Optimal Spacecraft Trajectories John E Prussing Full Chapter

Optimal Spacecraft Trajectories John E.
Prussing
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/optimal-spacecraft-trajectories-john-e-prussing/
O P T I M A L S PA C E C R A F T T R A J E C T O R I E S
Optimal Spacecraft
Trajectories
john e. prussing
Professor Emeritus
Department of Aerospace Engineering
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Urbana, Illinois, USA
3
3
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP,
United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of
Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
© John E. Prussing 2018
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
First Edition published in 2018
Impression: 1
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics
rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Control Number: 2017959440
ISBN 978–0–19–881108–4 (hbk.)
ISBN 978–0–19–881111–4 (pbk.)
Printed and bound by
CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY
Preface
T his text takes its title from an elective course at the University of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign that has been taught to graduate students for the past 29 years. The
book assumes the reader has a background of undergraduate engineering (aerospace,
mechanical, or related), physics, or applied mathematics. Parts of the book rely heav-
ily on Optimal Control Theory, but an entire chapter on that topic is provided for those
unfamiliar with the subject.
Books on the field of optimal spacecraft trajectories are very few in number and date
back to the 1960s, and it has been nearly 40 years since a comprehensive new book has
appeared. Hence this volume.
Some classical results are presented using modern formulations and both impulsive-
thrust and continuous-thrust trajectories are treated. Also included are topics not
normally covered, such as cooperative rendezvous and second-order conditions. An
unusually large number of appendices (7) is provided to supplement the main text.
The book is suitable for a one-semester graduate-level university course. It is also a
scholarly reference book. Problems are included at the ends of the chapters and some of
the appendices. They either illustrate the subject matter covered or extend it. Solving
them will enhance the reader’s understanding of the material, especially if they are
assigned by your instructor as homework!
I am indebted to all the students who have taken my graduate course and to the many
colleagues I have interacted with over the years.
I have greatly benefitted from interacting with some of the giants in optimal trajec-
tories: Derek F. Lawden, Theodore N. Edelbaum, John V. Breakwell, and Richard H.
Battin. These fine gentlemen have passed on, but I hope this book helps convey their
contributions, both directly and indirectly.
J.E.P.
Urbana. Illinois, USA
February, 2017
Introduction
Performance index for an optimal trajectory
T he performance index for an optimal spacecraft trajectory is typically minimum

propellant consumption, not because of the monetary cost of the propellant, but
because for each kilogram of propellant saved an additional kilogram of payload is
delivered to the final destination. The term “minimum fuel” is often used in place of
“minimum propellant”, even for chemical rockets in which the propellant is composed
of both fuel and oxidizer. As is often the case, the term “fuel” is used rather than “pro-
pellant” because it’s shorter – having one syllable instead of three. In some applications
other performance indices are used, such as minimum time, maximum range, etc.
In optimizing spacecraft trajectories the two major branches of optimization theory
are used: parameter optimization and optimal control theory. In parameter optimization
the parameters are constants and we minimize a function of a finite number of param-
eters. An example is to represent the propellant consumed as the sum of a finite number
of velocity changes caused by rocket thrusts. By contrast, optimal control is a problem of
infinite dimensions where the variables are functions of time. An example of this is the
fuel consumed by continuously varying the thrust magnitude for a finite duration rocket
thrust.
Types of orbital maneuvers

The three types of orbital maneuvers are orbital interception, orbital rendezvous, and
orbit transfer. In orbital interception at the final time tf the position vector of the space-
craft r(tf ) and the position vector of a target body r# (tf ) are equal: r(tf ) = r# (tf ). A word
of explanation of the term “target” would be helpful here. The term is more general (and
more benign) than describing a military target to be eliminated. For a planetary flyby the
target body is the flyby planet, such as Jupiter during the Cassini Mission to Saturn. At
the flyby time the spacecraft position vector and the flyby planet position vector are equal
and the spacecraft has intercepted the flyby planet.
Optimal Spacecraft Trajectories. John E. Prussing.

© John E. Prussing 2018. Published 2018 by Oxford University Press.
2 | Introduction
By contrast, in an orbital rendezvous both the position vector and the velocity vector
of the spacecraft at the final time are equal to those of the target body: r(tf ) = r# (tf ) and
v(tf ) = v# (tf ). Putting a lander on Mars is an example of a rendezvous of a spacecraft with
a planet.
Lastly, in an orbit transfer there is no target body. The desired final condition is a
specific orbit, characterized by values of semimajor axis, eccentricity, inclination, etc.
Any one of these maneuvers can be either time-fixed (constrained, closed, finite or
fixed horizon) or time-open (unconstrained, open, infinite horizon). Note that in a well-
posed time-open optimization problem the value of tf will be optimized as part of the
solution.
Notation and preliminaries

A bold-faced symbol denotes a vector (column matrix) x having components (elements)
xi . An example is the n-vector
⎡ ⎤
x1
⎢x ⎥
⎢ 2⎥
⎢ ⎥
x=⎢ · ⎥ (1)
⎢ ⎥
⎣ · ⎦
xn
A symbol x without the bold face is the magnitude of the vector x:

1 1
x = | x | = (x · x) 2 = (xT x) 2 (2)
We will encounter a scalar function of a vector φ(x), e.g., a gravitational potential

function, and our convention is that the gradient ∂φ
∂x
is a row (1 × n) vector:

∂φ ∂φ ∂φ ∂φ
= ... (3)
∂x ∂x1 ∂x2 ∂xn
One advantage of this convention is that
∂φ
dφ = dx (4)
∂x
with no transpose symbol being needed. The gradient appearing in Eq. (4) corresponds
T
to the gradient vector g = ∂φ∂x
, which is the vector normal to the surface φ = constant.
We will also encounter a Jacobian matrix, which is the derivative of a vector F with
respect to another vector x. If F is a p-vector and x is an n-vector the Jacobian is an p × n
matrix with ij element equal to ∂F
∂xj
i
, where i is the row index and j is the column index:
Notation and preliminaries | 3
⎡ ∂F ∂F ∂F1 ⎤
1 1
·
⎢ ∂x1 ∂x2 ∂xn ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢ ∂F ∂F ∂F2 ⎥
⎢ 2 2
· ⎥
∂F ⎢⎢ ∂x ∂x ∂x
⎥
⎥
= 1 2 n
∂x ⎢ ⎥ (5)
⎢ · · · · ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎣ ∂F ∂F ∂Fp ⎦
p p
·
∂x1 ∂x2 ∂xn
Finally, we distinguish between a function and a functional. A function maps numbers

into numbers. An example is f (x) = x2 which for f (2) = 4. By contrast a functional maps
1
functions into numbers. An example is J = f (x)dx, which for f (x) = x2 yields J = 1/3.
0
1 Parameter Optimization
1.1 Unconstrained parameter optimization
P arameter optimization utilizes the theory of ordinary maxima and minima. In our
analysis, we will use the notation in Chapter 1 of Ref. [1.1]. The unconstrained prob-
lem is to determine the value of the m-vector u of independent parameters (decision
variables) to minimize the function
L(u) (1.1)
where the scalar L is termed a performance index or cost function. We note that a max-
imum value of L can be determined by minimizing –L, so we will treat only minimization
conditions.
If the ui are independent (no constraints) and the first and second partial derivatives of
L are continuous, then a stationary solution u∗ satisfies the necessary conditions (NC) that
∂L
= 0T (1.2a)
∂u
where 0 is the zero vector (every element equal to zero) and that the Hessian matrix

∂ 2L
≥0 (1.2b)
∂u2 u∗
which is a shorthand notation that the m × m matrix having elements ∂u∂ i ∂u

2
L
j
evaluated
∗
at u must be positive semidefinite (all eigenvalues zero or positive). Equation (1.2a)
represents m equations that determine the values of the m variables u∗i .
Sufficient conditions (SC) for a local minimum are the stationary condition (1.2b) and
that the Hessian matrix of (1.2b) be positive definite (all eigenvalues positive). (The

Unconstrained parameter optimization | 5
semidefinite NC is simply a statement that for the stationary point to be a minimum,

it is necessary that it is not a maximum!)
In the general case of m parameters we can write the first variation of our function as
∂L ∂L
δL = δu1 + · · · + δum = 0 (1.3)
∂u1 ∂um
and conclude, using the conditions of Eq. (1.2a), that at a stationary point δL = 0. In a
series expansion about the stationary point:
L(u) = L(u∗ ) + δL + δ 2 L + · · · (1.4)
the term δ 2 L is the second variation. A zero value for the first variation and a positive
value for the second variation are the SC for a local minimum.
As an example consider u to be a 2-vector. The NC (1.2a) for a minimum provides
two equations that determine the values of u∗1 and u∗2 .
The SC is
⎡ 2 ⎤
∂ L ∂ 2L
2 ⎢ ∂u ∂u ∂u ∂u ⎥
T ∂ L ⎢ 1 1 1 2 ⎥ δu1
δ L = δu
2
δu = [δu1 δu2 ] ⎢ ⎥ >0 (1.5)
∂u2 u∗ ⎣ ∂ 2L ∂ L
2 ⎦ δu2
∂u2 ∂u1 ∂u2 ∂u2 u∗
where δu1 ≡ u1 – u∗1 and δu2 ≡ u2 – u∗2 are arbitrary infinitesimal variations away from
their stationary values. If the strict inequality in Eq. (1.5) is satisfied for all nonzero δu1
and δu2 the matrix is positive definite. A simple test is that a matrix is positive definite if
all its leading principal minors are positive. For the 2 × 2 matrix in Eq. (1.5) the required
conditions are that the first principal minor is positive:
∂ 2L
>0 (1.6a)
∂u1 ∂u1
and that the second principal minor (the determinant of the matrix in this case) is
positive:
2
∂ 2L ∂ 2L ∂ 2L
– >0 (1.6b)
∂u1 ∂u1 ∂u2 ∂u2 ∂u1 ∂u2
As a very simple example consider
L(u) = 2u21 + u22 + u1 u2 (1.7)
The reader can verify that the NC (1.2a) for this example has the unique solution
u1 = u2 = 0 and that Eqs (1.6a) and (1.6b) are also satisfied because the values of the
leading principal minors are 4 and 7. So the function has a minimum at u = 0.
6 | Parameter Optimization
1.2 Parameter optimization with equality constraints

If there are one or more constraints the values of the parameters are not independent, as
we assumed previously. As an example, if a point (x1 , x2 ) is constrained to lie on a circle
of radius R centered at the origin we have the constraint
x21 + x22 – R2 = 0 (1.8)
The constrained minimum problem is to determine the values of m-decision parameters u

that minimize the scalar cost L(x, u) of n + m parameters, where the n-state parameters x
are determined by the decision parameters through a set of n equality constraints:
f(x, u) = 0 (1.9)
where f is an n-vector. Note that the number of state parameters n is by definition equal to
the number of constraints. In general, n > m so there are n – m independent variables.
(If m = n the problem is overconstrained and there is no optimization possible; there is
either only one solution or no solution.)
1.2.1 Lagrange multipliers
In the constrained problem the parameters can be treated as independent if we introduce

n additional variables λ1 , λ2 , . . . , λn , called Lagrange multipliers. We use these Lagrange
multipliers to adjoin the constraints to the cost function by forming an augmented
function H
H(x, u, λ) = L(x, u) + λT f(x, u) (1.10)
where λT ≡ [λ1 λ2 · · · λn ]. From Eq. (1.10) we see that if the constraints are satisfied,
f = 0, H is equal to L, and for first-order NC we can treat the problem as the unconstrained
optimization δH = 0. The necessary conditions are
∂H
= 0T (1.11a)
∂x
∂H
= 0T (1.11b)
∂u
and the constraint
∂H
= fT = 0T (1.11c)
∂λ
Equations (1.11a–c) are 2n + m equations in 2n + m unknowns (x, λ, and u).
Introducing the n additional variables λ seems to be counterproductive, because we
now have more unknowns to solve for. Instead of introducing the Lagrange multi-
pliers we could, in principle, solve the constraints f = 0 for the n state variables x in
Parameter optimization with equality constraints | 7
terms of the decision variables u, leaving only m equations to solve for the m decision
variables. However, those equations, while fewer, are usually more complicated than
Eqs (1.11a–c), so it is easier to solve the simpler 2n + m equations (see Problem 1.2).
The Lagrange multiplier λ has an interesting and useful interpretation, which makes it
worth solving for. It provides the sensitivity of the stationary cost to small changes in the
constants in the constraint equations. So, we can obtain the change in the stationary cost
due to small changes in these constants without resolving the problem. This can be very
useful in a complicated problem that is solved numerically.
This interpretation is discussed in Appendix A. To summarize, write the constraints as
f(x, u, c) = 0 (1.12)
where c is a q-dimensional vector of constants in the constraint equations. Due to changes

in these constants, dc, the change in the stationary cost is given by
dL∗ = λT fc dc (1.13)
∂f
where fc = ∂c
is an n × q matrix.
∂2L
The SC analogous to the Hessian matrix condition ∂u2 u∗
> 0 for the unconstrained
problem is given in Section 1.3 of Ref. [1.1] as

∂ 2L
x fu – fu fx Hxu + fu fx Hxx fx fu > 0
T –T T –T
= Huu – Hux f–1 –1
(1.14)
∂u2 f=0
where the symbol f–Tx is shorthand for the transpose of the inverse, which is equal to the
inverse of the transpose (see Problem 1.3).
Example 1.1 Minimization using a Lagrange multiplier
Determine the rectangle of maximum perimeter that can be inscribed in a circle of

radius R. In this example, there are two variables x and y and a single constraint—
the equation of the circle. So n = m = 1 and we arbitrarily assign y to be the decision
variable u. Let the center of the circle lie at (x, u) = (0, 0) and denote the corner of
the rectangle in the first quadrant as (x, u). To maximize the perimeter, we minimize
its negative and form
L(x, u) = –4(x + u) (1.15)
subject to the constraint
f (x, u) = x2 + u2 – R2 = 0 (1.16)
where x and u are scalars.

