IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,378,007
Granted Patent B2
US 12,378,007 · App. 18/340,613 · Granted Aug 5, 2025

Methods and systems for generating a mission plan that guides a spacecraft to orbiting target objects

Inventors: Leo H. Hui (Alhambra, CA); Haig F. Krikorian (Fullerton, CA); Chrysanthie D. Chamis (Palos Verdes Peninsula, CA)
Assignee: The Boeing Company
B64G1/247B64G1/1078B64G1/242B64G1/2427B64G1/646G05D1/683G05D1/697G05D2109/40
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,378,007
App. No.
18/340,613
Granted
Aug 5, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

An example method executed by a controller onboard a spacecraft generates a mission plan in real-time that guides the spacecraft along a space autonomous mission to rendezvous with two or more orbiting target objects. The method includes establishing potential permutations for all possible unique maneuver sequences in which to visit the two or more orbiting target objects, and for each potential permutation, determining a collision-free maneuver plan for defining orbit trajectories to intercept each of the two or more orbiting target objects for each of the possible unique maneuver sequences. An optimal permutation is determined that meets viewing constraints of the two or more orbiting target objects, a viewing priority, and fuel constraints of the spacecraft. A mission visit plan is generated using the optimal permutation, and the spacecraft executes the plan to rendezvous with and inspect the two or more orbiting target objects.

Claims (65)

1. A method executed by a controller onboard a spacecraft to generate a mission plan in real-time that guides the spacecraft along a space autonomous mission to rendezvous with two or more orbiting target objects, the method comprising:

establishing, for two or more orbiting target objects to visit, potential permutations for all possible unique maneuver sequences in which to visit the two or more orbiting target objects;

for each potential permutation, determining a collision-free maneuver plan for defining orbit trajectories to intercept each of the two or more orbiting target objects for each of the possible unique maneuver sequences;

based on the collision-free maneuver plan for each potential permutation, determining an optimal permutation from the potential permutations that meets viewing constraints of the two or more orbiting target objects, a viewing priority, and fuel constraints of the spacecraft, wherein the optimal permutation is further based on an orbit transfer location of the spacecraft and an inspection starting location on the two or more orbiting target objects;

generating a mission visit plan, using the optimal permutation, for the spacecraft to rendezvous with and inspect the two or more orbiting target objects; and

causing the spacecraft to rendezvous with and inspect the two or more orbiting target objects according to the mission visit plan.

2. The method of claim 1 , wherein establishing potential permutations for all possible unique maneuver sequences in which to visit the two or more orbiting target objects comprises:

utilizing a pathfinding algorithm for gaming for determining all potential permutations for all possible unique maneuver sequences in which to visit the two or more orbiting target objects.

3. The method of claim 2 , wherein the pathfinding algorithm for gaming is an A* algorithm.

4. The method of claim 1 , wherein determining the collision-free maneuver plan for each of the possible unique maneuver sequences comprises:

calculating a transfer orbit relative intercept location based on current expected spacecraft and target object positions, velocities, and orbital parameters.

5. The method of claim 1 , wherein determining the optimal permutation from the potential permutations comprises:

ranking each potential permutation based on intercept success of the two or more orbiting targets, the viewing priority, and remaining fuel of the spacecraft; and

selecting the optimal permutation from the potential permutations to be a potential permutation that has no rendezvous intercept failures and has a highest fuel remaining on the spacecraft.

6. The method of claim 1 , wherein determining the optimal permutation from the potential permutations comprises:

ranking each potential permutation based on solar point constraints or sun exclusion zones; and

selecting the optimal permutation from the potential permutations to be a potential permutation that meets the solar point constraints and has a highest fuel remaining on the spacecraft.

7. The method of claim 1 , wherein determining the optimal permutation from the potential permutations comprises:

ranking each potential permutation based on orbit trajectory limitations due to a point of closest approach; and

selecting the optimal permutation from the potential permutations to be a potential permutation that meets the orbit trajectory limitations and has a highest fuel remaining on the spacecraft.

