Directions regarding the analytical models were received. A counter balance arm with weights was added at the top of the ASTROMAST to offset the arm with the gimbals. In addition to this model, three more models were requested from MSFC: structure as in the revised model with the addition of lumped masses at bays 46 and 91 of the ASTROMAST; cantilevered cruciform structure with lumped masses at bays 46 and 91, and an all up cruciform structure with lumped masses at bays 46 and 91. Figures for each model and their corresponding natural frequencies and general mode shapes associated with these frequencies are included. The drawbar in use in the cruciform models must be incorporated into the antenna and ASTROMAST models. The total tensile load carrying capability of the ASTROMAST is approximately 840 pounds

Doane, G. B., III

Seltzer, S. M.

English

NASA Technical Reports Server

General Disclaimer 
One or more of the Following Statements may affect this Document 
 
 This document has been reproduced from the best copy furnished by the 
organizational source. It is being released in the interest of making available as 
much information as possible. 
 
 This document may contain data, which exceeds the sheet parameters. It was 
furnished in this condition by the organizational source and is the best copy 
available. 
 
 This document may contain tone-on-tone or color graphs, charts and/or pictures, 
which have been reproduced in black and white. 
 
 This document is paginated as submitted by the original source. 
 
 Portions of this document are not fully legible due to the historical nature of some 
of the material. However, it is the best reproduction available from the original 
submission. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Produced by the NASA Center for Aerospace Information (CASI) 
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19850017066 2020-03-20T19:25:51+00:00Z
Control Dynamics Company 
Suite 1414, Executive Plaza, 555 Sparkman Drive, Huntsville, Alabama 35805 
(205) 837·8510 
April 4, 1985 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration 
" Marshall Space Flight Center, Alabama 35812 
Attention: r~r. Art Calsoni 
AP25-G 
Subject: Tenth r~onth Progress Report for "Definition of Ground Test for 
Verification of Large Space Structure Control", Contract Number 
NAS8-35835 
Control Dynamics Company is pleased to submit the enclosed Progr~ss Report fdr 
the period of March 1, 1985 through 11arch -31, 1985. Distribution in accol'-
dance with the contract specified standard distribution list is shown below. 
----.... 
Ic/~r'/!vt-::.J'" 2 ' 
~herman M. Seltzer, President 
Sl1S/mfr 
cc: ED12/Dr. Waites 
EM13B/Jordan 
AS24-0 
AT01 
DCASMA 
5 copies 
1 copy 
3 copies 
1 copy 0/ 
1 copy 
(NASA-CB-171438) DZF1NITICN C~ GEOUND TEST 
Fon VEnIFICITION (I L~RGE SF~C~ SiBUCTURE 
CONTROL EIOyteSS l1er,ctt, 1 ., .:1 liar. 1985 
(Control tynamics Co.) 18 p EC A02/MF A01 CSCL 22B G3/18 
N85-25317 
Unclas 
22521 
DEFINITIOtl OF GRoUtm TEST FOR VERIFICATION 
OF LARGE SPACE STRUCTURE COtlTROL 
TENTH HONTH 
R&D STATUS REPORT 
APRIL 4, 1985 
Sponsot'ed By: 
GEORGE C. NARSHALL SPACE FLIGHT CENTER 
MARSHALL SPACE FLIGHT CENTER, ALABAI,1A 35812 
Und' r: 
Contract No. NAS8-35835 
Prepared By: 
CONTROL DYNAIHCS CDt4PANY 
555 SPARKi~All DRIVE, SUITE 1414 
HUNTSVILLE, ALABAf4A 35805 
TENTH MONTH R&D STATUS REPORT 
CONTRACT: 
CONTRACTOR: 
DATE OF CONTRACT: 
CONTRACT END DATE: 
AMOUNT: 
CONTRACT NO.: 
REPORTING PERIOD: 
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: 
CO-PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: 
1.0 Progress 
April I, 1905 
Definition of Ground Test for Verification of 
Large Space Structure Control 
CONTROL DYNAMICS COMPANY 
20 June 1984 
19 June 1986 
$224,808.00 
NAS8-35835 
March I, 1985 through Harch 31, 1985 
Dr. Sherma.n M. Seltzer (205)837-8510 
Dr. George 8. Doane III (205)837-8510 
During the past month, Control Dynamics received new directions regarding 
the analyticill model s. A counter bal ance arm with weights was added at the 
top of the ASTRot1AST to offset the arm with the gimbal s. Thi s revi sed model 
