Scaling Inertia Properties of a Manipulator Payload for 0- <i>g</i> Emulation of Spacecraft
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a method to control a manipulator system grasping a rigid-body payload so that the motion of the combined system as a consequence of external applied forces is the same as any other free-floating rigid-body (with different inertial properties). This allows 0-g emulation of a scaled spacecraft prototype under the test in a 1-g laboratory environment. The controller consisting of motion feedback and force/moment feedback adjusts the motion of the test spacecraft so as to match that of the flight spacecraft, even if the latter has flexible appendages (such as solar panels) and the former is rigid. The stability of the overall system is analytically investigated, and the results show that the system remains stable provided that the inertial properties of two spacecraft are different and that an upperbound on the norm of the inertia ratio of the payload to the manipulator is respected. Important practical issues such as calibration and sensitivity analysis to sensor noise and quantization are also presented. Finally, experimental results obtained from a robotic setup for spacecraft emulation with a milli-gravity accuracy are presented.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".