We construct the augmented function H as
H(x, u, λ) = L(x, u) + λf (x, u)

(1.17)
= –4(x + u) + λ(x2 + u2 – R2 )
Applying the NC of Eqs. (1.11a–c):

∂H
Hx = = –4 + 2λx = 0 (1.18a)
∂x
∂H
Hu = = –4 + 2λu = 0 (1.18b)
∂u
and the constraint
∂H
Hλ = = x2 + u2 – R2 = 0 (1.18c)
∂λ
where we use subscript notation for partial derivatives. Equations (1.18a–c) are easily
solved to yield
√
∗ ∗ 2
x =u = R (1.19)
2
√
2 2
λ= (1.20)
R
where Eq. (1.19) indicates that the rectangle of maximum perimeter is a square. To
verify that our stationary solution is indeed a minimum we use Eq. (1.14):

∂ 2L
= Huu – Hux fx–1 fu – fu fx–1 Hxu + fu fx–1 Hxx fx–1 fu
∂u2 f =0
√ √ √ (1.21)
4 2 4 2 8 2
= –0–0+ = >0
R R R
and this constrained second derivative√being positive satisfies the SC for a minimum,
resulting in a maximum perimeter of 4 2R = 5.657R.
Applying Eq. (1.13) with the single constant c being R:
√
2 2 √
dL∗ = λfR dR = (–2R)dR = – 4 2dR (1.22)
R
Consider a nominal value R = 1 and a change in the radius
√ of dR = 0.1. Using Eq.
(1.22) the change in the minimum cost is equal to –0.4 2 = –0.566, resulting in a
maximum perimeter
√ of 5.657 + 0.566 = 6.223. This compares very favorably with the
exact value of 4 2(1.1) = 6.223
Parameter optimization with an inequality constraint | 9
For this simple example using the interpretation of the Lagrange multiplier is not very
profound, but in a complicated problem, especially if the solution is obtained numerically
rather than analytically, a good approximation to the cost of a neighboring stationary
solution can be obtained without completely resolving the problem.
Appendix B provides a more complicated constrained minimum example: the
Hohmann transfer as a minimum v solution.
1.3 Parameter optimization with an inequality

constraint
Consider the simple case of a scalar cost L(y) subject to a constraint of the form f (y) ≤ 0,
where y is p dimensional and f is a scalar. We will consider only the simple case of
a single constraint, because that is all we need for the single application that we treat
in Section 7.2. Consideration of the general case results in the Karush–Kuhn–Tucker
conditions and is discussed in Section 1.7 of Ref. [1.1] (as the Kuhn–Tucker conditions).
As in the equality constraint case in Section 1.1 a Lagrange multiplier λ is introduced
and a scalar H is defined as:
H(y, λ) = L(y) + λf (y) (1.23)
Note that there is a total of p + 1 unknowns, namely the elements of y and λ. As in the
equality constraint case an NC can be written as
∂H
= 0T (1.24)
∂y
but, unlike the equality constraint case, the inequality constraint is either active or inactive,
resulting in the NC:
λ≥0 if f (y) = 0 (active) (1.25)
λ=0 if f (y) < 0 (inactive) (1.26)
Note that in either case the product λf = 0, resulting in H being equal to L.

Expanding Eq. (1.24):
∂H ∂L ∂f
= +λ = 0T (1.27)
∂y ∂y ∂y
or
∂L ∂f
= –λ (1.28)
∂y ∂y
which provides the geometrical interpretation that when the constraint is active the gra-
∂f
dients ∂L
∂y
and ∂y are oppositely directed (see Fig. 1.1 for p = 2). From that figure we see
f<0
Constant L fy
y2 Ly
fy Active
Ly constraint
f=0
Ly
Linareacy fy f=0
y1
f<0
y2 Unconstrained
Min L Inactive
constraint
f<0
y1
¶L ¶f
=–λ = 0T because
¶y ¶y λ=0
Figure 1.1 An active constraint and an inactive constraint
that at any point on the constraint not at the constrained minimum (where the gradients
are oppositely directed) we can slide along the constraint and decrease the cost until we
reach the constrained minimum.
This is even more evident when we note that the SC for the constraint being active is
λ > 0, indicating that the only way to decrease the cost is to violate the constraint.
If the constraint is inactive the constrained minimum is the unconstrained minimum.
In that case ∂L
∂y
= 0T as seen in Eq. (1.28) with λ = 0.
Example 1.2 Simple inequality constraint

In order to show how the NC are applied, consider the very simple example to
minimize
1
L(y) = y2 (1.29)
2
subject to the constraint
f (y) = y – a ≤ 0 (1.30)
where y and a are scalars. Use Eq. (1.23) to form H:

1
H(y, λ) = y2 + λ(y – a) (1.31)
2
Equation (1.24) provides the NC:
∂H
=y+λ=0 (1.32)
∂y
Problems | 11
where from Eqs. (1.25) and (1.26)
λ≥0 if y = a (active) (1.33)

λ=0 if y < a (inactive) (1.34)
We next assume the constraint is active or inactive and investigate whether the NC
are satisfied. Consider two separate cases, a = 1 and a = –1.
Case I a = 1
Assume the constraint is active. Then y = 1 and, from Eq. (1.32), λ = –1, which
violates NC (1.33). Assuming the constraint is inactive yields λ = 0 and y = 0, which
satisfy the NC. So, the constrained minimum is at y = 0 and is the same as the uncon-
strained minimum with a cost L = 0. Because the constraint is inactive the SC that
∂ 2 L/∂y2 = 1 > 0 is satisfied.
Case II a = –1
Assume the constraint is inactive. Then λ = 0 and y = 0, which violates the con-
straint y < –1. Assuming the constraint is active yields y = –1 and λ = 1, which satisfy
the NC. So the constrained minimum occurs at y = –1 with a cost L = 1/2. Note also
that the SC λ > 0 is satisfied.
Section 7.2 provides a more complicated example of an inequality constraint
minimization, namely, the terminal maneuver for an optimal cooperative impulsive
rendezvous.
Problems
1.1 a) Determine the value of the constant parameter k that “best” approximates a
given function f (x) on the interval a ≤ x ≤ b. Use as a cost function to be
minimized
b
1
J(k) = [k – f (x)]2 dx
2
a
This is the integral-squared error, which is the continuous version of the familiar
least-squares approximation in the finite-dimensional case.
Verify that a global minimum is achieved for your solution.
b) For a = 0, b = 1, and f (x) = x3 evaluate the cost J for (i) the optimal value of k
and (ii) another value of k that you choose.
1.2 Solve the problem in Example 1.1 without using a Lagrange multiplier.
1.3 Show that for a nonsingular square matrix the inverse of its transpose is equal to the
transpose of its inverse.
1.4* Minimize L(y) = 12 (y21 + y22 ) subject to the constraints y1 + y2 = 1 and y1 ≥ 3/4.
a) Attempt to satisfy the NC by assuming the inequality constraint is inactive.
b) Attempt to satisfy the NC by assuming the inequality constraint is active.
c) Determine whether the solution to the NC satisfies the SC.
Reference
[1.1] Bryson, A.E., Jr., and Ho, Y-C, Applied Optimal Control. Hemisphere Publishing, 1975.
2 Rocket Trajectories
2.1 Equations of motion
T he equation of motion of a spacecraft which is thrusting in a gravitational field can

be expressed in terms of the orbital radius vector r as:
r̈ = g(r) + ; = u (2.1)
The variable is the thrust acceleration vector. The scalar is the magnitude of the
thrust acceleration defined as the thrust (force) T divided by the mass of the vehicle m.
The variable u is a unit vector in the thrust direction, and g(r) is the gravitational accel-
eration vector. Equation (2.1) is somewhat deceptive and looks like a simple statement
of “F equals ma” with the thrust term appearing on the right-hand side as if it were an
external force like gravity. In actuality, F does not equal ma (but it does equal the time
derivative of the linear momentum mv), because the mass is changing due to the gen-
eration of thrust and because the thrust is an internal force in the system defined as the
combination of the vehicle and the exhausted particles. A careful derivation of Eq. (2.1)
requires deriving the so-called rocket equation by equating the net external force (such as
gravity) to the time rate of change of the linear momentum of the vehicle-exhaust particle
system (see Sections 6.1–6.4 of Ref. [2.1]).
An additional equation expresses the change in mass of the spacecraft due to the
generation of thrust:
ṁ = –b; b≥0 (2.2)
In Eq. (2.2) b is the (nonnegative) mass flow rate. The thrust magnitude T is given by
T = bc, where c is the effective exhaust velocity of the engine. The word “effective” applies
in the case of high-thrust chemical engines where the exhaust gases may not be fully
expanded at the nozzle exit. In this case an additional contribution to the thrust exists
and the effective exhaust velocity is
Ae
c = ca + (pe – p∞ ) (2.3)
b

14 | Rocket Trajectories
In Eq. (2.3) the subscript e refers to conditions at the nozzle exit, ca is the actual (as
opposed to effective) exhaust velocity, and p∞ is the ambient pressure. If the gases are
exhausted into the vacuum of space, p∞ = 0.
An alternative to specifying the effective exhaust velocity is to describe the engine in
terms of its specific impulse, defined to be:
(bc)t c
Isp = = (2.4)
(bt)g g
where g is the gravitational attraction at the earth surface, equal to 9.80665 m/s2 . The spe-
cific impulse is obtained by dividing the mechanical impulse delivered to the vehicle by
the weight (on the surface of the earth) of propellant consumed. The mechanical impulse
provided by the thrust force over a time t is simply (bc)t, and, in the absence of other
forces acting on the vehicle is equal to the change in its linear momentum. The weight
(measured on the surface of the earth) of propellant consumed during that same time
interval is (bt)g, as shown in Eq. (2.4). Note that if instead one divided by the mass
of the propellant (which is the fundamental measure of the amount of substance), the
specific impulse would be identical to the exhaust velocity. However, the definition in
Eq. (2.4) is in standard use with the value typically expressed in units of seconds.
2.2 High-thrust and low-thrust engines

A distinction between high- and low-thrust engines can be made based on the value of
the nondimensional ratio max /g. For high-thrust devices this ratio is greater than unity
and thus these engines can be used to launch vehicles from the surface of the earth. This
ratio extends as high as perhaps 100. The corresponding range of specific impulse val-
ues is between 200 and approximately 850 sec., with the lower values corresponding to
chemical rockets, both solid and liquid, and the higher values corresponding to nuclear
thermal rockets.
For low thrust devices the ratio max /g is quite small, ranging from approximately
10–2 down to 10–5 . These values are typical of electric rocket engines such as magneto-
hydrodynamic (MHD), plasma arc and ion devices, and solar sails. The electric engines
typically require separate power generators such as a nuclear radioisotope generator or
solar cells. The ratio for solar sails is of the order of 10–5 .
2.3 Constant-specific-impulse (CSI)

and variable-specific-impulse (VSI) engines
Two basic types of engines exist: CSI and VSI, also called power-limited engines. The
CSI category includes both high- and low- thrust devices. The mass flow rate b in some
cases can be continuously varied but is limited by a maximum value bmax . For this reason,
this type of engine is also described as a thrust-limited engine, with 0 ≤ ≤ max .
Constant-specific-impulse (CSI) and variable-specific-impulse | 15
The VSI category includes those low thrust engines which need a separate power
source to run the engine, such as an ion engine. For these engines, the power is limited
by a maximum value Pmax , but the specific impulse can be varied over a range of values.
The fuel expenditure for the CSI and VSI categories is handled separately.
The equation of motion (1) can be expressed as:
cb cb
v̇ = u + g(r); ≡ (2.5)
m m
For the CSI case Eq. (2.5) is solved using the fact that c is constant as follows:
cb
dv = u dt + g(r) dt (2.6)
m
Using Eq. (2.2),
dm
dv = –c u + g(r) dt (2.7)
m
This can be integrated (assuming constant u) to yield:
tf
v = v(tf ) – v(to ) = –cu(ln mf – ln mo ) + g(r) dt (2.8)
to
tf
mo
v = c u ln + g(r) dt (2.9)
mf
to
which correctly indicates that, in the absence of gravity, the velocity change would be in
the thrust direction u. The actual velocity change achieved also depends on the gravita-
tional acceleration g(r) which is acting during the thrust period. The term in Eq. (2.9)
involving the gravitational acceleration g(r) is called the gravity loss. Note there is no
gravity loss due to an impulsive thrust.
If one ignores the gravity loss term for the time being, a cost functional representing
propellant consumed can be formulated. As will be seen, minimizing this cost functional
is equivalent to maximizing the final mass of the vehicle. Utilizing the fact that the thrust
is equal to the product of the mass flow rate b and the exhaust velocity c, one can write:
–m
ṁ = –b = (2.10)
c
dm
= – dt (2.11)
m c
For the CSI case the exhaust velocity c is constant and Eq. (2.11) can be integrated to
yield
tf
mf 1
ln =– dt (2.12)
mo c
to
or
tf
mo
c ln = dt ≡ JCSI (2.13)
mf
to
JCSI is referred to as the characteristic velocity of the maneuver or the V (pronounced

“delta vee”) and it is clear from Eq. (2.13) that minimizing JCSI is equivalent to maximiz-
ing the final mass mf .
In the impulsive thrust approximation for the unbounded thrust case (max → ∞)
the vector thrust acceleration is represented by

n
(t) = vk δ(t – tk ) (2.14)
k=1
with to ≤ t1 < t2 < · · · < tn ≤ tf representing the times of the n thrust impulses. (See
Sections 6.1–3 of Ref. [2.1].) Using the definition of a unit impulse,
tk
+
δ(t – tk ) dt = 1 (2.15)
tk–
and tk± ≡ lim ε → 0(tk ± ε); ε > 0.

