A method and device for comprehensive judgment of the validity of gyroscope data

Abstract

This invention relates to the field of spacecraft attitude and angular velocity measurement technology, and more specifically, to a method and apparatus for comprehensively judging the validity of gyroscope data. The invention provides a method for comprehensively judging the validity of gyroscope data, comprising the following steps: Step S1: Acquire gyroscope data packets and determine the validity of the current gyroscope itself. If the current gyroscope is valid, proceed to Step S2; if the current gyroscope is invalid, the current gyroscope arbitration result is invalid, and proceed to Step S5; Step S2: Determine whether other gyroscopes are valid. If other gyroscopes are valid, proceed to Step S3; otherwise, proceed to Step S5; Step S3: Perform mutual validity judgment between gyroscopes. If the mutual judgment passes, the current gyroscope arbitration result is valid; otherwise, the current gyroscope arbitration result is invalid, and proceed to Step S5; Step S5: Output the current gyroscope arbitration result. This invention can reduce the missed detection rate of gyroscope anomalies and improve the reliability of gyroscope use.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of spacecraft attitude angular velocity measurement technology, and more specifically, to a method and device for comprehensive judgment of the validity of gyroscope data. Background Technology

[0002] Fiber optic gyroscopes are widely used in the aerospace field. A fiber optic gyroscope is a sensing device based on optical fiber coils. As a crucial single unit for measuring angular velocity on satellites, the fiber optic gyroscope determines the success or failure of a satellite mission.

[0003] As precision instruments, gyroscopes generate complex data. Current satellite attitude control systems rely solely on the gyroscope's internal validity indicators to determine the accuracy of its data, neglecting other potential anomalies. Therefore, the assessment of gyroscope data validity is inaccurate and unreliable. Furthermore, when a gyroscope malfunctions, it's difficult to directly and accurately identify the type of fault, requiring historical data analysis, which is labor-intensive and impacts troubleshooting efficiency.

[0004] Considering redundancy, satellites typically have two or more gyroscopes installed. Current technology only judges whether there is any abnormality or whether the gyroscope itself is effective based on the gyroscope itself. Once the gyroscope is effective, its data is used, which easily leads to the omission of gyroscope abnormalities with fixed deviations. Summary of the Invention

[0005] The purpose of this invention is to provide a method and apparatus for comprehensive judgment of the validity of gyroscope data, thereby solving the problem of low reliability in the valid judgment of gyroscope data in the prior art.

[0006] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention provides a comprehensive method for judging the validity of gyroscope data, comprising the following steps:

[0007] Step S1: Obtain the gyroscope data packet and determine the validity of the current gyroscope itself. If the current gyroscope itself is valid, proceed to step S2. If the current gyroscope itself is invalid, the arbitration result of the current gyroscope is invalid, and proceed to step S5.

[0008] Step S2: Determine if other gyroscopes are valid. If other gyroscopes are valid, proceed to step S3; otherwise, proceed to step S5.

[0009] Step S3: Perform a validity check between the gyroscopes. If the check passes, the current gyroscope arbitration result is valid; otherwise, the current gyroscope arbitration result is invalid, and proceed to step S5.

[0010] Step S5: Output the current gyroscope arbitration result.

[0011] In one embodiment, step S1 further includes:

[0012] Step S11: Obtain the gyroscope data packet and determine whether the gyroscope data packet has been updated. If it has been updated normally, proceed to step S12 for the next judgment. If it has not been updated, proceed to step S15.

[0013] Step S12: Obtain the internal flag of the gyroscope and determine whether the internal flag of the gyroscope is valid. If it is valid, proceed to step S13 for the next judgment. If it is invalid, proceed to step S15.

[0014] Step S13: Determine if the gyroscope data exceeds the limit. If the data does not exceed the limit, proceed to step S14 for the next judgment. If the data exceeds the limit, proceed to step S15.

[0015] Step S14: Determine whether the gyroscope data is continuous. If the data is continuous, the current gyroscope itself is valid and proceed to step S2. If the data is not continuous, proceed to step S15.

[0016] Step S15: The current gyroscope itself is invalid, and the reason for the error is output. Proceed to step S5.

[0017] In one embodiment, step S13, determining whether the gyroscope data exceeds the limit, further includes:

[0018] Based on the characteristics of a single gyroscope, determine the maximum measurement threshold ω of the gyroscope's angular velocity. max ;

[0019] The gyroscope's measured angular velocity is compared with the gyroscope's maximum angular velocity measurement threshold ω. max If the data is within the threshold range, then the data has not exceeded the limit.

