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

net/publication/352734120

Second paper

Article  in  Control Engineering Practice · June 2021

DOI: 10.1016/j.conengprac.2021.104866

CITATIONS READS

0 9

2 authors, including:

Mehdi Heydari Shahna

Shahid Beheshti University
2 PUBLICATIONS   2 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

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

Control of attitudes View project

Robust algorithms for robotics manipulator View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mehdi Heydari Shahna on 25 June 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Control Engineering Practice 114 (2021) 104866

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Control Engineering Practice

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/conengprac

Design of a finite time passivity based adaptive sliding mode control

implementing on a spacecraft attitude dynamic simulator
Mehdi Heydari Shahna, Mostafa Abedi ∗
Department of Electrical Engineering, Shahid Beheshti University, Velenjak, Tehran, Iran

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: Design of a passivity-based adaptive robust control for attitude tracking of a three-axis satellite is investigated
Attitude control in this paper. By defining a virtual angular velocity for the satellite Kinematics and utilizing the finite time
Adaptive passivity features, it is proved that the developed method drives the system trajectories into the equilibrium
Sliding mode
point for various signs of the satellite quaternions. Therefore, the closer equilibrium point is always selected
Passivity
and the unwinding problem is resolved. A novel structure is defined for the sliding manifold that uses the
Unwinding
Virtual velocity
selected virtual velocity. Then, a dynamic feedback controller is developed that considers uncertain parameters
Fault tolerance and faulty actuators (unknown inputs). The upper bounds of unknown inputs and unknown inertia moments
Uncertainty are estimated by the developed adaptation mechanisms. A three degrees of freedom dumbbell style dynamic
simulator has been developed to provide a rigorous evaluation of the suggested algorithms in a dynamic
condition near to space. The proposed algorithms have been implemented for both reaction wheels and
thrusters as actuators and the effectiveness of the introduced control methodologies was proved.

1. Introduction
With the development of modern micro satellites and the growing
advances in space missions in diverse areas such as the surveillance,
earth imaging and telecommunications, it has been essential that these
space vehicles perform highly accurate pointing maneuvers in a limited
time along wide-angle trajectory (Wertz, 1995). The attitude tracking
problem may be further complicated due to highly nonlinear dynamics
of satellites which is also affected by various external disturbances or
uncertainties. These uncertainties are due to partially knowledge of
the satellite mass or inertia matrix that arises from inaccurate mea-
surement devices, onboard payload motion or fuel consumption (Jiang,
Hu, & Ma, 2010; Kai, Lia, & Song, 2008). In addition, the satellite
actuators may fail during the system mission while the number of
faulty actuators and the extent of their defects are unknown (Guan,
Zhang, & Chen). These factors make considerable difficulty in the atti-
tude control system design to achieve adequate accuracy and stability
particularly when all these issues are treated simultaneously. In face
of different environmental disturbances and uncertainties, there have
been a variety of research to investigate the robust control techniques.
Among these methods, the sliding mode control is well known as
an effective control scheme to cope with profound nonlinear char-
acteristics and unknown uncertainties or failure events. It has also
been studied in some previous studies to solve the satellite attitude
control problem. Pukdeboon and Kumam (2015) proposed optimal
position and attitude controllers to achieve asymptotic convergence to
the desired values. Cao and Chen (2015) suggested a minimum sliding
mode error feedback control for the attitude control of satellites in the
presence of disturbances. A continuous attitude control system based
on special orthogonal group has been proposed by Lee (2012) which
guarantees an exponential stability. Wu, Wang, Radice, et al. (2015)
investigated an observer based sliding mode control in the presence
of wheel low speed friction and external disturbances. The mentioned
studies are based on this assumption that the full knowledge of satellite
parameters and disturbances are available or their upper bounds are
known which does not hold in practical situations. Accordingly, Cao
and Wu (2015) investigated an indirect adaptive robust approach to
dealing with the effects of the unknown friction torque and external
disturbances; in the developed method, the upper bounds of the above
uncertainties/disturbances are obtained by including some adaptation
mechanisms according to which the gains of controller are tuned. Also,
a chattering free adaptive sliding mode control was proposed by Zhang
and Liu where the unknown external disturbance has been handled
by using adaptive control technique. In this vein, a second order SMC
with adaptive features was developed by Tiwari, Janardhanan, and
Nabi (2017). Another important problem that we may encounter in
the control system design is the loss of effectiveness of actuators. It
can deteriorate the control system performance or even its instability
and loss of mission. Therefore, it is essential to provide high reliability
for the satellite control system in the presence of possible actuator

∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: mo_abedi@sbu.ac.ir (M. Abedi).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conengprac.2021.104866
Received 1 October 2020; Received in revised form 8 May 2021; Accepted 8 June 2021
Available online xxxx
0967-0661/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M.H. Shahna and M. Abedi
faults. It motivates the development of several attitude control sys-
tems to meet the desired performance despite occurrence of faults.
Zhu and Guo (2017) investigated an adaptive fault tolerant attitude
tracking controller with the consideration of actuator faults, unknown
time varying inertia and external disturbances. Hu, Zhang, Huo, et al.
(2011) proposed an adaptive integral sliding mode control theory for
a satellite suffering from unknown stuck failures of thrusters, external
disturbances and inertia matrix. A robust adaptive fault tolerant con-
trol scheme suggested by Hu (2010) for attitude tracking of flexible
spacecraft in the presence of reaction wheels failures. An adaptive
SMC method considering stuck failures was proposed by Zhu and Guo
(2011).
The attitude tracking problems considered in the mentioned lit-
eratures are solved by the asymptotic stability method. However, it
is well known that the finite time tracking of dynamic systems sat-
isfy the requirement of higher precision, faster convergence rate and
better disturbance attenuation. Recognizing these benefits, several con-
trol strategies have been proposed for finite time attitude tracking
of satellites. Erdong and Zhaowei (2008) investigated two controllers
based on terminal sliding mode control (TSMC) which can ensure
finite time reachability of given desired attitude motion. An attitude
tracking controller was proposed by Zhu, Xia, and Fu (2011) in
which the value of disturbances and uncertainties are obtained via
adaptive updating laws. The TSMC developed in the mentioned works
have some disadvantages like the singularity problem, also they have
slower convergence rate than the traditional SMC when the system
state is far away from the equilibrium point. Accordingly, Lu and Xia
(2013) developed an adaptive nonsingular TSMC to avoid the singu-
larity problem and improve the transient performance compared with
conventional linear SMC. An alternative nonsingular terminal sliding
mode control was proposed by Wang, Su, and Zhang (2017) for a
rigid spacecraft with inertia uncertainties and external disturbances.
In another category of methods, finite time control is achieved in the
presence of actuator failures. Gui and Vukovich (2017) proposed an
adaptive integral TSMC in the presence of uncertain inertias, unknown
disturbances and sudden actuator faults. A finite time convergence
control strategy based on adaptive non-singular fast terminal sliding
mode control was investigated by Han, Zhang, Yang, et al. (2016) for
spacecraft subject to actuator faults and saturations. Cao, Yue, and Liu
(2017) developed a finite time attitude control scheme considering the
misalignment error of actuators, disturbances and flexible appendages.
The work proposed by Hu, Huo, and Xiao (2013) ensures finite time
reachability of the system state into a neighborhood of the equilibrium
point. In this regard, an NTSMC technique has been developed by Zeng,
Yuxin, and Liyin (2017) considering uncertain satellite inertia. A global
finite time stability problem was addressed in Tiwari, Janardhanan, and
Nabi (2015) utilizing the integral second order sliding mode control.
Also, a finite time SMC method was suggested by Wu, Radice, Gao, and
Sun (2011). An output feedback stabilization problem was investigated
by Hong, Huang, and Xu (2001) that achieves the global finite time
stability. A FTC strategy was introduced by Shen, Wang, Zhu, and
Poh (2015) that provides the local finite time convergence considering
control input saturation.
In most of the aforementioned investigations, since redundant pa-
rameters are used for unit quaternions, the attitude system of a satellite
should have two equilibrium points. If a control law is designed con-
sidering only one stable equilibrium point, the system trajectory tends
to the considered equilibrium point even if it was close to other point.
This is called the unwinding problem which may result in unnecessary
revolution and energy consumption. Till now, some solutions have been
suggested to overcome this problem. Long, Liu, Zhao, et al. (2016)
proposed a controller to avoid the unwinding problem due to the
double values of unit quaternions. However, the issue of fault tolerance
and finite time convergence have not been addressed. A second order
sliding mode control was introduced by Tiwari, Chakraborty, and Soni
2
Control Engineering Practice 114 (2021) 104866
(2016) to mitigate chattering and eliminate unwinding in attitude con-
trol, however, the reaction wheels failures have not been considered.
So, there are limited works that consider all of the above issues.
Different solutions have been investigated in the previous works to
achieve the finite time convergence. This feature is generally achieved
by some lemmas in which certain conditions must be met for the
Lyapunov functions and their derivatives as it can be observed in the
work performed by Hong et al. (2001). However, since the passivity is a
principal property of many physical systems which used to be defined
in terms of energy dissipation, it has long been used to tackle some
complex control problems. Although there are limited passivity works
in satellite attitude control, however, they have some applications on
other various areas. A passivity-based controller with quantization was
proposed in Lang, Damaren, and Cao (2018) for spacecraft attitude
control. A novel passivity-based SMC scheme of permanent magnetic
synchronous generator was introduced by Yang, Yu, Shu, et al. (2018)
for maximum power point tracking. In the mentioned methods, the
asymptotically stability of the designed controllers was ensured under
the framework of the passivity theory. There are also some approaches
that synthesized to drive the system trajectories onto the sliding mani-
fold in a finite time. In this category, the passivity features of uncertain
singular Markovian jump systems were investigated in the work of
Jiang, Kao, Gao, et al. (2017). Also, the finite time reachability of the
sliding surface was guaranteed by Jiang, Gao, and Xie (2015).
The current work focuses on designing a novel control method
by combining the adaptive sliding mode control and the finite time
passivity properties of the satellite attitude motion. For this purpose,
a virtual velocity input is defined so that the relative attitude kine-
matics becomes strictly finite time passive. Therefore, the satellite
attitude tracking is achieved in finite time. The aforementioned finite
time tracking is guaranteed for various signs of the scalar part of the
quaternion vector. Accordingly, the system states are regulated to the
closest equilibrium point that results in smaller satellite revolutions.
The sliding manifold is defined based on the selected virtual control
input so that when the system states stay on this surface, the actual
satellite velocity is approached toward the virtual input. By considering
the satellite parametric uncertainties, external disturbances or degraded
performance of actuators, an attitude control scheme is developed uti-
lizing the designed sliding manifold. Furthermore, the upper bounds of
uncertain parameters and disturbances are obtained by the developed
online adaptation laws. By defining a combined Lyapunov function, the
finite time approach of system states toward the sliding manifold and
the convergence of adaptation parameters are guaranteed. Therefore,
a combination of the aforementioned finite time approaches (stated as
Lemmas 1, 3 and 4) was considered in the current work. In this paper,
the results have been achieved using two different types of actuators,
the reaction wheels and the thrusters. So different control designs and
stability proof have been represented for the mentioned actuators.
By conducting different simulations, it was shown that the devel-
oped algorithm leads to more accurate results and better response
times compared to the similar works. Besides, an Attitude Dynamic
Simulator (ADS) has been developed in this work to provide a rigorous
evaluation of the proposed algorithms. Using this simulator, we can
experience a dynamic condition near to the space. It is a three degrees
of freedom dumbbell style simulator with high accurate ball and bowl
joint that allows unconstrained rotational motion in the presence of
actual conditions. The gyro sensors and magnetometers have been used
to determine the satellite attitude in both Euler angles and quaternions.
It is also equipped with reaction wheels and thrusters as actuators.
The experimental results also show the successful performance of the
designed algorithms for both the healthy and faulty conditions despite
the real constraints imposed by the mentioned ADS.
The main contributions of this study are: (1) A new virtual velocity
input is suggested that provides the finite time attitude tracking of
the satellite based on the passivity properties (2) It is proved that
the mentioned finite time tracking is provided for different signs of
M.H. Shahna and M. Abedi
Fig. 1. The developed ADS in the lab.
the initial satellite quaternions. So, both the unwinding problem and
the finite time convergence are resolved together. (3) A novel sliding
manifold is defined that ensures the finite time convergence of the satel-
lite angular velocity toward the selected virtual input. (4) A feedback
control scheme based on some adaptation mechanisms is introduced
that ensures the finite time approach of the system states toward the
sliding manifold despite uncertain parameters, external disturbances or
degraded performance of actuators. (5) A satellite simulator has been
developed to evaluate the performance of the suggested algorithms in
an operational condition near to space. (6) It is shown that the devel-
oped algorithm will have a successful performance in the simulation
and experimental conditions for both healthy or defective actuators.
Also, different types of actuators (the reaction wheels and the thrusters)
are used to provide the mentioned performance.
The outline of paper is as follows. In Section 2, the ADS is briefly
reminded. Section 3 explains the satellite kinematics and dynamics.
Section 4 is allocated to the proposed control scheme. The simulation
and experimental results are represented in Section 5. Finally, the paper
is concluded in Section 6.
2. Spacecraft Attitude Dynamic Simulator
ADS is an experimental spacecraft that is utilized to confirm the
attitude tracking in a dynamical condition near to space. In this regard,
Fig. 2. The block diagram of the control loop.
3
Control Engineering Practice 114 (2021) 104866
a spherical ADS is considered that includes an accurate ball and bowl
joint. A thin layer of air separates the ball and bowl which minimizes
the force applied to the sphere. There are several types of satellite
simulators that utilize the spherical ADS. But three basic designs are
tabletop, umbrella, and dumbbell (Mirshams, Taei, Ghobadi, et al.,
2015). The umbrella types of ADS are able to rotate in the yaw axis,
nonetheless roll and pitch rotations are typically confined to less than
±90 (Schwartz, Peck, & Hall, 2003). Regarding the configuration of
platform (two contrary arms), dumbbell form air-bearings result in
structural intervention to greatly reduce through space. As a significant
result, it provides unlimited motion in both the roll and yaw axes. In
this paper, the ADS of dumbbell style with three degrees of freedom
has been used as shown in Fig. 1. Three gyros and one magnetometer
are used as attitude sensors to determine the attitude of the simulator.
By using the above set of sensors, the attitude can be measured in
quaternions or Euler angles. The sensors outputs are received by a
processing computer which directly connect to onboard processor via
wireless network. Also, the attitude commands are set in this com-
puter. After receiving the reference attitudes by the control system
implemented in the onboard processor and comparing to the sensors
outputs, the related torque commands are generated and applied to
the active actuators including the reaction wheels or thrusters. The
aforesaid steps continue so that the desired objectives are met. The
mentioned interconnections between different control loop elements
have been detailed in Fig. 2.
As illustrated in Fig. 3, the control purpose is to reach the instanta-
neous attitude (YAW, PITCH, ROLL) of ADS to the attitude of command.
In Fig. 4, The reaction wheels configuration in the mentioned test bed
is illustrated.
3. The satellite kinematics and dynamics
In this section, the satellite kinematics and dynamics based on
reaction wheels are detailed. In the next sections, some modifications
are applied in the dynamics part so that the thrusters can also be
selected to generate the required torque commands.
3.1. The spacecraft kinematics
The satellite kinematics based on unit quaternion is govern by Wertz
(1995):
1 1
𝑞̇ 0 = − 𝐪𝐓 𝝎, 𝐪̇ 𝐯 = (𝑞0 𝐈𝟑×𝟑 + 𝐪×
𝐯 )𝝎 (1)
2 𝐯 2
M.H. Shahna and M. Abedi Control Engineering Practice 114 (2021) 104866