Using Eq. (2.14) in Eq. (2.13):
tf
n
JCSI = dt = vk (2.16)
to k=1
and the total propellant cost is given by the sum of the magnitudes of the velocity changes.
The corresponding cost functional for the VSI case is obtained differently. The exhaust
power (stream or beam power) is half of the product of the thrust and the exhaust
velocity:
1 1 1
P = Tc = mc = bc2 (2.17)
2 2 2
Constant-specific-impulse (CSI) and variable-specific-impulse | 17
Using this along with

b –ṁ d 1
= = (2.18)
m2 m2 dt m
results in

d 1 2
= (2.19)
dt m 2P
which integrates to
tf
1 1 1 2
– = dt (2.20)
mf mo 2 P
to
Maximizing mf for a given value of mo regardless of whether is optimal or not is

obtained by running the engine at maximum power P = Pmax . This is not as obvious as it
looks in Eq. (2.20), because the value of might be different for different values of P. To
see that the engine should be run at maximum power note that for a specified trajectory
r(t) the required vector thrust acceleration is given by Eq. (2.1) as
(t) = r̈(t) – g[r(t)] (2.21)
Thus, for a given trajectory r(t) (optimal or not), the final mass in Eq. (2.20) is
maximized by running the engine at maximum power.
For this reason the VSI cost functional can be taken to be
tf
1
JVSI = 2 dt (2.22)
2
to
To summarize, the cost functionals representing minimum propellant expenditure are

given by
tf
JCSI = dt (2.23)
to
and
tf
1
JVSI = 2 dt (2.24)
2
to
As seen in Eqs. (2.23) and (2.24) the minimum-propellant cost can be written in terms
of the control (t) rather than introducing the mass as an additional state variable whose
final value is to be maximized.
Problems
2.1 For an impulsive thrust consider first-order changes in J = v and in the final
mass mf . Obtain an expression for the marginal (fractional) change δmf /mf in terms
of the marginal change δJ/J. Assume the values of mo and c are specified and there is
no gravity loss.
2.2 Consider a constant thrust T = To in a CSI propulsion system.
a) Determine an expression for ˙ in terms of (only) the exhaust velocity c and the
thrust acceleration magnitude .
b) Solve the ODE in part (a) for (t). Express your answer in terms of To divided
by a time-varying mass.
2.3 Show how Eq. (2.19) follows from Eq. (2.18).
Reference
[2.1] Prussing, J.E. and Conway, B.A., Orbital Mechanics, Oxford University Press, 2nd Edition,
2012.
3 Optimal Control Theory
3.1 Equation of motion and cost functional
C onsider a dynamic system that operates between a specified initial time to and a
final time tf , which may be specified or unspecified. The equation of motion of the
system can be written as
ẋ = f(x, u, t); x(to ) = xo (specified) (3.1)
where x(t) is an n × 1 state vector and u(t) is an m × 1 control vector. Given an initial
state x(to ), the state x(t) is determined by the control u(t) through the equation of
motion (3.1).
The first-order form of Eq. (3.1) is completely general because any higher-order
equation can be transformed into first-order form. As an example consider Eq. (2.1):
r̈ = g(r) + (2.1)
To transform to first-order form let
ṙ = v (3.2a)
v̇ = g + (3.2b)
Then

ṙ v
ẋ = = (3.3)
v̇ g+
and a second-order equation for a 3-vector r has been transformed into a first-order
equation for a 6-vector x.

20 | Optimal Control Theory
To formulate an optimal control problem we define a cost functional
tf
J = φ[x(tf ), tf ] + L[x(t), u(t), t] dt (3.4)
to
to be minimized by choice of a control u(t). The first term in Eq. (3.4) is sometimes
called the “terminal cost” and the second term the “path cost”.
As a simple example let φ = tf and L = 0. Then the cost is J = tf and we have a
minimum time problem.
As noted elsewhere, if we wish to maximize a performance index J̃, we minimize J = –J̃.
There are three basic forms of the cost functional, named after pioneers in the Calculus
of Variations:
Mayer form: J = φ[x(tf ), tf ]

tf
Lagrange form: J = L(x, u, t) dt
to
tf
Bolza form: J = φ[x(tf ), tf ] + L(x, u, t) dt [Eq. (3.4)]
to
There is also a special case of the Mayer form: J = xn (tf ), i.e., the cost is the final value of
the last component of the state vector.
Although the Bolza form appears to be the most general, all the forms have equal gen-
erality. To see this we will transform the Bolza form into the special case of the Mayer
form.
Example 3.1 Cost transformation

Given that x is an n-vector, define ẋn+1 = L with xn+1 (to ) = 0. Then
tf
L dt = xn+1 (tf ) – xn+1 (to ) = xn+1 (tf ).
to
Then,
J = φ[x(tf ), tf ] + xn+1 (tf ) ≡ xn+2 (tf ) (3.5)

General problem | 21
3.2 General problem

Over the time interval to ≤ t ≤ tf , where the final time can be specified or unspecified
(fixed or free, closed or open) there is the dynamic constraint of the equation of motion:
ẋ = f(x, u, t); x(to ) = xo (specified) (3.1)
and a cost to be minimized
tf
J = φ[x(tf ), tf ] + L[x(t), u(t), t] dt (3.4)
to
The ODE constraint of Eq. (3.1) is what makes Optimal Control Theory a generalization
of the Calculus of Variations.
There may be terminal constraints ψ[x(tf ), tf ] = 0, for example, r(tf ) – r# (tf ) = 0,
where r is the spacecraft position vector and r# is a target body position vector. This con-
straint then represents an orbital interception. And there may be control constraints such
as a bounded control | u(t) | ≤ M.
First consider the simplest optimal control problem: fixed final time, no terminal or
control constraints. We will derive first-order necessary conditions (NC) that must be
satisfied to determine the control u * (t) that minimizes the cost J. This is treated in more
detail in Section 3.3 of Ref. [3.1] and Section 2.3 of Ref. [3.2].
Before we begin our derivation of the NC, a fundamental point needs to be made. We
will be assuming that an optimal control u * (t) exists and deriving conditions that must
be satisfied. If no optimal control exists the NC are meaningless.
Peron’s Paradox illustrates this point and goes as follows: Let N = the largest integer.
We will prove by contradiction that N = 1.
If N > 1, N 2 > N, which is a contradiction because N is the largest integer. Therefore,
N = 1, a nonsensical result because there is no largest integer.
Assuming an optimal control u * (t) exists for the general problem, let’s proceed. First,
we adjoin the equation of motion constraint to the cost to form
tf
J̄ = φ[x(tf ), tf ] + L(x, u, t) + λT [f(x, u, t) – ẋ] dt (3.6)
to
Where λ(t) is an n × 1 vector variously called the “adjoint” vector, the “costate” vector,
or a “time-varying Lagrange multiplier” vector. Note that if the constraint equation of
motion (3.1) is satisfied, we have added zero to the cost, in the same spirit as the use of a
Lagrange multiplier in Section 2.2.1.
We will form the variation in the cost δ J̄ and derive NC that make δ J̄ = 0 due to a
small variation in the control about the optimal control δu(t) = u(t) – u∗ (t). Note that
the variation is equal to the difference at a common value of time t and for this reason it
is sometimes called a contemporaneous variation, for which δt ≡ 0.
For convenience define the Hamiltonian
H(x, u, λ, t) ≡ L(x, u, t) + λT (t)f(x, u, t) (3.7)
(The terminology comes from classical mechanics, in which H = pT q̇ – L, where L is the

Lagrangian, p are the generalized momenta, and q̇ are the generalized velocities.)
Using the definition of the Hamiltonian, J̄ in Eq. (3.6) is equal to J̄ = φ +
tf
[H – λT ẋ] dt.
to
tf
Before forming the variation δ J̄ we will deal with the last term in J̄, namely – λT ẋ dt.
to
First, we derive a vector integration by parts formula by using d(λT x) = λT dx + dλT x.
T
Then d(λT x) = λT x = λT dx + dλT x. Using dx = ẋdt and dλT = λ̇ dt we obtain
T
λT ẋdt = λT x – λ̇ xdt.
tf
Applying this to the definite integral term – λT ẋ dt.
to
tf tf
T
– λT ẋdt = –λT (tf )x(tf ) + λT (to )x(to ) + λ̇ (t)x(t) dt (3.8)
to to
Using this result we rewrite Eq. (3.6) as
tf
T
J̄ = φ + λT (to )x(to ) – λT (tf )x(tf ) + [H + λ̇ x]dt (3.9)
to
Forming the cost variation δ J̄ due to a control variation δu(t):
δ J̄ = δφ + δ[λT (to )x(to )] – δ[λT (tf )x(tf )]
tf
T
+δ [H + λ̇ x] dt
to
∂φ
= δx(tf ) + λT (to )δx(to ) – λT (tf )δx(tf )
∂x(tf )
tf
∂H ∂H T
+ δx + δu + λ̇ δx dt (3.10)
∂x ∂u
to
Combining coefficients:

∂φ
δ J̄ = – λT (tf ) δx(tf ) + λT (to )δx(to )
∂x(tf )
tf (3.11)
∂H T ∂H
+ + λ̇ δx + δu dt
∂x ∂u
to
Because δx(t) and δu(t) are arbitrary, for δ J̄ = 0 the NC are obtained from Eq. (3.11) by
setting individual coefficients equal to zero:
∂H
T ∂L ∂f
λ̇ = – =– – λT (3.12)
∂x ∂x ∂x
∂φ
λT (tf ) = (3.13)
∂x(tf )
∂H
= 0T (3.14)
∂u(t)
either δxk (to ) = 0 or λk (to ) = 0, k = 1, 2, . . . , n (3.15)
where δxk (to ) will be equal to 0 if the component xk (to ) is specified, but if xk (to ) is
unspecified, λk (to ) = 0. This represents a generalization of the initial condition x(to ) =
xo to allow some of the initial states to be unspecified. An additional NC is that the
constraint Eq. (3.1) must be satisfied: ẋ = f with initial conditions given by Eq. (3.15).
Equation (3.13) has a simple geometrical interpretation as a gradient vector. The final
value of the adjoint vector is orthogonal to the line or surface φ = constant.
Note that there are 2n + m unknowns: x(t), λ(t), and u(t). Equation (3.1) with initial
conditions given by (3.15) provide n equations; Eqs. (3.12) and (3.13) provide n equa-
tions; and Eq. (3.14) provides m equations, for a total of 2n + m NC equations in that
same number of unknowns. So, in principle, the optimal control problem is solved! But
there are several details to be worked out and observations to be made.
First note that even if the system equation ẋ = f is nonlinear the adjoint equation
(3.12) for λ(t) is linear because L and f are not functions of λ. And if the cost is of the
Mayer form (no L), the adjoint equation is homogeneous. But also note that the bound-
ary condition (3.13) is at the final time in contrast to the conditions in Eq. (3.15) at the
initial time. So, we have a split Two-Point Boundary Value Problem (2PBVP), which
indicates a fundamental difficulty in solving the NC for an optimal control problem,
because not all boundary conditions are given at the same value of time.
Note that the adjoint equation (3.12) and the system equation (3.1) are differential
equations, but what is often called the optimality condition (3.14) is an algebraic equation
that applies at all values of to ≤ t ≤ tf . It requires that the optimal control result in a
stationary value of H at each point along the trajectory. Later we will learn the stronger
result that the optimal control must minimize the value of H.
A simple argument shows why Eq. (3.14) is an NC. Consider a scalar control u and
assume ∂H/∂u = 0 on a small finite interval t. Because u is arbitrary, if ∂H/∂u > 0,
choose δu < 0 and if ∂H/∂u < 0, choose δu > 0. In either case ∂H/∂u δu < 0, result-
ing in δJ < 0 and a decrease in the cost. Therefore, it is necessary that ∂H/∂u = 0 for J
to be a minimum.
Hidden in Eq. (3.11) is an interpretation of the vector λ. If all the other NC are
satisfied
δ J̄ = δJ = λ(to )T δx(to ) (3.16)
which provides the interpretation
∂J
λ(to )T = (3.17)
∂x(to )
That is, each component λk (to ) is the sensitivity of the minimum cost to a small change
in the corresponding component of the initial state. This means that the change in cost
due to a small change δxk (to ) can be calculated using Eq. (3.16) without resolving the
problem.
Note that this is consistent with Eq. (3.15) that λk (to ) = 0 if xk (to ) is unspecified. The
best value of xk (to ) to minimize J is the value for which the cost is insensitive to small
changes.
Finally, note that Eq. (3.17) can be generalized because any time t along an optimal
trajectory can be considered to be the initial time for the remainder of the trajectory (as
in today is the first day of the rest of your life). So, we can replace to by the time t and state
that
∂J
λ(t)T = (3.18)
∂x(t)
This is an application of Bellman’s Principle of Optimality. Stated simply: Any part of an
optimal trajectory is itself an optimal trajectory.
Example 3.2 Constant Hamiltonian

Form the total time derivative of H(x, u, λ, t):
dH ∂H ∂H ∂H ∂H
= ẋ + u̇ + λ̇ + (3.19)
dt ∂x ∂u ∂λ ∂t
Using ẋ = f and ∂H/∂λ = fT

dH ∂H T ∂H ∂H
= + λ̇ f + u̇ + (3.20)
dt ∂x ∂u ∂t
Applying the NC results in
dH ∂H
= (3.21)
dt ∂t
So if ∂H/∂t = 0, i.e., H is not an explicit function of t, then H is a constant. This

occurs if neither L nor f is an explicit function of t, i.e., L = L(x, u) and f = f(x, u).
That property for f occurs when the system is time invariant (autonomous). In clas-
sical mechanics the constant H is known as the Jacobi Integral and often represents
conservation of total mechanical energy.
What good is a constant Hamiltonian? It can be used to evaluate the accuracy of a
numerically integrated solution by monitoring the value of H as the solution is gener-
ated. Also, as with conservation of energy, if the value of H is known at one value of
time, the unknown values of some variables at another time can be calculated.
Example 3.3 Rigid body control

Consider the single axis rotation of a rigid body for 0 ≤ t ≤ T, where the final time T
is specified. In terms of the angular velocity ω and the moment of inertia I the angular
momentum is given by h = Iω. With an external moment Mext acting about the axis
the equation of motion is ḣ = I ω̇ = Mext . In state and control variable notation, let
x = ω and u = Mext /I. Then the equation of motion is that of a simple integrator ẋ = u
with x(0) = xo , a specified initial angular velocity.
To formulate an optimal control problem define a cost
T
1 1
J = kx2 (T) + u2 (t)dt (3.22)
2 2
0
(The half factors are included to avoid factors of 2 when we differentiate.) The
squared terms ensure that positive contributions to the cost occur regardless of the
algebraic sign of the variables. The cost includes a terminal cost term to penalize the
final state (angular velocity) and a path cost to penalize control (external moment).
So, the effect is to slow down (for k > 0) the rotation without using an excessive
amount of external moment, which presumably incurs some sort of cost such as pro-
pellant. The constant k is a weighting coefficient that determines the relative weight
of each term in the cost. If we allow k < 0 we can represent a spin-up maneuver in
which a large final angular velocity is desired. From the form of terminal cost term,
we can expect that in the limit as k → ∞ x(T) → 0 and we stop the rotation. So,
this example has the essential aspects of a simple optimal control problem for which
n = m = 1.
To apply the NC form the Hamiltonian
1
H = u2 + λu (3.23)
2
Then the adjoint equation is
∂H
λ̇ = – =0 (3.24)
∂x
so λ is constant and
∂φ
λ(t) = λ(T) = = kx(T) (3.25)
∂x(T)
The optimality condition is
∂H
=u+λ=0 (3.26)
∂u
so that
u = –λ = constant = –kx(T) (3.27)
which indicates two important facts: (i) The adjoint variable λ provides important
information to determine the optimal control, and (ii) of all the possible u(t) for this
problem the optimal control is a constant. (Note that, in addition to a stationary value
of H, it is minimized because Huu = 1 > 0.)
To solve the NC substitute for the control,
ẋ = –kx(T) (3.28)
which yields
x∗ (t) = –kx(T)t + xo (3.29)
Evaluating at t = T and solving:
xo
x∗ (T) = (3.30)
1 + kT
and a larger k > 0 results in a smaller x(T) because more weight is given to the
terminal cost term.
Terminal constraints and unspecified final time | 27
The rest of the solution is given by
–kxo
u∗ (t) = (3.31)
1 + kT
and