[0020] In one embodiment, step S13 involves comparing the gyroscope's measured angular velocity with the maximum gyroscope angular velocity measurement threshold ω. max The comparison further includes:

[0021] The absolute value of the measured angular velocity of any axis of the gyroscope is compared with the maximum measurement threshold ω of the gyroscope's angular velocity. max If all values ​​are within the threshold range, then the data has not exceeded the limit.

[0022] In one embodiment, step S14, determining whether the gyroscope data is continuous, further includes:

[0023] Based on ground tests, the threshold ω for comparing the front and back beats of the gyroscope was determined. e ;

[0024] The angular velocity of the gyroscope in the current cycle is compared with that in the previous cycle to determine whether the gyroscope data is continuous.

[0025] In one embodiment, step S14 involves determining a threshold ω for comparing the preceding and following beats of the gyroscope based on ground testing. e Further including

[0026] Based on ground tests, the maximum change in the satellite's angular velocity within one control cycle is obtained and used as the threshold ω for comparing the gyroscope's front and back frames. e .

[0027] In one embodiment, step S14, comparing the current cycle angular velocity of the gyroscope with the previous cycle angular velocity, further includes:

[0028] Compare the angular velocities of the gyroscope along the X, Y, and Z axes in the current cycle with those in the previous cycle. If any one of these values ​​satisfies the following expression, then the gyroscope data is discontinuous. The corresponding expression is as follows:

[0029]

[0030] Where, ω x(或y，z) This represents the angular velocity of the gyroscope along the X, Y, or Z axis during its current period.

[0031] This refers to the angular velocity of the gyroscope along the X, Y, or Z axis during the previous cycle.

[0032] In one embodiment, the current gyroscope is a first gyroscope, and the other gyroscopes include at least a second gyroscope;

[0033] Step S3 further includes:

[0034] Step S31: Determine the threshold δ1 for gyroscope mutual judgment based on ground tests;

[0035] Step S32: Calculate the difference Δω between the X-axis angular velocities of the first and second gyroscopes. bix The difference Δω between the angular velocities of the Y and Y axes biy The difference Δω between the Z-axis and the angular velocity biz The corresponding expression is:

[0036] Δω bix =|ω biAx -ω biBx |;

[0037] Δω biy =|ω biAy -ω biBy |;

[0038] Δω biz =|ω biAz -ω biBz |;

[0039] Where, ω biAx ωbiAy ω biAz Let ω be the angular velocity of the first gyroscope along the X, Y, and Z axes. biBx ω biBy ω biBz These are the angular velocities of the second gyroscope along the X, Y, and Z axes;

[0040] Step S33: Calculate the difference Δω bix , Δω biy , Δω biz The comparison is performed with the threshold δ1. If both satisfy the following expression, the gyroscope cross-test passes:

[0041] Δω bix <δ1;

[0042] Δω biy <δ1;

[0043] Δω biz <δ1.

[0044] In one embodiment, the step between step S2 and step S5 further includes:

[0045] Step S4: Perform a validity check between the current gyroscope and the star sensor. If the check passes, the arbitration result of the current gyroscope is valid; otherwise, the arbitration result of the current gyroscope is invalid, and proceed to step S5.

[0046] Step S2 further includes: if other gyroscopes are invalid, proceed to step S4.

[0047] In one embodiment, step S3 further includes:

[0048] If the mutual judgment fails, proceed to step S4.

[0049] In one embodiment, step S4 further includes:

[0050] Step S41: Based on the ground test, determine the threshold δ2 for the mutual judgment between the gyroscope and the star sensor.

[0051] Step S42: Use the inertial frame attitude quaternion Q obtained from the previous cycle of the star sensor. bi_pre , and the inertial frame angular velocity ω obtained from the current periodic gyroscope bi_gyroA The attitude quaternion Q of the inertial frame in the current period is calculated by integration. bi_gyroA ;

[0052] Step S43: Calculate the inertial frame attitude quaternion Q for the current period. bi_gyroA The inertial frame attitude quaternion Q obtained from the current period of the star sensor bi error q e The corresponding expression is:

[0053]

[0054] Step S44: Calculate Δq = q e1 2 +q e2 2 +q e3 2 ;

[0055] Step S45: Compare Δq with the threshold δ2. If the following expression is satisfied, the mutual judgment between the gyroscope and the star sensitivity period passes:

[0056] Δq<δ2.

[0057] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention provides a comprehensive judgment device for the validity of gyroscope data, comprising a gyroscope data acquisition module and a comprehensive judgment module:

[0058] The gyroscope data acquisition module collects gyroscope data and sends it to the comprehensive judgment module.

[0059] The comprehensive judgment module uses the comprehensive judgment method for the validity of gyroscope data as described in any of the above-mentioned methods to comprehensively judge the validity of gyroscope data and output the gyroscope arbitration result.