3.2. The satellite dynamics

The satellite dynamics with reaction wheels actuators is considered

as below (Kai et al., 2008):
( × )
̇ −𝟏
𝝎=𝐈 𝑠 −𝝎 𝐇 + 𝐂𝐟 𝐓 + 𝐓𝐝 (8)
[ ]𝑇
where 𝐓 = 𝑇 𝑇2 𝑇3 is the real control torque, 𝐓𝐝 =
[ ]𝑇 1
𝑇𝑑1 𝑇𝑑2 𝑇𝑑3 is the external disturbance torque applied along the
three axes of the satellite, 𝐈𝑠 illustrates the moments of inertia matrix,
𝐂𝐟 is the actuators configuration matrix with the dimension of 3 × 3
and 𝐇 is defined as follows:

𝐇 = 𝐈𝐬 𝝎 + 𝐂𝐟 𝐡𝝎 (9)
Fig. 3. The 3-Axis attitude tracking of ADS.
𝐡𝝎 = 𝐈𝝎 𝝎𝝎 (10)

where 𝐡𝝎 , 𝐈𝝎 and 𝝎𝝎 are the angular moment, the inertia moment and
the angular velocity of reaction wheels, respectively. Also, the control
torque is generated as follows using the reaction wheels:

𝐓𝐜 = −𝐡̇ 𝝎 (11)

Also, the torque applied by the actuators in the presence of faults is

defined as (Guan et al.):

𝐓=𝜦𝐓𝐜 + 𝐓𝐬 (12)
[ ]𝑇
where 𝐓𝐬 = 𝑇𝑠1 𝑇𝑠2 𝑇𝑠3 is the additive actuators fault,
[ ]𝑇
𝐓𝐜 = 𝑇𝑐1 𝑇𝑐2 𝑇𝑐3 is the command control torque, 𝜦 =
( )
𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑔 𝜦1 𝜦2 𝜦3 is a positive semi definite matrix that describes
the multiplicative fault of the actuators in which 0 ≤ 𝜦𝑖 ≤ 1, 𝛬𝑖 = 1
and 𝑇𝑠𝑖 = 0 represent that the related actuator is healthy, 𝛬𝑖 = 0 and
𝑇𝑠𝑖 = 0 denote that the 𝑖th actuator has completely been shut down
and 𝛬𝑖 = 0 and 𝑇𝑠𝑖 ≠ 0 show the stuck failure. Finally, the spacecraft
dynamics in the presence of faults is stated as:
Fig. 4. The configuration of the reaction wheels in the developed ADS.
̇ − 𝝎× 𝐇 + 𝐂𝐟 𝜦𝐓𝐜 + 𝐓𝐝 + 𝐂𝐟 𝐓𝑠
𝐈𝑠 𝝎= (13)

[ ] [ ] Assumption 1. The uncertainty in the inertia moments 𝜟𝑰, the exter-

𝑞̇ 0 −𝐪𝐓
𝐯
= 0.5 𝝎 (2) nal disturbance 𝐓𝐝 and their time derivatives are bounded. However,
𝐪̇ 𝐯 𝑞0 𝐈𝟑×𝟑 + 𝐪×
𝐯
their upper bounds are unknown.
where 𝝎 is the angular velocity of the spacecraft body, 𝑞0 is the scalar
[ ]𝑇 Assumption 2. The quaternion vector q and the angular velocity 𝝎
component and 𝐪𝐯 = 𝑞1 𝑞2 𝑞3 is the vector part of the quaternion.
Also, 𝐈𝟑×𝟑 is the identity matrix and 𝐪× are measurable for feedback.
𝐯 is an operator expressed as
follows:
Remark 1. Assumption 1 is convenient in SMC techniques, it implies
⎡ 0 −𝑞3 𝑞2 ⎤
⎢ ⎥ that the satellite uncertainties and external disturbances are norm
𝐪𝐯 = ⎢ 𝑞3
×
0 −𝑞1 ⎥ (3) bounded with unknown upper bounds as it was considered in the works
⎢ ⎥
⎢ ⎥ developed by Zhu et al. (2011), Lu and Xia (2013), Wang et al. (2017)
⎣−𝑞2 𝑞1 0 ⎦
and Gui and Vukovich (2017). Also, Assumption 2 is reasonable for
The desired attitude is shown by 𝐪𝐝 . The attitude tracking error is practical applications. In fact, measuring the quaternions and angular
considered as below (Jiang et al., 2010): velocities will be quite accessible due to the fact that satellites are
[ ] [ ]
𝑞̃0 𝑞𝑑0 𝑞0 + 𝐪𝐓 𝐪
𝐝 𝐯
equipped with a variety of attitude sensors (like magnetic sensors, sun
∗
̃=
𝐪 = 𝐪 ⊗ 𝐪𝐝 = (4) sensors, gyros and star trackers).
̃𝐯
𝐪 𝑞𝑑0 𝐪𝐯 − 𝑞0 𝐪𝐝 + 𝐪×𝐯 𝐪𝐝
where 𝐪∗𝐝 is the desired conjugate of the quaternion. According to
4. Designing of the PSAA control law
Eq. (2), the kinematics based on the attitude tracking error can be given
as follows:
[̇ ] [ ] In this section, the proposed passivity based sliding mode adaptive
𝑞̃0 𝐪𝐯 𝐓
−̃
= 0.5 𝝎
̃ (5) algorithm (PSAA) is developed. For this purpose, the control scheme
̃̇ 𝐯
𝐪 𝑞̃0 𝐈𝟑×𝟑 + 𝐪̃𝐯 × is designed in two steps. In the first step, a virtual velocity input
𝑇
̃ = 𝝎 − 𝐑(̃
𝝎 𝐪)𝝎𝐝 (6) is selected in Theorem 1, so that the desired orientation [±1, 𝟎𝑇 ] is
achieved in finite time. Then, after selecting the sliding surface, the
in which, 𝝎̃ and 𝝎𝐝 are the angular velocity tracking error and the feedback control law is designed in Theorem 2 in such a way that the
desired angular velocity, respectively. Furthermore, 𝐑(̃
𝐪) is the rotation
actual velocity vector of the satellite tends toward the suggested virtual
matrix between the desired frames and the satellite body obtained as:
velocity in finite time. The following lemmas are required before stating
𝑞02 − 𝐪
𝐪) = (̃
𝐑(̃ ̃𝐯 𝐓 𝐪
̃𝐯 )𝐈𝟑×𝟑 + 2̃ ̃𝐯 𝐓 − 2̃
𝐪𝐯 𝐪 ̃𝐯 ×
𝑞0 𝐪 (7) the above theorems.

