proceedings of the 1999 American Control

Conference, San Diego, CA, pp. 1642-1656,1999.

**[18] McCarthy J. J., Rowton S.; GEODYN ΙΙ Systems
**

Description, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Green belt

Maryland (1993).

**[5] M. A. Lelic and P. E. Wellstead; Generalized Pole
**

Placement Self Tuning Controller. Part 1.Basic Algorithm.

Int. J. Control, 46(2):547-568.1987.

**[19] Tapley B. D; Precision Orbit Determination for
**

TOPEX/POSEIDON, 99, (1994).

Prof.Dr. Abd Elsalam F. ALY is a professor of Electrical

Engineering,

Faculty

of

Engineering,

Alexandria University, Egypt. M.Sc. and Ph.D. from

University of Illinois USA, 1966. Alexandria university

since 1966, head of Electrical Department 1992-1995.

Dean of Faculty of Engineering Beirut Arab University

1988-1991. The main interest is Digital control systems and

Artificial intelligence systems.

**[6] D. A. Linkers and M. Mahfonf; Advances in Model-Based
**

Predictive Control, chapter Generalized Predictive Control in

Clinical Anaesthesia, Oxford University Press, 1994.

[7] M. A. Zayan; “Noise Cancellation Using Adaptive Digital

Filters and Neural Network”, Master thesis; Electrical Dep.,

Communication Section, Faculty of Engineering, Alexandria

University, Egypt, 1998.

**Prof.Dr .Mohamed Naguib Aly is a professor of Nuclear
**

Engineering, Faculty of Engineering,

Alexandria University, Egypt. The main

interest are digital simulation and modeling

of nuclear power plants, Artificial

intelligence systems and numerical methods.

**[8] Soloway, D. and P.J. Haley; “Neural Generalized
**

Predictive Control” Proceedings of the 1996, IEEE

International Symposium on Intelligent Control, pp. 277-281,

1996.

[9] Hagan, M.T., O. De Jesus, and R. Schultz; ”Training

Recurrent Networks for Filtering and Control,” Chapter 12 in

Recurrent Neural Networks; Design and Applications,

L.Medsker and L. C. Jain, Eds., CRC Press, pp. 311-340,

1999.

**Eng. Mohamed Ahmed Zayan was born in 1969, He
**

received the B.Sc. in 1991, M.Sc. degree in

1998

in

digital

Communication

Engineering from the Faculty of

Engineering, Alexandria University, Egypt.

Since 1996, he is working as a Satellite

Control Engineer for The Egyptian

Satellite Company (Nilesat) (one of the Egyptian Radio and

TV Union companies). He is currently working toward the

PhD at the Department of Electrical Engineering,

Alexandria University. His current research involves

Artificial Intelligence, Fuzzy Logic, Genetic Algorithm,

Satellite Control, and Orbit Determination.

**[10] Oliver Motenbruck, Eberhard Gill; “Satellite Orbit
**

(Models,

Methods,

Application)”,

Springer-Verlag

Heidelburg New York (2000).

[11] Pocha, J. J. (Jehangir. J.); An Introduction to Mission

Design For Geostationary Satellites, Published by D. Reidel

Publishing Company, Holland; 1987.

[12] MATLAB Soft Ware Package “The Technical Language

of Technical Computing”; Version 6.0.0.88 Release 12, Math

Work Inc, 2000.

[13] A.F. Aly, M. Nguib Aly, M. E. Elshishtawy, M.A.

Zayan; ”Optimization Techniques for Orbit Estimation and

20

- On the Estimated Precession of Mercury's Orbit. PMC Physics A-v2aUploaded byrwayte
- 4Uploaded bysilika
- What is ScienceUploaded byBrent Silby
- Mars Direct Space ExplorationUploaded bydumi_user
- Introduction of RINEX21Uploaded by59Gudlar
- Handout Eee Ete 412Uploaded bymaafkoro
- Feynman's Lost Lecture essayUploaded bythisapebiz
- cmc-q bankUploaded byNaveen Kumar
- R05322106-INTRODUCTIONTOSPACETECHNOLOGYUploaded byJayavenkatesh Tamilarasan
- SPH4U Centripetal Force Lab.pdfUploaded byMatthew Greeson
- Collection Articles Book II Donate PROF FEUPUploaded byexp
- taurus and gemini traits!Uploaded byBeth Jemelka
- 2006Uploaded bynilu
- Physics SpacenotesUploaded bybaannii
- EoKS Mock Paper 2 4-7Uploaded bymargit
- EggUploaded byOm Prakash Pal
- Bluetooth NotesUploaded bymurugesaen
- Power Generation Operation y Control Allen Wood 013Uploaded byVinod Murugan
- How to Do ResearchUploaded byTurhan Pathan
- IAO-2009Uploaded byDani Ibrahim
- Face Recognition PretamUploaded byPritamJaiswal
- Circular MotionUploaded byAkshay97
- Co Po MappingUploaded byVikram Anand
- Stockpile and Cut-Off Optimization ModuleUploaded byBrandy Gonzalez
- Lecture 1Uploaded bysamsim1232
- part_cUploaded byTushar Kadiya
- Doc-1101-B.P.S.-XI-Physics-Worksheet.pdfUploaded byPraveen Maram
- 10.1016@j.compag.2005.08.005_2Uploaded byenggsabi
- Sphere in Cone PaperUploaded byShweta Sridhar
- m 142 f 06 Newton KeplerUploaded byBambang Adi Sutrisno

- Optimization Techniques for Orbit Estimation and Determination to Control the Satellite MotionUploaded bym_zayan
- 6003298B Multi Dim Cal of Measurement While Drilling Tools wUploaded bym_zayan
- plc_3Uploaded bym_zayan
- 20120705 Hongwei SecurityUploaded bym_zayan
- Satellite Orbits and Flight Dynamics_finalUploaded bym_zayan
- Orbits Design for Remote Sensing SatelliteUploaded bym_zayan
- Frances ClevelandUploaded bym_zayan
- 1 Market-update KunstadterUploaded bym_zayan
- 02_SCADA (1)Uploaded bym_zayan
- Satellite Orbits Guidance Using State Space Neural NetworkUploaded bym_zayan
- Lecture Two OrbitsUploaded bym_zayan
- Satellite Orbits Guidance Using State Space Neural NetworkUploaded bym_zayan
- Esa Astro Zayan Experment Op-sat Technical IntroductionUploaded bym_zayan
- Satellite Orbits Control Using 1Adaptive Neural Networks Predictive Controllers (ANNPC)Uploaded bym_zayan
- CHAP6_revUploaded bym_zayan
- Stela Release Note 2.4.2Uploaded bym_zayan
- ISUs EMBA Brochure_Jun10Uploaded bym_zayan
- CS Lecture VKIUploaded bym_zayan
- CostUploaded bym_zayan
- LTU-EX-2011-32639631Uploaded bym_zayan
- Space Law Certificate Course 2013Uploaded bym_zayan
- Pan Jing Thesis 2011 (1)Uploaded bym_zayan
- OPS SAT ExperimeterInformation and QuestionnaireUploaded bym_zayan
- Space Law Certificate Course 2013Uploaded bym_zayan
- 130225 Esnc13 International Kick-Off ProgrammeUploaded bym_zayan
- ColtUploaded bym_zayan
- Structured Cabling NewUploaded bym_zayan
- if1_4stUploaded bym_zayan
- Panel MaintenanceUploaded bym_zayan
- GATOR 01 LibreUploaded bym_zayan