[0060] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention provides a comprehensive judgment device for the validity of gyroscope data, comprising a gyroscope data acquisition module, a star sensor data acquisition module, and a comprehensive judgment module:

[0061] The gyroscope data acquisition module collects gyroscope data and sends it to the comprehensive judgment module.

[0062] The star sensor data acquisition module acquires star sensor data and sends it to the comprehensive judgment module.

[0063] The comprehensive judgment module adopts the comprehensive judgment method for the validity of gyroscope data as described in any of the above-mentioned methods, and comprehensively judges the validity of gyroscope data by combining gyroscope data and star sensor, and outputs the gyroscope arbitration result.

[0064] This invention provides a comprehensive method and apparatus for judging the validity of gyroscope data. It presents a method for judging the validity of gyroscope data itself, which may be caused by various fault types such as communication anomalies, data jams, angular velocity exceeding limits, and data jumps. In the event of a gyroscope malfunction, the method outputs the gyroscope's malfunction type. Through mutual judgment between gyroscopes and a comparison mechanism with a star sensor, the method further comprehensively judges the validity of data from two or more gyroscopes, thereby reducing the missed judgment rate of gyroscope malfunctions and improving the reliability of gyroscope use. Attached Figure Description

[0065] The above and other features, properties and advantages of the present invention will become more apparent from the following description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings and embodiments, in which the same reference numerals always denote the same features, wherein:

[0066] Figure 1 A flowchart of a comprehensive judgment method for the validity of gyroscope data according to an embodiment of the present invention is disclosed;

[0067] Figure 2 A flowchart of a method for determining the validity of gyroscope data according to an embodiment of the present invention is disclosed;

[0068] Figure 3 A flowchart of a gyroscope mutual judgment method according to an embodiment of the present invention is disclosed;

[0069] Figure 4 A flowchart of a comprehensive method for judging the validity of gyroscope data according to another embodiment of the present invention is disclosed;

[0070] Figure 5 A block diagram illustrating the principle of a comprehensive gyroscope data validity determination device according to an embodiment of the present invention is disclosed.

[0071] Figure 6 A block diagram of a comprehensive gyroscope data validity determination device according to another embodiment of the present invention is disclosed. Detailed Implementation

[0072] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of this invention clearer, the invention will be further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments. It should be understood that the specific embodiments described herein are for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to limit the invention.

[0073] Figure 1 A flowchart of a comprehensive judgment method for the validity of gyroscope data according to an embodiment of the present invention is disclosed, such as... Figure 1 As shown, the present invention proposes a comprehensive method for judging the validity of gyroscope data, which includes the following steps:

[0074] Step S1: Obtain the gyroscope data packet and determine the validity of the current gyroscope itself. If the current gyroscope itself is valid, proceed to step S2. If the current gyroscope itself is invalid, the arbitration result of the current gyroscope is invalid, and proceed to step S5.

[0075] Step S2: Determine if other gyroscopes are valid. If other gyroscopes are valid, proceed to step S3; otherwise, proceed to step S5.

[0076] Step S3: Perform a validity check between the gyroscopes. If the check passes, the current gyroscope arbitration result is valid; otherwise, the current gyroscope arbitration result is invalid, and proceed to step S5.

[0077] Step S5: Output the current gyroscope arbitration result.

[0078] Although the methods described above are illustrated and depicted as a series of actions for the sake of simplicity, it should be understood and appreciated that these methods are not limited by the order of the actions, as some actions may occur in a different order and / or concurrently with other actions from the illustrations and descriptions herein or not illustrated and described herein but which may be understood by those skilled in the art, according to one or more embodiments.

[0079] These steps will be described in detail below. It should be understood that, within the scope of this invention, the above-described technical features of this invention and the technical features specifically described below (such as in the embodiments) can be combined with each other to form preferred technical solutions.

[0080] Step S1: Obtain the gyroscope data packet and determine the validity of the current gyroscope itself. If the current gyroscope itself is valid, proceed to step S2. If the current gyroscope itself is invalid, the arbitration result of the current gyroscope is invalid, and proceed to step S5.

[0081] Figure 2 A flowchart of a method for determining the validity of gyroscope data according to an embodiment of the present invention is disclosed, such as... Figure 2 As shown, step S1 of the present invention further includes:

[0082] Step S11: Obtain the gyroscope data packet and determine whether the gyroscope data packet has been updated. If it has been updated normally, proceed to step S12 for the next judgment. If it has not been updated, proceed to step S15.

[0083] Step S12: Obtain the internal flag of the gyroscope and determine whether the internal flag of the gyroscope is valid. If it is valid, proceed to step S13 for the next judgment. If it is invalid, proceed to step S15.

[0084] Step S13: Determine if the gyroscope data exceeds the limit. If the data does not exceed the limit, proceed to step S14 for the next judgment. If the data exceeds the limit, proceed to step S15.