4
M.H. Shahna and M. Abedi Control Engineering Practice 114 (2021) 104866

Lemma 1. Consider the following nonlinear system: Proof. Consider the following storage function:
( )2 ( )
𝑥̇ = 𝑓 (𝑥, 𝑢) , 𝑦 = ℎ (𝑥, 𝑢) (14) 𝐯=𝐪 ̃𝐯 + 1 − ||𝑞̃0 || = 2 1 − ||𝑞̃0 ||
̃𝐯 𝐓 𝐪 (22)
in which 𝑓 ∶ 𝑅𝑛 × 𝑅𝑛→ 𝑅𝑛 is locally Lipschitz, ℎ ∶𝑅𝑛 × 𝑅𝑛 → 𝑅𝑛 is Since 𝐪 ̃𝐯 + 𝑞̃02 = 1 and 0 ≤ 𝑞̃𝑖 ≤ 1, i = 1, 2, 3, the condition
̃𝐯 𝐓 𝐪
continuous, 𝑓 (0, 0) = 0 and ℎ(0, 0) = 0. The system described in (14) is ̃𝐯 𝐓 𝐪
𝐪 ̃𝐯 < 1 is satisfied outside the equilibrium point, therefore, we have
finite time strictly passive if we have a continuous differentiable positive semi 0 < 𝑞̃0 < 1 and v>0 is established in this region. Differentiating equation
definite storage function 𝑣 (𝑥) such as: (22) results in:
𝑢𝑇 𝑦 ≥
𝜕𝑣
+ 𝑐𝑣𝛼 (15) ( ) 𝐓
𝜕𝑥 𝐯̇ = 𝑠𝑔𝑛 𝑞̃0 𝝎̃ 𝐪 ̃𝐯 (23)
where 𝛼 ∈ (0, 1) and 𝑐 > 0 (Hong et al., 2001). where
{
Lemma 2. If 𝛼 ∈ (0, 1), then the following inequality is established (Qian 1 𝑞̃0 ≥ 0
𝑞0 ) =
𝑠𝑔𝑛(̃ (24)
& Lin, 2001): −1 𝑞̃0 < 0
( 𝑛 )𝛼 ( 𝑛 )𝛼
∑ ∑
𝑛 ∑
|𝑥𝑖 | ≤ | |𝛼 1−𝛼 | | The attitude tracking equation is obtained as (Liu, Geng, & Sun,
| | |𝑥𝑖 | ≤ 𝑛 |𝑥𝑖 | (16)
𝑖=1 𝑖=1 𝑖=1 2015):
1( × ) ( )( ( ))
̃̇ 𝐯 =
𝐪 ̃ + 𝑞̃0 𝐈𝟑×𝟑 𝑠𝑔𝑛 𝑞̃0 𝐮 − 𝐅𝐜 𝐪
𝐪 ̃𝐯 (25)
Lemma 3. Suppose that there exists a Lyapunov function 𝐕(𝐱) for the 2 𝐯
nonlinear system 𝑥̇ = 𝑓 (𝑥, 𝑢) and scalars 𝜃 > 0, 0 < 𝑔 < 1 and 0 ≤ 𝓁 < ∞ ( )
where 𝐮 and 𝐅𝐜 𝐪 ̃𝐯 are the input and feedback control of the quater-
so that (Bhat & Bernstein, 2000):
nion error equation, respectively. In terms of Eqs. (5) and (25), the
̇
𝐕(𝑥) ≤ −𝜃𝐕𝑔 (𝑥) + 𝓁 (17) following relation for 𝝎 ̃ is deduced:
( ) ( )
where 𝑓 ∶ 𝑈 × 𝑅+ → 𝑅𝑛 is continuous on an open neighborhood 𝑈 of the 𝑠𝑔𝑛 𝑞̃0 𝝎 ̃ = 𝐮 − 𝐅𝐜 𝐪 ̃𝐯 (26)
origin. Then, the origin of the system 𝑥̇ = 𝑓 (𝑥, 𝑢) is practically finite time
stable (PFS); Furthermore, the system states are bounded in finite time as: So, we have:
( ) 𝐓 ( )
𝓁 ̃ = 𝐮𝐓 − 𝐅𝐓 ̃ (27)
lim x ∈ (𝐕𝑔 (𝐱) ≤ ) (18) 𝑠𝑔𝑛 𝑞̃0 𝝎 𝐜 𝐪𝐯
𝜁→𝜁0 ((1 − 𝜁)𝜃)
Multiplying both sides of (27) in 𝐪
̃𝐯 and considering (23) results in:
where 0 < 𝜁 < 1 and the converging time is obtained as:
𝐕1−𝑔 (𝐱𝟎 ) ( ) 𝐓 ( ) ( )
𝑡𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 ≤ (19) 𝐮𝐓 𝐪
̃𝐯 = 𝑠𝑔𝑛 𝑞̃0 𝝎̃ 𝐪 ̃𝐯 𝐓 𝐅𝐜 𝐪
̃𝐯 + 𝐪 ̃𝐯 𝐓 𝐅𝐜 𝐪
̃𝐯 = 𝐯̇ + 𝐪 ̃𝐯 (28)
𝜃𝜁0 (1 − 𝑔)
( )
where 0 < 𝜁0 < 1. in which 𝐅𝐜 𝐪 ̃𝐯 is chosen as:
( ) ( )
Proof. Consider a scalar 0 < 𝜁 ≤ 1 such that the inequality (17) 𝐅𝐜 𝐪̃𝐯 = 𝑛1 𝑎𝑟 𝑠𝑔𝑛2𝑟−1 𝐪̃𝐯 + 𝑛2 𝐪̃𝐯 (29)
can be obtained as 𝐕(𝑥) ̇ ≤ −𝜁 𝜃𝐕𝑔 (𝑥) − (1 − 𝜁)𝜃𝐕𝑔 (𝑥) + 𝓁. Obviously,
̇ Replacing (29) into (28) results in:
𝐕(𝑥) ≤ −𝜁 𝜃𝐕𝑔 (𝑥) if 𝐕𝑔 (𝑥) > 𝓁∕(1 − 𝜁)𝜃. According to Bhat and Bernstein
(2000), the finite time reduction of 𝐕(𝑥) causes that the trajectories of ∑
3
𝐮𝐓 𝐪
̃𝐯 = 𝐯̇ + 𝑛1 𝑎𝑟 |𝐪 |2𝑟 ‖̃𝐯 ‖2 (30)
the closed-loop system converge to 𝐕𝑔 (𝑥) ≤ 𝓁∕(1−𝜁)𝜃. Thus, the system |̃𝐯𝑖 | + 𝑛2 ‖𝐪 ‖
𝑖=1
trajectories will be bounded in finite time as lim𝜁→𝜁0 x ∈ (𝐕𝑔 (𝑥) ≤ 𝓁∕(1−
𝜁)𝜃) in which 0 < 𝜁0 < 1, and also, the upper value of the time required In terms of Lemma 2, it follows that:
to achieve this limitation is obtained as 𝑡𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 ≤ 𝐕1−𝑔 (𝑥0 )∕𝜃𝜁0 (1 − 𝑔) in ( )𝑟 [ ( )]𝑟
𝑎
+ 𝑛2 ‖ ̃𝐯 ‖ 2
which 𝐕(𝑥0 ) is the initial value of 𝐕(𝑥). 𝐮𝐓 𝐪
̃𝐯 ≥ 𝐯̇ + 𝑛1 2 1 − 𝑞̃02 ‖𝐪 ‖
2
( )𝑟 [ (
𝑎 )]𝑟
2 1 − ||𝑞̃0 || + 𝑛2 ‖ ̃𝐯 ‖ 2
≥ 𝐯̇ + 𝑛1 ‖𝐪 ‖ (31)
Lemma 4. Assume the system considered by Eq. (14), then the equilibrium 2
point of the system is finite-time stable, if the system is finite-time strictly According to Eq. (22), and considering that the last term in the
passive as defined in Lemma 1 (Hong et al., 2001). above equation is positive, the inequality is simplified as:
( )𝑟
𝑎
Remark 2. As it was mentioned before, there exist two equilibrium 𝐮𝐓 𝐪
̃𝐯 ≥ 𝐯̇ + 𝑛1 𝐯𝑟 (32)
2
points [1, 𝟎𝑇 ]𝑇 and [−1, 𝟎𝑇 ]𝑇 to represent a satellite orientation. In the
In view of Lemma 1, the attitude tracking error equation is strictly
following, it will be shown that when 𝑞0 (0) ≥ 0, the attitude error
finite-time passive. Therefore, by Lemma 4, the desired orientation
equation becomes finite time strictly passive and therefore in the sense [ ]𝑇 [ ]𝑇
of the passivity feature described in Lemma 4, the system trajectory 𝐪𝐯 = +1, 𝟎𝑇 or 𝐪𝐯 = −1, 𝟎𝑇 is achieved within finite time. So,
will be approached into [1, 𝟎𝑇 ]𝑇 in finite time. Also, when 𝑞0 (0) < the affiliating virtual angular velocity is obtained as:
0, the developed control scheme will take the satellite orientation to ( ) ( ) ( )
𝝎𝑣 = −𝑠𝑔𝑛 𝑞̃0 𝑛1 𝑎𝑟 𝑠𝑔𝑛2𝑟−1 𝐪 ̃𝐯 − 𝑛2 𝑠𝑔𝑛 𝑞̃0 𝐪 ̃𝐯 (33)
[−1, 𝟎𝑇 ]𝑇 in finite time. Therefore, the shorter path is always passed to
the equilibrium point in finite time and both the unwinding problem To achieve a continuous control input for the satellite kinematics,
and the finite time convergence are resolved together. the selected virtual angular velocity in Eq. (33) is improved as follows
which is similar to the theorem:
Theorem 1. Suppose the quaternion error described in Eqs. (4) and (5), ( ) ( ) ( )
if the following virtual angular velocity is selected, then the satellite attitude 𝝎𝑣 = −𝑠𝑔𝑛 𝑞̃0 (0) 𝑛1 𝑎𝑟 𝑠𝑔𝑛2𝑟−1 𝐪
̃𝐯 − 𝑛2 𝐪
̃𝐯 𝑠𝑔𝑛 𝑞̃0 (0) (34)
is approached to the closest desired orientation in finite time: Replacing (34) into (23) results in:
( ) ( ) ( )
𝝎𝑣 = −𝑠𝑔𝑛 𝑞̃0 (0) 𝑛1 𝑎𝑟 𝑠𝑔𝑛2𝑟−1 𝐪 ̃𝐯 − 𝑛2 𝐪 ̃𝐯 𝑠𝑔𝑛 𝑞̃0 (0) (20) ∑
3
( ) ( ) |̃ |2𝑟 ( ) ( ) 𝐓
[ ]𝑇 𝐯̇ = −𝑠𝑔𝑛 𝑞̃0 𝑠𝑔𝑛 𝑞̃0 𝑛1 𝑎𝑟 |𝐪𝐯𝑖 | − 𝑛2 𝑠𝑔𝑛 𝑞̃0 𝑠𝑔𝑛 𝑞̃0 𝐪
̃𝐯 𝐪
̃𝐯 (35)
where 𝐪 ̃𝐯 = 𝑞̃1 𝑞̃2 𝑞̃3 , also, 𝑛1 > 0, n2 > 0, 𝑎 > 0 and 0.5 < 𝑟 < 1 | |
𝑖=1
are design parameters and 𝑠𝑔𝑛𝑟 (̃ 𝐪𝐯 ) is defined as:
Also, inserting (34) into (5) satisfies:
[ ]𝑇
| | 𝑟
𝑞1 ) ||𝑞̃2 || 𝑠𝑔𝑛(̃ 𝑞2 ) ||𝑞̃3 || 𝑠𝑔𝑛(̃ ( ) ( ) ( )
𝑟 𝑟
𝐪𝐯 ) = ||𝑞̃1 || 𝑠𝑔𝑛(̃
𝑠𝑔𝑛𝑟 (̃ 𝑞3 ) (21) ̇𝑞̃ = 𝑠𝑔𝑛 𝑞̃ (0) 𝑛 𝑎𝑟 1 𝐪 1 𝐓
0 0 1 ̃𝐓 𝑠𝑔𝑛2𝑟−1 𝐪̃𝐯 + 𝑛2 𝐪 ̃ 𝐪
̃𝑠𝑔𝑛 𝑞̃0 (0) (36)
2 𝐯 2