∗ 1 + k(T – t)
x (t) = xo (3.32)
1 + kT
where x(t) is conveniently expressed in terms of the “time-to-go” T – t and the state
changes linearly in time from its initial value to its final value.
Some limiting cases are instructive: As k → ∞, x∗ (T) → 0 and u∗ (t) → –xo /T
indicating that as infinite weight is put on the terminal cost the control drives the
initial state to zero in the allotted time.
As k → 0, x∗ (T) → xo , and u∗ (t) → 0 indicating that when all the weight is put
on the control cost no control is used and the state remains unchanged.
The optimal cost is calculated to be
kx2o
J∗ = (3.33)
2(1 + kT)
and we can explicitly verify the interpretation of λ(0) in Eq. (3.17) as ∂J ∗ /∂xo =
kxo /(1 + kT) = –u(0) = λ(0).
Finally, since ∂H/∂t = 0, H = constant = H(T) and
1 k2 x2o
H(T) = – <0 (3.34)
2 (1 + kT)2
And we note anecdotally that ∂J ∗ /∂T = H(T) (we will see why this is true later).
This means that there is no optimal value of T; the larger the value of T the smaller
the value of J*.
With that observation we seem to have extracted all we can from this example!
3.3 Terminal constraints and unspecified final time

In addition to the general problem considered in Section 3.2 we now include an unspeci-
fied (open) final time tf and terminal constraints of the form ψ[x(tf ), tf ] = 0, where ψ is
a q × 1 vector and 0 ≤ q ≤ n. Our augmented cost is now
tf
J̄ = φ + ν ψ +
T
L + λT [f – ẋ]dt (3.35)
to
which is Eq. (3.6) with an additional terminal cost term and an unspecified upper limit
on the integral. The vector ν is a constant Lagrange multiplier q-vector.
For convenience define
[x(tf ), tf ] ≡ φ + ν T ψ (3.36)
where the vector ν has a useful interpretation (see Problem 3.4).

Consider the perturbation dJ̄ due to δu(t), where the symbol “d” includes the effect of
a differential change dtf , for example, the noncontemporaneous variation dx(tf ) ≡ x(tf +
dtf ) – x∗ (tf ). The result is a modified version of Eq. (3.11):

∂ ∂
dJ̄ = dx(tf ) + + Lf dtf – λT (tf )δx(tf ) + λT (to )δx(to )
∂x(tf ) ∂tf
tf
∂H T ∂H
+ + λ̇ δx + δu dt (3.37)
∂x ∂u
to
where Lf ≡ L[(x(tf )), u(tf ), tf ].

Next, we observe that dx(tf ) = x(tf + dtf ) – x∗ (tf ) is to first order equal to x(tf ) +
ẋ(tf )dtf – x∗ (tf ). Using δx(tf ) = x(tf ) – x∗ (tf ) we can write dx(tf ) = δx(tf ) + ẋ(tf )dtf ,
where the last term is the contribution due to the change dt f . However,
ẋ(tf )dtf = [ẋ ∗ (tf ) + δẋ(tf )]dtf

(3.38)
= ẋ ∗ (tf ) + dtf + second order term
So to first order we have the “d – δ” rule:
dx(tf ) = δx(tf ) + ẋ ∗ (tf )dtf (3.39)
This is shown in Figure 3.1.

Next use δx(tf ) = dx(tf ) – ẋ(tf )dtf to write Eq. (3.37) as

∂ ∂
dJ̄ = – λT (tf ) dx(tf ) + + Lf + λT (tf )ẋ(tf ) dtf + λT (to )δx(to )
∂x(tf ) ∂tf
tf
∂H ∂H
+ + λ̇T δx + δu dt (3.40)
∂x ∂u
to
Pontryagin minimum principle | 29
.
x(tf)dtf
dx(tf)
δx(tf)
x* (t) Nominal
Perturbed
x(t)
t
tf tf + dtf
Figure 3.1 Relationship between dx(tf ), ∀x(tf ), and dtf
3.4 Pontryagin minimum principle

The statement that the optimal control must provide a stationary value of the
Hamiltonian, as expressed by the NC ∂H/∂u = 0T can be strengthened to the Minimum
Principle, the NC that the optimal control must minimize the Hamiltonian, specifically,
H[x∗ , u∗ , λ, t] ≤ H[x∗ , u, λ, t] (3.41)
This has great generality and applies even in the case that the control is an element of a
closed set: u(t) ∈ U. The standard reference for the Minimum Principle is Ref. [3.3] and
Ref. [3.4] provides a short introduction to the subject.
The proof of this principle is notoriously difficult, but applying it is easy. A very sim-
ple example is for the bounded control: –1 ≤ u(t) ≤ 1 and the Hamiltonian H = 3u.
Application of the principle determines u∗ (t) = –1. In fact, for this example there is no
value of u that provides a stationary value of H, so that weaker condition does not provide
the optimal control.
Example 3.4 Minimum principle application
Consider a minimum time problem for a vehicle traveling at a constant scalar speed vo .
The control vector is a steering command in the form of a unit vector u in the
direction of the velocity. The equation of motion is for 0 ≤ t ≤ T:
ṙ = vo u
with r(0) = ro = 0 (specified). The terminal constraint is ψ = r(T) = 0. The initial

time is zero and the cost is T.
Considering φ = T and L = 0 the Hamiltonian is H = L + λT f = vo λT u.
Because H is linear in u it has no stationary value, so we choose u to minimize H

by aligning u opposite to λ (to minimize the dot product) and enforce the fact that u
is a unit vector. The result is u = –λ/λ.
T
Another NC is λ̇ = –∂H/∂r = 0T indicating that λ(t) is constant and hence u(t)
is constant indicating a constant steering direction.
From Eq. (3.36)
= φ + ν T ψ = T + ν T r(T)
and the boundary condition is simply λT (T) = ∂ /∂r(T) = ν T . Using Eq. (3.47)
we calculate = 1 + vo λT u = 1 – vo λ = 0 which yields the value of λ = 1/vo .
From the equation of motion ṙ = vo u, and because u is constant, we have r(t) –
r(0) = vo tu. Evaluating at the final time and applying the terminal constraint yields
r(T) = ro + vo Tu = 0, from which we solve for u = –ro /Tvo . Requiring u to be a unit
vector yields the result that the minimum time is T = ro /vo and the optimal control is
u = –ro /ro . Note that ∂J/∂ro = λo = 1/vo .
Finally note that this minimum-time example is actually a minimum-distance
example made to sound more exciting as a minimum-time vehicle motion problem.
The result is the well-known straight-line solution.
Problems
3.1 Based on the discussion at the end of the Preface, is the cost in Mayer form a function
or a functional? Explain your answer.
T
3.2 Show that Eqs. (3.1) and (3.12) can be written as the pair of equations ẋ = ∂H ∂λ
T
and λ̇ = – ∂H∂x
, which are known as Hamilton’s Equations in classical mechanics.
3.3 In Eq. (3.10) why are there no δλ terms?
3.4 The terminal constraint (3.45) can be generalized to ψ[x(tf ), tf , c] = 0, where c is a
vector of constants in the constraints. Show that the vector ν provides the interpret-
ation of a change in the cost due to a small change in c, namely, ∂J/∂c = ν T ψ c . Also
q
show that in component form we have ∂J/∂ci = νj ∂ψj /∂ci .
j=1
∂f ∂f
3.5 Consider the state variational equation δẋ = ∂x δx + ∂u δu. Show for a cost in the
Mayer form that along a solution satisfying the NC the product λT (t)δx(t) is
constant.
3.6 In Example 3.3 for k < 0:
a) Determine the range of values of k for which the solution makes sense.
b) Determine the maximum value of x * (T) that can be achieved.
References | 31
3.7 a) In Example 3.4 consider r = [x y z] with specified initial position components

xo and yo , but an unspecified value zo . Determine the optimal solution including
the optimal value of zo using the NC.
b) Determine the values of H(T) and .
c)* Determine the optimal solution including the optimal value of α for the ter-
minal constraint r(T) = αa, where a is a specified vector for which ro × a = 0
and –∞ < α < ∞ (sketch this).
References
[3.1] Longuski, J.M., Guzman, J.J., and Prussing, J.E., Optimal Control with Aerospace Applications,
Springer, New York, 2014.
[3.2] Bryson, A.E. Jr and Ho, Y-C, Applied Optimal Control, Hemisphere Publishing, Washington,
D.C., 1975.
[3.3] Pontryagin, L.S., Boltyanski, V.G., Gamkrelidze, R.V, and Mishchenko, E.F., The
Mathematical Theory of Optimal Processes. Wiley, New York, 1962.
[3.4] Ross, I.M., A Primer on Pontryagin’s Principle in Optimal Control, Collegiate Publishers,
Carmel CA, 2009.
4 Optimal Trajectories
4.1 Optimal constant-specific-impulse trajectory
C onstant-specific-impulse and variable-specific-impulse rocket engines are discussed

in Section 2.3, with the cost functional for a CSI engine given by Eq. (2.23):
tf
JCSI = dt (4.1)
to
The equation of motion in first-order form is given by Eq. (3.2):

ṙ v
ẋ = = (4.2)
v̇ g+
The first-order necessary conditions for an optimal CSI trajectory were first derived by
Lawden in Ref. [4.1] using classical Calculus of Variations. In the derivation that follows,
an Optimal Control Theory formulation is used, but the derivation is similar to that of
Lawden. One difference is that the mass is not defined as a state variable, but is kept track
of indirectly.
In order to minimize the cost in Eq. (4.1) one forms the Hamiltonian using Eqs. (3.7)
and (3.2) as
H = + λTr v + λTv [g(r) + u] (4.3)
where we have written the thrust acceleration vector as the product u, where is the
scalar thrust acceleration magnitude and u is a unit vector in the thrust direction.
The adjoint equations (3.41) are then
T ∂H
λ̇r = – = –λTv G(r) (4.4)
∂r

Optimal constant-specific-impulse trajectory | 33
T ∂H
λ̇v = – = –λTr (4.5)
∂v
where
∂g(r)
G(r) ≡ (4.6a)
∂r
is the symmetric 3 × 3 gravity gradient matrix. (See Problem 4.1.)
Example 4.1 Derivation of a gravity gradient matrix

For the inverse-square gravitational field: g(r) = – rμ2 rr = – rμ3 r show that the gravity
gradient matrix G(r) of Eq. (4.6) is equal to G(r) = – rμ5 (3rrT – r2 I3 ), where I3 is the
3 × 3 identity matrix.
For g = – μr
r3
we have:

∂g ∂r ∂r
G= = r3 –μ + μr 3r2 /r6 (4.6b)
∂r ∂r ∂r
Using ∂r/∂r = I3 and differentiating r2 = rT r yields 2r(∂r/∂r) = 2rT , so ∂r/∂r =

rT /r and we obtain the final result:
3μ(r2 rrT /r – μr3 I3 ) μ

G= = 5 (3rrT – r2 I3 ) (4.6c)
r6 r
For terminal constraints of the form

ψ r(tf ), v(tf ), tf = 0 (4.7)
which may describe an orbital intercept, rendezvous, etc., the boundary conditions on
Eqs. (4.4–4.5) are given in terms of
≡ ν T ψ[r(tf ), v(tf ), tf ] (4.8)
by Eq. (3.42):
∂ ∂ψ
λTr (tf ) = = νT (4.9)
∂r(tf ) ∂r(tf )
∂ ∂ψ
λTv (tf ) = = νT (4.10)
∂v(tf ) ∂v(tf )
There are two control variables, the thrust direction u and the thrust acceleration magni-
tude , that must be chosen to satisfy the Minimum Principle discussed in Section 3.4,
34 | Optimal Trajectories
i.e., to minimize the instantaneous value of the Hamiltonian H. By inspection, the

Hamiltonian of Eq. (4.3) is minimized over the choice of thrust direction by aligning
the unit vector u(t) opposite to the adjoint vector λv (t). Because of the significance of
the vector –λv (t) Lawden termed it the primer vector p(t):
p(t) ≡ –λv (t) (4.11)
The optimal thrust unit vector is then in the direction of the primer vector, specifically:
p(t)
u(t) = (4.12)
p(t)
and
λTv u = –λv = –p (4.13)
in the Hamiltonian of Eq. (4.3).