[0085] Step S14: Determine whether the gyroscope data is continuous. If the data is continuous, the current gyroscope itself is valid and proceed to step S2. If the data is not continuous, proceed to step S15.

[0086] Step S15: The current gyroscope itself is invalid, and the reason for the error is output. Proceed to step S5.

[0087] The order of steps S11 to S14 above can be interchanged; for example, steps S12 and S13 can be interchanged, but... Figure 2 The sequence of steps shown is a preferred embodiment.

[0088] Furthermore, step S11 further includes: reading the gyroscope data packet; if the gyroscope data packet is updated normally, then proceed to the next judgment; otherwise, output that the gyroscope itself is invalid and output the reason for the error: communication error.

[0089] Furthermore, step S12 further includes: reading the internal flag bit of the gyroscope; if the internal flag of the gyroscope is valid, then continue; otherwise, output that the gyroscope itself is invalid and output the reason for the error: internal flag is invalid.

[0090] Furthermore, step S13 further includes:

[0091] Based on the characteristics of a single gyroscope, determine the maximum measurement threshold ω of the gyroscope's angular velocity. max ;

[0092] The gyroscope's measured angular velocity is compared with the gyroscope's maximum angular velocity measurement threshold ω. max If the data is within the threshold range, then the data is not exceeded; otherwise, the output gyroscope itself is invalid, and the error reason is output: gyroscope data exceeds the limit.

[0093] The product documentation for a gyroscope typically specifies a measurement range. In this embodiment, the maximum measurement threshold ω for the gyroscope's angular velocity is... max The measurement range can be determined by referring to the product documentation.

[0094] In this embodiment, the gyroscope's measured angular velocity is compared with the maximum gyroscope angular velocity measurement threshold ω. max The comparison further includes:

[0095] The absolute value of the measured angular velocity of any axis of the gyroscope is compared with the maximum measurement threshold ω of the gyroscope's angular velocity. max If all values ​​are within the threshold range, then the data has not exceeded the limit.

[0096] Furthermore, step S14 further includes:

[0097] Based on ground tests, the threshold ω for comparing the front and back beats of the gyroscope was determined. e ;

[0098] The gyroscope's current cycle angular velocity is compared with the previous cycle angular velocity to determine whether the gyroscope data is continuous. If the gyroscope data is continuous, the output "The gyroscope itself is valid" is output; otherwise, the output "The gyroscope itself is invalid" is output, along with the error message "Data is discontinuous".

[0099] In this embodiment, the threshold ω for comparing the preceding and following beats of the gyroscope is determined based on ground testing. e Further including

[0100] Based on ground tests, the maximum change in the satellite's angular velocity within one control cycle is obtained and used as the threshold ω for comparing the gyroscope's front and back frames. e .

[0101] In this embodiment, comparing the current cycle angular velocity of the gyroscope with the previous cycle angular velocity further includes:

[0102] Compare the angular velocities of the gyroscope along the X, Y, and Z axes in the current cycle with those in the previous cycle. If any one of these values ​​satisfies the following expression, then the gyroscope data is discontinuous. The corresponding expression is as follows:

[0103]

[0104] Where, ω x(或y，z) This represents the angular velocity of the gyroscope along the X, Y, or Z axis during its current period.

[0105] This refers to the angular velocity of the gyroscope along the X, Y, or Z axis during the previous cycle.

[0106] If the current gyroscope itself is invalid, then the current gyroscope arbitration result is invalid, and proceed to step S5 to output the current gyroscope arbitration result.

[0107] Step S2: Determine if other gyroscopes are valid. If other gyroscopes are valid, proceed to step S3; otherwise, proceed to step S5.

[0108] After obtaining the validity of the gyroscope itself, a process of mutual validity judgment between gyroscopes is performed.

[0109] Considering that there are usually more than two gyroscopes installed on a satellite, taking the first gyroscope A and the second gyroscope B as an example, we read the valid status of the first gyroscope A and the second gyroscope B.

[0110] If both the first gyroscope A and the second gyroscope B are valid, perform a mutual validity check between the gyroscopes.

[0111] Step S3: Perform a validity check between the gyroscopes. If the check passes, the current gyroscope arbitration result is valid; otherwise, the current gyroscope arbitration result is invalid, and proceed to step S5.

[0112] Figure 3 A flowchart of a gyroscope mutual judgment method according to an embodiment of the present invention is disclosed, as follows: Figure 3 As shown, if both the first gyroscope A and the second gyroscope B are valid, then the validity of the first gyroscope A and the second gyroscope B is mutually determined.

[0113] If the two gyroscopes pass each other's arbitration, then both gyroscope A and gyroscope B are valid arbitrators.