5
M.H. Shahna and M. Abedi Control Engineering Practice 114 (2021) 104866

Based on the above equation, it can be deduced that for 𝑞̃0 (0) ≥ 0, Theorem 2. Suppose the satellite attitude control system in Eq. (8) and
we have 𝑞̃̇ 0 ≥ 0, which in turn results in 𝑞̃0 ≥ 0 for ∀t ≥ 0. Therefore, the sliding surface given in Eq. (38); if control scheme is selected as follows:
( ) ( )
𝑠𝑔𝑛 𝑞̃0 (0) 𝑠𝑔𝑛 𝑞̃0 = 1 and the following inequality is concluded in
[ ]
view of Lemma 2: 𝝎× 𝐂𝐟 𝐡𝝎 𝐷̂ + 𝐼̂ ‖𝑃 ‖
( )𝑟 𝐓𝐜 = 𝐂𝐓 −𝑎0 ‖𝐒‖𝑔−1 𝐒 + − 𝐒 (48)
𝐯̇ ≤ −𝑛1
𝑎
𝐯𝑟 (37)
𝐟
‖𝐂𝐟 ‖2 ‖𝐒‖
2 ‖ ‖
where
For the case that 𝑞̃0 (0) < 0, it can be established that Eq. (37) still
holds. Accordingly, in terms of Lemma 3, the finite time approach of 𝑃 = 𝑃1 𝝎
̃ + 𝑃2 (49)
[ ]𝑇
the satellite attitude toward the desired orientations 𝐪𝐯 = +1, 𝟎𝑇
[ ]𝑇 and the adaptive updating laws are defined as:
or 𝐪𝐯 = −1, 𝟎𝑇 is concluded utilizing the selected virtual angular
velocity in Eq. (20). □ 𝐷̂̇ = 𝛼0 (−𝑎1 𝐷̂ + ‖𝐒‖) (50)
Now, a fast terminal sliding mode (FTSM) manifold is selected as: 𝐼̂̇ = 𝛼1 (−𝑎2 𝐼̂ + ‖
‖𝝎̃‖
‖ ‖𝐒‖) (51)
𝐭 ( ) 𝐭
in which 𝑎𝑖 , 𝛼𝑖 > 0 are scalars, 𝐷̂ and 𝐼̂ are the two estimated values of
𝐒 = 𝐞 𝝎 + 𝑏1 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑔 ||𝐪
̃𝐯 ||2𝑟−2 𝐞𝝎 𝑑𝑡 + 𝑏2 𝑠𝑔𝑛𝑔 (𝐞𝝎 )𝑑𝑡 (38)
∫𝟎 ∫ 𝟎 the upper bounds given in Assumption 3, then the finite time convergence of
[ ]𝑇 control system trajectories into a small neighborhood of the sliding surface
where 𝐒 = 𝑆1 𝑆2 𝑆3 , 𝑏1 , 𝑏2 > 0, and 0 < 𝑔 < 1, also: 𝐒=𝟎 is ensured.
𝐞𝝎 =̃
𝝎 − 𝝎𝑣 (39)
Proof. Consider an unknown 𝜆 > 0 which is less than the minimum
in which, 𝐞𝝎 is the control error. eigenvalue of 𝐂𝐟 𝜦𝐂𝐓 𝐟
as a marginal assurance of adaptation. Consider-
ing this parameter confirms Assumption 3 such that it causes adaptive
Lemma 5. Consider the error Eq. (38) with the FTSM manifold (38) estimations to settle above the upper bound of the real amount. Now,
satisfying 𝐒=𝟎; the error vector 𝐞𝝎 is approached to zero in finite time along a positive semi-definite Lyapunov function is defined as:
[ ]
the FTSM manifold (Song, Li, & Sun, 2014). 1 ( )2 1 ( )2
It can be shown that: 𝑉 = 0.5 𝐒𝐓 𝐈𝑠 𝐒 + 𝐷 − 𝜆𝐷̂ + 𝐼 − 𝜆𝐼̂ (52)
𝛼0 𝜆 𝛼1 𝜆
( )
̃𝐯 ||2𝑟−2 𝐞𝝎 + 𝑏2 𝑠𝑔𝑛𝑔 (𝐞𝝎 )
𝐒̇ = 𝐞̇ 𝝎 + 𝑏1 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑔 ||𝐪 (40) Taking the time derivative of 𝑉 leads to:
1 ( ) 1 ( )
After inserting (13) into (39) and considering (40), 𝐈𝑠 𝐒̇ is obtained as 𝑉̇ = 𝐒𝐓 𝐈𝑠 𝐒̇ − 𝐷 − 𝜆𝐷̂ 𝐷̂̇ − 𝐼 − 𝜆𝐼̂ 𝐼̂̇ (53)
𝛼0 𝛼1
follows:
( ) ( ) Replacing (45) into (53) results in:
𝐈𝑠 𝐒̇ = 𝐂𝐟 𝜦𝐓𝐜 + 𝐂𝐟 𝐓𝐬 + 𝐓𝐝 − 𝝎× 𝐇 − 𝐈𝑠 𝐑 𝐪 ̃ 𝝎̇ 𝐝 − 𝐈𝑠 𝐑̇ 𝐪̃ 𝝎𝐝 − 𝐈𝑠 𝝎̇ 𝐯
( ) (41) 𝑉̇ = −𝐒𝐓 𝝎× 𝐈𝑠 𝝎 + 𝐒𝐓 𝐂𝐟 𝜦𝐓𝐜 + 𝐒𝐓 𝐂𝐟 𝐓𝐬
|
+ 𝐈𝑠 𝑏1 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑔 |𝐪 |
̃𝐯 |2𝑟−2 𝑔
𝐞𝝎 + 𝐈𝑠 𝑏2 𝑠𝑖𝑔 (𝐞𝝎 )
+ 𝐒𝐓 𝐓𝐝 + 𝐒𝐓 𝐈𝑠 𝑃2 + 𝐒𝐓 𝐈𝑠 𝑃1 𝝎̃ − 𝐒𝐓 𝝎× 𝐂𝐟 𝐡𝝎
where 𝑠𝑖𝑔 𝑔 (.) is obtained similar to (21). Since (38) and (41) includes 1 ( ) 1 ( )
− 𝐷 − 𝜆𝐷̂ 𝐷̂̇ − 𝐼 − 𝜆𝐼̂ 𝐼̂̇ (54)
negative fractional power 2𝑟−2, the singularity may occur when 𝑞̃(𝑣𝑖 = 0 and 𝛼0 𝛼1
)
̃ 𝐯 = 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑔 |𝐪
𝑞̃̇ 𝑣𝑖 ≠ 0. The singularity is prevented by considering 𝐐 |2𝑟−2 ( )
|̃𝐯 | Defining 𝐺 = −𝐒𝐓 𝝎× 𝐈𝑠 𝝎−𝐒𝐓 𝝎× 𝐂𝐟 𝐡𝝎 + 𝐒𝐓 𝝎× 𝐂𝐓 𝜦𝐂𝐟 𝐡𝝎 ∕ ‖ ‖𝟐
𝐟 ‖𝐂𝐟 ‖ and
with 𝐐 ̃ 𝐯 ∈ 𝐑𝟑 that obtained as (Shen et al., 2015):
inserting (48) one can write:
⎧| |2𝑟−2 [ ]
if ||̃
q𝑣𝑖 ||
2𝑟−2
q̇ 𝑣𝑖 ≠ 0
≥ 𝜒 and ̃ 𝐷̂ + 𝐼̂ ‖𝑃 ‖
⎪|𝑞̃𝑣𝑖 | 𝑉̇ ≤ 𝐒𝐓 𝐂𝐟 𝜦𝐂𝐓 − 𝐒 − 𝑎 0 ‖𝐒‖ 𝑔−1
𝐒
⎪
𝐟 ‖𝐒‖
if ||̃
q𝑣𝑖 ||
2𝑟−2
̃𝑣,𝑖
𝑄 = ⎨ |𝜒|2𝑟−2 q̇ 𝑣𝑖 ≠ 0
< 𝜒 and ̃ (42) ‖ ‖
⎪ + ‖𝐒‖ ‖𝐂𝐟 𝐓𝐬 + 𝐓𝐝 ‖ + 𝐒 𝐈𝑠 𝑃2 + 𝐒𝐓 𝐈𝑠 𝑃1 𝝎
𝐓
̃+𝐺
⎪ 0 q̇ = 0
̃ 1 ( ̂
) ̇
̂ 1 ( ̂
) ̇
̂
⎩ 𝑣𝑖 − 𝐷 − 𝜆𝐷 𝐷 − 𝐼 − 𝜆𝐼 𝐼 (55)
𝛼0 𝛼1
where 𝑞̃𝑣𝑖 is the ith component of 𝐐 ̃ 𝐯 and 𝜒 is a positive scalar. Ac-
According to Eqs. (46), (47) and (49), it is implied that:
cording( to Eqs. )(20), (39) and considering 𝝎̇ 𝐯 = −𝑠𝑔𝑛(̃ 𝑞0 (0))𝑛1 𝑎𝑟 (2𝑟 − [ ]
( ) 𝐷̂ + 𝐼̂ ‖𝑃 ‖
|
1)𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑔 |𝐪 |
̃𝐯 | 2𝑟−2 ̇ ̇
̃𝐯 𝑠𝑔𝑛 𝑞̃0 (0) , one can define:
̃𝐯 − 𝑛2 𝐪
𝐪 𝑉̇ ≤ 𝐒𝐓 𝐂𝐟 𝜦𝐂𝐓 − 𝐒 − 𝑎 ‖𝐒‖ 𝑔−1
𝐒 + ‖𝐒‖ 𝐼 ‖𝑃 ‖ + ‖𝐒‖ 𝐷 + 𝐺
0
𝐟 ‖𝐒‖
( )
̃ 𝐯 𝑞̃0 𝐈3×3 + 𝐪
𝑞0 (0))𝑛1 𝑎𝑟 (2𝑟 − 1)𝐐 ̃× 1 ( ) 1 ( )
𝑃1 = 0.5𝑠𝑔𝑛(̃ 𝐯 − 𝐷 − 𝜆𝐷̂ 𝐷̂̇ − 𝐼 − 𝜆𝐼̂ 𝐼̂̇ (56)
( ) (43) 𝛼0 𝛼1
+ 0.5𝑛2 𝑠𝑔𝑛(̃ ̃×
𝑞0 (0)) 𝑞̃0 𝐈3×3 + 𝐪 ̃
𝐯 + 𝑏1 𝐐 𝐯
( ) ( ) Regarding 0 ≤ 𝜦𝑖 ≤ 1, the defined 𝜆 and also replacing (50) and
̃ 𝐯 𝝎𝐯 + 𝑏2 𝑠𝑖𝑔 𝑔 (̃
𝑃2 = −𝑏1 𝐐 𝝎 − 𝝎𝐯 ) − 𝐑 𝐪 ̃ 𝝎̇ 𝐝 − 𝐑̇ 𝐪̃ 𝝎𝐝 (44) (51) into (56) result in:

Finally, Eq. (41) is stated as: 𝑉̇ ≤ −𝜆𝑎0 ‖𝐒‖𝑔+1 + ‖𝐒‖ 𝐼 ‖𝑃 ‖ + ‖𝐒‖ 𝐷 − 𝜆 ‖𝐒‖ 𝐼̂ ‖𝑃 ‖ − 𝜆 ‖𝐒‖ 𝐷̂ + 𝐺
( ) ( )
𝐈𝑠 𝐒̇ = −𝝎× 𝐈𝑠 𝝎 + 𝐂𝐟 𝜦𝐓𝐜 + 𝐂𝐟 𝐓𝐬 + 𝐓𝐝 + 𝐈𝑠 𝑃2 + 𝐈𝑠 𝑃1 𝝎
̃ − 𝝎× 𝐂𝐟 𝐡𝝎 (45) − 𝐷 − 𝜆𝐷̂ (−𝑎1 𝐷̂ + ‖𝐒‖) − 𝐼 − 𝜆𝐼̂ (−𝑎2 𝐼̂ + ‖𝑃 ‖ ‖𝐒‖) (57)

After simplifying (57), we can further obtain:

Assumption 3. There are positive and bounded scalars as below:
( ) ( )
𝑉̇ ≤ −𝜆𝑎0 ‖𝐒‖𝑔+1 + 𝑎1 𝐷̂ 𝐷 − 𝜆𝐷̂ + 𝑎2 𝐼̂ 𝐼 − 𝜆𝐼̂ + 𝐺 (58)
‖𝐂𝐟 𝐓𝐬 + 𝐓𝐝 ‖ ≤ 𝐷 (46)
‖ ‖
‖𝐈𝑠 ‖ = ‖𝐈𝟎 + 𝜟𝑰 ‖ ≤ 𝐼 If 𝛼𝑖 > 2, then:
‖ ‖ ‖ ‖ (47)
𝑎1
̂
𝑎1 𝐷(𝐷 ̂ =−
− 𝜆𝐷) (𝐷 − 𝜆𝐷̂ − 𝐷)(𝐷 − 𝜆𝐷)
̂
where D is the upper bound of the unknown inputs due to disturbances 𝜆 ( )
or faulty actuators and I is the upper bound of unknown inertia and its 𝑎 𝛼 − 0.5 𝛼0 2
≤ 1 −(𝐷 − 𝜆𝐷) ̂ 2 0 + 𝐷 (59)
uncertainty. 𝜆 𝛼0 2

