Upload
tex
View
52
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Passive CubeSat Tracking: A Distributed Radiometric Approach to Tracking Near-Earth Small Satellites. Benjamin Kempke University of Michigan - MXL. The Problem – I Can’t Find My Satellite!. CubeSats are usually flown as secondary payloads - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Passive CubeSat Tracking:A Distributed Radiometric Approach to Tracking
Near-Earth Small Satellites
Benjamin KempkeUniversity of Michigan - MXL
The Problem – I Can’t Find My Satellite!
• CubeSats are usually flown as secondary payloads
• Multiple CubeSats in the same launch dropped off in nearly identical orbits
• The CubeSats, along with other debris from the rocket are initially given anonymous classifications from NORAD– Object A, B, C, etc.
• It is up to the satellite operators to distinguish which object is which
• LEOTrack aims to help out with these issues, along with providing a mechanism for generic day-to-day satellite tracking
An Example: Recent Launch of M-Cubed, RAX-2, and E1P
• Six unidentified objects to start• Two quickly classified with help from high-gain dish• RAX-2 took about a week to get a firm determination• Remaining three objects took approximately one month
to classify• One issue was
that one object was likely just debris
• M-Cubed and E1P stuck together
Current Heuristic Classification Methods
• Differing orbits will result in different profiles of the observable Doppler shift during a pass of the satellite over a ground station
• This spectrum, derived from tracking AubieSat-1, shows deviations in the Doppler profiles of nearby E1P and M-Cubed
• Still fairly hard to make out the exact doppler profile of each satellite, even after one month
• All three of these satellites were ejected at the same time
Current Heuristic Classification Methods Aren’t Good Enough
• No systematic way of distinguishing the satellites• Current approaches rely on ‘eye-balling’ it• Require at least 5-10km in spacecraft separation to
produce a distinguishable difference in Doppler estimates• It can take weeks for the spacecraft to separate this far,
wasting valuable time for spacecraft checkout and operations
• It would be great to add GPS or use current deep-space tracking techniques, but these significantly increase system cost and complexity
How Did We Fix It?• Accurate tracking using Doppler-based methods
requires extremely accurate (<1Hz) measurement
• Even the spacecraft transmissions do not maintain this level of stability over time
• Need a way to cancel out these effects• LEOTrack is set up to estimate pairwise
difference-based Doppler measurements between ground stations
• Accurately determining the time-of-arrival of a signal is also valuable, but these estimates are inherently noisy
• LEOTrack also estimates these difference-based time-of-arrival (ToA) measurements
Moving Complexity to the Ground• Still need a stable clock and time reference at each station, but now this
burden has been shifted away from spacecraft designers• Multiple ground stations are synchronized together using GPS• Software-defined radio (SDR) architecture is required in order to record the
necessary raw baseband measurements• Each time a transmission is heard at a listening ground station, the raw
baseband data along with any pertinent timing information is forwarded to a central server for pairwise analysis
LEOTrack Algorithm Basics
• LEOTrack constructs pairwise diff-Doppler and diff-ToA estimates for each transmission received at listening ground stations
• LEOTrack works in tandem with an orbit determination (OD) filter to iteratively improve an estimate of the satellite’s orbit
• An Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) in Monte (JPL-propriety software suite) processes the noisy measurements and provides updated estimates of the satellite’s orbit
First Step: ‘Coarse Acquisition’• First step is to clean up the data received from independent
ground stations• Retimes and resamples all baseband data so that respective
samples from each ground station line up in time• All non-transmission data is also discarded• The data is also transformed to remove any expected time- and
Doppler-shift from each station’s viewpoint using the current estimate of the satellite’s orbit
• Assuming the orbital model is perfect, the transformed baseband data from each station should be identical
• Any remaining errors will be determined in the ‘Fine Acquisition’ step
Second Step: ‘Fine Acquisition’
• Here, the diff-Doppler and diff-ToA estimates are refined for each pair of ground stations
• Exhaustive searching of the entire {diff-Doppler, diff-ToA} subspace is time consuming
• diff-Doppler is searched first, then diff-ToA• Search space is defined by the uncertainty imposed by
the current orbit model estimate• Resulting point of max
correlation corresponds to the final estimate
Last Step: Uncertainty Estimation & OD Filter Update
• OD Filter requires variance estimates for all measurement inputs in order to know how much to ‘trust’ the measurement
• diff-Doppler uncertainty is simple as it depends only on the observed signal and noise power of the transmission
• diff-ToA uncertainty is more complex and dependent upon the actual message being transmitted– Can say for certain that if the message is decoded, it is less
than the bitrate of the message
Contributions This Summer• Created baseband data simulation tools• Developed and evaluated LEOTrack in a
variety of operational scenarios• Created the necessary interfacing
between LEOTrack and Monte• Result: It works!• Graphs to the right show pre-fit and
post-fit absolute position error – Position error has been reduced from a
maximum of ~3km to ~0.42km• Faster anonymous object classification• Better accuracy than TLEs
Next Steps
• Supporting ground station hardware development – realizing the system
• Collect and process ‘real’ data• Further development and evaluation of
LEOTrack for different application domains– Higher orbits and/or deep-space trajectories
CONCLUSION