Modeling and Optimization in Space Engineering pp 295-341 | Cite as
Optimal Magnetic Cleanliness Modeling of Spacecraft
Abstract
The magnetometers used by spacecraft for scientific research in the near-Earth and interplanetary space are highly sensitive. Since spacecraft contain in general some more or less magnetic parts which can impair scientific measurements, stringent magnetic cleanliness requirements have to be imposed on the spacecraft. In the domain of constant magnetics (magnetostatics), which is part of EMC (electromagnetic compatibility), modeling is a key issue for the verification of the magnetic cleanliness requirements. The paper describes the concept, improvements, and extensions of the multiple magnetic dipole modeling (MDM) method which had been introduced by the author in 1977 and which then has been used by numerous international scientific spacecraft projects during more than three decades. Specific issues, like the NLP method chosen and like the problem of the ambiguity of solutions, are presented in detail. Special techniques for the handling of model parameter constraints, for optimal MDM sizing, for avoidance of relative minima, and for multiple-point far-field compensation are presented as well. The extension of the MDM method to field gradient measurements is formulated and demonstrated by a significant example. Some challenging applications of MDM to spacecraft provide insight in practical modeling problems. Finally, a short description of the MDM software used is given.
Keywords
Magnetic cleanliness Multiple dipole model Magnetic field and field gradient modeling Magnetic testing Magnetic compensation Inversion problemsAcronyms
- ASTOS
Astos Solutions GmbH, Germany
- CNES
Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales, France
- CSG
Centre Spatial Guyanais, French Guiana
- CSP
Magnetic Cleanliness Specification Point
- ECG
Electrocardiography
- EEG
Electroencephalography
- EMC
Electromagnetic Compatibility
- ESA
European Space Agency, Paris
- ESTEC
European Space Technology Centre, Netherlands
- F2, F6, F7
RTG flight models
- FGM
Fluxgate Magnetometer
- FGMI
Inboard Magnetometer
- FGMO
Outboard Magnetometer
- GAMAG
MDM Software
- GRB
Solar X-ray and Cosmic Gamma-Ray Burst Instrument
- GSFC
Goddard Space Flight Center, USA
- IABG
Industrieanlagen Betriebsgesellschaft, Germany
- ISEE-B
International Sun-Earth Explorer
- KSC
Kennedy Space Center, USA
- MAG-1
Magnetometer
- MCF
Mobile Coil Facility
- MDM
Multiple Dipole Model
- MEG
Magneto Encephalography
- MFSA
Magnet-Field simulations-Anlage, IABG, Germany
- NLP
Non-Linear Programming
- RTG
Radioisotope Thermoelectric Power Generator
- S/C
Spacecraft
- SCS
Spacecraft Coordinate System
- SNR
Signal-to-Noise Ratio
- TCS
Test Coordinate System
- TSS
Tethered Satellite System
- TWT
Travelling Wave Tube
- UCS
Unit Coordinate System
- URAP
Unified Radio and Plasma Wave Instrument
- VHM
Vector Helium Magnetometer
References
- 1.Musmann, G., Neubauer, F.M., Lammers, E.: Observations by the Helios-1 spacecraft. J. Geophys. 42, 591–598 (1977)Google Scholar
- 2.Musmann, G.: Design guide for magnetic cleanliness control, internal paper GIOTTO (1982)Google Scholar
- 3.Kuegler, H.: Performance improvement of the magnetic field simulation facility MFSA. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Environmental Testing for Space Programmes, Noordwijk (ESA SP-558, June 2004). Compiled by: K. Fletcher, pp. 407–414, Bibliographic Code: 2004ESASP.558.407K, p. 409, § 3 (2004)Google Scholar
- 4.Mehlem, K.: Multiple magnetic dipole modeling and field prediction of satellites. IEEE Trans. Magn. 14(5), 1064–1071 (1978). ISSN: 0018-9464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Mehlem, K., Narvaez, P.: Magnetostatic cleanliness of the radioisotope thermoelectric power generators (RTGs) of Cassini. IEEE Int. Symp. Electromagn. Compat. 2, 899–904 (1999). ISBN: 0-7803-5057-XGoogle Scholar
- 6.Campbell, S.L., Meyer Jr., C.D.: Generalized Inverses of Linear Transformations. Dover, New York (1991)MATHGoogle Scholar
- 7.Nocedal, J., Wright, S.: Numerical Optimization. Springer, New York (1999). ISBN 0387987932MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Rosenbrock, H.H.: An automatic method for finding the greatest or least value of a function. Comput. J. 3, 175–184 (1960). doi: 10.1093/comjnl/3.3.175. doi:dx.doi.org, ISSN: 0010-4620MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Zisserman, A.: Robotics Research Group in the Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Andrew Zisserman's Home Page, Lecture Courses, B1 Optimization (Michaelmas Term 2011), Lecture 2 “Newton and Newton like methods, and the amoeba algorithm”, www.robots.ox.ac.uk/~az/lectures/b1/lect2.pdf
- 10.Duffin, W.J.: Electricity and Magnetism, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill, London (1990)Google Scholar
- 11.Mehlem, K.: Cassini RTG F5, F2, F7, F6 magnetic analysis report, ESA/ESTEC-JPL internal working paper (1996/1997)Google Scholar
- 12.Mehlem, K.: Ulysses RTG F3 magnetic compensation, ESA/ESTEC internal working paper 1537 (March 1989)Google Scholar
- 13.Balogh, A., Beek, T.J., Forsyth, R.J., Hedgecock, P.C., Marquedant, R.J., Smith, E.J., Southwood, D.J., Tsurutani, B.T.: The magnetic field investigation on the Ulysses mission: instrumentation and preliminary scientific results. Astron. Astrophys. Suppl. Ser. 92, 221–236 (1992)Google Scholar
- 14.Mehlem, K.: Magnetic properties of the Cluster I and II spacecraft, 11 ESA/ESTEC working papers (2000)Google Scholar