6
M.H. Shahna and M. Abedi Control Engineering Practice 114 (2021) 104866

with the same procedure, the following equation is achieved: time. According to Lemma 3, the trajectories of the closed loop system
( ) is bounded in finite time as:
𝑎 𝛼 − 0.5 𝛼1 2
̂ − 𝜆𝐼)
𝑎2 𝐼(𝐼 ̂ ≤ 2 −(𝐼 − 𝜆𝐼)̂2 1 + 𝐼 (60) ( √ ( )1∕(g+1) )
𝜆 𝛼1 2 𝜆max 𝓁
lim = 𝐒(t) ∈ ‖𝐒‖ ≤ (68)
By considering 𝜆min (𝐈𝑠 ) ‖𝐒‖𝟐 ≤ 𝐒𝐓 𝐈𝑠 𝐒 ≤ 𝜆max (𝐈𝑠 ) ‖𝐒‖𝟐 (Zou, Kumar, t→tconv 𝜆min 𝜆𝑎0 (1 − 𝜕0 )
Hou, et al., 2011) and inserting (59) and (60) into (58), the following
Also, the upper bound of the convergence time 𝑡𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 is obtained as
inequality can be expressed:
follows:
0.5(𝑔+1)
⎛ 1 𝐒𝐓 𝐈𝑠 𝐒 ⎞ ( ) 𝐕1−𝑔 (𝐱𝟎 )
𝑎 (𝛼 − 0.5) 0.5(𝑔+1)
𝑉̇ ≤ −𝜆𝑎0 ⎜ 2 ⎟ ̂ 2 1 0
− (𝐷 − 𝜆𝐷) 𝑡𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣 ≤
𝜃𝜁0 (1 − 𝑔)
□ (69)
⎜ 0.5𝜆max (𝐈𝑠 ) ⎟ 𝜆𝛼0
⎝ ⎠
( )0.5(𝑔+1) ( )
𝑎 (𝛼 − 0.5) 𝑎 (𝛼 − 0.5) 0.5(𝑔+1) Remark 3. The above theorem proposes a novel control structure based
+ (𝐷 − 𝜆𝐷) ̂ 2 1 0 ̂2 2 1
− (𝐼 − 𝜆𝐼)
𝜆𝛼0 𝜆𝛼1 on the passivity properties of the control systems that ensures the
( )0.5(𝑔+1) finite time approach of system states in the presence of disturbances,
𝑎 (𝛼 − 0.5)
+ (𝐼 − 𝜆𝐼) ̂2 2 1 uncertain parameters and degraded performance of actuators without
𝜆𝛼1
[ ] encountering the unwinding problems. The above features have not
𝑎1 (𝛼 − 0.5) 𝛼0 2
+ −(𝐷 − 𝜆𝐷) ̂ 2 0 + 𝐷 been considered simultaneously in most of the investigations. In certain
𝜆 𝛼0 2
[ ] studies, like Hu et al. (2011) and Hu (2010), although the robustness
𝑎2 (𝛼1 − 0.5) 𝛼1 2
+ −(𝐼 − 𝜆𝐼)̂ 2
+ 𝐼 +𝐺 (61) against the mentioned factors was considered, however the asymptotic
𝜆 𝛼1 2 stability of the control system is guaranteed. Also, Han et al. (2016)
𝜆𝑎 0 and Cao et al. (2017) are finite time fault tolerant works but they
Defining 𝜃 = satisfies:
(0.5𝜆max (𝐈𝑠 ))0.5(𝑔+1) suffer from the unwinding problem. Moreover, despite the unwinding
{
( )0.5(𝑔+1) [ ]0.5(𝑔+1) phenomenon is prevented in the attitude tracking controllers developed
1 𝐓 1 ̂ 2
𝑉̇ ≤ −𝜃 𝐒 𝐈𝑠 𝐒 + (𝐷 − 𝜆𝐷) in Long et al. (2016) and Tiwari et al. (2016), but the finite time
2 2𝜆𝛼0
[ ]0.5(𝑔+1) } features are not necessarily provided.
1 ̂2
+ (𝐼 − 𝜆𝐼)
2𝜆𝛼1 Remark 4. If the thrusters are selected as active actuators, 𝐡𝝎 = 0
( ) ( ) meaning that 𝐇 = 𝐈𝐬 𝝎. Therefore, inserting 𝐇 = 𝐈𝐬 𝝎 in equation (13),
𝑎 (𝛼 − 0.5) 0.5(𝑔+1) 𝑎 (𝛼 − 0.5) 0.5(𝑔+1)
+ (𝐷 − 𝜆𝐷) ̂ 2 1 0 + (𝐼 − 𝜆𝐼) ̂2 2 1 the satellite dynamics can be derived as follows (Jin, Park, Park, et al.,
𝜆𝛼0 𝜆𝛼1
( )0.5(𝑔+1) 2006):
𝑎 𝛼 − 0.5 𝛼0 2
+ 1 −(𝐷 − 𝜆𝐷) ̂ 2 0 + 𝐷
𝜆 𝛼0 2 ̇ − 𝝎× 𝐈𝑠 𝝎 + 𝐂𝐟 𝜦𝐓𝐜 + 𝐓𝐝 + 𝐂𝐟 𝐓𝑠
𝐈𝑠 𝝎= (70)
( ) [ ]𝑇
𝑎 𝛼 − 0.5 𝛼1 2 0.5(𝑔+1) where 𝐓𝐝 = 𝑇𝑑1 𝑇𝑑2 𝑇𝑑3 is the external disturbance torque ap-
+ 2 −(𝐼 − 𝜆𝐼) ̂2 1 + 𝐼 +𝐺 (62)
𝜆 𝛼1 2 plied along three axes of the satellite, 𝐂𝐟 is the thrusters configuration
[ ]𝑇
The above inequality is more simplified as: matrix with the dimension of 3 × 3, 𝐓𝐬 = 𝑇𝑠1 𝑇𝑠2 𝑇𝑠3 is the
[ ]𝑇
( ) additive actuators fault, 𝐓𝐜 = 𝑇𝑐1 𝑇𝑐2 𝑇𝑐3 is the command control
𝑎 (𝛼 − 0.5) 0.5(𝑔+1) ( )
𝑉̇ ≤ −𝜃𝑉 0.5(𝑔+1) + (𝐷 − 𝜆𝐷) ̂ 2 1 0 torque of the thrusters and 𝜦 = 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑔 𝜦1 𝜦2 𝜦3 describes the
𝜆𝛼0
( ) multiplicative fault of the actuators so that 0 ≤ 𝜦𝑖 ≤ 1. Different faulty
2 𝑎2 (𝛼1 − 0.5) 0.5(𝑔+1) modes are considered similar to the reaction wheels case. Accordingly,
+ (𝐼 − 𝜆𝐼) ̂
𝜆𝛼1 if 𝐡𝝎 = 0 is inserted in the control scheme developed in Theorem 2,
̂ 2 𝑎1 (𝛼0 − 0.5) 𝑎 (𝛼 − 0.5)
̂2 2 1 the following controller is achieved for the satellite dynamics with the
− (𝐷 − 𝜆𝐷) − (𝐼 − 𝜆𝐼)
𝜆𝛼0 𝜆𝛼1 thrusters:
𝑎1 𝛼0 2 𝑎2 𝛼1 2 [ ]
+ 𝐷 + 𝐼 +𝐺 (63) 𝐷̂ + 𝐼̂ ‖𝑃 ‖
2𝜆 2𝜆 𝐓𝐜 = 𝐂𝐓 − 𝐒 − 𝑎0 ‖𝐒‖𝑔−1 𝐒 (71)
𝐟 ‖𝐒‖
In general, the following equation holds true:
( ) By considering the control scheme (71) together with the adaptation
𝑎 (𝛼 − 0.5) 0.5(𝑔+1) 𝑎 (𝛼 − 0.5) laws (50) and (51) and replacing 𝐡𝝎 = 0 into the proof of Theorem 2,
̂ 2 1 0
(𝐷 − 𝜆min 𝐷) ̂ 2 1 0
− (𝐷 − 𝜆min 𝐷) < 𝓁1 (64)
𝜆min 𝛼0 𝜆min 𝛼0 the finite time stability proof of the closed loop dynamics will be
straightforward and so it has been ignored here.
There is also the same explanation for 𝐼̂ as below:
( ) According to the above remark, the finite time convergence of
𝑎 (𝛼 − 0.5) 0.5(𝑔+1) 𝑎 (𝛼 − 0.5)
̂2 2 1
(𝐼 − 𝜆min 𝐼) ̂2 2 1
− (𝐼 − 𝜆min 𝐼) < 𝓁2 (65) the systems states is also ensured by the thrusters, considering the
𝜆min 𝛼1 𝜆min 𝛼1
𝑎 𝛼 𝑎 𝛼
uncertain parameters, faulty actuators and external disturbances.
Defining 𝓁 = 𝓁1 + 𝓁2 + 2𝜆 1 0
𝐷2 + 2𝜆
2 1 2
𝐼 and considering equations
̇
(63) to (65), 𝐕(𝑡) is further bounded by: 5. Software simulation and experimental tests
𝑉̇ ≤ −𝜃.𝑉 0.5(𝑔+1) + 𝓁 + 𝐺 (66)
In this section, some numerical results and experimental tests are
In terms of the above inequality, the following cases may occur: conducted to demonstrate the attitude tracking controller developed in
the previous sections. The related results are illustrated separately as
(1) If 𝐺 ≤ 0, then 𝑉̇ ≤ −𝜃.𝑉 0.5(𝑔+1) + 𝓁
𝑎1 𝛼0 2 𝑎2 𝛼1 2 below.
(2) if 𝐺 > 0 and supposing 𝓁 = 𝓁1 + 𝓁2 + 2𝜆
𝐷 + 2𝜆
𝐼 + 𝐺, then
𝑉̇ ≤ −𝜃.𝑉 0.5(𝑔+1) + 𝓁
5.1. Software simulation
Accordingly, it is ensured that:
The satellite simulated in this section is a three-axis stabilized type
𝑉̇ ≤ −𝜃.𝑉 0.5(𝑔+1) + 𝓁 (67)
with the parameters and assumptions given in Table 1. It was supposed
The above inequality implies that the attitude tracking error and that the satellite equipped with three reaction wheels to generate the
angular velocity error converge into 𝐕0.5(𝑔+1) (𝐱) ≤ 𝓁∕((1 − 𝜁)𝜃) in finite related command torques around the body axes of the satellite. Also,

7
M.H. Shahna and M. Abedi Control Engineering Practice 114 (2021) 104866

Fig. 5. The quaternion error in case 1 (a) PSAA (b) TSM.

Fig. 6. The angular velocity error in case 1 (a) PSAA (b) TSM.

Fig. 7. A close view for the quaternion error and the angular velocity error in case 1 (a) PSSA (b) TSM.

it is assumed that three thrusters are symmetrically mounted along Finally, the performance of the control schemes is evaluated in the third
the satellite body axes so that the force generated by each of them case in the presence of actuators failures.
is perpendicular to the related principal axis. The satellite attitude is For each case, the performance of the developed PSAA schemes
measured with mean of zero and standard deviation of better than in (48) or (71) are compared to the fixed-time-based terminal sliding
0.1◦ . Also, the satellite angular velocity is provided by a fiber optic mode (TSM) proposed by Jiang et al. (2016). The main parameters
gyro for which the bias stability, the random noise and the scale of the aforementioned control algorithms are given in Table 2. More-
factor are considered as 0.4 (deg/h), 0.05 (deg/h) and 100 (ppm), over, the disturbance and uncertainties in the satellite parameters are
respectively. Thus, the configuration matrix of the above actuators set assumed as follows:
can be derived as shown in Table 1. In the following, the simulation [ ]
𝑡 𝑡 𝑡 𝐓
results are illustrated for three cases. In the first case, the satellite is 𝐓𝐝 = 0.02 sin( ), sin( ), sin( ) ,
10 5 5
healthy and the reaction wheels are active actuators. In the second case, ( ) (72)
𝑡 𝑡 𝑡
we work still in healthy condition, however, the thrusters are used. 𝜟𝑰 = 𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑔 5 sin( ), 3.5 sin( ), 4 sin( )
8 7 3

8
M.H. Shahna and M. Abedi Control Engineering Practice 114 (2021) 104866

Fig. 8. The control torque generated in case 1 (a) PSSA (b) TSM.

