AERO -1 Room 14-0551 77 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02139 Ph: 617.253.2800 Milbraries Email: [email protected] Document Services
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Coverage Optimization Using a Single Satellite Orbital Figure-of-Merit by John L. Young III B.S. Aerospace Engineering United States Naval Academy, 2001 SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS AT THE MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY OF TECHNOLOGY June 2003 NL 0 52 J @ 2003 John L. Young III. All Rights Reserved LIBRARIES The author hereby grants to MIT permission to reproduce and distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part. Signature of Author Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics May 23, 2003 Certified by David W. Carter Technical Staff, The Charles Stark Draper Laboratory Thesis Supervisor Certified by_ John E. Draim Captain, USN (ret) Thesis Advisor Certified by Paul J. Cefola Technicistaff, The MIT Lincoln Laboratory Lecturer, Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics Thesis Advisor Accepted by E H.N. Slater Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics Chair, Committee on Graduate Students AERO -1 Room 14-0551 77 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02139 Ph: 617.253.2800 MILbraries Email: [email protected] Document Services http://libraries.mit.edu/docs DISCLAIMER NOTICE The accompanying media item for this thesis is available in the MIT Libraries or Institute Archives. Thank you. Coverage Optimization Using a Single Satellite Orbital Figure-of-Merit By John L. Young III Submitted to the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics on May 23, 2003, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science In Aeronautics and Astronautics Abstract A figure-of-merit for measuring the cost-effectiveness of satellite orbits is introduced and applied to various critically inclined daily repeat ground track orbits. The figure-of-merit measures orbit performance through the coverage time provided over a specified point or region on the ground. This thesis primarily focuses on coverage to a ground station, however coverage to a region is briefly examined. The selected repeat ground track orbits are optimized to maximize the coverage provided by varying the orbit's argument of perigee and longitude of ascending node. Several known orbits were reproduced as a result of this coverage optimization. The figure-of-merit measures the cost of the orbit by the launch cost in AV to attain the mission orbit. The launch AV is calculated using a series of analytic formulas. Trends in the figure-of-merit are investigated with respect to repeat ground track pattern, ground station location, orbit eccentricity, and minimum elevation angle. Using the proposed figure-of-merit, various repeat ground track orbits are examined and compared to draw conclusions on the cost-effectiveness of each orbit. This figure-of-merit has potential for use by satellite system designers to compare the cost-effectiveness of different orbits to determine the optimal orbit for a single satellite and by extension, a constellation of satellites. Technical Supervisor: Dr. David W. Carter Title: Member of the Technical Staff, C.S. Draper Laboratory, Inc. Thesis Advisor: Dr. Paul J. Cefola Title: Member of the Technical Staff, MIT Lincoln Laboratory Thesis Advisor: Captain John E. Draim, USN (ret) Title: Aerospace Consultant 3 [This page intentionally left blank] 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS May 23, 2003 I would first like to thank the Charles Stark Draper Laboratory for the opportunity and funding to pursue my Masters Degree these past two years. I would also like to thank my thesis advisor, Dr. David Carter, for taking me on as a student. If it were not for him, I would probably still be searching for a research topic. I gained a wealth of knowledge from our numerous meetings and discussions. It was also a pleasure working with Dr. Paul Cefola, from whom I have learned a great deal. He was right when he told me that I was going to be playing with the 'big dogs,' and I am happy that I had to opportunity to do so. The insight from Captain John Draim, USN (ret) was also instrumental in this thesis. It is always great working with another Annapolis grad. Hopefully I will be able accomplish some of the great things that he has done in his career, both in and out of the Navy. This thesis would not have been possible without the help from all three of my advisors. Countless hours were spent on the phone with them reviewing both my work and my writing. I am also grateful for their support in writing the AAS Paper this past February. It was an extremely valuable experience and I can't complain about Puerto Rico. Thanks also goes to Jeff Cipolloni of Draper Laboratory for his time with all of my computer questions and problems. I would also like to thank the Draper Fellows I have worked with my time here. Eric, we first met as roommates 2/c year in Annapolis. Who would have thought that we'd end up working down the hall from each other two years later? Thanks for all your help these past two years and I wish you and Emily the best of luck in the future. Andrew, what can I say? We've had a lot of fun here, both in the office and out of it. Thanks (I think) for introducing me to the addicting habit we call golf. We've had some good times on the course- in the snow, pouring rain, and sweltering heat. It's a good thing there was another crazy person to go play when no one else would. Good luck at Power School and I'm sorry I won't be down there to enjoy it with you. Stephen, what are we going to do without the great state of Massachusetts? I know you thought I was crazy and didn't think I'd be able to go NFO, but thanks for humoring me for over a year. It is too bad I won't be able to hang out with both you and Andrew down in Charleston. To the rest of the Fellows, Chris G., Hon-Fai, Stuart, Ed, Barry, Luke, Corbin, Chris J., Daryl, and Keith, thanks for all of the interesting lunch time discussions. Ed, I'll see you down in Pensacola in a year. Finally I would like to thank my family for their support throughout the years. Without it, I would have never gotten this far. Thank you. This thesis was prepared at The Charles Stark Draper Laboratory, Inc., under internal Independent Research and Development Project 0305043. Publication of this thesis does not constitute approval by Draper or the sponsoring agency of the findings or conclusions contained herein. It is publikhed for the exchange and stimulation of ideas. L. Young III 5 [This page intentionally left blank] 6 Table of Contents 1 Introdu ction ................................................................................................. 15 1.1 Thesis Objective ........................................................................................................ 15 1.2 Figure-of-M erit..............................................................................................................15 1.3 Thesis Sum mary ........................................................................................................ 17 2 B ackground ................................................................................................ 19 2.1 Chapter Overview ....................................................................................................... 19 2.2 Cost-Effectiveness Metrics......................................................................................... 19 2.2.1 Cost Per Billable M inute.................................................................................... 19 2.2.2 Cost Per Billable TI M inute................................................................................ 20 2.3 Satellite Constellation Perform ance ........................................................................... 21 2.3.1 Revisit Tim e ...................................................................................................... 21 2.3.2 Coverage Tim e .................................................................................................... 22 2.4 Constellation D esign.................................................................................................. 22 2.4.1 R .D. LU ders...................................................................................................... 22 2.4.2 R . L. Easton and R. Brescia................................................................................ 23 2.4.3 John W alker............................................................................................................24 2.4.4 D avid Beste.............................................................................................................24 2.4.5 A rthur Ballard.................................................................................................... 25 2.4.6 John Draim ........................................................................................................ 27 2.4.7 Thom as Lang ...................................................................................................... 30 2.4.8 John H anson ...................................................................................................... 30 3 M ethodology .............................................................................................. 31 3.1 Chapter Overview .......................................................................................................... 31 3.2 Repeat Ground Track Orbits ....................................................................................... 31 3.3 Repeat Ground Track Orbit Calculation ...................................................................