[0114] In this embodiment, the validity of the first gyroscope A and the second gyroscope B is mutually determined, which further includes the following steps:

[0115] Step S31: Determine the threshold δ1 for gyroscope mutual judgment based on ground tests;

[0116] Step S32: Calculate the difference Δω between the X-axis angular velocities of the first gyroscope A and the second gyroscope B. bix The difference Δω between the angular velocities of the Y and Y axes biy The difference Δω between the Z-axis and the angular velocity biz The corresponding expression is:

[0117] Δω bix =|ω biAx -ω biBx |;

[0118] Δω biy =|ω biAy -ω biBy |;

[0119] Δω biz =|ω biAz -ω biBz |;

[0120] Where, ω biAx ω biAy ω biAz Let ω be the angular velocity of the first gyroscope A along the X, Y, and Z axes. biBx ω biBy ω biBz The angular velocities of the second gyroscope B along the X, Y, and Z axes are given.

[0121] Step S33: Calculate the difference Δω bix , Δω biy , Δω biz The comparison is performed with the threshold δ. If both satisfy the following expression, the gyroscope mutual test passes:

[0122] Δω bix <δ1;

[0123] Δω biy <δ1;

[0124] Δω biz <δ1.

[0125] In step S2, when the first gyroscope A is valid and the second gyroscope B is invalid, in order to further determine the validity of the gyroscope data, the present invention introduces a star sensor comparison mechanism and proceeds to step S4.

[0126] Furthermore, in step S3, if the validity comparison between the first gyroscope A and the second gyroscope B fails, the process proceeds to step S4 to compare the gyroscopes with the star sensor.

[0127] Figure 4 A flowchart of a comprehensive judgment method for the validity of gyroscope data according to another embodiment of the present invention is disclosed, such as... Figure 4 As shown, the present invention further includes the following step between step S2 and step S5:

[0128] Step S4: Perform a validity check between the current gyroscope and the star sensor. If the check passes, the arbitration result of the current gyroscope is valid; otherwise, the arbitration result of the current gyroscope is invalid, and proceed to step S5.

[0129] like Figure 3 and Figure 4 As shown, when the validity check between the first gyroscope A and the second gyroscope B fails, the first gyroscope A and the second gyroscope B then sequentially check with the star sensor:

[0130] If the first gyroscope A and the star sensor pass each other's judgment, then the arbitration of the first gyroscope A is valid; otherwise, the arbitration of the first gyroscope A is invalid.

[0131] If the second gyroscope B and the star sensor pass each other's judgment, then the arbitration of the second gyroscope B is valid; otherwise, the arbitration of the second gyroscope B is invalid.

[0132] When the first gyroscope A is active and the second gyroscope B is inactive, then the active gyroscope A is compared with the star sensor for mutual evaluation.

[0133] If the first gyroscope A and the star sensor pass each other's judgment, then the arbitration of the first gyroscope A is valid; otherwise, the arbitration of the first gyroscope A is invalid.

[0134] The following uses the first gyroscope A as an example to illustrate the mutual judgment method between the gyroscope and the star sensor in step S4. The mutual judgment method between the second gyroscope B and the star sensor is the same.

[0135] The first gyroscope A and the star sensor mutually determine each other, further including:

[0136] Step S41: Based on the ground test, determine the threshold δ2 for the mutual judgment between the gyroscope and the star sensor.

[0137] Step S42: Use the inertial frame attitude quaternion Q obtained from the previous cycle of the star sensor. bi_pre The inertial frame angular velocity ω obtained from the first gyroscope A in the current period. bi_gyroA The attitude quaternion Q of the inertial frame in the current period is calculated by integration. bi_gyroA ;

[0138] Step S43: Calculate the inertial frame attitude quaternion Q for the current period. bi_gyroA The inertial frame attitude quaternion Q obtained from the current period of the star sensor bi error q e The corresponding expression is:

[0139]

[0140] Step S44: Calculate Δq = q e1 2 +q e2 2 +q e3 2 ;

[0141] Step S45: Compare Δq with the threshold δ2. If the following expression is satisfied, the mutual judgment between the first gyroscope A and the star-sensitive period passes; otherwise, the mutual judgment between the first gyroscope A and the star-sensitive period fails:

[0142] Δq<δ2.

[0143] In this embodiment, the quaternion Q of the inertial frame attitude for the current period bi_gyroA It is obtained by calculating using the following expression:

[0144] Δθ=|ω bi_gyroA |Δt

[0145]

[0146]

[0147]

[0148] When the first gyroscope A is invalid and the second gyroscope B is invalid, then both the first gyroscope A and the second gyroscope B are invalid in arbitration.

[0149] Step S5: Output the current gyroscope arbitration result.

[0150] Current gyroscope arbitration results include whether the gyroscope itself is valid or invalid.

