Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vvkck Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T21:00:54.130Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Emergency ejection characteristics of space manipulator multi-body system

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 August 2023

He Cai Open the ORCID record for He Cai [Opens in a new window] ,
Yanbo Wang ,
Songbo Deng  and
Tao Yang
He Cai
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Aerospace Servo Actuation and Transmission, Beijing Institute of Precision Mechatronics and Controls, Beijing, China
Yanbo Wang*
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Aerospace Servo Actuation and Transmission, Beijing Institute of Precision Mechatronics and Controls, Beijing, China
Songbo Deng
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Aerospace Servo Actuation and Transmission, Beijing Institute of Precision Mechatronics and Controls, Beijing, China
Tao Yang
Affiliation:
Laboratory of Aerospace Servo Actuation and Transmission, Beijing Institute of Precision Mechatronics and Controls, Beijing, China
*
Corresponding author: Yanbo Wang; Email: www-2001@163.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Space manipulators are typically installed on spacecraft using an emergency separation device (ESD). In the event of a malfunction, the ESD ejects the manipulator from the spacecraft. However, due to the relative rotation of the manipulator’s joints during the ejection, the equivalent ejection mass varies depending on different attitudes. This paper focuses on studying manipulators equipped with separation slide rails and analyzes their ejection characteristics under different attitudes to determine the optimal manipulator attitude for ejection. Initially, the ejection dynamics model of the space manipulator is established using the Lagrangian method, based on the kinetic energy equation, kinematics equation, and the boundary condition between the manipulator and ESD. Afterward, the space dynamics model is transformed into the dynamic model of plane ejection state by recursion formula. From this model, the equivalent ejection mass and ejection velocity are obtained, and the joint angular variation during ejection is acquired by considering joint friction torque. Using the law of conservation of angular momentum, the ejection angular velocity is then calculated. Finally, this study selected a 7-DOF space manipulator as an example and adjusted the damping parameter B of the joint for more precise calculations by choosing the attitude with a relatively larger joint angular variation. The modified model was then tested for its applicability to other attitudes. After determining the value of B, the correctness of the algorithm was validated by MATLAB calculation, ADAMS simulation, and real object ejection test.

Keywords

ejection of space manipulatorequivalent ejection massejection velocityjoint angular variationejection angular velocity
Type
Research Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 41 , Issue 11 , November 2023 , pp. 3252 - 3274
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bao, W. M. and Wang, X. W., “Prospect of airline-flight-mode aerospace transportation system,” Astronaut. Syst. Eng. Technol. 5(3), 1–6 (2021).Google Scholar
Wang, W. L. and Yang, J. Z., “Spacecraft docking & capture technology: Review,” Chin. J. Mech. Eng. 57(20), 215–231 (2015).Google Scholar
Jiang, C. and Wang, Z. K., “Angular velocity depressing method of constrained and centroid biased on-orbit separation,” Acta Aeronaut. Astronaut. Sin. 36(10), 3382–3392 (2015).Google Scholar
Jiang, C., Wang, Z. K. and Zhang, Y. L., “Study of on-orbit separation schemes for configuration initialization of fractionated spacecraft cluster flying,” In: Proceedings of the 1st IAA Conference on Dynamics and Control of Space Systems (2012) pp. 1436–1448.Google Scholar
Komarsofla, A. K., Yazdi, E. A. and Eghtesad, M., “Dynamic modeling and control of a novel one-legged hopping robot,” Robotica 39(9), 1692–1710 (2021).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallina, P., Bulian, G. and Mosetti, G., “Water bouncing robots: A first step toward large-scale water running robots,” Robotica 34(7), 1659–1676 (2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Senoo, T. and Ishikawa, M., “Analysis of sliding behavior of a biped robot in centroid acceleration space,” Robotica 35(3), 636–653 (2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Z. G. and Yang, Y. N., “Dynamics analysis of the spatial catapult separation problem,” Flight Dyn. 32(3), 239–252 (2014).Google Scholar
Zhang, H. and Xiao, Y. Z., “Study on on-orbit dynamic simulation of space docking mechanism separation,” J. Syst. Simul. 26(4), 954–958 (2014).Google Scholar
Zhang, J. Y., Non-liner Dynamic Research of Cubesats On-Orbit Deployment (Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, 2017).Google Scholar
Luo, C. Q., Sun, J. L. and Wen, H., “Research on separation strategy and deployment dynamics of a space multi-rigid-body system,” Chin. J. Theor. Appl. Mech. 52(2), 503–513 (2020).Google Scholar
Chen, G., Liu, D. and Wang, Y., “Contact force minimization for space flexible manipulators based on effective mass,” J. Guid. Control Dyn. 42(8), 1870–1877 (2019).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahmadizadeh, M., Shafei, A. M. and Fooladi, M., “Dynamic analysis of multiple inclined and frictional impact-contacts in multi-branch robotic systems,” Appl. Math. Modell. 91, 24–42 (2021).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yan, W., Liu, Y. and Lan, Q., “Trajectory planning and low-chattering fixed-time nonsingular terminal sliding mode control for a dual-arm free-floating space robot,” Robotica 40(3), 625–645 (2022).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoshida, K. and Sashida, N., “Modeling of impact dynamics and impulse minimization for space robots,” In: IEEE/RSJ Intemational Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IEEE, 1993) pp. 2064–2069.Google Scholar
Zhang, H. L. and Liao, X., “Research on performance validation of aircraft based on air-table,” J. Syst. Simul. 30(10), 3739–3745 (2018).Google Scholar
Jae, J. K. and Brij, N. A., “Automatic mass balancing of air-braing-baesd three-axis rotational spacecraft simulator,” J. Guid. Control Dyn. 32(3), 1005–1017 (2009).Google Scholar
Korayem, M. H. and Dehkordi, S. F., “Dynamic modeling of flexible cooperative mobile manipulator with revolute-prismatic joints for the purpose of moving common object with closed kinematic chain using the recursive Gibbs-Appell formulation,” Mech. Mach. Theory 137, 254–279 (2019).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korayem, M. H. and Shafei, A. M., “Motion equation of nonholonomic wheeled mobile robotic manipulator with revolute-prismatic joints using recursive Gibbs-Appell formulation,” Appl. Math. Modell. 39(5-6), 1701–1716 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mata, V., Provenzano, S. and Valero, F., “Serial-robot dynamics algorithms for moderately large numbers of joints,” Mech. Mach. Theory 37(8), 739–755 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korayem, M. H. and Dehkordi, S. F., “Derivation of motion equation for mobile manipulator with viscoelastic links and revolute-prismatic flexible joints via recursive Gibbs-Appell formulations,” Rob. Auton. Syst. 103, 175–198 (2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhu, Y. and Wang, S. L., “Analytical solution for vibration system with time-varying mass,” J. Vibr. Shock 27(11), 160–167 (2008).Google Scholar
Nenchev, D. N. and Yoshida, K., “Impact analysis and post-impact motion control issues of a free-floating space robot subject to a force impulse,” In: IEEE Intemational Conference on Robotics and Automation (IEEE, 1999) pp. 548–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, G., Jia, Q. X. and Sun, H. X., “Analysis on impact motion of space robot in the object capturing process,” Robot 32(3), 432–438 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, O., Dang, H. and Pham, K., “On-orbit identification of inertia properties of spacecraft using a robotic arm,” J. Guid. Control Dyn. 31(6), 1761–1771 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar