3
$\begingroup$

In general I would like to know how to minimise fuel mass spent for an orbiting body that continuously jettisons its mass (i.e. ion thruster) so as to perform efficient transfer maneuver in heterogenous gravitational field.

But for the sake of this question let us consider the simpler case: We have a body in 1D space with a given initial position $x_0$ and velocity $v_0$ and we want it to transfer to a given position $x_1$ at given time $t1$. Gravitational acceleration $-g$ is constant. Mass of the body is mass of fuel $mp$. Jettisoned mass velocity is constant (relatively to the body)$vs$.

I tried solving it by the means of Hamilton principle, where Lagrangian can be: $$L=T-V+W$$ Where the work done by the the thrust is: $$\text{W}\text{=}\int \text{vs} \frac{d \left(\text{mp}\left(t_0\right)-\text{mp}(t)\right)}{dt} \sqrt{x'(t)} \, dt$$ and kinetic and potential energy is: $$T\text{=}\frac{1}{2} \text{mp}(t) x'(t)^2$$ $$V\text{=}g \text{mp}(t) x(t)$$

Then by incorporating Euler-:Lagrange equation:

$\frac{d \frac{\partial L}{\partial \frac{d q_i}{dt}}}{dt}=\frac{\partial L}{\partial q_i}$

Assuming the jettisoned mass is a generalized coordinate then we have 2 equations: $$\left\{-\frac{\text{vs} \text{mp}'(t) x'(t)}{\sqrt{x'(t)^2}}+\text{mp}'(t) x'(t)+\text{mp}(t) x''(t)=-g \text{mp}(t),-\text{vs} \sqrt{x'(t)^2}=\frac{1}{2} x'(t)^2-g x(t)\right\}$$ -I’ve expected it would yield me the function $mp(t)$ – that would show the lowest mass spent for given given position at tgiven time. Unfortunately these equations rather show this is a DAE system and mass cant be a generalized coordinate here because of dependency to position of a body. I think my approach is dead end, isn’t it? How can I minimize the fuel spent the right way for mentioned case? Ive tried but havent found an alternative solution so far.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ If you try to launch a rocket but you are generating too little force to overcome the weight, the rocket stays on the ground, no matter how long it keeps thrusting. It's just a waste of propellant. If you generate just enough force for it to hover, it will still stay on the ground. The faster it gets accelerated to the max. possible velocity the more efficient it becomes. In orbital situations it's more complicated and we end up with apogee and periapsis burns. See e.g. space.stackexchange.com/q/20249. In either case short burns will be the most efficient, I believe. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 15 at 22:59
  • $\begingroup$ @FlatterMann I dont mean launching the rocket and continuous thrust is on mind as for Ion thrusters. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 16 at 16:10
  • $\begingroup$ Is $mp$ the product of two variables (i.e., $m\times p$) or a single variable (i.e., $m_p$)? And also same question for $vs$? $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 16 at 18:25
  • $\begingroup$ @KyleKanos these are the single variables. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 17 at 9:53

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

The usual approach is to use optimal control. I will change the notations slightly. Let $x$ be the position, $v$ the velocity and $m$ the mass. I will also set the constant the exhaust relative speed $|v_e|=1$. You can combine the direction of the rocket and mass exhaust into a single real control parameter $u = -\frac{\dot m}m v_e$. The equations of motion are: $$ \dot x = v\quad \dot v = u-g $$ You want to minimise the total mass expelled (setting the initial mass to $1$ with no loss of generality) during the time interval $t\in(0,1)$, you will need to minimise the action: $$ S = \int_0^1|u|dt $$ under the constraint that $x(0) = 0,v(0) = v_0,x(1) = x_1$ and along the trajectory. You therefore identify the Lagrangian and compute the corresponding Hamiltonian: $$ L(x,v,u) = |u|\quad H(x,v,p_x,p_v) = \sup_up_xv+p_v(u-g)-|u| = \begin{cases} -\infty & p_v<-1\\ p_xv-p_vg & -1<p_v<1\\ +\infty & 1<p_v\end{cases} $$ Essentially, this is telling you that for optimal trajectories, $u=0$ or $u=\pm\infty$ so that you instantaneously eject a finite amount of mass. This makes sense, in terms of distance travelled, ejection $udt$ at time $t_*\in(0,1)$ will result distance $udt(1-t_*)$, so to make the most of it, you just need to eject everything at the beginning $t=0$ instantaneously. This amounts to effectively tuning the initial velocity just to reach the final position in the desired time under free fall. If you also want to additionally control the final velocity (consider landing for example), then you would additionally need to add a final instantaneous boost accordingly.

For practical purposes, you therefore need to refine your objective function. Everything will depend on how you penalise high mass ejection rate $|u| \to +\infty$. A simple tweak is to impose a maximum value $|u|\leq U$. Another analytically motivated amendment is to replace it by add a quadratic cost, i.e. a soft boundary, $u^2/2$. For the former choice, the new Hamiltonian is: $$ H(x,v,p_x,p_v) = \sup_{u\in[-U,U]}p_xv+p_v(u-g)-|u| = \begin{cases} p_xv-p_v+U(|p_v|-1) & p_v\not\in(-1,1)\\ p_xv-p_vg & p_v\in(-1,1)\end{cases} $$

Applying Pontryaguin's principle, you get the equations of motion: $$ \dot x = v\quad \dot v = \begin{cases} -g & p_v\in(-1,1)\\ U\operatorname{sgn}(p_v)-g & p_v\not\in(-1,1)\end{cases}\\ \dot p_x = 0\quad \dot p_v = -p_x $$ The trajectories therefore comprise of on/off states where the rocket is maximally thrusting or not at all respectively. By tuning the piecewise parabolas, you can match the beginning and final desired state. Note that you now have an issue of attainability if $U$ is not large enough to accommodate for the desired distance and velocity.

Hope this helps.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ Thank You, but I have to process it: Why for Lagrangian You didnt include terms for potential and kinetic energy? Is this p variable a Lagrange multiplier - is it the same as lambda in other texts? Also does this sup operator be substituted by max? $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 18 at 21:27
  • $\begingroup$ *...also CAN this sup operator... A mistake:) $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 19 at 8:36
  • $\begingroup$ If you are not familiar with optimal control, then this answer is pretty incomprehensible, so I'd recommend looking into that before hand (plus landing problems of aircrafts is a classical example). Your objective function is just to minimise expelled mass, so there is no need to include them in the objective. Yes, $p$ are Lagrange multipliers to enforce the dynamics, however, you can interpret them as momenta just as in classical mechanics. The $\sup$ is general, since the argument is concave over a convex set, general theorems guarantee that it is a max. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 19 at 9:59
  • $\begingroup$ I'm sorry, I couldnt respond earlier - I got disease. I'll mark it as the answer but can you please provide with a source to such examples where expelled mass of aircrafts/ starcrafts is minimized via your approach (that is with these "p variables"). So far the best source I've found is Bertsekas' "Dynamic programming and optimal control". It almost does the job however the examples described there are too general to be applied for my case. $\endgroup$ Commented 2 days ago

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.