[0151] When the gyroscope itself is invalid, the error message should also be output.

[0152] The causes of the anomalies include: gyroscope communication failure, invalid internal gyroscope flags, gyroscope data exceeding limits, and discontinuous gyroscope data.

[0153] The following is an embodiment of the comprehensive judgment method for the validity of gyroscope data proposed in this invention, which was tested on a certain type of satellite.

[0154] Example 1:

[0155] Tests were conducted on a certain type of satellite.

[0156] The satellite is equipped with two fiber optic gyroscopes: fiber optic gyroscope A and fiber optic gyroscope B. Based on previous ground-based performance tests of the gyroscopes, the maximum measurement threshold ω of the gyroscope angular velocity was determined. max The comparison threshold ω for the gyroscope's previous and next shots is 50° / s. e Given a speed of 10° / s, the threshold δ1 for mutual judgment between gyroscopes is determined to be 0.2° / s, and the threshold δ2 for mutual judgment between gyroscopes and star sensors is determined to be 2e-5.

[0157] On-orbit data showed that the output Z-axis angular velocity of fiber optic gyroscope B was 52° / s. This angular velocity was compared with the maximum measurement threshold ω of the gyroscope. max Compare.

[0158] At this time, the telemetry data shows that the telemetry fiber optic gyroscope B itself is in an invalid state, and the reason for the abnormality is that the gyroscope data exceeds the limit.

[0159] Using the comprehensive judgment method for the validity of gyroscope data proposed in this invention, this type of satellite has taken appropriate action on gyroscope B.

[0160] Example 2:

[0161] The satellite is equipped with two fiber optic gyroscopes: fiber optic gyroscope A and fiber optic gyroscope B. Based on the previous ground-based performance test results of the gyroscopes, the maximum measurement threshold for the gyroscope angular velocity was determined to be 50° / s, the comparison threshold for the gyroscope's forward and backward shots was determined to be 10° / s, the threshold δ1 for mutual judgment between the gyroscopes was determined to be 0.2° / s, and the threshold δ2 for mutual judgment between the gyroscope and the star sensor was determined to be 2e-5.

[0162] During on-orbit testing, taking a specific data frame as an example:

[0163] ω biA :[ω biAx ω biAy ω biAz ] T = [0.0062, -0.0092, 0.0007] T ;

[0164] ω biB :[ω biAx ω biAy ω biAz ] T = [0.0059, -0.0087, -0.0006] T ;

[0165] Gyroscope A and gyroscope B have passed mutual detection. The telemetry indicator shows that gyroscope A is in a valid state: valid.

[0166] Gyroscope B's own active state: Active;

[0167] Arbitration status of gyroscope A: valid; Arbitration status of gyroscope B: valid.

[0168] Figure 5 A block diagram of a gyroscope data validity comprehensive judgment device according to an embodiment of the present invention is disclosed, such as... Figure 5 As shown, this invention proposes a comprehensive gyroscope data validity judgment device, which can realize the above-mentioned comprehensive gyroscope data validity judgment method, including a gyroscope data acquisition module 61 and a comprehensive judgment module 62:

[0169] The gyroscope data acquisition module 61 acquires gyroscope data and sends it to the comprehensive judgment module 62;

[0170] The comprehensive judgment module 62 uses the gyroscope data validity comprehensive judgment method described above to comprehensively judge the validity of the gyroscope data and output the gyroscope arbitration result.

[0171] It should be noted that the comprehensive judgment module 62 is used to implement the detailed algorithm in the above-mentioned comprehensive judgment method for the validity of gyroscope data. Since it has been described in detail in the above-mentioned comprehensive judgment method for the validity of gyroscope data, it will not be repeated here.

[0172] Figure 6 A block diagram of a gyroscope data validity comprehensive judgment device according to another embodiment of the present invention is disclosed, such as... Figure 6 As shown, this invention proposes a comprehensive gyroscope data validity judgment device, which can realize the above-mentioned comprehensive gyroscope data validity judgment method, including a gyroscope data acquisition module 61, a star sensor data acquisition module 63, and a comprehensive judgment module 62:

[0173] The gyroscope data acquisition module 61 acquires gyroscope data and sends it to the comprehensive judgment module 62;

[0174] The star sensor data acquisition module 63 acquires star sensor data and sends it to the comprehensive judgment module 62.

[0175] The comprehensive judgment module 62 adopts the gyroscope data validity comprehensive judgment method as described above, and comprehensively judges the validity of the gyroscope data by combining the gyroscope data and the star sensor, and outputs the gyroscope arbitration result.

[0176] It should be noted that the comprehensive judgment module 62 is used to implement the detailed algorithm in the above-mentioned comprehensive judgment method for the validity of gyroscope data. Since it has been described in detail in the above-mentioned comprehensive judgment method for the validity of gyroscope data, it will not be repeated here.

