A symplectic moving horizon estimation algorithm with its application to the Earth—Moon L2 libration point navigation

  • Xinwei Wang
  • Haijun PengEmail author


Accurate state estimations are perquisites of autonomous navigation and orbit maintenance missions. The extended Kalman filter (EKF) and the unscented Kalman filter (UKF), are the most commonly used method. However, the EKF results in poor estimation performance for systems are with high nonlinearity. As for the UKF, irregular sampling instants are required. In addition, both the EKF and the UKF cannot treat constraints. In this paper, a symplectic moving horizon estimation algorithm, where constraints can be considered, for nonlinear systems are developed. The estimation problem to be solved at each sampling instant is seen as a nonlinear constrained optimal control problem. The original nonlinear problem is transferred into a series of linear-quadratic problems and solved iteratively. A symplectic method based on the variational principle is proposed to solve such linear-quadratic problems, where the solution domain is divided into sub-intervals, and state, costate, and parametric variables are locally interpolated with linear approximation. The optimality conditions result in a linear complementarity problem which can be solved by the Lemke’s method easily. The developed symplectic moving horizon estimation method is applied to the Earth-Moon L2 libration point navigation. And numerical simulations demonstrate that though more time-consuming, the proposed method results in better estimation performance than the EKF and the UKF.


moving horizon estimation symplectic method quasilinearization variational principle L2 libration point navigation 



The authors are grateful for the financial support of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 11772074).


  1. [1]
    Castelvecchi, D. Chinese satellite launch kicks off ambitious mission to Moon’s far side. Nature, 2018, 557(7706): 478–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Hill, K., Born, G. H., Lo, M. W. Linked, autonomous, interplanetary satellite orbit navigation (LiAISON) in lunar halo orbits. In: Proceedings of AAS/AIAA Astrodynamical Specialists Conference, 2005.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Hill, K., Born, G. H. Autonomous interplanetary orbit determination using satellite-to-satellite tracking. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2007, 30(3): 679–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    Sheikh, S. I., Pines, D. J., Ray, P. S., Wood, K. S., Lovellette, M. N., Wolff, M. T. Spacecraft navigation using X-ray pulsars. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2006, 29(1): 49–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Psiaki, M. L. Absolute orbit and gravity determination using relative position measurements between two satellites. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2011, 34(5): 1285–1297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Cielaszyk, D., Wie, B. New approach to halo orbit determination and control. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 1996, 19(2): 266–273.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Ghorbani, M., Assadian, N. Optimal station-keeping near Earth-Moon collinear libration points using continuous and impulsive maneuvers. Advances in Space Research, 2013, 52(12): 2067–2079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Hou, X. Y., Liu, L., Tang, J. S. Station-keeping of small amplitude motions around the collinear libration point in the real Earth-Moon system. Advances in Space Research, 2011, 47(7): 1127–1134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Welch, G., Bishop, G. An introduction to the Kalman filter. University of North Carolina, 2001.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Julier, S. J., Uhlmann, J. K. Unscented filtering and nonlinear estimation. Proceedings of the IEEE, 2004, 92(3): 401–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Kandepu, R., Foss, B., Imsland, L. Applying the unscented Kalman filter for nonlinear state estimation. Journal of Process Control, 2008, 18(7–8): 753–768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Kalman, R. E., Bucy, R. S. New results in linear filtering and prediction theory. Journal of Basic Engineering, 1961, 83(1): 95–108.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Abdelrahman, M., Park, S. Y. Simultaneous spacecraft attitude and orbit estimation using magnetic field vector measurements. Aerospace Science and Technology, 2011, 15(8): 653–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Xiong, K., Wei, C. L. Adaptive iterated extended KALMAN filter for relative spacecraft attitude and position estimation. Asian Journal of Control, 2018, 20(4): 1595–1610.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Soken, H. E., Hajiyev, C. UKF-based reconfigurable attitude parameters estimation and magnetometer calibration. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, 2012, 48(3): 2614–2627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Rao, C. V., Rawlings, J. B., Lee, J. H. Constrained linear state estimation—a moving horizon approach. Automatica, 2001, 37(10): 1619–1628.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Wang, S., Chen, L., Gu, D. B., Hu, H. S. An optimization based moving horizon estimation with application to localization of autonomous underwater vehicles. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 2014, 62(10): 1581–1596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    Abdollahpouri, M., Takács, G., Rohal’-Ilkiv, B. Real-time moving horizon estimation for a vibrating active cantilever. Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 2017, 86: 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Zavala, V. M., Laird, C. D., Biegler, L. T. A fast moving horizon estimation algorithm based on nonlinear programming sensitivity. Journal of Process Control, 2008, 18(9): 876–884.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    Chen, T. P., Foo, Y. S. E., Ling, K. V., Chen, X. B. Distributed state estimation using a modified partitioned moving horizon strategy for power systems. Sensors, 2017, 17(10): 2310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    Vandersteen, J., Diehl, M., Aerts, C., Swevers, J. Spacecraft attitude estimation and sensor calibration using moving horizon estimation. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2013, 36(3): 734–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    Huang, J. L., Zhao, G. R., Zhang, X. Y. MEMS gyroscope/TAM-integrated attitude estimation based on moving horizon estimation. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G: Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 2016, 231(8): 1451–1459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    Betts, J. T. Practical methods for optimal control using nonlinear programming. SIAM, 2001.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    Soneda, Y., Ohtsuka, T. Nonlinear moving horizon state estimation with continuation/generalized minimum residual method. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2005, 28(5): 878–884.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    Bryson, A. E. Jr., Ho, Y. C. Applied Optimal Control. Hemisphere, 1975.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    Szebehely, V. Theory of Orbits, the Restricted Problem of Three Bodies. Academic Press, 1967.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    Peng, H. J., Jiang, X., Chen, B. S. Optimal nonlinear feedback control of spacecraft rendezvous with finite low thrust between libration orbits. Nonlinear Dynamics, 2014, 76(2): 1611–1632.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. [28]
    Peng, H. J, Wang, X. W., Shi, B. Y., Zhang, S., Chen, B. S. Stabilizing constrained chaotic system using a symplectic psuedospectral method. Communications in Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulation, 2018, 56: 77–92.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. [29]
    Bellman, R. E., Kalaba, R. E. Quasilinearization and Nonlinear Boundary-value Problems. Elsevier, 1965.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    Liu, X. F., Lu, P., Pan, B. F. Survey of convex optimization for aerospace applications. Astrodynamics, 2017, 1(1): 23–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. [31]
    Wang, X. W., Peng, H. J., Zhang, S., Chen, B. S., Zhong, W. X. A symplectic pseudospectral method for nonlinear optimal control problems with inequality constraints. ISA Transactions, 2017, 68: 335–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. [32]
    Wang, X. W., Peng, H. J., Zhang, S., Chen, B. S., Zhong, W. X. A symplectic local pseudospectral method for solving nonlinear state-delayed optimal control problems with inequality constraints. International Journal of Robust and Nonlinear Control, 2018, 28(6): 2097–2120.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. [33]
    Tomlin, J. A. Robust implementation of Lemke’s method for the linear complementarity problem. Complementarity and Fixed Point Problems, 1978, 55–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Tsinghua University Press 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Engineering Mechanics, State Key Laboratory of Structural Analysis for Industrial EquipmentDalian University of TechnologyDalianChina

Personalised recommendations