From Eqs. (4.5) and (4.11) it is evident that
λr (t) = ṗ(t) (4.14)
Equations (4.4, 4.5, 4.11, 4.14) combine to yield the primer vector equation
p̈ = G(r)p (4.15)
The boundary conditions on the solution to Eq. (4.15) are obtained from
Eqs. (4.9–4.10):
∂ψ
p(tf ) = –ν T (4.16)
∂v(tf )
∂ψ
ṗ(tf ) = ν T (4.17)
∂r(tf )
Note that in Eq. (4.16) the final value of the primer vector for an optimal intercept is the
zero vector, because the terminal constraint ψ does not depend on v(tf ).
Using Eqs. (4.11–4.15) the Hamiltonian of Eq. (4.3) can be rewritten as
H = –(p – 1) + ṗT v – pT g (4.18)
To minimize the Hamiltonian over the choice of the thrust acceleration magnitude ,
one notes that the Hamiltonian is a linear function of and thus the minimizing
Optimal constant-specific-impulse trajectory | 35
Γmax
S(t)
MT MT MT
0
NT NT t
Figure 4.1 Three-burn CSI switching function and thrust profile.
value for 0 ≤ ≤ max will depend on the algebraic sign of the coefficient of in Eq.
(4.18). It is convenient to define the switching function
S(t) ≡ p – 1 (4.19)
The choice of the thrust acceleration magnitude that minimizes H is then given by the
“bang-bang” control law:

max for S > 0 (p > 1)
= (4.20)
0 for S < 0 (p < 1)
That is, the thrust magnitude switches between its limiting values of 0 (an NT null-thrust
arc) and Tmax (an MT maximum-thrust arc) each time S(t) passes through 0 (p(t) passes
through 1) according to Eq. (4.20). Figure 4.1 shows an example switching function for
a three-burn trajectory.
The possibility also exists that S(t) ≡ 0 (p(t) ≡ 1) on an interval of finite duration.
From Eq. (4.18) it is evident that in this case the thrust acceleration magnitude is not
determined by the Minimum Principle and may take on intermediate values between 0
and max . This IT “intermediate thrust arc” in Ref. [4.1] is referred to as a singular arc in
optimal control (Ref. [4.2]).
Lawden explained the origin of the term primer vector in a personal letter in 1990:
In regard to the term ‘primer vector’, you are quite correct in your supposition. I served in
the artillery during the war [World War II] and became familiar with the initiation of the
burning of cordite by means of a primer charge. Thus, p = 1 is the signal for the rocket motor
to be ignited.
For a CSI engine running at constant maximum thrust Tmax the mass flow rate bmax
will be constant. If the engine is on for a total of t time units,
max (t) = Tmax /(mo – bmax t) (4.21)
Other necessary conditions are that the variables p and ṗ must be continuous every-
where. Equation (4.19) then indicates that the switching function S(t) is also continuous
everywhere.
Even though the gravitational field is time-invariant, the Hamiltonian in this formula-
tion does not provide a first integral (constant of the motion) on an MT arc, because
is an explicit function of time as shown in Eq. (4.21). From Eq. (4.18)
H = –S + ṗT v – pT g (4.22)
Note that the Hamiltonian is continuous everywhere because S = 0 at the discontinuities

in the thrust acceleration magnitude.
4.2 Optimal impulsive trajectory

For a high-thrust CSI engine the thrust durations are very small compared with the
times between thrusts. Because of this one can approximate each MT arc as an impulse
(Dirac delta function) having unbounded magnitude (max → ∞) and zero duration.
The primer vector then determines both the optimal times and directions of the thrust
impulses with p ≤ 1 corresponding to S ≤ 0. The impulses can occur only at those
instants at which S = 0 (p = 1). These impulses are separated by NT arcs along which
S < 0 (p < 1). At the impulse times the primer vector is then a unit vector in the optimal
thrust direction.
The necessary conditions (NC) for an optimal impulsive trajectory first derived by
Lawden are in Ref. [4.1].
For a linear system these NC are also sufficient conditions (SC) for an optimal trajec-
tory, Appendix C and (Ref. [4.3]). Also in Appendix C, an upper bound on the number
of impulses required for an optimal solution is given.
Figure 4.2 shows a trajectory (at top) and a primer vector magnitude (at bottom) for
an optimal three-impulse solution. The orbital motion is counterclockwise and canonical
units are used. The canonical time unit is the orbital period of the circular orbit that has a
radius of one canonical length unit. The initial orbit is a unit radius circular orbit shown
as the topmost orbit going counterclockwise from the symbol ⊕ at (1, 0) to (–1, 0).
The transfer time is 0.5 original (initial) orbit periods (OOP). The target is in a coplanar
circular orbit of radius 2, with an initial lead angle (ila) of 270◦ and shown by the symbol
at (0, –2). The spacecraft departs and intercepts at approximately (1.8, –0.8) as
shown. The + signs at the initial and final points indicate thrust impulses and the + sign
on the transfer orbit very near (0, 0) indicates the location of the midcourse impulse. The
magnitudes of the three vs are shown at the left, with the total v equal to 1.3681 in
units of circular orbit speed in the initial orbit.
The bottom graph in Fig. 4.2 displays the time history of the primer vector magnitude.
Note that it satisfies the necessary conditions of Table 4.1 for an optimal transfer.
The examples shown in this chapter are coplanar, but the theory and applications
apply to three-dimensional trajectories as well, e.g., Prussing and Chiu, Ref. [4.4].
Optimal variable-specific-impulse trajectory | 37
tf = 0.5 OOP, ∆V = 1.3681

0.5585
0.5 0.14239
0.66717
Canonical distance
−0.5
−1
−1.5
−2
−4 −3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3 4
ila = 270°
Canonical distance
1.2
1
Primer magnitude
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5
Time [OOP]
Figure 4.2 Optimal three-impulse trajectory and primer magnitude. Figure 4.2 was
generated using the MATLAB computer code written by S.L. Sandrik for Ref. [4.9].
Table 4.1 Impulsive necessary conditions
1. The primer vector and its first derivative are continuous everywhere.
2. The magnitude of the primer vector satisfies p(t) ≤ 1 with the impulses occurring at those
instants at which p = 1.
3. At the impulse times the primer vector is a unit vector in the optimal thrust direction.
4. As a consequence of the above conditions, dp/dt = ṗ = ṗT p = 0 at an intermediate impulse
(not at the initial or final time).
4.3 Optimal variable-specific-impulse trajectory

A variable specific impulse (VSI) engine is also known as a power-limited (PL) engine,
because the power source is separate from the engine itself, e.g., solar panels, radioiso-
tope thermoelectric generator (RTG), etc. The power delivered to the engine is bounded
between 0 and a maximum value Pmax , with the optimal value being constant and equal
to the maximum, as discussed in Section 2.3. The cost functional representing minimum
propellant consumption for the VSI case is given by Eq. (2.22) as
tf
1
JVSI = 2 (t) dt (4.23)
2
to
Writing 2 as T the corresponding Hamiltonian function can be written as
1
H = T + λTr v + λTv [g(r) + ] (4.24)
2
For the VSI case there is no need to consider the thrust acceleration magnitude and
direction separately, so the vector is used in place of the term u that appears
in Eq. (4.3).
Because H is a nonlinear function of the Minimum Principle is applied by setting
∂H
= T + λTv = 0T (4.25)
∂
or
(t) = –λv (t) = p(t) (4.26)
using the definition of the primer vector in Eq. (4.11). Thus, for a VSI engine the optimal
thrust acceleration vector is equal to the primer vector: (t) = p(t).
Because of this Eq. (4.2), written as r̈ = g(r) + , can be combined with Eq. (4.15), as
in Ref. [4.5] to yield a fourth-order differential equation in r:
riv – Ġṙ + G(g – 2r̈) = 0 (4.27)
Every solution to Eq. (4.27) is an optimal VSI trajectory through the gravity field g(r).
But desired boundary conditions, such as specified position and velocity vectors at the
initial and final times, must be satisfied.
From (Eq. 4.25) we get:
T
∂ 2H ∂ ∂H
= = I3 (4.28)
∂ 2 ∂ ∂
where I3 is the 3 × 3 identity matrix. Eq. (4.28) shows that the (Hessian) matrix of
second partial derivatives is positive definite, verifying that H is minimized.
Because the VSI thrust acceleration of Eq. (4.26) is continuous, a procedure described
in Ref. [4.6] to test whether second-order NC and SC are satisfied can be applied.
Equation (4.28) shows that a NC for minimum cost (Hessian matrix positive semi-
definite) and part of the SC (Hessian matrix positive definite) are satisfied. The other
condition that is both a NC and SC is the Jacobi no-conjugate-point condition. Reference
[4.6] details the test for that.
Solution to the primer vector equation | 39
4.4 Solution to the primer vector equation

The primer vector equation Eq. (4.15) can be written in first-order form as the linear
system:

d p O3 I3 p
= (4.29)
dt ṗ G O3 ṗ
where O3 is the 3 × 3 zero matrix.

Equation (4.29) is of the form ẏ = F(t) y and its solution can be written in terms of a
transition matrix (t, to ) as
y(t) = (t, to )y(to ) (4.30)
for a specified initial condition y(to ).

Glandorf in Ref. [4.7] and Battin in Ref. [4.8] present forms of the transition matrix
for an inverse-square gravitational field. [In Ref. [4.7] the missing Eq. (2.33) is (t, to ) =
P(t)P–1 (to ).]
Note that on an NT (no-thrust or coast) arc the variational (linearized) state equation
is, from Eq. (4.2)

δṙ O3 I3 δr
δẋ = = (4.31)
δv̇ G O3 δv
which is the same equation as Eq. (4.29). So, the transition matrix in Eq. (4.30) is also
the transition matrix for the state variation, i.e., the state transition matrix in Ref. [4.8].
Also shown in Ref. [4.8] is that this state transition matrix has the usual properties
from linear system theory (Appendix D) and is also symplectic, the definition of which is
that
T (t, to )J(t, to ) = J (4.32)
where

O3 I3
J= (4.33)
–I3 O3
√
Note that J2 = –I6 indicating that J is a matrix analog of the imaginary number i = –1.
As shown in Problem 4.7 the inverse of the matrix can be simply obtained by matrix
multiplication. This is especially useful when the state transition matrix is determined
numerically because the inverse matrix –1 (t, to ) = (to , t) can be computed without
explicitly inverting a 6 × 6 matrix. As seen from Eq. (4.30) this inverse matrix yields the
variable y(to ) in terms of y(t): y(to ) = (to , t)y(t).
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
zeldzaamheid waren, mogen wij, op goede gronden, reeds
vermoeden en afleiden uit het voorkomen van metronymicale
benamingen op onzen naamlijst—met zekerheid wordt deze zaak
bevestigd, blijkens sommige andere benamingen, welke uit oude
oorkonden op die naamlijst zijn vermeld. In onze dagen wordt zulk
eene geboorte buiten huwelijk der ouders zooveel mogelijk
verbloemd, bemanteld en verzwegen; althans nooit zonder
dringende noodzaak vrijwillig openlijk erkend. Maar oudtijds dacht
men daar anders over; men was oprecht en ongekunsteld genoeg
om zulk eene zaak in eenen omschrijvenden toenaam te vermelden,
en zulken toenaam, ter verduidelijking, achter den eigenen
doopnaam te voeren of in geschrifte te stellen. Zoo vinden wij op
onze naamlijst eenen J a n v a n R i x t e l n a t u e r l y k e s o e n
J a n K e m e r l i n x (1421), dat is: van J a n K e m e r l i n k of
K a m e r l i n g . Ook eenen G h e r i t n a t u e r l i c s o e n h e e r e n
D a e m D u y s s c h e n (1420), en eene B e l e n a t u r l y k e
d o c h t e r A r n t s v a n R y p e l b e r c h (1441). Verder G o d e r t
natuerlyc soen Goderts wilen Aleiten soens van
S t i p h o u t (1389); hier was G o d e r t , de vader van den
eerstgenoemden G o d e r t , [187]waarschijnlijk ook, als zijn zoon, een
„natuurlijk” kind, omdat hij slechts een metronymicum, slechts den
naam van zijne moeder, van A l e i t v a n S t i p h o u t voert, en niet
zijn vadersnaam. Dan nog J a n v a n B e r l a e r n a t u e r l i k e
soen wilen Maes Shogen die hi hadde van
J u f f r o u w M a r g r i e t e n v a n B e r l a e r (1419), waar nevens
den naam van den vader ook nog dien van de moeder vermeld
wordt. Dit is ook het geval bij de benaming van J u t t e d o c h t e r
Meys van Herzel die dieselve natuerlic
g e w o n n e n h a d d e C o r s t i n e v a n d e G o e r (1446), enz.
Het kan niet anders—waar de onwettige geboorten zoo menigvuldig
voorkwamen, en waar die zaak zelfs vermeld werd en genoemd in
de benamingen die de kinderen, uit zulk eene geboorte
voortgesproten, te dragen hadden, daar moesten de lieden van
wettige geboorte er prijs op stellen dat ook deze zaak blijken kon uit
de benamingen die zij voerden. Zoo vinden wij dan ook in de
Helmondsche oorkonden met name genoemd eenen J a n v a n
den Grave wittige soen wilen Jans Comans van
H e l m o n t (1428). Bijzonderlijk, als een man zoo wel wettige
kinderen had als onwettige, zullen de eerstgenoemden de wettigheid
hunner geboorte gaarne opzettelijk bij hunnen naam vermeld
hebben, in onderscheiding van de namen hunner halve broeders en
zusters van onechten bedde. M a e s S h o g h e n (d.i. T h o m a s
d e s H o o g e n , de zoon van den man, die, om de eene of andere
reden den toenaam van d e H o o g e of H o o g gevoerd had)—
M a e s S h o g h e n verkeerde in dit geval; hij had eenen wettigen
en eenen natuurlijken zoon. De volle benaming van den laatsten,
van J a n v a n B e r l a e r , hebben wij reeds hierboven op deze
bladzijde medegedeeld. Die van den eerstvermelden, den wettigen
zoon, was A r t v a n G h e e l , w i t t i g e s o e n w i l e n M a e s
S h o e g h e n (1419).
Bijzonder belangrijk en merkwaardig is de Helmondsche naamlijst

nog wegens een groot aantal schoone, ja edele, oude, volledige,
volkseigen-Germaansche namen die daar op vermeld staan: namen,
die ten deele nog wel onder de hedendaagsche Nederlanders
voorkomen, vooral in de Friesche gewesten, maar [188]die voor een
ander deel ook geheel verouderd zijn en bij het tegenwoordige
geslacht niet meer in gebruik. Namen, die heden ten dage door
allerlei onredelijke en leelijke, voor Nederlanders geheel
onvoegzame, Fransche en Engelsche namen en naamsvormen
verdrongen zijn, zeer tot schande onzer volkseigene zake. Zulke
oude en edele namen, die wij den hedendaagschen
Helmondenaren, en den Brabanderen in het algemeen, voorhouden
en aanbevelen om weêr in gebruik genomen en in hun eere hersteld
te worden (immers onder de Brabanders in het bijzonder zijn
vreemde, Fransche namen veelvuldig in zwang)—zulke namen dan
zijn:
G o s e w y n , voluit G o d e s w i n , beteekenende: G o d s v r i e n d .
Deze naam komt in verschillende vormen en verkortingen voor, als
G o e s w y n (G o e s w y n ) H e i l w i g h e n s o e n v a n
G h e r w e n (1389), en G o e s w y n S c h u e r m a n s (1419); als
G o s w y n (G o s w y n ) W e v e r s (1402); samengetrokken als
G o e s s e n , heden ten dage G o o s s e n : G o e s s e n S c o r t e n
(1460).
G o d a r t , voluit G o d h a r d (G o d h a r t ). Deze naam komt op de

naamlijst zeer menigvuldig voor. In zijnen vollen vorm is hij heden
ten dage nagenoeg uitgestorven onder ons volk; slechts in sommige
oud-adellijke geslachten is hij, ook in den vorm G o d e r t , nog
erfelijk. Buitendien komt hij, in samengetrokken vorm, en met
gewijzigden klank, als G e u r t , dat is G ö ( d ) e r t , en G u u r t nog
hier en daar ten platten lande voor. In Noord-Holland is de
vrouwelijke vorm G u u r t j e (G o d e h a r d a ) niet zeldzaam.—
G o d a r t V r a n c k e n (1418), in 1439 G o d a r t
V r a n k e n s o e n genoemd; G o d a r t v a n d e r C a p e l l e n
(1460); R o e v e r G o d a r t M e u s s o e n s s o e n (1419);
G o d e r t v a n B i s t e r v e l t (1348); G o d e r t B a n t s (1435).
A l a e r t , ook A l a i r t geschreven; voluit A d e l a a r t , A d e l h a r t ,