[0177] This invention provides a comprehensive method and apparatus for judging the validity of gyroscope data. It presents a method for judging the validity of gyroscope data itself, which may be caused by various fault types such as communication anomalies, data jams, angular velocity exceeding limits, and data jumps. In the event of a gyroscope malfunction, the method outputs the gyroscope's malfunction type. Through mutual judgment between gyroscopes and a comparison mechanism with a star sensor, the method further comprehensively judges the validity of data from two or more gyroscopes, thereby reducing the missed judgment rate of gyroscope malfunctions and improving the reliability of gyroscope use.

[0178] As indicated in this application and claims, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the words "a," "an," "an," and / or "the" are not specifically singular and may include plural forms. Generally speaking, the terms "comprising" and "including" only indicate the inclusion of explicitly identified steps and elements, which do not constitute an exclusive list, and the method or apparatus may also include other steps or elements.

[0179] Those skilled in the art will understand that information, signals, and data can be represented using any of a variety of different techniques and arts. For example, the data, instructions, commands, information, signals, bits, symbols, and chips described throughout the above description can be represented by voltage, current, electromagnetic waves, magnetic fields or magnetic particles, light fields or optical particles, or any combination thereof.

[0180] Those skilled in the art will further appreciate that the various illustrative logic blocks, modules, circuits, and algorithm steps described in conjunction with the embodiments disclosed herein can be implemented as electronic hardware, computer software, or a combination of both. To clearly illustrate this interchangeability between hardware and software, the various illustrative components, blocks, modules, circuits, and steps are described above in a generalized manner in terms of their functionality. Whether such functionality is implemented as hardware or software depends on the specific application and the design constraints imposed on the overall system. Those skilled in the art may implement the described functionality in different ways for each specific application, but such implementation decisions should not be construed as departing from the scope of the invention.

[0181] The various illustrative logic modules and circuits described in conjunction with the embodiments disclosed herein may be implemented or performed using a general-purpose processor, a digital signal processor (DSP), an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC), a field-programmable gate array (FPGA) or other programmable logic device, discrete gate or transistor logic, discrete hardware components, or any combination thereof designed to perform the functions described herein. The general-purpose processor may be a microprocessor, but in alternatives, it may be any conventional processor, controller, microcontroller, or state machine. The processor may also be implemented as a combination of computing devices, such as a combination of a DSP and a microprocessor, multiple microprocessors, one or more microprocessors cooperating with a DSP core, or any other such configuration.

[0182] The steps of the methods or algorithms described in conjunction with the embodiments disclosed herein may be embodied directly in hardware, in a software module executed by a processor, or in a combination of both. The software module may reside in RAM memory, flash memory, ROM memory, EPROM memory, EEPROM memory, registers, hard disk, removable disk, CD-ROM, or any other form of storage medium known in the art. An exemplary storage medium is coupled to a processor such that the processor can read and write information to / from the storage medium. In an alternative, the storage medium may be integrated into the processor. The processor and storage medium may reside in an ASIC. The ASIC may reside in a user terminal. In an alternative, the processor and storage medium may reside as discrete components in the user terminal.

[0183] The above embodiments are provided for those skilled in the art to implement or use the present invention. Those skilled in the art can make various modifications or changes to the above embodiments without departing from the inventive concept of the present invention. Therefore, the protection scope of the present invention is not limited to the above embodiments, but should be the maximum scope that conforms to the innovative features mentioned in the claims.

Claims

1. A method of comprehensively judging validity of gyro data, characterized by, The method comprises the following steps: Step S1, acquiring a gyro data packet, judging whether the current gyro is valid, if the current gyro is valid, entering step S2, if the current gyro is invalid, the current gyro arbitration result is invalid, and entering step S5; Step S2, judging whether other gyros are valid, if the other gyros are valid, entering step S3, otherwise, entering step S5; if the other gyros are invalid, entering step S4; Step S3, judging the validity between the gyros, if the mutual judgment is passed, the current gyro arbitration result is valid, otherwise, the current gyro arbitration result is invalid, and entering step S5; Step S4, judging the validity between the current gyro and the star sensor, if the mutual judgment is passed, the current gyro arbitration result is valid, otherwise, the current gyro arbitration result is invalid, and entering step S5; Step S5, outputting the current gyro arbitration result.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein The step S1 further comprises: Acquiring the gyro data packet, judging whether the gyro data packet is updated, if the gyro data packet is updated, entering the next judgment, if the gyro data packet is not updated, the current gyro is invalid, and outputting the abnormal reason; Acquiring the gyro internal flag, judging whether the gyro internal flag is valid, if the gyro internal flag is valid, entering the next judgment, if the gyro internal flag is invalid, the current gyro is invalid, and outputting the abnormal reason; Judging whether the gyro data is out of limit, if the gyro data is not out of limit, entering the next judgment, if the gyro data is out of limit, the current gyro is invalid, and outputting the abnormal reason; Judging whether the gyro data is continuous, if the gyro data is continuous, the current gyro is valid, if the gyro data is not continuous, the current gyro is invalid, and outputting the abnormal reason.