Table 1 As it can be deduced from the mentioned results, the system states
Spacecraft parameters used in the simulations Sidi (1997). reach the nearest equilibrium point of [−1, 𝟎𝑇 ]𝑇 due the control scheme
Parameters Values developed in (48) that inevitably results in a shorter moving path. The
[ ]𝐓
Desired quaternion ±1 0 0 0 mentioned results show the suitably of the virtual input introduced in
⎡45 1.2 0.9 ⎤ Theorem 1 and thus the claim stated in this theorem is confirmed. The
⎢ ⎥ resulted performance of the developed control schemes was compared
2
Satellite moments of inertia (kg.m ) 𝐈𝟎 = ⎢1.2 42 1.4 ⎥
⎢ ⎥ with TSM in Table 3. It should be noted that, although the PSAA
⎢ ⎥
⎣0.9 1.4 37.5⎦ method has led to a larger overshoot compared to the TSM, it has made
The moments of inertia of the 𝐈𝐰 = diag([2 2 2]) × 10−2 significant improvements in the accuracy and time of convergence,
reaction wheels (kg.m2 ) which have a higher priority in the present work. Also, the extra over-
Number of actuators n = 3 shoot has not violated any of the theoretical and operational limitations
and so it can be acceptable.
⎡1 0 0⎤
⎢ ⎥ Fig. 8 illustrates the reaction wheels torque obtained for the men-
Configuration matrix of the actuators 𝐂𝐟 = ⎢ 0 1 0⎥ tioned control schemes. According to this figure, the developed con-
⎢ ⎥
⎢ ⎥ troller is smooth and low chattering. It can be further concluded that
⎣0 0 1⎦
compared to the TSM, the proposed method leads to lower amplitudes
Structure type of the actuators Pyramid
in reaction wheels outputs. Hence, it does not suffer from the satura-
tion problem. As shown in Table 3, a lower control effort has been
demanded by the proposed method. Note that the criterion selected for
the control effort is the torque amplitude in the steady state. Fig. 9
Case 1: In this case, it is assumed that there is no fault for reaction represents the time responses of 𝐓𝐝 and its upper bound obtained by
wheels; so 𝜦 is an identity matrix
√ and 𝐓𝐬 = 0. The initial condition the adaptation law given in (50). Note that the fault term 𝐓𝐬 is zero in
of the satellite is 𝐪(0) = [− 0.7, −0.1, 0.5, −0.2]𝑇 which implies that this case. As it can be observed in this figure, the upper bound of the
𝑞0 (0) has a negative initial value. Also, the initial angular velocity is disturbance term has been properly estimated by the adaptation law.
𝝎(0) = [0.01, −0.01, 0.01]𝐓 (rad/s). The results obtained for the attitude Also, the time responses of the ‖ ‖ ‖ ‖
‖𝐈𝐬 ‖ = ‖𝐈𝟎 + 𝜟𝑰 ‖ and its upper bound
tracking error 𝐪̃ and the angular velocity error 𝝎̃ under PSAA and TSM was illustrated in Fig. 10. This figure shows that the upper bound of
methods are, respectively, exhibited in Figs. 5 and 6. The close views the inertia matrix norm has been correctly provided by the adaptation
of these variables for the mentioned control methods are shown in law developed in (51). Therefore, Assumption 3 is validated and it can
Fig. 7. As we can see in these figures, the desired tracking performance be concluded from the mentioned results that the upper bound values
is achieved by the PSAA controller while the unknown input due to required in this assumption are correctly provided by the designed
uncertain parameters is propagated to the satellite dynamics. The PSAA adaptation laws. So, the proper performance of the designed adaptation
manages to drive the satellite quaternions into the desired orientation mechanisms in Theorem 2 is verified.
in the limited time of about 11 (sec) with the accuracy within 4 × 10−4 The aforementioned results verify the conclusion as stated in Re-
in steady state error. Also, almost 14.3 (sec) is demanded by the TSM mark 3 that the proposed controller in (48) achieves the desired objec-
to approach the equilibrium point and the final error of about 9 × 10−4 tives in the absence of reaction wheels faults. Also, the unwinding prob-
is provided. The angular velocity tracking for the PSAA and the TSM lem is resolved through utilizing the mentioned controller as claimed in
can be provided within 13.9 (sec) and 17.5 (sec), respectively, also Remark 2. Similar results can be validated for the controller developed
in (71).
the steady state errors of angular velocities are 2.69 × 10−4 (rad/s) and
5.58×10−4 (rad/s), respectively. Accordingly, the finite time approach of Case 2: in this case, the thrusters are selected as active actuators. To
system states is provided under disturbances and uncertain parameters validate the anti-unwinding ability of the suggested attitude tracking
and so the control objectives stated in Theorem 2 is provided for controller,
√ the initial value of the satellite attitude is chosen as 𝐪(0) =
healthy actuators. [ 0.7, −0.1, 0.5, −0.2]𝑇 (𝑞0 (0) > 0). Also, the initial angular velocity is

Table 2
Control parameters used in the simulations.
Control algorithms Control parameters
𝑛 = 0.02, 𝑎 = 20, 𝛼0,1 = 1, 𝑏1 = 0.02, 𝑏2 = 0.05
PSAA
𝑎0 = 45, 𝑎1 = 8, 𝑎2 = 15, 𝑟 = 0.99, 𝑔 = 0.99
𝑝2 𝑔2
𝛼1 = 𝛽1 = 0.5, p1 = = 0.8, g1 = = 1.7, k1 = 1
TSM Jiang, Hu, and Friswell (2016) 2 2
𝛼2 = 𝛽2 = 10, c𝑖 = 1, 𝜎𝑖 = 8, 𝜒̂ (0) = 𝑌̂ (0) = 𝜇̂ (0) = 0.01

9
M.H. Shahna and M. Abedi Control Engineering Practice 114 (2021) 104866

Table 3
The results obtained by the PSAA and the TSM in case 1.
Control algorithms Quaternion Angular velocity Control effort
Steady state Convergence Overshoot Steady state Convergence Overshoot Torque
error time (sec) error (rad/sec) time (sec) amplitude (N m)
PSAA 4 × 10−4 11 0.04 2.69 × 10−4 13.9 0.24 5 × 10−4
TSM Jiang et al. 9 × 10−4 14.3 0.1 5.58 × 10−4 17.5 0.16 3 × 10−3
(2016)

selection of different actuators sets does not affect the resulted con-
trol performance. Fig. 14 shows that the developed scheme leads to
a smoother profile with less amplitude and less chattering intensity
compared to the TSM. This can also be deduced from the control effort
represented in Table 4. Since the results related to the upper bounds of
the disturbances and the moment of inertia matrix are exactly the same
as the previous case, they are omitted here.
Case 3: in this case, it is assumed that some failures occur in the
thrusters and the performance of the developed controller is investi-
gated against these events. The external disturbances and the supposed
fault profiles in the actuators are summarized as below:
⎧0.02 sin( 𝑡 ) 𝑡 < 50
⎪ 10
𝐓𝐝1 =⎨ 𝑡
⎪0.26 sin( ) 𝑡 ≥ 50
⎩ 10
(73)
⎧0.02 sin( 𝑡 ) 𝑡 < 55
⎪ 5 𝑡
𝐓𝐝2 =⎨ 𝑡 𝐓𝐝3 = 0.65 sin( )
Fig. 9. The results obtained for ‖ ‖ ̂ ⎪0.31 sin( ) 𝑡 ≥ 55 5
‖𝐓𝐝 ‖ and 𝐷 in case 1 achieved by the PSAA control
scheme. ⎩ 5

⎧
⎪ 𝑇𝑐1 (𝑛𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙) 𝑡 < 50
⎪
𝐓1 = ⎨ 0.9 (𝑠𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛) 50 ≤ 𝑡 < 51
⎪
⎪0.2𝑇𝑐1 (𝐿𝑂𝐸) 𝑡 ≥ 51
⎩ (74)
{
0.1 (𝑠𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛) 𝑡 < 55
𝐓2 =
0.4𝑇𝑐2 (𝐿𝑂𝐸) 𝑡 ≥ 55

𝐓3 = 0.3𝑇𝑐2 (𝐿𝑂𝐸) 𝑡≥0

Fig. 10. The results obtained for ‖ ‖ ⌢
‖𝐈𝐬 ‖ and 𝐼 in case 1 achieved by the PSAA control
scheme.
𝝎(0) = [0.01, −0.01, 0.01]𝐓 (rad/s). Figs. 11 and 12 represent the results
obtained for the satellite attitude error 𝐪̃ and the angular velocity error
̃ , respectively. Fig. 13 shows a close view of these parameters. From
𝝎 see, although a higher torque is requested by the developed scheme
the comparison between Figs. 11 and 5 for attitude errors and Figs. 12
and 6 for angular velocity errors, it can be concluded that despite
selection of an initial state that is far away the equilibrium point, the
proposed control method remains the resulted transient performance.
The performance achieved for the control algorithms was summarized
in Table 4. As illustrated in this table, a superior settling time and
steady state accuracy are obtained by the developed controller. In this
case, although the higher overshoot has been created by the proposed
method, but it has led to better performance in terms of accuracy
and convergence time. The above performance verifies the results as
claimed in Remark 4 that the proposed controller in (71) achieves
the desired objectives in the absence of actuators faults. Accordingly,
So, the above subsequent fault happening shows a relatively hard
condition for algorithm evaluation. As we can see, different un-healthy
conditions including the stuck and loss of power have been occurred
in the actuators. The
√ initial values of system states are chosen, respec-
tively, as 𝐪(0) = [ 0.7, −0.1, 0.5, −0.2]𝑇 and 𝝎(0) = [0.01, −0.01, 0.01]𝐓
(rad/s). The results obtained for the attitude error and the angular
velocity error are represented in Figs. 15 and 16, respectively. Also, the
close views of these figures are shown in Fig. 17. It can be observed
that high accuracy and acceptable convergence rate is achieved by
the proposed control scheme. It is clear that TSM is more susceptible
dealing with the occurred failures. Table 5 represents the performance
provided by different control schemes. Note that the settling time after
t = 50(sec) was considered as a comparison measure. The obtained
profiles for the thruster control torque are shown in Fig. 18. As we can
in the initial times, however, the PSAA continues to result in smaller
torques compared to the TSM. This can also be deduced from the con-
trol effort reported in Table 5. The above results confirm the conclusion
as outlined in Remark 4 that the controller proposed in (71) achieves
the desired objectives in the presence of actuators faults. It can be
justified that similar results can be achieved by the control scheme
obtained in (48). Fig. 19 shows the time responses of ‖ ‖
‖𝐂𝐟 𝐓𝐬 + 𝐓𝐝 ‖ and
𝐷̂ obtained by the PSAA. As it is shown, this parameter reaches around
the disturbance value in healthy cases. However, after fault occurrence
in actuators, its value jumps suddenly compared to healthy conditions.
Also, the upper bound is obtained in such a way that the inequality
described in (46) is satisfied. Therefore, the correct performance of

10
M.H. Shahna and M. Abedi Control Engineering Practice 114 (2021) 104866

Fig. 11. The quaternion error in case 2 (a) PSAA (b) TSM.

Fig. 12. The angular velocity error in case 2 (a) PSAA (b) TSM.

Fig. 13. A close view for the quaternion error and the angular velocity error in case 2 (a) PSSA (b) TSM.

Fig. 14. The control torque generated in case 2 (a) PSSA (b) TSM.

11
M.H. Shahna and M. Abedi Control Engineering Practice 114 (2021) 104866

Fig. 15. The quaternion error in case 3 (a) PSAA (b) TSM.

Fig. 16. The angular velocity error in case 3 (a) PSAA (b) TSM.

Fig. 17. A close view for the quaternion error and the angular velocity error in case 3 (a) PSSA (b) TSM.

