• Advances in aircraft and spacecraft science
• /
• v.5 no.2
• /
• pp.225-237
• /
• 2018

The difficulties of satellite vibration testing are due to the commonly expressed qualification requirements being incompatible with the limited performance of the entire controlled system (satellite + interface + shaker + controller). Two features cause the problem: firstly, the main satellite modes (i.e., the first structural mode and the high and low tank modes) are very weakly damped; secondly, the controller is just too basic to achieve the expected performance in such cases. The combination of these two issues results in oscillations around the notching levels and high amplitude beating immediately after the mode. The beating overshoots are a major risk source because they can result in the test being aborted if the qualification upper limit is exceeded. Although the abort is, in itself, a safety measure protecting the tested satellite, it increases the risk of structural fatigue, firstly because the abort threshold has been already reached, and secondly, because the test must restart at the same close-resonance frequency and remain there until the qualification level is reached and the sweep frequency can continue. The beat minimum relates only to small successive frequency ranges in which the qualification level is not reached. Although they are less problematic because they do not cause an inadvertent test shutdown, such situations inevitably result in waiver requests from the client. A controlled-system analysis indicates an operating principle that cannot provide sufficient stability: the drive calculation (which controls the process) simply multiplies the frequency reference (usually called cola) and a function of the following setpoint, the ratio between the amplitude already reached and the previous setpoint, and the compression factor. This function value changes at each cola interval, but it never takes into account the sensor signal phase. Because of these limitations, we firstly examined whether it was possible to empirically determine, using a series of tests with a very simple dummy, a controller setting process that significantly improves the results. As the attempt failed, we have performed simulations seeking an optimum adjustment by finding the Least Mean Square of the difference between the reference and response signal. The simulations showed a significant improvement during the notch beat and a small reduction in the beat amplitude. However, the small improvement in this process was not useful because it highlighted the need to change the reference at each cola interval, sometimes with instructions almost twice the qualification level. Another uncertainty regarding the consequences of such an approach involves the impact of differences between the estimated model (used in the simulation) and the actual system. As limitations in the current controller were identified in different approaches, we considered the feasibility of a new controller that takes into account an estimated single-input multi-output (SIMO) model. Its parameters were estimated from a very low-level throughput. Against this backdrop, we analyzed the feasibility of an LQG control in cancelling beating, and this article highlights the relevance of such an approach.