An Exploratory Exercise in Taguchi Analysis of Design Parameters: Application to a Shuttle-to-space Station Automated Approach Control System

The chief goals of the summer project have been twofold - first, for my host group and myself to learn as much of the working details of Taguchi analysis as possible in the time allotted, and, secondly, to apply the methodology to a design problem with the intention of establishing a preliminary set of near-optimal (in the sense of producing a desired response) design parameter values from among a large number of candidate factor combinations. The selected problem is concerned with determining design factor settings for an automated approach program which is to have the capability of guiding the Shuttle into the docking port of the Space Station under controlled conditions so as to meet and/or optimize certain target criteria. The candidate design parameters under study were glide path (i.e., approach) angle, path intercept and approach gains, and minimum impulse bit mode (a parameter which defines how Shuttle jets shall be fired). Several performance criteria were of concern: terminal relative velocity at the instant the two spacecraft are mated; docking offset; number of Shuttle jet firings in certain specified directions (of interest due to possible plume impingement on the Station's solar arrays), and total RCS (a measure of the energy expended in performing the approach/docking maneuver). In the material discussed here, we have focused on single performance criteria - total RCS. An analysis of the possibility of employing a multiobjective function composed of a weighted sum of the various individual criteria has been undertaken, but is, at this writing, incomplete. Results from the Taguchi statistical analysis indicate that only three of the original four posited factors are significant in affecting RCS response. A comparison of model simulation output (via Monte Carlo) with predictions based on estimated factor effects inferred through the Taguchi experiment array data suggested acceptable or close agreement between the two except at the predicted optimum point, where a difference outside a rule-of-thumb bound was observed. We have concluded that there is most likely an interaction effect not provided for in the original orthogonal array selected as the basis for our experimental design. However, we feel that the data indicates that this interaction is a mild one and that inclusion of its effect will not alter the location of the optimum