8. The method of claim 1 , further comprising:

after causing the spacecraft to begin the mission visit plan, receiving an update to at least one of a location of the two or more orbiting target objects and a spacecraft collision possibility;

based on the update to the at least one of the location of the two or more orbiting target objects and the spacecraft collision possibility, reevaluating an ability to execute the mission visit plan according to specified mission maneuvers, number and type of target observations, and available time to accomplish target encounters; and

based on constraints of meeting the specified mission maneuvers, updating the mission visit plan to modify an inspection time per target.

9. The method of claim 1 , further comprising:

after causing the spacecraft to begin the mission visit plan, updating position and velocity status on each of the two or more orbiting target objects and checking for a possible collision event with the spacecraft; and

based on updates to the position and velocity on each of the two or more orbiting target objects, updating the mission visit plan by performing one or more of modifying an orbit transfer time of the spacecraft, modifying wait times to rendezvous or perform inspection, or modifying a maneuver trajectory of the spacecraft.

10. The method of claim 1 , wherein for each of the two or more orbiting target objects, multiple inspection points exist, and the method further comprises:

establishing the potential permutations for all possible unique sequences in which to visit the two or more orbiting target objects to include permutations for at least two or more inspection points on each target object.

11. A method executed by a controller onboard a spacecraft to generate a mission plan in real-time that guides the spacecraft along a space autonomous mission to rendezvous with at least one orbiting target object, the method comprising:

establishing, for at least one orbiting target object to be inspected at two or more inspection points, potential permutations for all possible unique maneuver sequences in which to visit the at least one orbiting target object and perform inspections at the two or more inspection points;

for each potential permutation, determining a collision-free maneuver plan for defining orbit trajectories to intercept the at least one orbiting target object and perform inspections at the two or more inspection points for each of the possible unique maneuver sequences;

based on the collision-free maneuver plan for each potential permutation, determining an optimal permutation from the potential permutations that meets viewing constraints of the two or more inspection points, a viewing priority, and fuel constraints of the spacecraft, wherein the optimal permutation is further based on an orbit transfer location of the spacecraft and an inspection starting location of the at least one orbiting target object;

generating a mission visit plan, using the optimal permutation, for the spacecraft to rendezvous with the at least one orbiting target object and perform inspections at the two or more inspection points; and

causing the spacecraft to rendezvous with the at least one orbiting target object and perform inspections at the two or more inspection points according to the mission visit plan.

12. The method of claim 11 , wherein:

the at least one orbiting target object has the two or more inspection points, each of which requires a different orbital approach trajectory by the spacecraft for visiting; and

the different orbital approach trajectory depends on an order in which the two or more inspection points are visited.

13. The method of claim 11 , wherein determining the collision-free maneuver plan for each of the possible unique maneuver sequences comprises:

based on a unique maneuver sequence within a potential permutation that violates the viewing constraints of the two or more inspection points, the viewing priority, or the fuel constraints of the spacecraft, backtracking to a previous inspection point in the unique maneuver sequence as a next inspection point in the unique maneuver sequence to consider.

14. The method of claim 11 , wherein determining the collision-free maneuver plan for each of the possible unique maneuver sequences comprises:

based on a specific inspection point in a unique maneuver sequence not being viable, removing all subsequent permutations from further consideration.

15. The method of claim 11 , wherein determining the collision-free maneuver plan for each of the possible unique maneuver sequences comprises:

calculating a transfer orbit relative intercept location based on current expected spacecraft and target object positions, velocities, and orbital parameters.

16. The method of claim 11 , wherein determining the optimal permutation from the potential permutations comprises:

ranking each potential permutation based on intercept success of the two or more inspection points, the viewing priority, and remaining fuel of the spacecraft; and

selecting the optimal permutation from the potential permutations to be a potential permutation that has no rendezvous intercept failures and has a highest fuel remaining on the spacecraft.