is Model I in Attachment A. Al sn in the Attacl1ment are three more model s 
.whi ch Were requested from MSFC and they appear as follows: 
MODEL II. Structure as in Model I with the addition of lumped masses at 
bays 46 and 91 of the ASTROMAST. 
MODEL III. Cantilevered crucifor'm structure with lumped masses at bays 
46 and 91, 
MODEL IV. All up cruciform structure with lumped masses at bays 46 and 
91. 
Attachment A contains figures for each model and their corresponding natural 
frequencies and general mode shapes associated with these frequencies. 
Durit:g the last part of March, Mr. Bill Simmons of MSFC related to 
Control Dynamics that the drawbar in use in the cruciform model s will need 
to be incorporated into the antenna and ASTROMAST model s. These model swill 
be included in the next monthly report. 
R&D STATUS REPORT NO. 10 
Page 2 
Control Dynamics also investigated the load carrying capabilities of the 
ASTROMAST during this period. ASTRO Research. the originators of the 
ASTRot~AST. provided the information that the total tensile load capability on 
the ASTRot1AST is approximately 840 pounds and is limited only the setting 
used to connect it to the rest of the structure. 
Finally. during March, Dr. Sherman Seltzer traveled to California to 
attend a SDIO/LLNL workshop on Control Systems for DEW. A discussion of this 
workshop is located in Attachment B. 
R&D STATUS REPORT NO. 10 
Page 3 
We; ghted '£ 
TABLE 1.1 
SCOPE OF I-/,,)RK 
'£ Compl ete, 
12'£ Develop pl an to rr.odffy Voyager Magnetometer Boom (VBr~) so 90'£ 
that the test structure has LSS characteristics. 
8% Support LSS modal test with simulations. 65'£ 
3% Develop aliQnment, cal ibration, and strapdown update plan 90% 
for the KARS and Am sen SOl' systems. 
3'£ Provide software for alignment, calibration, and strapdown 90% 
update. 
5% Develop plan for control subsystem integration. 90% 
8% Support subsystem integration with simulation of KARS, ATM 60% 
systems, modified AGS, and the COSI1EC-I. 
8% Develop plan and support with simulation the base excitation 75% 
system and the suspension system. 
5% Provide plan for total system integration. 85% 
4% Provide centralized control software for COSMEC-I. 20% 
8% Develop full scal e system simul ati on wi th and wi thout closed 70% 
loop control. 
5% Use AFWAL data to develop plan for decentralized control and 30% 
distributive control with and without disturbance isolation. 
8'£ Provide simulation to support the decentralized control and 35'£ 
distribute control concepts. 
4'£ Develop software for decentralized control. 15% 
4% Develop softwal'e for distribution control. 15% 
4% Provide test plans for the decentralized and distribution 0% 
control. 
8% Support data reduction for all control test phases. 40% 
3% Provide WBS support. 65% 
100% 
R&D STATUS REPORT NO. 10 
Page 4 
2.0 Change in Key E~nnel 
None 
3.0 Summary of Substantive Information Derived from Special Events 
See Progress section. 
4.0 Problems Encountered and/or Anticipated 
None. 
5.0 Anticipated Deviation of Planned Effort 
None. 
6.0 Description of Major Items/Equipment Purchased Under Contract 
None. 
7.0 Summary of Actions Required by Government 
None. 
8.0 Fiscal Status 
Amount approved for contract: 
.Cos ts th is peri od: 
Costs to date: 
Required to complete: 
9.0 Attachments 
A. FOUR ANALYTICAL MODELS. 
$224,808.00 
10,334.00 
136,162.00 
$ 88,645.00 
B. SDIO/LLNL WORKSHOP ON CotlTROL SYSTEMS FOR DEW. 
9.1 Due Dates and Status of Contract Deliverable Items 
Table 9.1 shows the current status. 
R&D STATUS REPORT NO. 10 
Page 5 
TABLE 9.1 
GTVLSS 
•• 
DUE DATES AND STATUS OF DELIVERABLE ITEMS 
DATE DELIVERED 
July 84 
August 84 
September 84 
October 84 
November 84 
December 84 
January 85 
February 85 
r1arch 85 
April 85 
ITEM 
-
R&D STATUS #1 (Jun. 84) 
R&D STATUS #2 (Jul. 84) 
R&D STATUS #3 (Aug. 84) 
R&D STATUS #4 (Sep. 84) 
R&D STATUS #5 (Oct. 84) 
R&D STATUS #6 (Nov. 84) 
R&D STATUS #7 (Dec. 84) 
R&D STATUS #8 (Jan. 85) 
R&D STATUS #9 (Feb. 85) 
R&D STATUS #10 (r1ar. 85) 
STATUS 
Delivered1 
Delivered2 
Delivered3 
Delivered4 
Delfvered5 [Jelivered6 
