USAT-I attitude control system trade-off studies, stability analysis and simulations

Elián Hanisch; Pablo Servidia; Elián Hanisch; Pablo Servidia

doi:10.3934/mina.2025003

Metascience in Aerospace

2025, Volume 2, Issue 3: 42-67. doi: 10.3934/mina.2025003

Previous Article Next Article

Research article

USAT-I attitude control system trade-off studies, stability analysis and simulations

Elián Hanisch ¹,
Pablo Servidia ^{2
,
,}

1.
UIDET SENyT - Electrical Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, National University of La Plata, Argentina
2.
CONAE - National Commission of Space Activities, Av. Paseo Colón 751, CABA, Argentina

Received: 23 June 2025 Revised: 25 June 2025 Accepted: 31 July 2025 Published: 15 August 2025

In this work, a comparison was made between possible detumbling and Sun-pointing attitude controls for the USAT-I 3U CubeSat, considering a magnetic-only control versus a combination between coils and a single reaction wheel. The simulation considered software-in-the-loop simulation using NASA's 42 simulator with ad-hoc control law routines. The result is instrumental in defining the trade-off at the system level, considering the power generation on each case for a class of Sun-synchronous orbits as a function of the orbit local hour. As the satellite orbit is not known in advance, the control must be evaluated along different scenarios, with and without an eclipse, considering a near circular and near polar orbit as typical for LEO launch opportunities. For all these actuator cases the nonlinear system is also time varying and underactuated, hence the stability analysis was made using the averaging theory. This includes a Sun-pointing mode with spin, which makes the mission more feasible under operational constraints. The Sun-pointing error feedback was evaluated using a partial quaternion defined in this context.
- USAT-I,
- CubeSat,
- attitude control,
- magnetic control,
- detumbling,
- Sun-pointing
Citation: Elián Hanisch, Pablo Servidia. USAT-I attitude control system trade-off studies, stability analysis and simulations[J]. Metascience in Aerospace, 2025, 2(3): 42-67. doi: 10.3934/mina.2025003

Related Papers:

Abstract

In this work, a comparison was made between possible detumbling and Sun-pointing attitude controls for the USAT-I 3U CubeSat, considering a magnetic-only control versus a combination between coils and a single reaction wheel. The simulation considered software-in-the-loop simulation using NASA's 42 simulator with ad-hoc control law routines. The result is instrumental in defining the trade-off at the system level, considering the power generation on each case for a class of Sun-synchronous orbits as a function of the orbit local hour. As the satellite orbit is not known in advance, the control must be evaluated along different scenarios, with and without an eclipse, considering a near circular and near polar orbit as typical for LEO launch opportunities. For all these actuator cases the nonlinear system is also time varying and underactuated, hence the stability analysis was made using the averaging theory. This includes a Sun-pointing mode with spin, which makes the mission more feasible under operational constraints. The Sun-pointing error feedback was evaluated using a partial quaternion defined in this context.