17. The method of claim 11 , wherein determining the optimal permutation from the potential permutations comprises:

ranking each potential permutation based on solar point constraints or sun exclusion zones; and

selecting the optimal permutation from the potential permutations to be a potential permutation that meets the solar point constraints and has a highest fuel remaining on the spacecraft.

18. The method of claim 11 , wherein determining the optimal permutation from the potential permutations comprises:

ranking each potential permutation based on orbit trajectory limitations due to a point of closest approach; and

selecting the optimal permutation from the potential permutations to be a potential permutation that meets the orbit trajectory limitations and has a highest fuel remaining on the spacecraft.

19. The method of claim 11 , further comprising:

after causing the spacecraft to begin the mission visit plan, receiving an update to at least one of a location of the at least one orbiting target object and a spacecraft collision possibility;

based on the update to the at least one of the location of the at least one orbiting target object and the spacecraft collision possibility, reevaluating an ability to execute the mission visit plan according to specified mission maneuvers, number and type of target observations, and available time to accomplish target encounters; and

based on constraints of meeting the specified mission maneuvers, updating the mission visit plan to modify an inspection time per target.

20. An onboard mission controller for a spacecraft, comprising:

a processor; and

non-transitory computer-readable media having stored therein instructions, which when executed by the processor, cause the spacecraft to perform functions comprising:

establishing, for two or more orbiting target objects to visit, potential permutations for all possible unique maneuver sequences in which to visit the two or more orbiting target objects;

for each potential permutation, determining a collision-free maneuver plan for defining orbit trajectories to intercept each of the two or more orbiting target objects for each of the possible unique maneuver sequences;

based on the collision-free maneuver plan for each potential permutation, determining an optimal permutation from the potential permutations that meets viewing constraints of the two or more orbiting target objects, a viewing priority, and fuel constraints of the spacecraft, wherein the optimal permutation is further based on an orbit transfer location of the spacecraft and an inspection starting location on the two or more orbiting target objects;

generating a mission visit plan, using the optimal permutation, for the spacecraft to rendezvous with and inspect the two or more orbiting target objects; and