3. The method of claim 2, wherein The judgment whether the gyro data is out of limit further comprises: According to the characteristics of the gyro single machine, the maximum measurement threshold value ω of the gyro angular velocity is determined max ; comparing the measured angular velocity of the gyroscope with a maximum measured threshold value ω max If the data is within the threshold range, then the data is not out of limits.

4. The method of claim 3, wherein, said comparing the gyro measured angular velocity with a gyro angular velocity maximum measurement threshold ω max comparing, further comprising: The absolute value of the measured angular velocity of any one axis of the gyroscope is compared with the maximum measurement threshold value ω max If both are within the threshold range, the data is not out of limits.

5. The method of claim 2, wherein, The judgment whether the gyro data is continuous further comprises: According to the ground test, the threshold value ω of the gyro before and after the comparison is determined e ; Comparing the current period angular velocity of the gyro with the last period angular velocity, and judging whether the gyro data is continuous.

6. The method of claim 5, wherein, The threshold value ω for comparison of the gyro before and after the shot is determined according to the ground test e , further comprising According to the ground test, the maximum change value of the angular velocity of the satellite in a control cycle is obtained as a threshold value ω of the gyro before-after comparison e .

7. The method of claim 5, wherein, The comparison of the current period angular velocity of the gyro with the last period angular velocity further comprises: Respectively comparing the current period X, Y and Z axis angular velocities of the gyro with the last period X, Y and Z axis angular velocities, if one of the following expressions is met, the gyro data is not continuous, and the corresponding expression is as follows: where ω x(或y，z) is the current angular velocity of the gyroscope in the X or Y or Z axis is the angular velocity of the previous cycle of the X or Y or Z axis of the gyroscope.

8. The method of claim 1, wherein, The current gyro is a first gyro, and the other gyros comprise at least a second gyro; The step S3 further comprises: Step S31, determining the mutual judgment threshold δ1 of the gyros according to the ground test; Step S32, calculate the difference Δω of the X-axis angular velocity of the first and second gyroscopes bix , the difference Δω of the Y-axis angular velocity biy , the difference Δω of the Z-axis angular velocity biz , the corresponding expression is: Δω bix = |ω biAx - ω biBx |; Δω biy = |ω biAy - ω biBy |; Δω biz = |ω biAz - ω biBz |; where ω biAx , ω biAy , ω biAz are the angular velocities of the X, Y, Z axes of the first gyroscope, and ω biBx , ω biBy , ω biBz are the angular velocities of the X, Y, Z axes of the second gyroscope. Step S33, comparing the difference Δω bix , Δω biy , Δω biz with a threshold threshold value δ1, and if both satisfy the following expression, the gyroscopic mutual authentication passes: Δω bix <δ1; Δω biy <δ1; Δω biz <δ1。 9. The method of claim 1, wherein, The step S3 further comprises: If the mutual judgment is not passed, entering step S4.

10. The method of claim 1, wherein, The step S4 further comprises: Step S41, determining the mutual judgment threshold δ2 of the current gyro and the star sensor according to the ground test; Step S42, using the inertial system attitude quaternion Q obtained in the last period of the star sensor bi_pre , and the inertial system angular velocity ω obtained in the current period of the gyroscope bi_gyroA , to calculate the inertial system attitude quaternion Q of the current period by integration bi_gyroA ; Step S43, calculate the inertial system attitude quaternion Q of the current period bi_gyroA the error q of the inertial system attitude quaternion Q obtained by the star sensor in the current period bi e The corresponding expression is:​ Step S44, calculate Δq = q e1 2 + q e2 2 + q e3 2 ; Step S45, comparing Δq with the threshold δ2, if the following expression is met, the mutual judgment of the gyro and the star sensor is passed: Δq < δ2.

11. A device for comprehensively judging the validity of gyroscope data, characterized in that, The method comprises a gyro data acquisition module, a star sensor data acquisition module and a comprehensive judgment module: The gyro data acquisition module acquires the gyro data and sends the gyro data to the comprehensive judgment module; The star sensor data acquisition module acquires the star sensor data and sends the star sensor data to the comprehensive judgment module; The comprehensive judgment module adopts the gyro data validity comprehensive judgment method in any one of claims 1 to 10, comprehensively judges the validity of the gyro data and the star sensor to the gyro data, and outputs a gyro arbitration result.

Images