## The Lambert problemIn general, the term Lambert's problem refers to the question of finding the orbit that connects any two points in space where the departure and arrival time is given. This definition includes trajectories of arbitrary length or very high propellant consumption.
In particular, we are in the following concerned with the subset of Thus, we assume in the following that the chaser is 'reasonably close' in altitude and phase angle - and want to solve the transfer problem for that situation within the next orbital period.
## The initial stateLet's set up a situation is it might arise just after a phasing period - chaser and target are in circular orbits, 20 km separate in altitude with the target being higher and the chaser approaching from below.(Note that the chaser could equally well approach from the front and be above the target - assuming the chaser was launched from Earth, it's just energetically cheaper to come from a lower orbit, but if the chaser were an interplanetary spacecraft arriving, it would be cheaper to approach from above.) Add the following lines to a config file:
Note that here we give an example of a target position (rather than state vector) which makes the altitude separation rather obvious. Due to the slightly changed heading, the orbital plane of the two craft is similar, but not quite the same.
## The Lambert burn sequenceNow, let's program a fit for a rendezvous burn sequence. This is conceptually similar to the PEG-4 fit, but unlike in the PEG-4 case where a specific point in space is targeted and there are constraints on the vertical speed at this point, in a Lambert fit the time at which the point is reached is fixed.
Since LEO targeting only allows one single rendezvous target in the simulation, the fit is completely specified by providing the initial time However, likely the target is an extended object. So we might in fact not want to reach it precisely - we'd like to reach a position somewhat distance so that we can start proximity operations and e.g. dock. To do that, optionally offset_x, offset_y and offset_z can be specified (in proximity coordinates). Note that only the x-offset will lead to a stationary position with respect to the target if velocities are matched - both other offsets will lead to drift due to orbital mechanics and will require stationkeeping. Add the following lines to the config file:
This aims to get us to a position 100 meters below the target. If you run the fit and plot x and z proximity coordinates, the parameters of both burns will be shown after it converges and the simulation will show a small drift afterwards, If you plot the y-coordinate, you'll see that the two burn sequence has also adjusted the orbital plane. We've seen before that this would usually be done with a single burn at the crossing nodes of the orbits, but generally it is possible to change plane also with nearly any two burns. The exception to this is when the times are such that the transfer angle is near 180 degrees - in this case, symmetry will dictate that whatever normal burns are initiated, we always reach the same point (at different altitude) at arrival. If such a situation arises, the y-fit will automatically be inhibited. If so desired, it is also possible to manually inhibit any plane changes during the Lambert fit via disable y_fit added to the burn sequence definition. You can vary the departure and arrival time somewhat - for a while the fit will still converge, but eventually it will get more and more propellant-costly and at the same time more and more difficult to converge.
## Analytical vs. numerical Lambert solutionThere are many analytical Lambert solvers available in libraries or as sample codes. They assume a spherical gravity field and instantaneous burns (impulse approximation). Using the LEO targeting software, it is relatively easy to first set spherical gravity and impulse approximation, do a Lambert fit, then change to J3 gravity and finite duration burns and program the Lambert solution obtained before as PEG-7 burns.The result of such a procedure is shown here for the above rendezvous:
In the event, the analytical solution misses the target by a good 2.5 km - and is much worse in letting the chaser come to a good rest relative to the target. So while it is quite possible to use the analytical solution and then do suitable correction burns, there's something to be said for the numerics.
Continue with Rendezvous plans. Back to main index Back to science Back to LEO targeting Created by Thorsten Renk 2019 - see the disclaimer, privacy statement and contact information. |