causing the spacecraft to rendezvous with and inspect the two or more orbiting target objects according to the mission visit plan.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Jun 23, 2023
From: HUI, LEO H.; KRIKORIAN, HAIG F.; CHAMIS, CHRYSANTHIE D.
To: THE BOEING COMPANY
Reel/Frame 064047/0021 →
Continuity (1)
Related Publication 20240425206A1 · Dec 26, 2024
References Cited (49)
US 5299764A · Scott · 1994 [cited by examiner]
US 11987396B2 · Weiss · 2024 [cited by examiner]
US 20050258311A1 · Scott · 2005 [cited by examiner]
US 20070228219A1 · Behrens · 2007 [cited by examiner]
US 20090132105A1 · Paluszek · 2009 [cited by examiner]
US 20180118377A1 · Garber · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20210061494A1 · Belieres Montero · 2021 [cited by applicant]
Barbee et al.; Design of spacecraft missions to remove multiple oribital debris objects; 2011 Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, MT, USA, 2011, pp. 1-14 (Year: 2011). [cited by examiner]
Zavoli et al.; Impulsive Multi-Rendezvous Trajectory Design and Optimization; 8th European Conference for Aeronautics and Space Sciences (EUCASS), Madrid, Spain 2019; pp. 1-15 (Year: 2019). [cited by examiner]
A. Baranov, “An algorithm for calculating the parameters of four-impulse transfers between close almost circular orbits,” Kosmicheskie Issledovaniia, vol. 24, pp. 400-403, May 1986. (English abstract included). [cited by applicant]
W. H. Clohessy and R. S. Wiltshire, “Terminal guidance system for satellite rendezvous,” Journal of the Aerospace Sciences, vol. 27, No. 9, pp. 653-658, 1960. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.2514/8.8704. [cited by applicant]
A. Baranov, “An algorithm for calciulating parameters of mult-orbit manuevers in remote guidance,” Cosmic Res, vol. 28, No. 1, 1990. [cited by applicant]
R. Vepa, “Application of the nonlinear tschauner-hempel equations to satellite relative position estimation and control,” Journal of Navigation, vol. 71, No. 1, p. 44-64,2018. [cited by applicant]
R. Reesman and J. R. Wilson, “The physics of space war: How orbital dynamics contrain space-to-space engagements,” Oct. 2020. [cited by applicant]
K. K. Timmons and J. C. Ringelberg, “Approach and capture for autonomous rendezvous and docking,” in 2008 IEEE Aerospace Conference, Mar. 2008, pp. 1-6. [cited by applicant]
L. Sun and W. Huo, “Robust adaptive relative position tracking and attitude synchronization for spacecraft rendezvous,” Aerospace Science and Technology, vol. 41, pp. 28-35, 2015, [On-Line]. [cited by applicant]
Alexander Korsfeldt Larsen et al., “A Computationally Efficient Model Predictive Control Scheme for Space Debris Rendezvous”, ScienceDirect, IFAC PapersOnLine 52-12 (2019) pp. 103-110. [cited by applicant]
Yu-heng Shen and Ming-shan Hou, “Adaptive Guidance for Spacecrafts Autonomous Rendezvous with Aspect Contraint”, IEEE, 2011. [cited by applicant]
D. F. Lawden, Optimal trajectories for space navigation. Butterworhs London, 1963. [cited by applicant]
E. I. Butikov, “Orbital maneuvers and space rendezvous,” Advances in Space Research, vol. 56, No. 11, pp. 2582-2594, 2015, [On-Line]. [cited by applicant]
Danylo Malyuta et al., “Advances in Trajectory Optimization for Space Vehicle Control”, Annual Reviews in Control, Aug. 2021, pp. 1-100. [cited by applicant]
Luo Yazhong et al., “Survey of orbital dynamics and control of space rendezvous,” Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 1-11, 2014, [On-line]. [cited by applicant]
Yizhai Zhang, et al., “An Angles-Only Navigation and Control Scheme for Noncooperative Rendezvous Operations”, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 66, No. 11, Nov. 2019, pp. 8618-8627. [cited by applicant]
X. Yan, S. Chen, M. Xu, Y. Qian, W. Yao, and R. Zhang, “Mission planning of long distance guidance for space rendezvous,” in 2009 International Conference on Information Engineering and Computer Science, Dec. 2009, pp. … [cited by applicant]
L. Sun, W. Huo, and Z. Jiao, “Adaptive backstepping control of spacecraft rendezvous and proximity operations with input saturation and full-state constraint,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 64, No. 1… [cited by applicant]
L. Kun, J. Haibo, and L. Fei, “Adaptive backstepping control for spacecraft rendezvous on elliptical orbits,” in 2015 34th Chinese Control Conference (CCC), Jul. 2015, pp. 528-532. [cited by applicant]
R. G. Melton, “Time-explicit representation of relative motion between elliptical orbits,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 604-610, 2000. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.2514/2.46… [cited by applicant]
