Automated Method to Compute Orbital Reentry Trajectories with Heating Constraints

Abstract

Flight Center flown by a more traditional guidance method. trajectory problems onboard. Although research into algorithms with numerical solution capability is not new 2"4, their use as actual flight software remains untapped. This is due mainly https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20020065568 2017-11-06T21:15:02+00:00Z to issues of computational complexity that accompany all numerical procedures of this nature. EGuide addresses some of these issues with an architecture that combines the best of traditional guidance methods with the advantage of onboard solution capability. EGuide uses a classic shooting method as its solver. When solving a specific entry problem, EGuide adjusts parameters to meet specified goals using a Newton method that has been configured to generate [7] Hanson,

Entry guidance with real-time planning of reference based on analytical solutions

“…The other type of entry guidance is the predictor-corrector guidance (Powell, 1993;Graesslin et al, 2004), in which the control profiles are typically parameterized to simplify the complexity of the algorithm and increase its robustness. Later, Zimmerman et al (2003) proposed a predictor-corrector entry guidance that satisfies the heating rate constraint by breaking the entry trajectory into two parts. Additionally, Yu and Chen proposed a guidance scheme that can effectively suppresses the trajectory oscillations (Yu and Chen, 2011).…”

Skip entry guidance using numerical predictor–corrector and patched corridor

“…The essence of the "predictor" is to parameterize the bank profile. One or two parameters were used to describe the bank angle magnitude in Powell and Braun (1993); Powell (1998); Zimmerman et al (2003); Brunner and Lu (2008); Bairstow (2006); Tigges et al (2007). A three-dimensional profile, including the magnitude and sign, was proposed in Fuhry (1999); Leavitt and Mease (2007); Lu (2008).…”

Progress in Guidance and Control Research for Space Access and Hypersonic Vehicles

“…The advanced methods were evaluated against the performance of the X-33 baseline guidance and control system in order to ascertain the benefits of the new technologies. A number of entry guidance techniques were tested including Drag-Energy 3D (EAGLE) [17,18] and Quasi-Equilibrium Glide [19,20,21], which tied for the best scores, as well as a Linear Quadratic Regulator [22], Predictor-Corrector [23], and Shuttle-like entry [24] guidance method. A number of advanced control methods were developed and tested under this project, as well including a dynamic inversion based adaptive/reconfigurable control law with linear programming based control allocation [25], robust PI servomechanism and quadratic programming-based control allocation [26], a direct adaptive neural network based controller [27], trajectory linearization [28,29], and sliding mode control [30].…”