Delivered7 
Delivered8 
. Delivered9 
Delivered10 
lInitial evaluation of possible modifications to test structure 
2Results of analysis of modified structure 
3Sensor system update plan 
4Preliminary subsystem integration plan 
5preliminary system integration plan 
6Al gorithlOs for sensor system update pl an 
7Control system simul ation resul ts usi ng linear control model 
8Base excitation system and suspension system simulation resu1ts 
9Complete subsystem integration plan 
10Complete system integration plan 
ATTACHMENT A 
MODEL I 
() 1 H IIt.JFI) "\ KH~";)\"H 1 lO~ I 1\ 
k .. -,I, 'I ' -' "''''''~'' .. ' QUi.r.Jr'l. uti f~OOl~ 
. \ 
MODEL I 
1-3 rigid body 
4 .0573 (Hz) torsion 
5 .1432 pendulum y-plane 
6 .1466 pendulum x-plane 
7 .3613 bending y-plane 
8 .4252 bending x-plane 
9 .4435 lJp.nding y-plane 
10 .4513 torsion + little bending in x-plane 
11 .4696 local-antenna 
12 .4702 local-antenna 
13 .6139 bending y-plane 
14 .7119 torsion + x-plane bending 
15 1.0387 local-antenna 
16 1.0387 local-antenna 
17 1.2978 local-cw arms 
18 1.2995 local-cw arms 
19 1.3074 bending y-plane 
20 1.4176 twisting 
21 1.4185 torsion + x-plane bend'!ng 
22 1.7893 local-antenna 
23 2.1512 bending y-plane 
24 2.2202 tors'ion + x-pl ane bending 
25 2.3288 torsion + x-plane bending 
MODEL r r 
,o~, 
IOr.~ 
I 
MODEL II 
With added masse ilt bllJit 46 and 91 note division changes in ASTROMAST, from 4 
segments of lengths: 2.02m, 3.55m, 3.66m, 3.66mj to 4 segments of lengths: 
3.29m, 3.2910, 3.21m, 3.21m. 
46. 
This was done to accomodate lumped masses at bay 
1-3 rigid body 
4 .0573 (Hz) torsion 
5 .1373 pendulum y-~lane 
6 .1407 pendulum x-plane 
7 .3396 bending y-plane 
8 .4237 bending x-plane + torsion 
9 .4379 bending y-plane 
10 .4512 torsion + x-plane bending 
11 .4696 local-antenna 
12 .4702 local-antenna 
13 .5983 bending x-plane + torsion 
14 .6131 bending y-plane 
H 
15 1.0387 local-antenna I 16 1.0387 local-antenna 
! , 
17 1.0607 bending x-plane + torsion I • 
18 1.2576 bending y-plane 
19 1.2976 local-cw anns 
20 1.3000 local-cw anns 
21 1.3985 bending y-plane 
22 1.4978 bending y-plane 
23 1.7893 local-antenna 
24 1.8389 bending x-plane 
25 2.1869 torsion + x-plane bending 
m 'li' lJ ''C' """ , '., '~~."\ ''''I.- ..... '. u.~ 't: ._.. "-__ .'-' ~ 
Tr:.F'\~LA"iIO~) 
nOiAT 10 1\.1 
1 10 
sll ~,;: 
\ 
:n, ~c) 
38,(,i3'l,Q: . 
\ .31 3~ 
. 3~·,~(J 33:3: 
MODEL III 
MODEL III 
Gimbals and shake table are fixed: ASTROMAST w/crucfform 
1 .1422 (Hz) x-plane pendulum 
2 .1422 y-plane pendulum 
3 .3363 tor~ion 
4 1.0105 y-plane bending 
5 1.0144 x-plane bending 
6 1.1384 y-plane + 1st leg of cruciform 
7 1.1557 1st & 2nd cruciform legs 
8 1.1895 2nd cruciform leg 
9 1.2212 2nd & 3rd cruciform legs 
10 1.2457 3rd cruciform leg 
11 1.2870 3rd & 4th cruciform legs 
12 1.3065 4th cruciform leg 
13 2.7371 torsion 
14 3.6523 torsion 
15 5.0380 x-plane bending 
16 5.2114 y-plane + torsion 
17 7.3938 z direction translation 
18 10.5013 x-plane 
19 10.5357 y-plane 
20 11.1723 1st cruciform leg 
21 11.2636 1st & 2nd legs 
22 11.6944 2nd cruciform leg 
23 11.8890 2nd & 3rd legs 
24 12.2647 3rd cruciform leg 
25 12.5121 cruciform 
Tt:.FlI\\5LATIO~J 
1)OiRT 10 I\J 
0, I",~'!.J 15 -y -1.!l)I~ . 
, ~I~II'I 
!:1. z.QI' ,f. .. , ' !§ 21 
. MODEL IV 
, ... 
f10DEL IV 
ASTROf1AST w/cruciform and added lumped masses 
1-3 rigid body 
4 .1209 pendulum y-plane 
5 .1248 pendulum x-plane 
6 .3730 torsion 
7 .6949 y-plane bending 
8 .7003 x-plane bending 
9 1.1274 cruciform leg #1 
10 1.1535 cruciform legs 1 & 2 
11 1.1808 cruciform leg #2 
12 1. 2182 cruciform legs 2 & 3 
13 1.2390 cr'uciform 1 eg #3 
14 1.2847 cruciform legs 3 & 4 
15 1.3008 cruciform leg #4 
16 2.5039 x-plane bending 
17 2.i'415 torsion 
18 3.6197 y-plane iJelld'jng + torsion 
19 3.7394 y-plane bending + torsion 
20 5.1403 x-plane bending + torsion 
21 5.4858 y-plane bending + torsion 
22 7.3938 z-direction trallslation 
23 10.7363 x-plane bending + cruciform rotation 
24 11.0188 mainly cruciform motion 
25 11. 2622 mainly cruciform leg 1 motion 
A TT ACHt1ENT B 
SOIO/LLNL WORKSHOP ON CONTROL SYSWIS FOR DEW. 