A t h a l h a r d , in de Friesche gewesten nog heden als A l l a r d en
A l l e r t , ook A l d e r t , geenszins zeldzaam.—J a n s o e n A e r t
A l a e r t s (1481), dat is: J a n (J o h a n n e s ), zoon van A e r t
(A r n o u t ), die een zoon was van A l a e r t (A d e l h a r d );
L a m b r e c h t A l a i r t s S a l e n s o e n v a n B a k e l (1416).
G h e v a r t , dat is G e v a r t of G e e v a e r t , Hoogduitsch
G e b h a r d .—G h e v a r t L u t e n s o e n (1401). [189]
Y s b o u t , I s b a l d .—Y s b o u t D i r x S n o e x s o e n v a n d e r
Z a n t v o e r t (1416).
R e y n e r , voluit R a g i n h e r i , ook als R e i n i e r voorkomende, en

in de Friesche gewesten nog heden als R e i n e r en R e i n d e r .—
R e y n e r v a n d e n W i n t m o e l e n (1348) en R e y n i e r
H a e n g r e v e (1389).
V r a n c k , in betere spelling F r a n k , een schoone, Oud-

Nederlandsche naam, zóó, en als F r a n k e , nog heden bij de
Friezen in gebruik, even als oudtijds ook bij Hollanders en Zeeuwen
(F r a n k v a n B o r s s e l e n ).—V r a n c k v a n d e n D ĳ c k
(1462) en V r a n c T h u y n s (1435).
R a b o u t , voluit R a d b o u t , R a d b o l d of R e d b a l d .—Met
eenige verwondering, maar tevens met veel genoegen vinden wij
dezen schoonen, tamelijk zeldzamen, Oud-Frieschen koningsnaam
nog in de 15e eeuw in Brabant (of in Limburg? Neder-Rijnland?) in
gebruik: R a b o u t h e e r e n R a b o u t s s o e n v a n
V l o e d o r p (1425). Dit V l o e d o r p is toch zeker het
hedendaagsche V l o d o r p of V l o d r o p in Limburg, bij Roermond,
op de grens van Neder-Rijnland.
R y m b o u t , waarschijnlijk eene misschrijving voor R e y n b o u t ,

voluit R e g i n b o l d of R a g i n b a l d , eveneens een schoone Oud-
Germaansche mansnaam.—R y m b o u t H e n r i x s o e n v a n
d e n B e r g e (1444).
Nevens deze en meer andere merkwaardige mansnamen levert de
Helmondsche namenlijst ons ook eenige bijzondere vrouwennamen
op, die eveneens heden ten dage volkomen of geheel buiten gebruik
zijn geraakt, maar die ook eveneens als schoone, volledige Oud-
Germaansche namen onze belangstelling ten volsten waardig zijn.
Ook deze namen worden bijzonderlijk den hedendaagschen
Brabanderen voorgesteld en aanbevolen om daar hunne
jonggeborene dochterkens, in oud-vaderlandschen, in oud-
volkseigenen geest mede te noemen.
E r m g a r d e , ook E r m g a e r t , I r m i n g a r d ; zóó heetten, onder

anderen, Boergondische koninginnen in de 9de en 11de eeuw.—
E r m g a r d e J a n B e l i e n s o e n s d o c h t e r (1401), dat is:
E r m g a r d e , dochter van J a n , die een zoon was van B e l i e (zie
bladzijde 183 hiervoren).
A l e y t , A l e i d a , voluit A d e l h e i d , ook een naam die oudtijds

[190]door Germaansche koningsvrouwen en dochters gedragen is, en
dien de Franschen tot Adelaïde hebben verknoeid. A l e i t ,
A l e i d a was ook in de middeleeuwen in Holland geenszins
zeldzaam (A l e y t v a n P o e l g e e s t ).—Te Helmond A l e y t
M o e r k e n s (1395) en A l e y t A r t s C r e p p e n d o c h t e r
(1427).
L u y t g a r t of L u y t g a e r d e , L u t g a r d i s , een welluidende en
liefelijke naam, de naam van S i n t e - L u u t g a a r d e van Tongeren,
bij de Roomsch-Catholyken bijzonderlijk als Beschermheilige der
Nederlandsche (Dietsche, Vlaamsche) taal vereerd, wier gedenkdag
op den 16den Juni valt. L u y t g a e r t H o u b e n (1394), wier naam
in den jare 1400 als L u y t g a r t H u b e n d o c h t e r voorkomt.
E n g e l , in Friesland nog als E n g e l t j e (veelal uitgesproken

I n g e l t s j e ), en elders in Noord-Nederland in den wansmakelijk-
opgesmukten vorm E n g e l i n a voorkomende.—E n g e l v a n
d e n D o r e n P e t e r s d o c h t e r v a n d e n V e h u s e (1419).
W a n d e l , ook W e n d e l , W e n d e l a .—W a n d e l J a n
E m b r e c h t s d o c h t e r (1419).
H e i l w i g . —H e i l w i g d o c h t e r w i l e n H e r m a n s D i r c s
G u e d e l e n s o e n s (1443). De oude naam G u e d e l e ,
G o e d e l a , G u d u l a , in deze benaming voorkomende als eigen
aan de grootmoeder of overgrootmoeder van H e i l w i g , is mede
een Oud-Nederlandsche naam, te Brussel welbekend.
Den bijzondersten en merkwaardigsten naam van de Oud-

Helmondsche benamingen hebben wij voor het lest bewaard. Het is
die van S w e n e l t w i l e n H e n r i c s M o r t e l s d o c h t e r
(1436); S w e n e l t , verloopen in vorm en klank uit den ouden,
volledigen vorm S w a n h i l d e , een welluidende en overschoone
naam, die zoo menige herinnering aan den Oud-Germaanschen
sagen- en heldentijd onzes volks opwekt.
Zeer ongewoon, ten deele ook mij onverklaarbaar, ofschoon niet

onbekend, zijn nog enkele andere namen van onze lijst. Bij
voorbeeld die van U d e m a n v a n T h e f e l e n (1439);
(U d e m a n is een bijvorm van den bekenden mansnaam U d o , in
Friesland nog heden ten dage in verkleinvorm O e d t s e n , O e d s ,
O e t s ); van B r u y s t e n Y s e b o u t s s o e n (1426) en van D y r c
C n o o p s o e n v a n Z o e m e r e n (1389.) De namen
B r u y s t e n , B r u s t e n of B r u s t y n en C n o o p komen ook
elders in de [191]Nederlanden voor, in de middeleeuwen en later nog.
Den laatstgenoemden naam, ook als K n o o p , treft men nog heden
als maagschapsnaam aan; ook in patronymicalen vorm: K n o o p s ,
C n o o p s , en verlatijnscht als C n o p i u s .
Halve, ingekorte, samengetrokkene, vervloeide en versletene
naamsvormen, als zoogenoemde vleinamen ontstaan en bekend,
komen ook menigvuldig en in allerlei gedaanten in de Helmondsche
lijst voor. Sommigen daarvan hebben wij reeds medegedeeld en
verklaard: M a e s , voluit T h o m a s ; R o e f en R o v e r k e =
R o v e r t , R o d f r e d , R o d f r i e d , enz. Verder vermelden wij hier
nog H e n n e k e n = J o h a n n e s , voorkomende in de benamingen
van H e n n e k e n J a n D e y n e n s o e n (1478); H e n n e k e n
R o e s e l m a n s M e l y s b r u e d e r (1439); en H e n n e k e
G e r r i t C e l e n s o e n (1460). R u e l k e n , in de Friesche
gewesten nog wel, zonder den verkleinvorm, voorkomende als
R o e l , een verkorte of afgekapte naamsvorm van R o e l o f ,
R o l o f , R o d l o f of R o d o l f (bij letterkeer), R u d o l f ,
H r o d o l f ; wij vinden dezen naamsvorm bij R u e l k e n d i e
S c o e m e k e r L a m b r e c h t R u e l k e n s s o e n (1401).
L e m m e n , bij L e m m e n v a n d e L a e r (1416), geldt heden
ten dage in de Vlaamsche gouwen voor eene verbastering van
W i l l e m , W i l h e l m ; in de Friesche gewesten, waar L e m en
L e m k e ook voorkomen, heeft deze vleinaam waarschijnlijk eenen
anderen oorsprong. Eene andere verbastering van W i l l e m of van
eenigen anderen met den naamsstam wil samengestelden naam
(W i l b a l d of W i l l e b o u t , W i l m a r , W i l b r e c h t ) is
W i l l e k e n , zoo als W i l l e k e n v a n G h e m e r t (1410) heette.
Dat op gelijke wijze de naam Lodeken, de dagelijksche benaming
van L o d e k e n v a n L o f e n (1410), eene verkorting in
verkleinvorm is van den naam L o d e w ĳ k , blijkt hieruit dat
bovengenoemde L o d e k e n acht jaren later in eene oorkonde van
1418 voorkomt als L o d e w i c h L o d e w i c h s s o e n v a n
L o e f f e n . Ook nog van eene andere verkorting en vleivorm geeft
onze naamlijst eene oplossing. Te weten van A e r n o u t , A r n o l d ,
A r n w a l d , een naam die in de laatste middeleeuwen veelvuldig in
gebruik was. Deze naam, in Holland en andere Noord-
Nederlandsche gewesten gemeenlijk tot A r e n d en ook nog wel
korter tot A a r t versleten (in Friesland zelfs wel tot A a n ), was
onder de [192]Helmondsche burgerij in den regel tot A r n t en A r t
ingekort. Bij voorbeeld bij A r t P e t e r M e e u s s o e n (1418); A r t
v a n d e n P a e p e n d o n c k (1439); A r t v a n G h e e l (1419);
A r n t L y s e n L y s k e n s s o e n (1392); A r n t E b b e n (1395)
enz. Van deze reeds ingekorte en saamgetrokkene naamsvormen
A r n t en A r t had men oudtijds te Helmond nog den vleinaam A y e
of A y e n gemaakt. Dit wordt ons bewezen uit de benamingen van
Art geheyten Ayen naturlike soen Hermans van
E y n d h o u t s (1418). Het schijnt in der daad als of deze man, dien
wij nog in eene oorkonde van den jare 1420 ontmoeten als A r n t
geheyten Ayen Hermans natuerlic soen van
E y n d h o u t s (1420), en in eene andere van 1421 als A r n t
geheyten Aye natuerlic soen wilen Hermans van
E y n d h o u t s , bij zijne tijdgenooten schier uitsluitend en vast
algemeen als A y e n of A y e bekend was, zoo dat deswegen die
omslachtige omschrijving van zijn persoon in zijne benaming
noodzakelijk was.
Dat ook de vrouwennamen alzoo verbasterd werden leert ons de

namenlijst in de benamingen van H e y l e v a n d e n P u t (1394),
van J u t t e v a n R ĳ t h o v e n (1416) en van J u t t e G o b b e l s
(1436). H e y l e is een vleinaam van den eenen of anderen
volledigen, met den naamsstam heil samengestelden vrouwennaam
—van H e i l w i g waarschijnlijk. Als H e i l t j e is deze naamsvorm
nog heden ten dage in de Friesche gewesten geenszins zeldzaam.
En J u t t e is een zonderlinge vleivorm van den naam J o h a n n a .
In de middeleeuwen kwam deze naam J u t t e ook in Holland en in
andere onzer gewesten voor; thans is hij, voor zoo verre mij bekend
is, ganschelijk bij ons volk buiten gebruik geraakt.
Aangaande de gewone ook hedendaags nog gebruikelijke

verkortingen en verbasteringen van gewone namen, zoo als J a n
van J o h a n n e s , K l a e s , C l a u s van N i c o l a a s , G e r i t of
G h e r y t , G e r r i t van G e r h a r d , L y s b e t van E l i s a b e t h ,
enz. die ook rijkelijk vertegenwoordigd zijn in de Helmondsche
namenlijst, behoef ik hier wel geen woord ter verklaring te verspillen.
Heden ten dage komen onder de Nederlanders veel vreemde,

[193]vooral Fransche namen voor, en tevens veel lieden, die met
twee, drie, vier, ja met nog meer vóórnamen zijn opgepronkt. Zóó te
doen is eene wanzede. In de zuidelijke Nederlanden, bij Brabanders
en Vlamingen is dit misbruik juist meest inheemsch. Hoe noordelijker
in de Nederlanden, hoe minder men zulke vreemde namen aantreft.
In de Friesche gewesten zijn ze zeldzaam. Ten platten lande in
Friesland komen vreemde namen en dubbele of veelvoudige namen
slechts uiterst zeldzaam, schier nimmer voor. Deze zelfde Oud-
Germaansche reinheid en eenvoud van zeden in de namen der
menschen heerschte in de laatste middeleeuwen ook nog te
Helmond. In onze gansche lange lijst van ruim twee-honderd namen
vind ik slechts één Fransche en één dubbele naam: L o u i s
O r s s e n (1481), in 1477 voluit L o u i s A e r t O r s s e n s o e n
genoemd; en M a r i e L u y t g a r d e d e s V i s s c h e r s
d o c h t e r (1404).
Als bijzonder opmerkelijk kunnen wij er nog op wijzen, dat twee

soorten van toe- of geslachtsnamen, die nog heden ten dage
bijzonder eigen zijn aan de Brabantsche gewesten, ook in de
middeleeuwsche Helmondsche namenlijst niet ontbreken. Wij
bedoelen de geslachtsnamen, die op mans eindigen, in Brabant
ongemeen talrijk vertegenwoordigd; en die, welke gevormd zijn door
eene s, als overblijfsel van het verbogene lidwoord des, vóór den
eigentlijken naam geplaatst. Die zelfde s wordt bij plaatsnamen zeer
te recht nog afzonderlijk geschreven, als ’s, bij voorbeeld ’ s -
Gravenhage, ’s-Hertogenbosch, ’s-Heerenberg.
Bij de geslachtsnamen is zij echter reeds onafscheidelijk met den
eigentlijken naam verbonden, in één woord; bij voorbeeld
S m u l d e r s , eigentlijk ’ s - M u l d e r s , des mulders (zoon), de zoon
van den molenaar; S m e r t e n s , dat is: ’ s - M e r t e n s , des
M e r t e n s (zoon), de zoon van den man die M e r t e n , M a r t e n ,
M a r t i n u s heette; S m e u n i n c k x , de zoon van den monnik, enz.
De namen op mans eindigende, en als M o s m a n s ,

