MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Mission Architecture for On-Orbit Servicing Industrialization

2021· article· en· W3170507366 on OpenAlexafffund
Patrick Rousso, Sanaz Samsam, Robin Chhabra

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpace Satellite Systems and Control
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRendezvousService (business)Computer scienceScheduling (production processes)EngineeringOperations researchOperations managementAerospace engineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Similar to any service or product, industrialization of On-Orbit Servicing (OOS) demands performance enhancement through introducing relevant autonomy elements in planning and executing single and multiple servicing missions. This paper proposes an overall mission architecture for performing multiple on-orbit servicing missions by a fleet of servicers in the form of free-flying single-arm space manipulators. The architecture targets to improve the two key industrialization criteria of resource and service. In the far-range rendezvous with target satellites, the servicers burn most of their fuel. Furthermore, the time that servicers spend in transfer orbits determines the approximate duration of a servicing mission. Hence, as part of resource management, the presented architecture first identifies the main contributors to the fuel consumption and mission duration in far-range rendezvous phase of OOS missions being: (i) the location of the parking orbit, (ii) the type of transfer trajectories, and (iii) the dispatch scheduling. As the result, separate optimization loops are considered for minimizing the mission costs, across the OOS industry. Servicers are suggested to form an equally phased constellation in a parking orbit close to Sun-synchronous orbits in the Low Earth Orbital (LEO) region, where 57.5% of operational LEO satellites reside. A satellite in the parking orbit constellation is named “Administrator”, whose sole purpose is to plan and manage servicing missions. The Administrator determines the optimal number and sequence of servicing missions that must be performed by the available servicers, and the optimal transfer trajectories servicers shall follow to reach the targets. Upon completion of their missions, each servicer returns to the parking orbit and occupies the available position that requires the lowest fuel consumption to enter. In almost 90% of servicers' lifetime, they are in an idle state in the parking orbit awaiting dispatch or in transfer orbits. To enhance quality of the provided service, the proposed architecture suggests effective use of this time to task servicers with performing machine learning that helps improve the functionality of their guidance, navigation and control systems in upcoming missions. The task involves trajectory learning for a servicer's manipulator system in free-floating regime to reach a simulated moving target while avoiding (virtual) obstacles and compensating for environmental disturbances. Both supervised and unsupervised machine learning techniques are considered, and based on a qualitative analysis, the unsupervised DDPG algorithm is deemed most applicable in the free-floating trajectory learning task.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.847
Threshold uncertainty score0.247

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.208 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpace Satellite Systems and ControlFrench-language works237,207