T. E. Carter, “State transition matrices for terminal rendezvous studies: Brief survey and new example,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 148-155, 1998. [Online]. Available https://doi.org… [cited by applicant]
L. Zheng and Y. Jiang, “An improved algorithm to determine the relative attitude during rolling phase of spacecraft rendezvous and docking,” in IEEE 10th International Conference on Industrial Informatics, Jul. 2012, pp… [cited by applicant]
K. Yamanaka and F. Ankersen, “New state transition matrix for relative motion on an arbitrary elliptical orbit,” Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 60-66, 2002. [Online]. Available: https://… [cited by applicant]
Antoine Petit et al., “Tracking complex targets for space rendezvous and debris removal application”, 2012 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Oct. 7-12, 2012, Portugal, pp. 4483-4488. [cited by applicant]
Bin Zhou et al., “Truncated Predictor Feedback for Periodic Linear Systems with Input Delays with Applications to the Elliptical Spacecraft Rendezvous”, IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, vol. 23, No. 6, N… [cited by applicant]
Toralf Boge and Ou Ma, “Using Advanced Industrial Robotics for Spacecraft Rendezvous and Docking Simulation”, ICRA Communications, 2011 IEEE. [cited by applicant]
Zhen-Jiang Sun et al., “Uncertainity-Dependent Warning Threshold for Spacecraft Rendezvous Collision Probability”, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, vol. 55, No. 1, Feb. 2019, pp. 2-16. [cited by applicant]
Hiroyuki Takano et al., “Optimal Spacecraft Rendezvous with PNG”, 2015 15th International Conference on Control, Automation and Systems (ICCAS 2015) Oct. 13-16, 2015 in Bexco, Busan, Korea, pp. 192-196. [cited by applicant]
Julia C. Bell, Autonomous Mission Planning for Spacecraft Rendezvous and Proximity Operations, Air Force Institute of Technology, (2021) Theses and Dissertations, 5065. [cited by applicant]
Jacob Broida and Richard Linares, “Spacecraft Rendezvous Guidance in Cluttered Environments Via Reinforcement Learning”, Conference paper, Jan. 2019 [Online] available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331135… [cited by applicant]
Christopher Karlgaard and Frederick H. Lutz, “Second-Order Relative Motion Equations”, Journal of Guidance, Control and Dynamics, vol. 26, No. 1, Jan-Feb. 2003, pp. 41-49. [cited by applicant]
Lifen Tan et al., “Research on Optimal Strategy of Fixed-Time Rendezvous”, 2010 IEEE, pp. 1065-1069. [cited by applicant]
Huijin Gao et al, “Multi-Objective Robust H Control of Spacecraft Rendezvous”, IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, vol. 17, No. 4, Jul. 2009, pp. 794-802. [cited by applicant]
P.R. Arantes Gilz, “Predictive Control Algorithm for Spacecraft Rendezvous Hovering Phases”, 2015 European Control Conference (ECC) Jul. 15-17, 2015, Linz, Austria, pp. 2085-2090. [cited by applicant]
Edward N. Hartley et al., “Model Predictive Control System Design and Implementation for Spacecraft Rendezvous”, Control Engineering Practice 20 (2012) pp. 695-713. [cited by applicant]
David Sternberg and David Miller, “Mapping a Chaser Satellite's Feasibility Space for Soft Docking”, 2017 IEEE, pp. 1-12. [cited by applicant]
Avishai Weiss et al., “Model Predictive Control for Spacecraft Rendezvous and Docking: Strategies for Handling Constrains and Case Studies”, IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology, vol. 23, No. 4, Jul. 2015, pp… [cited by applicant]
Edward Hartley, “A Tutorial on Model Predictive Control for Spacecraft Rendezvous”, 2015 European Control Conference (ECC) Jul. 15-17, 2015, Linz, Austria, pp. 1355-1361. [cited by applicant]
Xiangyu Gao et al., A Smoothed Exact Penalty Function Method for the Optimal-Fuel Spacecraft Rendezvous Problem with the Collision Avoidance Constraint, Proceedings of the 11th World Conference on Intelligent Control an… [cited by applicant]
Ping Lu and Xinfu Liu, “Autonomous Trajectory Planning for Rendezvous and Proximity Operations by Conic Optimization”, Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, vol. 36, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 2013, pp. 375-389. [cited by applicant]
James Wertz and Robert Bell, “Autonomous Rendezvous and Docking Technologies —Status and Prospects”, SPIE AeroSense Symposium, Paper No. 5088-3, Space Systems Technology and Operations Conference, Orlando, Florida, Apr.… [cited by applicant]
Robert N. Lea, “Automated Orbital Rendezvous Considerations”, downloaded on Jul. 23, 2022 from IEEE Xplore, pp. 1871-1872. [cited by applicant]