Sĳstelman, Heuvelmans, Pellemans,
M u y l d e r m a n s , B o r g m a n s , R o y m a n s , enz. enz. zoo
menigvuldig in Brabant voorkomende, dat zij als ’t ware eenen
eigenen stempel drukken op de Brabantsche namen in het
algemeen, zijn echte of ook oneigentlijke patronymica, afgeleid van
doopnamen die reeds op [194]man eindigen, als H e r m a n ,
H a r t m a n , T i e l m a n , U d e m a n , of van bij- of toenamen met
dien uitgang; bij voorbeeld R o y m a n , (de roode, roodharige man,
of de man die aan eene rode [rooi], aan eene uitgerode, van boomen
ontbloote plaats in het bosch woonde), W i e l m a n , B e r g m a n ,
S c h u u r m a n , enz.
Onze naamlijst vermeldt de namen van L a m b r e c h t

L a u w r e y z e n T i e l m a n s s o e n (1400—L a m b r e c h t , de
zoon van L a u w r e y s [L a u r e n s ], die een zoon was van
T i e l m a n ); W i l l e m G h e v a r t s L u t e n
M e d e m a n s s o e n s s o e n (1401); J o h a n n e s
R o e s e l m a n s s o e n (1400); C l a e s C l a e s
W i e l m a n s s o e n (1418); L i s e b e t h H a r e m a n s d o c h t e r
(1388); L y s b e t h e n d e H i l l e d o c h t e r e n A r t s
S t i p p e l m a n s (1417). Bij deze vijf eerste namen is het woord
soen (zoon) of dochter nog achter den vadersnaam gehecht
gebleven; den oorsprong van deze namen duidelijk aangevende.
Andere mansnamen in onze lijst hebben dat kenmerk reeds
verloren, en onderscheiden zich in niets meer van de
hedendaagsche geijkte maagschapsnamen die op mans eindigen.
Dat zijn de namen van P e t e r S t i p p e l m a n s (1460), van
H e r m a n E y c m a n s (1439), P e t e r P e d e l m a n s (1416),
G o e s w y n S c h u e r m a n s (1419—deze naam, oorspronkelijk
als toenaam dienende voor mannen die een schuur bij hun huis
hadden, of misschien wel in eene schuur woonden, is zeer
algemeen, niet alleen in de Brabantsche, maar ook, meestal als
S c h u u r m a n en S c h u u r m a n s , in alle andere Nederlandsche
gewesten). Verder nog J a n C o f f e r m a n s (1436), H e n n e k e n
R o e s e l m a n s (1439—zie bladzijde 182), enz.
Namen met voorgevoegde s vinden wij bij H u b r e c h t s o e n

H a p p e n S m o l n e r s (1435—H u b r e c h t zoon van H a p p e
den molner of molenaar); D i r c U d e m a n s S w o l f s s o e n
(1435); M a t t h y s J a n S p a p e n s o e n v a n Z o m e r e n
(1417—M a t t h ĳ s , zoon van J a n [bijgenaamd P a a p ? of P a a p
= Priester?] van Zomeren); H e r m a n S w e v e r s (1492—des
Wevers); S o p h i e v a n G e l d r o p D i r c s S j o n c h e r e n
s o e n s d o c h t e r (1400). Twee zonen, een wettige en een
natuurlijke, van M a e s H o g e of H o e g h e , d.i. van T h o m a s
d e H o o g e , onder de benamingen A r t v a n G h e e l w i t t i g e
s o e n w i l e n M a e s S h o e g h e n (1419) en J a n v a n
B e r l a e r n a t u e r l i c s o e n w i l e n M a e s S h o g e n (1419);
G o e s s e n S c o r t e n , dat is: G o o s s e n of [195]G o s e w y n of
G o d e s w i n , zoon van den man die d e C o r t e werd genoemd,
enz. Duidelijk komt deze naamsvorm ook aan het licht in de
benamingen van W i l l e m d e n W e d e r w i l e n D i r c
S w e e d e r s s o e n (1428), met D i r c d i e W e d e r (1481) en
M a r g r i e t S w e d e r s d o c h t e r (1421).
Indien nu door het lezen en betrachten van deze verhandeling over
Oud-Helmondsche namen, deze of gene Brabander (hoe meer hoe
beter!) genoopt werd weêr de schoone en liefelijke, de welluidende
en voegzame, de eerbare en volkseigene Oud-Germaansche namen
zijner voorouders in hunne volledige vormen zijnen kinderkens te
geven, hij zoude deswegen den eerenaam van een kloek en degelijk
volks- en vaderlandsgezind man mogen dragen, en de schrijver van
dit opstel zoude zich daarin van harten verblijden. [196]
1 De getallen achter de namen duiden de jaren aan waar in de oorkonden zijn

opgesteld, die deze namen vermelden: de jaren dus (in den regel) waar in de
personen leefden, welke die namen droegen. ↑
2 Van alle deze oude benamingen zal, in het vervolg van dit opstel, de volledige
overzetting in onze hedendaagsche taal niet gegeven worden; de opmerkzame
lezer zal, bij eenig nadenken, zelf die namen wel kunnen duiden en verklaren.
Slechts sommige, anders schier onbekende benamingen zullen met een enkel
woord nader worden aangeduid; terwijl eenige zeer bijzondere en zeer
opmerkelijke vóórnamen aan het slot van dit opstel nog afzonderlijk nader zullen
behandeld worden. ↑
3 L a m b r e c h t L a u w r e y z e n T i e l m a n s s o e n (1400); W i l l e m
G e r i t s Ts w e e r t s s o e n (1439), dat is waarschijnlijk: W i l l e m de zoon
van G e r r i t d e n W e e r d , d e n W a a r d , den herberghouder (Ts w e e r t s =
des weerds); A r t A r t M e t t e n S w a g e r s s o e n v a n M i l h e z e (1416);
C e l e n C l a e s W o l f s s o e n (1416); H e y n c k e W i l l e m
D u y s s c h e n s o e n (1416); C l a e s C l a e s W i e l m a n s s o e n (1418);
D i r c U d e m a n s S w o l f s s o e n (1435); P e t e r W i l l e m L u p p e n s o e n
v a n B a k e l (1419); L o d e w i c h w i l e n H e y n e n S t o k s s o e n (1419);
H e n n e k e n J a n D e y n e n s o e n (1478). ↑
4 H u b r e c h t K e r s t i a e n s (1413), C o r n e l i s V r i e n s (1467), in 1492 als
C o r n e l i s V r i e n t s voorkomende; D i r c W a u t g e r s (1439); G o d a r t
V r a n c k e n (1418), in 1439 G o d a r t V r a n k e n s o e n genoemd; W i l l e m
M e y n s e n (1439); M a e s W e y l a r t s (1416); F i l i p s G o u k e n s (1402);
G o d e r t B a n t s (1435), enz. ↑
5 W o u t e r M a e s s o e n d i e h a n d s c h o e m e k e r v a n S o n (1418). Dat
deze W o u t e r , zoon van M a e s (T h o m a s ), een broeder had die even als
zijn vader ook M a e s heette, en dat zoowel die broeder als vader M a e s beiden
ook handschoenmakers waren, blijkt uit de benaming M a e s d e n
H a n t s c o m e k e r s o e n M a e s H a n t s c o m e k e r s , die wij in eene
oorkonde van den jare 1439 ontmoeten.—W i l l e m D i d d e n s o e n v a n
G r o t e l (1416): G o d a r t M a t h ĳ s B l o x s o e n (1450); R u e l k e n d i e n
S c o e m e k e r L a m b r e c h t R u e l k e n s s o e n (1401); G h e r i t w i l e n
A e r t s v a n d e n P u t (1440). Daar was nog een andere G h e r i t v a n d e n
P u t in die jaren te Helmond. Maar de vader van dezen heette niet A e r t gelijk die
van den eerstgenoemden G h e r i t ; hij heette J a n , en droeg den bijnaam van
H o l l a n d e r , waarschijnlijk omdat hij een Hollander van geboorte of herkomst
was. Dies wordt die tweede G h e r i t in eene oorkonde van den jare 1413
genoemd: G h e r i t g e h e i t e n v a n d e n P u t J a n s H o l l a n d e r s
s o e n .—S y m o n L a m b r e c h t s L a n g s m e e d s s o e n (1348). W i l l e m
v a n E y k e s o e n w i l e n H e n r i x B o y f a e s v a n E y k e (1421); deze
zelfde man komt in eene oorkonde van het volgende jaar voor als W i l l e m
[180]B o y f a e s s o e n v a n E y k e (1422). H u b r e c h t s o e n H a p p e n
S m o l n e r s , reeds op bladzijde 175 hiervoren vermeld. W i l l e m d e n W e d e r
w i l e n D i r c S w e e d e r s s o e n (1428); W e d e r , ook met het lidwoord d e n
W e d e r of d i e W e d e r , schijnt reeds als een vaste bijnaam, als of ’t een
hedendaagsche geslachtsnaam ware, bij W i l l e m en bij zijnen vader D i r k in
gebruik te zijn geweest. Immers S w e e d e r s s o e n in W i l l e m s benaming
staat voor ’s weders soen, des weders zoon. De vader komt in eene oorkonde van
1427 voor als D i r c k d i e W e d e r ; en ook in een geschrift van den jare 1481
wordt een D i r c d i e W e d e r genoemd. Weder, ook saamgetrokken tot weer, is
een goed Oud-Nederlandsch woord, dat ram, mannelijk schaap beteekent. Het
woord ram komt ook nog heden als maagschapsnaam (R a m en D e R a m )
voor. ↑
6 N o l l e v a n d e r E g e l m e e r e (1401); J a n Te m p e l e r (1498);
F l o r e n s v a n d e n V ĳ f e y k e n (1439); nog heden dragen drie
verschillende maagschappen, die echter zeer wel allen van dezen zelfden
Helmondschen F l o r e n s kunnen afstammen, de geslachtsnamen V ĳ f e i k e n ,
V a n V ĳ f e y k e n en V ĳ f e y k e n ; M i c h i e l d i e K e t e l e r (1472); K l a e s
M ĳ s (1472); H e y n r i c v a n d e n K e r c k h o v e ; dat deze toenaam aan
[181]de ligging van ’s mans huis ontleend was, blijkt uit de oorkonde die zijnen
naam vermeldt, van den jare 1414, en waarbij hij zijn huis verkoopt, gelegen te
Helmond, „bij den kerckhof.” Dit zelfde is het geval met den toenaam van P e t e r
v a n d e n D o s e l d o n c k (1469), die eigenaar was van het landgoed
Doseldonk. Verder A r t v a n d e n P a e p e n d o n c k (1439); H e y n v a n
d e n B e r k e n (1416); G h e r i t d i e V o l r e (de volder, lakenvolder: 1492);
J a n d e B l a k e (1416); H e y n Q u e y e n (1429), J a n d e B e r r e ,
g e h e i t e n v a n E y n d o v e n (1419); H e n r i c K u y l m a n (1416): R e y n e r
v a n d e n W i n t m o e l e n (1348); G o d e r t v a n B i s t e r v e l t (1348); J a n
v a n S t i p d o n c (1395); A r t d e n W i z e v a n A s t e n (1416)—een bijnaam
aan ’s mans wijsheid ontleend? Ook zekere H e n r i c had vroeger dien zelfden
bijnaam gedragen, zoo als blijkt uit de benaming waaronder diens zoon ten jare
1416 voorkomt. G o d a r t H e n r i c S w i s e n s o e n , dat is G o d a r t H e n r i c
des Wisen soen, Godart zoon van Hendrik den Wĳze.
Eindelijk nog J a n v a n H o n t h u y s (1418); Y d e v a n R o e z e l (1481);
U d e m a n v a n T h e f e l e n (1439); G o d a r t v a n d e r C a p e l l e n (1460);
L e m m e n v a n d e L a e r (1416); H e n r i c S c u e r m a n (1394); J a n
W y f l e t (1417); M a r c e l y s B r u y n s w y c k (1477), waarschijnlijk een
Duitscher, en van de stad Brunswijk herkomstig; W o u t e r Te r l i n k (1427)—
terlink, teerling, dobbelsteen, de bijnaam van eenen speler, eenen dobbelaar?;
J a n d i e V l e e s c h o u w e r (1404); J a n C o l i b r a n t (1450); J a n v a n
d e n B o c h t (1450); H e n r i c v a n d e n H o e g h e n h u y s (1386); W i l l e m
C o r t s m e t (1462); V r a n c k v a n d e n D ĳ c k (1462); H e n r i c W a u n a y s
(1429); L o d e k e n v a n L o f e n (1410), reeds vroeger vermeld op bladzijde
175; W i l l e k e n v a n G h e m e r t (1410); R e y n i e r H a e n g r e v e (den
Hanegraaf of Pluimgraaf was oudtijds het toezicht op het pluimgedierte van eenen
heerenhof, kasteel of landgoed opgedragen) v a n S t a k e n b o r c h M a t h e u s
s o e n v a n B o e s s c o t (1389); J a n d e B l a k e (1416). ↑
7 H e r m a n E y c m a n s (1439); J a n S t a r k e n s (1498), d.i. J a n , zoon van
W i l l e m (?) S t a r k e n ; deze toenaam S t a r k e n is ook weêr een
patronymicale naamsvorm, beteekenende v a n S t a r k of z o o n van P e t e r (?)
S t a r k , van den man, die om zijne bijzondere sterkte, den bijnaam v a n S t a r k
(of S t e r k ) verworven had. S t a r k en S t e r k , S t e r c k komen nog heden als
maagschapsnamen voor; ook de patronymicale vormen daar van: S t e r k e ,
S t e r c k x , S t e r k e n , enz. Verder P e t e r v a n E y n d h o u t s (1487);
P e t e r S t i p p e l m a n s , H e n r i c To u w e r s (1439; touwer = touwslager? zie
bladzijde 175), in 1435 H e y n To u w e r s genoemd; P e t e r P e d e l m a n s
(1416); G o s w y n W e v e r s (1402) en H e r m a n S w e v e r s (1492; des
Wevers); M a t h y s J a n S p a p e n s o e n v a n Z o m e r e n (1417), d.i.
M a t t h ĳ s , zoon van J a n de Paap of de Pastoor van den dorpe Zomeren, of
zoon van J a n die om d’eene of andere reden den bijnaam van P a a p droeg,
zonder daarom juist een Pastoor of ander Geestelijk Heer te zijn, en die van
Zomeren herkomstig was. Dan nog D i r y c k S w e r t s (1492); H e y n Te u l i n x
(1389); G o e s w y n S c h u e r m a n s (1419), met andere woorden: G o s e w ĳ n ,
de zoon of kleinzoon van eenen man, die den toenaam S c h u e r m a n voerde
(omdat zijn huis kenbaar was aan eene groote of anderszins bijzonder in ’t oog
vallende schuur?); de naam S c h u e r m a n s is nog heden als maagschapsnaam
aan Brabantsche geslachten eigen. Eindelijk nog J a n C o f f e r m a n s (1436) en
G o e s s e n S c o r t e n (1460). ↑
8 L u y t g a r t H u b e n d o c h t e r (1400), die in eene andere oorkonde van den
jare 1394 als L u y t g a e r t H o u b e n optreedt; A l e y t M o e r k e n s (1395);
J u t t e G o b b e l s (1436); L i s e b e t H a r c m a n s d o c h t e r (1388);
W a n d e l J a n E m b r e c h t s d o c h t e r (1419); A l e y t A r t s C r e p p e n
d o c h t e r (1427). Deze laatste benamingen komen reeds in samengestelden
vorm voor den dag; maar zij worden daarin nog verre overtroffen door benamingen
als E n g e l v a n d e n D o r e n P e t e r s d o c h t e r v a n d e n V e h u s e
(1419), waar de dochter eenen anderen toenaam voert als de vader. De toenaam
van dezen laatsten (v a n d e n V e h u s e ) hebben wij eerder in deze
verhandeling op (bladzijde 174) ontmoet en besproken. Verder S w e n e l t
w i l e n H e n r i c s M o r t e l s d o c h t e r (1436); M a r g r i e t S w e d e r s
d o c h t e r w i l e n J a n s v a n B i n d e r e n (1421), eene onduidelijke
benaming, die zoo wel de verklaring toelaat dat M a r g r i e t eene dochter van
S w e d e r en eene kleindochter van J a n v a n B i n d e r e n , als deze, dat zij
eene dochter van S w e d e r , maar de vrouw van J a n v a n B i n d e r e n was;
Heilwig dochter wilen Hermans Dircs Guedelen soens
(1443), dat is: H e i l w i g , de dochter van wijlen H e r m a n , die een zoon was van
D i r k , die weêr een zoon was van vrouw G u e d e l e (G o e d e l e , G u d u l a );
S o p h i e v a n G e l d r o p [184]D i r c s S j o n c h e r e n s o e n s d o c h t e r
(1400), dat is: S o p h i e , dochter van D i r k , die een zoon was van den Jonkheer
van Geldrop. Nog omslachtiger zijn de benamingen van G h e e r t r u y d o c h t e r
H e y n e n C o e n s e n M a e s s o e n v a n d e r H e y d e n (1472), dat is:
G e e r t r u i , de dochter van H e i n , die een zoon was van K o e n , die een zoon
was van M a e s v a n d e r H e y d e n ; van J u t t e d o c h t e r M e y s v a n
Herzel die dieselve natuerlic gewonnen hadde Coratine
v a n d e G o e r (1446), en van K a t l i n g e h e i t e n v a n d e D o n c
Marcelys Scillinx wilen spastoirs van Baerle natuerlike
d o c h t e r (1417). Wegens de geboorte dezer twee laatstgenoemde dochters
buiten huwelijk harer ouders, zijn hare namen zoo uitvoerig te boek gesteld. Bij de
eerste benaming is zoo wel de naam van den vader als die van de moeder
vermeld. De laatste wil zeggen K a t e l y n e of C a t h a r i n e , met toename v a n
d e D o n k , die de natuurlijke dochter was van M a r c e l i s S c h i l l i n k , in zijn
leven Pastoor in den dorpe Baarle. ↑
[Inhoud]
V
FRIESCHE NAMEN.
„Gaudete, charissimi Frisonides, quia Nomina
vestra in hoc libro reducta sunt ad originalem
typum. Imo potius gaudete, si Nomina vestra
scripta sunt in coelis.”
Regnerus Boegherman, De Nominibus