References

[1]	Alvarez D, Aguilar-Nadalini A, Bagur J, et al. (2023) Design and On-Orbit Performance of the Attitude Determination and Passive Control System for the Quetzal-1 CubeSat. J Small Satell 12: 1231–1247. https://jossonline.com
[2]	Carletta S, Nascetti A, Gosikere Matadha SS, et al. (2022) Characterization and Testing of the Passive Magnetic Attitude Control System for the 3U AstroBio CubeSat. Aerospace 9: 723. https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace9110723 doi: 10.3390/aerospace9110723
[3]	Alarazah H (2018) Theoretical and Numerical Analysis of the Attitude Control of a 3U CubeSat - Iraqi Satellite (TIGRISAT). Association Arab Universities J Eng Sci 25.
[4]	Riano-Rios C, Sun R, Bevilacqua R, et al. (2021) Aerodynamic and gravity gradient based attitude control for CubeSats in the presence of environmental and spacecraft uncertainties. Acta Astronautica 180: 439–450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2020.12.038 doi: 10.1016/j.actaastro.2020.12.038
[5]	Sutherland R, Kolmanovsky I, Girard AR (2019) Attitude Control of a 2U Cubesat by Magnetic and Air Drag Torques. in Ieee T Contr Syst Technol 27: 1047–1059. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCST.2018.2791979
[6]	Gaude A, Vaios L (2020) Design and Structural Analysis of a Control Moment Gyroscope (CMG) Actuator for CubeSats. Aerospace 7: 55. https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace7050055 doi: 10.3390/aerospace7050055
[7]	Grau S, Kapitola S, Weiss S, et al. (2021) Control of an over-actuated spacecraft using a combination of a fluid actuator and reaction wheels. Acta Astronaut 178: 870–880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2020.10.018 doi: 10.1016/j.actaastro.2020.10.018
[8]	Gatsonis N, Lu Y, Blandino J, et al. (2014) Cubesat Design and Attitude Control with Micro Pulsed Plasma Thrusters. In: AIAA SPACE 2014 Conference and Exposition. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2014-4211
[9]	Avanzini G, de Angelis E, Giulietti F, et al. (2019) Attitude control of Low Earth Orbit satellites by reaction wheels and magnetic torquers. Acta Astronaut 160: 625–634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2019.03.013 doi: 10.1016/j.actaastro.2019.03.013
[10]	El-wafi I, Haloua M, Guennoun Z, et al. (2024) A framework for developing an attitude determination and control system simulator for CubesSats: Processor-in-loop testing approach. Results Eng 22: 102201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2024.102201 doi: 10.1016/j.rineng.2024.102201
[11]	Botta S, Actis M, Rogers W, et al. (2021) USAT I - Avances en el primer satélite de la UNLP, $6^{to}$ Congreso Argentino en Ingeniería Aeronáutica, UTN Haedo.
[12]	Hu Y, Jiang Z, Yuan X (2024) Isometric mapping algorithm based GNSS-R sea ice detection. Metasci Aerosp 1: 38–52. https://doi.org/10.3934/mina.2024002 doi: 10.3934/mina.2024002
[13]	Sidi M (1997)Spacecraft Dynamics and Control: A Practical Engineering Approach, Cambridge University Press.
[14]	Lovera M, Astolfi A (2004) Spacecraft attitude control using magnetic actuators. Automatica 40: 1405–1414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.automatica.2004.02.022 doi: 10.1016/j.automatica.2004.02.022
[15]	Servidia P, Sanchez Peña R (2005) Practical Stabilization in Attitude Thruster Control. Ieee T Aero Elec Syst 41.
[16]	Stoneking E (2018) 42: An Open-Source Simulation Tool for Study and Design of Spacecraft Attitude Control Systems. NASA Document. Available from: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20180000954.
[17]	McComas D, Melton R (2017) OpenSatKit Enables Quick Startup for CubeSat Missions, SSC17-II-1, 31st Annual AIAA/USU Conference on Small Satellites, Logan, Utah.
[18]	Canepa V, Husain S, Servidia P (2024) Trade-Off Analysis for Attitude Control in Highly Elliptical Orbits. IEEE ARGENCON 2024, San Nicolás, Argentina. https://doi.org/10.1109/ARGENCON62399.2024.10735803
[19]	Ovchinnikov M Yu, Roldugin DS (2019) A survey on active magnetic attitude control algorithms for small satellites. Prog Aerosp Sci 109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paerosci.2019.05.006
[20]	Trégouët JF, Arzelier D, Peaucelle D, et al. (2013) Static input allocation for reaction wheels desaturation using magnetorquers, 19th IFAC Symposium on Automatic Control in Aerospace, IFAC Proceedings, 46: 559–564. https://doi.org/10.3182/20130902-5-DE-2040.00066
[21]	McKeen P (2025) Computational Methods to Improve Satellite Attitude Determination and Control with a Focus on Autonomy, Generalizability, and Underactuation, MIT Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics Thesis. Available from: https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/158874.
[22]	Zarourati M, Mirshams M, Tayefi M (2024) Active Underactuation Fault-Tolerant Backstepping Attitude Tracking Control of a Satellite with Interval Error Constraints. Adv Control Appl Eng Ind Syst. https://doi.org/10.1002/adc2.215
[23]	Horn RA, Johnson CR (2013) Matrix Analysis, Cambridge University Press.
[24]	Servidia P, Canepa V, Rizzo A, et al. (2024) Flight Safety, Guidance, Navigation and Control on a Suborbital Mission Concept with Aerobraking. IAA Latin American Conference on Small Satellites, Technology and Applications, Salta, Argentina.
[25]	Servidia P, Giribet J, España M (2024) Suborbital Ascent Guidance and Control on VEx1B. IAA Latin American Conference on Small Satellites, Technology and Applications Salta, Argentina.
[26]	Stack Exchange (2017) Maximum angle between a vector x and its linear transformation Ax. Available from: https://www.math.stackexchange.com/questions/2266057/maximum-angle-between-a-vector-x-and-its-linear-transformation-a-x.
[27]	Balan R (2005) An Extension of Barbashin-Krasovskii-LaSalle Theorem to a Class of Nonautonomous Systems. Nonlinear Dynam Syst Theor 8. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.math/0506459
[28]	Hassan Khalil (2002) Nonlinear systems, Prentice Hall.
[29]	Della Rossa F, Bergamasco M, Lovera M (2012) Bifurcation analysis of the attitude dynamics for a magnetically controlled spacecraft, 2012 IEEE 51st IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), 1154–1159. https://doi.org/10.1109/CDC.2012.6426150
[30]	Ward MJ (2017) Chapter 3: Basic Floquet Theory. Available from: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-1-84800-911-0_3.pdf.
[31]	Liberzon D, Switched Systems: Stability Analysis and Control Synthesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Lecture Notes, Available from: https://liberzon.csl.illinois.edu/teaching/Liberzon-LectureNotes.pdf.
[32]	Hanisch E (2024) Numerical simulations of the attitude control of the USAT-I, IAA Latin American Conference on Small Satellites, Technology and Applications, Salta, Argentina.
[33]	Alonso R, Anigstein P, Sánchez Peña RS (1998) SAC-A attitude control design, AS 98-307, Spaceflight Dynamics.
[34]	Slotine JJ, Li W (1991) Applied Nonlinear Control, Prentice Hall.
[35]	CubeSpace, CubeWheel, 2025. https://www.cubespace.co.za/products/cubewheel
[36]	Moreno A, Canepa V, Giribet J, et al. Simulador GNSS para la Evaluación de Algoritmos de Navegación Intergada en Vehículos Aeroespaciales, XI Congreso Argentino de Tecnología Espacial (CATE 2021), Mendoza, Argentina.
[37]	Burroni T, Servidia P (2022) Control Orbital Autónomo Restringido de Bajos Empujes y Filtrado de Elementos Orbitales 2022 IEEE Biennial Congress of Argentina (ARGENCON) San Juan, Argentina. https://doi.org/10.1109/ARGENCON55245.2022.9939743
[38]	Burroni T, Thangavel K, Servidia P, et al. (2024) Distributed satellite system autonomous orbital control with recursive filtering. Aerosp Sci Technol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ast.2023.108859

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2025 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)