Table 4
The results obtained by the PSAA and the TSM in case 2.
Control algorithms Quaternion Angular velocity Control effort
Steady state Convergence Overshoot Steady state Convergence Overshoot Torque
error time (sec) error (rad/sec) time (sec) amplitude (N m)
PSAA 4.5 × 10−4 9 0.04 2.89 × 10−4 11.6 0.24 4.5 × 10−4
TSM Jiang et al. 9.5 × 10−4 12.2 0.01 5.78 × 10−4 14.7 0.16 1 × 10−5
(2016)

the adaptation algorithm in (50) is ensured, leading to a robust per-
formance of the proposed method against external disturbances and
healthy conditions Fig. 20 illustrates the results obtained for ‖ ‖ ⌢
‖𝐈𝐬 ‖ and 𝐼 .
This figure also shows the correct operation of the adaptation algorithm
developed in (51). Therefore, Assumption 3 is validated again in this
case and the related upper bounds are properly estimated even if the
existence of disturbances and the fault events. Accordingly, the conver-
gence of the adaptation laws developed in Theorem 2 is confirmed in
the aforementioned faulty conditions.
Summarizing all the cases demonstrate that the proposed controllers
in (48) and (71) can improve the normal performance than the TSM.
Also, more suitable performance is achieved if even the presence of

12
M.H. Shahna and M. Abedi Control Engineering Practice 114 (2021) 104866

Fig. 18. The control torque generated in case 3 (a) T(1) (b) T(2) (c) T(3).

Table 5
The results obtained by the PSAA and the TSM in case 3.
Control algorithms Quaternion Angular velocity Control effort
Steady state Convergence Overshoot Steady state Convergence Overshoot Torque
error time (sec) error (rad/sec) time (sec) amplitude (N m)
PSAA 2 × 10−3 15 15 4.92 × 10−4 19 0.2 1 × 10−4
TSM Jiang et al. 7 × 10−3 19 30 9 × 10−4 24 0.13 1 × 10−2
(2016)

Fig. 19. The results obtained for ‖ ‖ ̂

‖𝐂𝐟 𝐓𝐬 + 𝐓𝐝 ‖ and 𝐷 in case 3 achieved by the PSAA
Fig. 20. The results obtained for ‖ ‖ ⌢
control scheme. ‖𝐈𝐬 ‖ and 𝐼 in case 3 achieved by the PSAA control
scheme.

external disturbances, actuator failures and satellite uncertainties. Fur-

thermore, the performance of the introduced control scheme is main-
tained for both positive and negative initial values of the satellite
attitude which leads to better results compared to the related works.
5.2. Experimental tests
In this section, the control algorithms proposed in (48) and (71)
are implemented and validated utilizing the ADS as detailed before.
The associated results are derived by performing the experimental
tests by two various actuators including wheels and thrusters. The
related torques are generated along the yaw, pitch and roll axes for
attitude control of the simulator. The reaction wheels are based on a
100 (w) and 30 (V) DC motor with 3000 (rpm) capacity in highest
speed. Because of battery constraints, this motor enables 2200 (rpm)
in the maximum angular velocity. Also, the thrusters are based on
high-pressure gaseous nitrogen. Due to the limitations in mass and
dimensions, separate nozzle and solenoid valve was included in this
actuator. The ADS parameters used in the experimental tests have been
illustrated in Table 6. The dynamical values in this table are obtained
by performing some test procedures. Also, the design parameters tuned
for the mentioned control schemes are provided in Table 7.
The initial attitude of the simulator was set to 𝐪(0) =
[0.92, −0.06, 0, −0.25]𝐓 when the reaction wheels are used as active
actuators. Also, 𝐪(0) = [−0.75, 0, 0, 0.7]𝐓 is selected for the test scenario
in which the thrusters are used. Fig. 21 illustrates the attitude tracking
capability by each of the mentioned actuators. Fig. 22 illustrates a close

13
M.H. Shahna and M. Abedi Control Engineering Practice 114 (2021) 104866

Table 6 Table 7
The parameters of the experimental setup. Control parameters used in the experimental tests.
Parameters Control values Control Control parameters
algorithms
G Gravity
Balancing mass (kg) 0.25 𝑛 = 0.06, 𝑎 = 4, 𝛼0 = 1, 𝛼1 = 2, 𝑏1 = 0.012, 𝑏2 = 0.005
PSAA
Stand mass (kg) 100 𝑎0 = 500, 𝑎1 = 1, 𝑎2 = 1, 𝑟 = 0.99, 𝑔 = 0.99
𝑝 𝑔
⎡3 0.2 0.5⎤ 𝛼1 = 𝛽1 = 0.6, p1 = 2 = 0.5, g1 = 2 = 1.3, k1 = 1
⎢ ⎥ 2 2
ADS moments of inertia (kg.m2 ) 𝐈𝟎 = ⎢0.7 12 0.1⎥ TSM Jiang
⎢ ⎥ et al. (2016) 𝛼2 = 𝛽2 = 9, c𝑖 = 1, 𝜎𝑖 = 7, 𝜒̂ (0) = 𝑌̂ (0) = 𝜇̂ (0) = 0.01
⎢ ⎥
⎣0.1 0.2 12 ⎦
Reaction wheels moments of inertia 𝐈𝐰 = diag([3 3 3]) × 10−3
(kg.m2 )
[ ]𝐓 actuators. Moreover, it represents a better condition compared to the
Reaction wheels initial angular velocity 𝝎𝐰 = 0 0 0 TSM.
(rad/sec)
It is now supposed that the following failures are applied to the
Diameter of reaction wheels (cm) 25 torques generated by the reaction wheels:
Settling time for thruster (s) 0.04 {
𝑇𝑐2 (𝑛𝑜𝑟𝑚𝑎𝑙) 𝑡 < 16
Settling time for reaction wheels (s) 0.1 𝐓1 = 0.8𝑇𝑐1 𝐓2 =
Number of actuators n = 3 0.2𝑇𝑐2 (𝐿𝑂𝐸) 16 ≤ 𝑡
{ (75)
Diameter of ball and bowl 24 cm
0.1 (𝑠𝑎𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛) 10 < 𝑡 < 12
Material (ball and bowl) Aluminum 𝐓3 =
⎡1 0 0⎤ 0.4𝑇𝑐3 (𝐿𝑂𝐸) 12 ≤ 𝑡
⎢ ⎥
Reaction wheels configuration matrix 𝐂𝐟 = ⎢0 1 0⎥ The initial attitude is selected as 𝐪(0) = [−0.7, −0.01, 0.01, 0.7]𝑇 .
⎢ ⎥
⎢ ⎥ Figs. 26 and 27 illustrate, respectively, the quaternion error and the an-
⎣0 0 1⎦
gular velocity error generated by the proposed controller in (48) (by the
Reaction wheels structure type Pyramid reaction wheels) and the TSM. Table 9 shows the detail performance
of the mentioned algorithms. According to the mentioned results, the
proposed controller achieves a steady state error about 2×10−2 within a
reaching time about 18 (sec). The resulted accuracy and reaching time
view of this figure. As it is observed in these figures, the proposed
for the TSM are 3 × 10−2 and 21 (sec), respectively. Also, the angular
controller in (48) achieves a tracking accuracy about 3.2 × 10−3 in a velocity accuracy of about 5.6 × 10−2 (rad∕s) with a settling time of 23
reaching time lower than 8.2 (sec). Also, the provided accuracy and (sec) is obtained by the proposed method. The related values for the
reaching time for the TSM are 3.8 × 10−3 and 13 (sec), respectively. It TSM are 6.3 × 10−2 (rad∕s) and 25 (sec), respectively. Accordingly, the
is noteworthy that since the inertia moments of the test bed are lower tracking performance provided by the control schemes has decreased
than in the simulation state, so fewer convergence times are obtained, significantly compared to the healthy mode (Table 8), which has been
which is also expected. When the thrusters are used, the proposed accompanied by an increase in the convergence time. Nevertheless,
controller in (71) manages to drive the trajectories to a bound about the resulted performance is still acceptable and the tracking task is
5.1 × 10−3 in a reaching time lower than 7 (sec). It was shown that successfully performed by the mentioned control schemes even if the
when 𝑞0 (0) is negative, it regulates the system states to the nearest existence of subsequence actuators failures. It is also clear that the
equilibrium point. So, resolving of the unwinding problem claimed in designed controller is more robust and has less overshoot and smaller
Theorem 1 is also met in the near-realistic conditions. In this condition, error bound compared to the TSM. The above performance is due to
the TSM achieves to an accuracy about 9.3 × 10−3 and the resulted the fact that the upper bound of satellite parameters uncertainties and
settling time equals to 7.5 (sec). The angular velocity trends with the actuators failures are properly estimated by the developed adaptation
developed control schemes and the TSM are shown in Fig. 23. It can laws in (50) and (51) as shown in Figs. 28 and 29. As it can be observed,
be revealed in these figures that the angular velocity accuracy of about due to fault occurrence, it takes a specified value to compensate for the
8.3 × 10−3 (rad∕s) with a settling time of 13.1 (sec) is obtained by the fault effect. Also, the ability to estimate the upper bound of the inertia
reaction wheels. The related accuracy and reaching time for the TSM matrix resulting from the adaptation law in (51) law has been validated.
are 1.2 × 10−2 (rad∕s) and 16.2 (sec), respectively. When the thrusters Since the resulting profiles for the control torques have the same
are used as active actuators, the accuracy and settling time reported for conditions as before, the corresponding figure is omitted here. Table 9
the developed scheme are 1.4 × 10−2 (rad∕s) and 5.3 (sec), respectively; also confirms that the torques produced by the proposed method have
the associated experimental results for the TSM are 3.5 × 10−2 (rad∕s) a smaller amplitude than the TSM.
The above experimental results verify again that the control ob-
and 7 (sec), respectively. Table 8 illustrates the convergence time
jectives stated in Theorem 2 is achieved even when the actuators are
and tracking error provided by the control schemes. As illustrated in
faulty. It is noteworthy that similar results can be achieved by the
this table, although both methods provide an acceptable performance,
suggested controller in (71) which has been omitted here because of
however the proposed control scheme results in a superior settling time
the brevity. Also, the ability to estimate the upper bounds of system
and steady state error.
uncertainties and external disturbances by the adaptation mechanisms
The obtained practical results show also that the overshoots pro- developed in Theorem 2 was practically confirmed.
vided by the PSAA and the TSM methods are almost similar. Accord- The time needed to run is one of the main priorities in operation and
ingly, the mentioned experimental results demonstrate that the closed computational complexity evaluation. Table 10 expresses a comparison
loop system is finite time strictly passive when the actuators are healthy between the proposed PSAA and the TSM algorithms. These results
and so the claim stated in Theorem 2 is verified in practical conditions. were obtained using the ‘timeit’ command in Matlab. It is worth men-
Fig. 24 represents the time responses of thrusters control torques. tioning that depending on account of variable number of outputs at any
Also, the control torques generated by the reaction wheels was shown moment, the associated run time for every moment will be different.
in Fig. 25. As it can be deduced from the above figures, the control So, the results have been extracted among 100 runs in various CPUs.
effort profiles are smooth, singularity free and do not violate the Despite more advantages, the PSSA has also had lower computational
saturation limits. Therefore, the performance illustrated in Table 8 is time than the TSM meaning that the proposed algorithm is practically
provided in acceptable trends of the control efforts demanded by the operative.

14
M.H. Shahna and M. Abedi Control Engineering Practice 114 (2021) 104866

Table 8
The results obtained by the PSAA and the TSM in the experimental tests for healthy condition.
Control Quaternion Angular velocity Control effort
algorithms
Steady state Convergence Overshoot Steady state Convergence Overshoot Torque
error time (sec) error time (sec) amplitude (N
(rad/sec) m)
PSAA 5.1 × 10−3 7 0.6 1.4 × 10−2 5.3 0.3 2
Using thrusters
TSM Jiang 9.3 × 10−3 7.5 0.65 3.5 × 10−2 7 0.25 2.2
et al. (2016)
PSAA 3.2 × 10−3 8.2 0.35 8.3 × 10−3 13.1 0.05 5
Using wheels
TSM Jiang 3.8 × 10−3 13 0.33 1.2 × 10−2 16.2 0.1 4.5
et al. (2016)

Table 9
The results obtained by the PSAA and the TSM in the experimental tests for faulty condition.
Control algorithms Quaternion Angular velocity Control effort
Steady state Convergence Overshoot Steady state Convergence Overshoot Torque
error time (sec) error (rad/sec) time (sec) amplitude (N m)
PSAA 2 × 10−2 18 4 5.6 × 10−2 23 0.45 3
TSM Jiang et al. 3 × 10−2 21 6.1 6.3 × 10−2 25 0.58 4.1
(2016)

Fig. 21. Experimental results of the quaternion error in healthy condition (a) PSAA (b) TSM.