Frisonum.
Het Friesche volk heeft zich, van ouds her en tot op den dag van
heden, door vele eigenaardigheden in taal, zeden, kleeding, enz.,
steeds bijzonder onderscheiden van andere, naburige en
stamverwante Germaansche volken. De bijzondere namen der
Friezen, zoowel hunne vóórnamen als hunne geslachts- en
plaatsnamen, die grootendeels van de vóórnamen zijn afgeleid,
nemen onder die eigenaardigheden almede eene eerste plaats in.
Veel van ’t gene in den tegenwoordigen tijd voor bijzonder en

eigenaardig Friesch geldt, is dit van ouds niet steeds geweest. In
tegendeel, veel van die zaken was oudtijds zoowel Sassisch en
Frankisch als Friesch, was algemeen Germaansch eigendom. Voor
tien en vijftien eeuwen, bij voorbeeld, was er tusschen de taal der
Friezen en die der Sassen bij lange na niet dat groote onderscheid ’t
welk thans bestaat tusschen het hedendaagsche Friesch en de
Sassische gouwspraken van Twente en den Gelderschen
Achterhoek, van Westfalen en andere gouwen in noordwestelijk
Duitschland. Ook het Angelsassisch, de moedertaal [197]van het
hedendaagsche Engelsch, stond in die eeuwen, in hoofdzaak, vrij
nabij het toenmalige Friesch.
Iets soortgelijks valt ook bij de kleeding op te merken. Immers de

vrouwen der Angelsassen en van andere Neder-Germaansche
volken en stammen droegen algemeen het oorijzer (natuurlijk in
andere, min of meer gewijzigde, en altijd zeer smalle vormen), gelijk
de Friezinnen en alle vrouwen die in de Nederlanden van Frieschen
stam zijn, nog heden doen. 1 Ook vele zeden en gebruiken, die thans
als bijzonder Friesch gelden, waren oudtijds allen Neder-
Germaanschen volken gemeen. Maar bij de Friezen bleven al zulke
oude zaken in stand, terwijl ze bij de verwante volken en stammen,
gedeeltelijk reeds sedert de invoering van het Christendom,
gedeeltelijk gedurende den loop der middeleeuwen, ten deele ook
nog bij, en kort na de kerkhervorming verdwenen, somtijds zelfs met
geweld werden uitgeroeid. De Friezen hebben zich daar steeds
tegen verzet. Zij bleven, zoo veel maar immer mogelijk was, aan het
oude en volkseigene, dat door hunne voorouders hun overgeleverd
was (voor zoo verre het ook goed was), „hou ende trou” en in liefde
gehecht. Dit is hun eene eere!
En zoo is het ook met de bijzonder Friesche mans- en vrouwen-

vóórnamen. Veel van wat thans in deze zaak als eigenaardig Friesch
geldt, is van ouds algemeen Germaansch geweest. Oorspronkelijk
toch hebben de Friezen geen afzonderlijke, slechts uitsluitend aan
hen eigene namen gehad. De namen, die de oude Friezen droegen,
hadden zij gemeen met de stamverwante volken. Maar bij de
Friezen hebben deze namen, zoo in hunnen volledigen vorm, als in
uiterst talrijke vervormingen, stand gehouden tot op den dag van
heden. Bij de andere Nederlanders, bij de Engelschen en bij de
Nederduitschers, hebben zij grootendeels plaats gemaakt voor
namen van Bijbelschen en Kerkelijken oorsprong, en voornamen uit
allerlei vreemde talen overgenomen. Ook dit vasthouden aan de
oude, schoone en eervolle namen hunner roemruchtige voorouders
strekt den Friezen tot eere, en is een bewijs van hunnen alouden
Germaanschen adeldom. [198]
De Friesche namen hebben, sedert de 16de eeuw, veelvuldig de
aandacht getrokken en de belangstelling gewekt van geleerden en
van navorschers op het gebied der taal- en volkenkunde. Sommigen
van dezen hebben min of meer uitvoerige, maar toch in geenen
deele ook maar eenigermate volledige lijsten van die namen
samengesteld. Maar die lijsten zijn slechts dorre opsommingen van
namen; meer niet. Ze zijn zonder nadere aanduidingen, en zonder
veel oordeel samengebracht, waarbij dan ook de oorsprong der
namen, hunne oorspronkelijke, volledige vormen, hunne vlei- en
verkleinvormen, hunne afleidingen tot geslachts- en plaatsnamen,
het onderlinge verband dat er tusschen de verschillende
namengroepen bestaat of ook niet bestaat, volstrekt niet in het licht
gesteld wordt, noch tot gelding komt. Eerst in deze eeuw verscheen
een eerste werkje, dat op eenigermate wetenschappelijke wijze, zij
het dan ook nog slechts uiterst oppervlakkig, de Friesche namen
behandelt. Het is opgesteld door Prof. Ev. Wassenbergh,
hoogleeraar te Franeker, en komt voor, onder den titel Verhandeling
over de Eigennamen der Friezen, in de Taalkundige Bijdragen tot
den Frieschen tongval, Leeuwarden, 1802. In deze verhandeling
worden ook de Friesche naamlijsten uit vorige eeuwen, die van
Ubbo Emmius, van Hundius, van Boegherman, vermeld,
overgenomen, en nader besproken.
Verder zijn in de verschillende jaargangen van het tijdschrift De

Navorscher en ook in die van den Frieschen Volksalmanak
onderscheidene kleine opstellen over sommige bijzondere Friesche
namen opgenomen, die grootendeels door mij zelven geschreven
zijn. Eenigszins uitvoeriger zijn in het tijdschrift De Vrije Fries, deel
XIII en XIV, sommige Friesche namen, vooral geslachtsnamen,
behandeld, in een opstel van mijne hand, Een en ander over
Friesche Eigennamen. Ook vindt men in mijn werk De
Nederlandsche Geslachtsnamen, Haarlem, 1885, vele zaken
vermeld en behandeld, die in het bijzonder op Friesche namen

Optimal Spacecraft Trajectories John E Prussing Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Optimal Spacecraft Trajectories John E Prussing Full Chapter

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Optimal Spacecraft Trajectories John E.

Performance index for an optimal trajectory

T he performance index for an optimal spacecraft trajectory is typically minimum

Types of orbital maneuvers

Optimal Spacecraft Trajectories. John E. Prussing.

Notation and preliminaries

A symbol x without the bold face is the magnitude of the vector x:

We will encounter a scalar function of a vector φ(x), e.g., a gravitational potential

One advantage of this convention is that

Finally, we distinguish between a function and a functional. A function maps numbers

1.1 Unconstrained parameter optimization

which is a shorthand notation that the m × m matrix having elements ∂u∂ i ∂u

Optimal Spacecraft Trajectories. John E. Prussing.

semideﬁnite NC is simply a statement that for the stationary point to be a minimum,

L(u) = L(u∗ ) + δL + δ 2 L + · · · (1.4)

As a very simple example consider

L(u) = 2u21 + u22 + u1 u2 (1.7)

1.2 Parameter optimization with equality constraints

x21 + x22 – R2 = 0 (1.8)

The constrained minimum problem is to determine the values of m-decision parameters u

1.2.1 Lagrange multipliers

In the constrained problem the parameters can be treated as independent if we introduce

H(x, u, λ) = L(x, u) + λT f(x, u) (1.10)

where c is a q-dimensional vector of constants in the constraint equations. Due to changes

Example 1.1 Minimization using a Lagrange multiplier

Determine the rectangle of maximum perimeter that can be inscribed in a circle of

L(x, u) = –4(x + u) (1.15)

subject to the constraint

where x and u are scalars.

We construct the augmented function H as

H(x, u, λ) = L(x, u) + λf (x, u)

Applying the NC of Eqs. (1.11a–c):

1.3 Parameter optimization with an inequality

H(y, λ) = L(y) + λf (y) (1.23)

λ≥0 if f (y) = 0 (active) (1.25)

λ=0 if f (y) < 0 (inactive) (1.26)

Note that in either case the product λf = 0, resulting in H being equal to L.

Figure 1.1 An active constraint and an inactive constraint

Example 1.2 Simple inequality constraint

where y and a are scalars. Use Eq. (1.23) to form H:

where from Eqs. (1.25) and (1.26)

λ≥0 if y = a (active) (1.33)

2.1 Equations of motion

T he equation of motion of a spacecraft which is thrusting in a gravitational ﬁeld can

Optimal Spacecraft Trajectories. John E. Prussing.

2.2 High-thrust and low-thrust engines

2.3 Constant-specific-impulse (CSI)

Using Eq. (2.2),

This can be integrated (assuming constant u) to yield:

JCSI is referred to as the characteristic velocity of the maneuver or the V (pronounced

and tk± ≡ lim ε → 0(tk ± ε); ε > 0.

Using this along with

Maximizing mf for a given value of mo regardless of whether  is optimal or not is

(t) = r̈(t) – g[r(t)] (2.21)

To summarize, the cost functionals representing minimum propellant expenditure are

3.1 Equation of motion and cost functional

ẋ = f(x, u, t); x(to ) = xo (speciﬁed) (3.1)

To transform to ﬁrst-order form let

Optimal Spacecraft Trajectories. John E. Prussing.

To formulate an optimal control problem we deﬁne a cost functional

Mayer form: J = φ[x(tf ), tf ]

Example 3.1 Cost transformation

J = φ[x(tf ), tf ] + xn+1 (tf ) ≡ xn+2 (tf ) (3.5)

JCSI is referred to as the characteristic velocity of the maneuver or the V (pronounced

Maximizing mf for a given value of mo regardless of whether is optimal or not is

H = + λTr v + λTv [g(r) + u] (4.3)

≡ ν T ψ[r(tf ), v(tf ), tf ] (4.8)

H = –(p – 1) + ṗT v – pT g (4.18)

max (t) = Tmax /(mo – bmax t) (4.21)

H = –S + ṗT v – pT g (4.22)

Writing 2 as T the corresponding Hamiltonian function can be written as

y(t) = (t, to )y(to ) (4.30)

T (t, to )J(t, to ) = J (4.32)