Reusable Launch Vehicles (RLV)

With NASA that has set to itself the top priority of drastically reducing--by a factor of 10--the cost of putting 1 lb of payload in orbit, more than ever before are innovative, even revolutionary, designs of launch vehicles being seriously considered. In particular, the Single Stage To Orbit (SSTO) concept appears within reach thanks to such high efficiency engines as air breathing scramjet engines and, more specifically, aerospikes rocket engines. These two emerging technologies are embodied in the following two concepts, which have been our benchmark examples over the past couple of years: The winged cone has served as testbed for several concepts gravitating around the overall idea that, during the hypersonic part of the launch, good longitudinal control requires a certain amount of decoupling between phugoid and short periodic modes. This problem was initially viewed as a Shapiro eigenstructure assignment, which was later optimized relative to an H-infinity criterion using genetic algorithms. More recently, the same problem was reformulated as a controllability subspace problem and, most recently, as an algebraic geometry problem. In this latest formulation, decoupling is viewed as the problem of maximizing the distance between two points subject to linear constraints on the G(2,4) Grassmannian of 2-D subspaces in 4-D space. As a warm up excercise for the X-33, an input representing differential thrust between upper and lower scramjet engine modules was introduced, and pitch control by a combination of elevon and propulsion was investigated. In particular, while most of our attention in the PCA problem focused on an H-infinity matching of the elevon response by compensated differential thrust, here the matching has been viewed as a geometric problem. The geometric design on the winged cone has proved feasible.

In the X-33, because of its very limited aerodynamic control mandated by the avoidance of hot spots during reentry and its aerospike engine technology that does not allow for gimballing, the necessity to control the attitude, at least in part, by propulsion is more heavily felt. Some preliminary studies of propulsion control have been conducted. However, a more substantial part of our effort has been devoted to reconfigurable control using Linear Set Valued Dynamically Varying (LSVDV) concepts inspired from our research on controlling nonlinear dynamics. The problem is basically viewed as that of tracking the nominal launch trajectory. The tracking error is linearized around every point of the nominal launch trajectory, resulting in the tracking error modeled as a linear system with its parameters generated by the nominal (dynamically varying) trajectory. If failure is allowed, then the nominal trajectory is no longer certain, but its dynamical evolution can nevertheless be narrowed down to within some uncertainty set, resulting in the Set Valued Dynamically Varying aspect of the linear system describing the error. Early simulation results have shown significantly improved performance over the more conventional Linear Parametrically Varying (LPV) concept.


Selected publications

  1. E. Jonckheere, "From Sioux-City to the X-33," in Proceedings of the Conference on System Structure and Control, International Federation of Automatic Control (IFAC), Ecole Centrale, Nantes, France, July 08--10, 1998, pp. 609--620.
  2. E. Jonckheere, P. Lohsoonthorn, and S. Bohacek, "From Sioux City to the X-33," Annual Reviews in Control, Elsevier/Pergamon, vol. 23, pp. 91-108, 1999.
  3. P. Lohsoonthorn, S. Dalzell, and E. Jonckheere, "Eigenstructure versus constrained H-infinity design for hypersonic winged cone, " Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA), Volume 24, Number 4, pp. 648-658, July-August 2001.
  4. E. A. Jonckheere and P. Lohsoonthorn, "A geometric approach to model matching reconfigurable propulsion control," American Control Conference (ACC'2000), Chicago, IL, June 28-30, 2000, Session TM-14, pp. 2388-2392.

For more information about this project, please, contact Stephan K. Bohacek at bohacek@eecis.udel.edu and/or Poonsuk "Matt" Lohsoonthorn at lohsoont@hotmail.com.


This research was supported by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) through Marshall Space Flight Center contract NAS8-97292.


Recent development

Unfortunately, after a rocky development plagued by control and fuel tanks problems, the X-33 project was canceled by NASA.


Other sites of interest

  1. Sea Launch
  2. The Energia Space Corporation of the legendary Sergei Korolev
  3. International Launch Services
  4. The Russian Proton rocket
  5. The Buran shuttle of the Molniya Corporation