Fig. 22. A close view for the quaternion error in healthy condition (a) PSSA (b) TSM.

Table 10 6. Conclusion
Typical needed time to run the control schemes for an iteration.
Control scheme Run time (sec)
Design of a finite time control scheme for a three-axis satellite has
PSAA 0.03437
been considered in this work in the presence of uncertain parameters
TSM Jiang et al. (2016) 0.02856
and unknown inputs. For this purpose, the sliding mode control ap-
proach has been combined with the finite time passivity properties
of the satellite attitude motion. Furthermore, the upper bounds of the

15
M.H. Shahna and M. Abedi Control Engineering Practice 114 (2021) 104866

Fig. 23. Experimental results of the angular velocity error in healthy condition (a) PSAA (b) TSM.

Fig. 24. Experimental results of the control torque generated by the thrusters: (a) T(1) (b) T(2) (c) T(3).

Fig. 25. Experimental results of the control torque generated by the reaction wheels (a) T(1) (b) T(2) (c) T(3).

16
M.H. Shahna and M. Abedi
Fig. 26. Experimental results of the quaternion error in faulty condition (a) PSAA (b) TSM.
Fig. 27. Experimental results of the angular velocity error in faulty condition (a) PSAA (b) TSM.
Fig. 28. The results obtained for ‖ ‖ ̂
‖𝐂𝐟 𝐓𝐬 + 𝐓𝐝 ‖ and 𝐷 in the experimental tests achieved
by the PSAA control scheme.
satellite parameters uncertainties and unknown inputs are estimated by
the online adaptive algorithms. The unwinding problem is prevented
by utilizing the passivity theorem. The aforementioned results were
achieved using both the reaction wheels and the thrusters and the as-
sociated stability proofs was provided. The developed control schemes
were validated using the numerical simulations and experimental tests.
Based upon the obtained results in the simulations, it is concluded that
superior convergence time and the steady state error are provided by
the developed controller in comparison to the related works. Moreover,
the finite time stability of the control system was ensured even when
17
Control Engineering Practice 114 (2021) 104866
Fig. 29. The results obtained for ‖ ‖ ⌢
‖𝐈𝐬 ‖ and 𝐼 in the experimental tests achieved by the
PSAA control scheme.
the initial values of the system states are far from the equilibrium
point. It was shown that the proposed controllers successfully tolerate
the degraded performance occurred in the actuators at certain random
times and more superior performance was provided comparing to the
similar works. The control algorithms were also validated utilizing the
ADS in which different actuators set were selected. The experimental
results were provided for both healthy and faulty conditions. It was
established that the proposed algorithms can maintain the mentioned
performances in a dynamical condition near to the reality. Further
research in this area would focus on the attitude tracking control design
in the presence of actuators saturation.
M.H. Shahna and M. Abedi
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgment
There has been no financial and personal support or other conflict
of interests for this work that could have influenced its outcome.
Funding sources
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agen-
cies in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
References
Bhat, S. P., & Bernstein, D. S. (2000). Finite-time stability of continuous autonomous
systems. SIAM Journal on Control and Optimization, 38(3), 751–766.
Cao, L., & Chen, X. (2015). Minimum sliding mode error feedback control and observer
for satellite attitude control and determination. Proceedings of the Institution of
Mechanical Engineers, Part G (Journal of Aerospace Engineering), 229(12), 2242–2257.
Cao, X., & Wu, B. (2015). Indirect adaptive control for attitude tracking of spacecraft
with unknown reaction wheel friction. Aerospace Science Technology, 47, 493–500.
Cao, X., Yue, C., & Liu, M. (2017). Fault-tolerant sliding mode attitude tracking control
for flexible spacecraft with disturbance and modeling uncertainty. Advances in
Mechanical Engineering, 9(3), 1–9.
Erdong, J., & Zhaowei, S. (2008). Robust controllers design with finite time convergence
for rigid spacecraft attitude tracking control. Aerospace Science Technology, 12(4),
324–330.
Guan, Y., Zhang, Y., & Chen, X. (2010). Application of robust fault-tolerant control in
satellite attitude control system. In: 3rd int symp syst control aeronaut astronaut.
(pp. 23-28).
Gui, H., & Vukovich, G. (2017). Adaptive fault-tolerant spacecraft attitude control using
a novel integral terminal sliding mode. International Journal of Robust and Nonlinear
Control, 27(16), 3174–3196.
Han, Z., Zhang, K., Yang, T., et al. (2016). Spacecraft fault-tolerant control using
adaptive non-singular fast terminal sliding mode. IET Control Theory & Applications,
10(16), 1991–1999.
Hong, Y., Huang, J., & Xu, Y. (2001). On an output feedback finite-time stabilization
problem. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. Transactions on Automatic
Control, 46(2), 305–309.
Hu, Q. (2010). Robust adaptive sliding-mode fault-tolerant control with L2-gain
performance for flexible spacecraft using redundant reaction wheels. IET Control
Theory & Applications, 4(6), 1055–1070.
Hu, Q., Huo, X., & Xiao, B. (2013). Reaction wheel fault tolerant control for spacecraft
attitude stabilization with finite-time convergence. International Journal of Robust and
Nonlinear Control, 23(15), 1737–1752.
Hu, Q., Zhang, Y., Huo, X., et al. (2011). Adaptive integral-type sliding mode control
for spacecraft attitude maneuvering under actuator stuck failures. Chinese Journal
of Aeronautics, 24(1), 32–45.
Jiang, B., Gao, C., & Xie, J. (2015). Passivity based sliding mode control of un-
certain singular Markovian jump systems with time-varying delay and nonlinear
perturbations. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 271, 187–200.
Jiang, B., Hu, Q., & Friswell, M. I. (2016). Fixed-time attitude control for rigid
spacecraft with actuator saturation and faults. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems
Technology, 24(5), 1892–1898.
Jiang, Y., Hu, Q., & Ma, G. (2010). Adaptive backstepping fault-tolerant control for
flexible spacecraft with unknown bounded disturbances and actuator failures. ISA
Transactions, 49(1), 57–69.
Jiang, B., Kao, Y., Gao, C., et al. (2017). Passification of uncertain singular semi-
markovian jump systems with actuator failures via sliding mode approach. Institute
of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. Transactions on Automatic Control, 62(8),
4138–4143.
Jin, J., Park, B., Park, Y., et al. (2006). Attitude control of a satellite with redundant
thrusters. Aerospace Science Technology, 10(7), 644–651.
18
View publication stats
Control Engineering Practice 114 (2021) 104866
Kai, W., Lia, X. H., & Song, Y. D. (2008). Indirect robust adaptive fault-tolerant control
for attitude tracking of spacecraft. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 31(5),
1456–1463.
Lang, X., Damaren, C. J., & Cao, X. (2018). Passivity-based attitude control with input
quantization. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G (Journal
of Aerospace Engineering), 233(4), 1546–1551.
Lee, T. (2012). Exponential stability of an attitude tracking control system on so(3) for
large-angle rotational maneuvers. Systems & Control Letters, 61(1), 231–237.
Liu, S., Geng, Z., & Sun, J. (2015). Finite-time attitude control: A finite-time passivity
approach. IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, 2(1), 102–108.
Long, H., Liu, F., Zhao, J., et al. (2016). Anti-unwinding constrained attitude control
for flexible spacecraft with actuator saturation. Proceedings of the Institution of
Mechanical Engineers, Part G (Journal of Aerospace Engineering), 230(1), 90–104.
Lu, K., & Xia, Y. (2013). Finite-time attitude stabilization for rigid spacecraft.
International Journal of Robust and Nonlinear Control, 25(1), 32–51.
Mirshams, M., Taei, H., Ghobadi, M., et al. (2015). Spacecraft attitude dynamics
simulator actuated by cold gas propulsion system. Proceedings of the Institution of
Mechanical Engineers, Part G (Journal of Aerospace Engineering), 229(8), 1510–1530.
Pukdeboon, C., & Kumam, P. (2015). Robust optimal sliding mode control for spacecraft
position and attitude maneuvers. Aerospace Science Technology, 43, 329–342.
Qian, C., & Lin, W. (2001). A continuous feedback approach to global strong stabiliza-
tion of nonlinear systems. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. Transactions
on Automatic Control, 46(7), 1061–1079.
Schwartz, J. L., Peck, M. A., & Hall, C. D. (2003). Historical review of air-bearing
spacecraft simulators. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 26(4), 513–522.
Shen, Q., Wang, D., Zhu, S., & Poh, E. K. (2015). Finite-time fault-tolerant attitude
stabilization for spacecraft with actuator saturation. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace
and Electronic Systems, 51(3), 2390–2405.
Sidi, M. J. (1997). Spacecraft dynamics and control: a practical engineering approach. New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Song, Z., Li, H., & Sun, K. (2014). Finite-time control for nonlinear spacecraft attitude
based on terminal sliding mode technique. ISA Transactions, 53(1), 117–124.
Tiwari, P. M., Chakraborty, P., & Soni, K. M. (2016). Fault tolerant attitude control
using anti-unwinding second-order sliding mode. In 1st IEEE int conf power electron
intelli control energy syst. (pp. 1-6).
Tiwari, P. M., Janardhanan, S., & Nabi, M. U. (2015). Rigid spacecraft attitude control
using adaptive integral second order sliding mode. Aerospace Science Technology,
42, 50–57.
Tiwari, P. M., Janardhanan, S., & Nabi, M. U. (2017). Spacecraft anti-unwinding
attitude control using second order sliding mode. Asian Journal of Control, 20(1),
455–468.
Wang, Z., Su, Y., & Zhang, L. (2017). A new non-singular terminal sliding mode
controller for rigid spacecraft attitude tracking. Journal of Dynamic Systems,
Measurement and Control, 140(5), 32–51, 051006.
Wertz, J. R. (1995). Spacecraft attitude determination and control (1st ed.). Dordrecht:
Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Wu, S., Radice, G., Gao, Y., & Sun, Z. (2011). Quaternion-based finite time control for
spacecraft attitude tracking. Acta Astronautica, 69(1–2), 48–58.
Wu, S., Wang, R., Radice, G., et al. (2015). Robust attitude maneuver control of
spacecraft with reaction wheel low-speed friction compensation. Aerospace Science
Technology, 43, 213–218.
Yang, B., Yu, T., Shu, H., et al. (2018). Passivity-based sliding-mode control design for
optimal power extraction of a PMSG based variable speed wind turbine. Renewable
Energy, 119, 577–589.
Zeng, W., Yuxin, S., & Liyin, Z. (2017). A new non-singular terminal sliding mode
controller for rigid spacecraft attitude tracking. Journal of Dynamic Systems,
Measurement and Control, 140(5), Article 051006-051006-9.
Zhang, X., & Liu, X. (2014). Chattering free adaptive sliding mode control for attitude
tracking of spacecraft with external disturbance. In Proc 33rd chin control conf. (pp.
2224-2228).
Zhu, Z., & Guo, Y. (2011). Adaptive integral-type sliding mode control for spacecraft
attitude maneuvering under actuator stuck failures. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics,
24(1), 32–45.
Zhu, Z., & Guo, Y. (2017). Adaptive fault-tolerant attitude tracking control for spacecraft
formation with unknown inertia. International Journal of Adaptive Control and Signal
Processing, 32(1), 13–26.
Zhu, Z., Xia, Y., & Fu, M. (2011). Attitude stabilization of rigid spacecraft with
finite-time convergence. International Journal of Robust and Nonlinear Control, 21(6),
686–702.
Zou, A. M., Kumar, K. D., Hou, Z. G., et al. (2011). Finite-time attitude tracking control
for spacecraft using terminal sliding mode and Chebyshev neural network. IEEE
Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics Part C (Cybern.), 41(4), 950–963.