Research paperAn analysis tool for collision avoidance manoeuvres using aerodynamic drag
Introduction
The regime of Low Earth Orbits (LEO), i.e., altitudes below [1], offers great possibilities for Earth observation, thermospheric investigations, and the global connectivity market. This draws the attention of various actors and leads to a sharp rise in satellite numbers. Growing numbers of satellites (and debris) do not only pose a threat to functional satellites. Every collision produces a huge amount of debris objects, which in turn threaten other satellites. Analyses have shown that this could end in an avalanche-like process, referred to as the Kessler syndrome, rendering the LEO regime useless for future generations [2], [3], [4]. This highlights the need to minimize collision risk.
Besides active debris removal, an obvious option for functional satellites is the implementation of collision avoidance manoeuvres (CAMs) in case of a predicted close encounter with another object. Typically, such manoeuvres are performed with impulsive thrusters to deflect the satellite trajectory. Satellites without thrusting capabilities, on the other hand, need other strategies to evade potential collisions. In LEO, aerodynamic drag due to the remaining atmospheric particles represents significant natural perturbing forces, which can be used to control and manoeuvre asymmetrically-shaped satellites or satellites with dedicated control panels. This control method has, for example, been researched for satellite formation flight by applying differential aerodynamic forces to affect relative motion [5]. Furthermore, aerodynamic CAMs have been studied [6], [7], even in combination with solar pressure [8]. Other approaches include using drag sails [9], [10], [11], [12] or tethers [13] to alter satellite trajectories for manoeuvring as well as de-orbiting.
Although achievable forces through aerodynamic drag are magnitudes smaller than what is possible with chemical thrusters, satellite orbits can be measurably altered given enough time, which allows for the implementation of CAMs. Satellites without thrusters can, therefore, greatly benefit from CAMs using aerodynamic drag.
One such satellite is the Flying Laptop of the Institute of Space Systems, University of Stuttgart. It orbits the Earth in a nearly circular polar orbit at an altitude of . From its launch into LEO in July 2017 until September 2022, the Flying Laptop’s operators received over 5000 warnings for over 150 close encounters from the Combined Space Operations Center (CSpOC), with the lowest predicted miss distance reported as . Since the Flying Laptop does not possess any thrusters, it has no possibility to perform impulsive collision avoidance manoeuvres. Thus, so far the operators had to remain without action upon reception of a collision warning. As previously pointed out, though, the orbital altitude and the asymmetric shape of the satellite, in principle, allow control via aerodynamic drag. The Flying Laptop will be used as an example satellite in this work.
The paper is structured as follows: At first, fundamental concepts are covered. The developed analysis tool is then introduced in Section 3. Lastly, results of exemplary analyses for the Flying Laptop are presented and discussed in Section 4. The research presented here is based on the corresponding author’s master thesis [14].
Section snippets
Satellite aerodynamics
Satellites in LEO are subject to a measurable perturbing force due to the remaining atmospheric particles, which impinge on the satellite surface. The aerodynamic forces acting on a satellite can be separated into lift and drag. Drag is defined as the component acting anti-parallel to the satellite velocity relative to the local atmosphere, whereas lift acts in perpendicular direction to that. The specific drag force depends on the satellite’s dimensionless aerodynamic drag coefficient ,
Analysis tool
In the following section, the methodology behind the analysis tool for collision avoidance using aerodynamic drag is explained.
Results
This section presents the results of analyses performed with the tool on exemplary close encounters of the Flying Laptop. Achievable separation distances are investigated before the influence of parameter uncertainties on the collision probability is analysed. Solar and geomagnetic data for the different activity levels are defined as in Table A.2, the used atmosphere model is NRLMSISE-00. The aerodynamic data of the Flying Laptop are defined in Table B.3 and determined via interpolation
Discussion
In the following section the results of the previous analyses are discussed. At first, the feasibility of aerodynamic collision avoidance manoeuvres for the Flying Laptop is evaluated. After that, possible manoeuvre strategies are discussed before the aspect of uncertainties is dealt with. Lastly, limitations and the applicability of the tool are discussed.
Summary
In this work, a tool was developed to analyse aerodynamic manoeuvres for satellite collision avoidance. Different manoeuvres can be compared with respect to their resulting miss distance and collision probability, considering solar and geomagnetic activity conditions. Further constraints regarding charging phases during the manoeuvre can be considered and uncertainties in the various parameters that are used as input to the tool can be accounted for, as well. At this point, the tool relies
Outlook
The presented tool will be developed further. Alternatives for the analytical equation will be examined to estimate achievable separation distances. This is expected to lead to a broader applicability due to fewer assumptions, e.g., the use for satellites and or secondary objects in elliptic orbits.
More research is necessary for a realistic approximation of the uncertainties in the parameters, their correlation to the position uncertainty defined in a CDM to obtain a reliable and less
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
References (47)
Collisional cascading: The limits of population growth in low earth orbit
Adv. Space Res.
(1991)- et al.
Collision avoidance of satellites using ionospheric drag
Acta Astronaut.
(2022) - et al.
Drag sails for space debris mitigation
Acta Astronaut.
(2015) - et al.
A planning tool for optimal three-dimensional formation flight maneuvers of satellites in VLEO using aerodynamic lift and drag via yaw angle deviations
Acta Astronaut.
(2022) - et al.
A critical assessment of satellite drag and atmospheric density modeling
Acta Astronaut.
(2014) - et al.
Gas-surface interactions and satellite drag coefficients
Planet. Space Sci.
(2005) - et al.
Satellite Orbits: Models, Methods and Applications
(2001) - et al.
Collision frequency of artificial satellites: The creation of a debris belt
J. Geophys. Res.
(1978) Critical Density of Spacecraft in Low Earth Orbit: Using Fragmentation Data to Evaluate the Stability of the Orbital Debris EnvironmentLMSEAT-33303
(2000)- et al.
On the exploitation of differential aerodynamic lift and drag as a means to control satellite formation flight
CEAS Space J.
(2020)