An agreement has been made between Lawrence Livermore 
Nati onal Lab (LLNL) and the Strateg'lc Defense Ini ti ative Offi ce 
to develop a "Center of Excellence in Control Systems for 
Oi rected Energy Weapons" at Lfvermore. The purpose of the work-
shop was to help Livermore to plan how to staff up and meet this 
agreement. A committee of experts from universities & industries 
has been formed to advise Livermore on developing a research plan 
to meet the critical control technology requirements. It is the 
purpose of this workshop to brief the Livermore staff and its 
advisory committee on 501, to review pertinent past work by DOD 
and NASA, and to identify criti cal control technol ogi es needed 
for future directed energy weapons. The workshop, then, was a 
kickoff to get this effort started. 
The workshop was initiated by an overview given by Bob 
Strunce of the 5010 Space Laser Program. Thi s was foll owed by 
Major Bob Van Allen's overview of Ground Based Lasers. This was 
foll owed by a very well presented di scussi on of the fundamental s 
of controlling a Space Laser by Don Washburne, formerly of 
Kirkland A.F.B. Next, a presentation on Space Laser designs and 
concepts was given by Terry Brennan of the Aerospace Corporation. 
This was followed by a presentation by Jim Negro of Draper Lab on 
Space Optics controls issues. On the afternoon of Thursday, 
• 
Bob Van Allen gave a good presentation on Control Systems for the 
Airborne Laser Laboratory (for which he was responsible when he 
was at Air Force Weapons Labs). This was followed by a presen-
tation by Paul Merritt of Hughes Aircraft Company on technology 
development needs for laser pointing systems. James Dillow of 
TASC presented a view on optical "zapping" at the Air Force 
Weapons Laboratory. Bill Witt then gave his overview of the 
Large Structures Technology Program. Finally. Hugh Dougherty of 
Lockheed presented an excellent presentation on the ST Control 
System. Friday. Bob Strunce started the program with an overview 
of the ACOSS program dUring which he mentioned Control Dynamics' 
part. He also said that the DARPA Model No.2 was developed by 
Draper and was modified by Control Dynamics. The rest of the 
morning was taken up by a presentation from Lockheed and 
Integrated Systems: a presentation that Mike Lyons very capably 
orchestrated on Lockheed's ACOSS work. both experimental and 
LAC/HAC. This was followed by a pl'esentation by Bob BenHabib 
from TRW on their control technology and finally by Dave Hyland 
of Harris Corporation on their way of developing large order 
systems descriptions with uncertain parameters. 
The members of the Mvi sory Commi ttee to Li vermore i ncl ude: 
Michael Athens. MIT; Art Bryson of Stanford; Drago Siljak of the 
University of Santa Clara; Gene. Franklin of Stanford; Gunter 
Stein of Hone.Ywell; Al an Taub of the University of Cal Hornia, 
Santa Barbara; and Donald Wiberg of UCLA. The Advisory Committe 
is headed by Dr. Charles Herget of Livermore Lab. 
'I , 
h 
r: 
" 
I 
At the end of the first day, 1.e., Thursday, the members 
of the committee were asked what they thought the major areas 
that ought to be addressed in control systems were for SD1. 
These were as a result of one day of listening. They listed the 
following areas: 
(a) Wide bandwidth digital control or how to obtain it; 
(b) The ability to attack the multirate sampling problem; 
(e) How to link Hierarchical control systems; 
(d) There is controversy amongst the committee members on 
whether or not new theory is needed for control systems; 
(e) How does one start up the operation of Hierarchical control 
systems; 
(f) Numerical analysis techniques; 
(g) Alternatives to finite eiement modeling especially since 
NASTRAN does not handle nonlinearities such as joints; 
(h) Can one handle the dynamic problem of when one attaches a 
nonlinear element to the rest of the system; 
(i) The characterization of disturbance characteristics. 


Definition of ground test for verification of large space structure control

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

NASA Technical Reports Server