A Quantitative Framework for the Comparison of Collision Avoidance Manoeuvre Optimisation Methods

Thomas Belchior Maurício Hughey Childs

Key information

Authors:

Thomas Belchior Maurício Hughey Childs (Thomas Belchior Maurício Hughey Childs)

Supervisors:

João Paulo Lopes Monteiro (João Paulo Lopes Monteiro); Paulo Jorge Soares Gil (Paulo Jorge Soares Gil)

Published in

November 19, 2024

Abstract

With the increasing number of space objects, the risk of collisions with active satellites has become an urgent issue. In this thesis, a methodology for the comparison of Collision Avoidance Manoeuvre (CAM) planning and optimisation techniques is proposed, taking into account the accuracy, optimality and computational cost of the resulting solutions. Satellite operators already perform conjunction risk assessment and avoidance activities at a significant cost, making invaluable the employment of CAM planning and execution methods with proven risk-mitigation capabilities, at minimum propellant and computational expense. Multiple authors have explored the determination of optimal CAMs over the last decades, so the goal of this study is to derive an appropriate set of comparison criteria for the evaluation and performance assessment of these. The criteria proposed consider factors such as the accuracy of the resulting solutions, their optimality, and the computational requirements of each method, maintaining enough generality to be applicable across all classes of CAM optimisation techniques. The developed framework is applied to a selection of CAM optimisation methods that address a set of commonly employed optimisation goals, constraints, and decision variables. The results are validated for the case of a single-encounter conjunction scenario, across various conjunction geometries and orbital regimes. This work contributes to the streamlining of collision avoidance operations, by reducing decision-making time and improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the performed manoeuvres; furthermore, to the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first work to provide a comparative, quantitative analysis of the performance of published CAMO methods.