Entity satellite-based multi-satellite cooperative on-orbit testing system, method, medium, and product

Abstract

This invention relates to the field of satellite testing and discloses a multi-satellite collaborative on-orbit testing system, method, medium, and product based on a physical satellite. The system includes: a satellite under test for performing preset operations; a ground station for sending macroscopic test commands to a master test satellite; a master test satellite for receiving macroscopic test commands, generating corresponding collaborative control strategies based on the macroscopic test commands, and then distributing the collaborative control strategies to collaborative test satellites; it also observes the satellite under test to obtain observation data, receives test data sent by the collaborative test satellites, and then generates test results based on the observation data and test data; and at least one collaborative test satellite for receiving the collaborative control strategies, forming a preset configuration around the satellite under test according to the collaborative control strategies to test the satellite, and also for collecting test data and sending the test data to the master test satellite. This invention improves the accuracy of on-orbit satellite testing.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of satellite testing, and specifically to a multi-satellite collaborative on-orbit testing system, method, medium, and product based on physical satellites. Background Technology

[0002] On-orbit testing of satellites is a crucial step in ensuring the functionality, performance, and reliability of satellite systems. The core of multi-satellite collaborative testing technologies lies in using "digital satellites" for logical deduction and employing "other-satellite ground simulators" to simulate the behavior of other satellites and establish links with the satellite under test. While these technologies have solved some of the automation issues in the testing process, these "semi-physical simulation satellites" and "ground simulation" methods have significant limitations. The physical fidelity of the testing environment is insufficient; ground simulators or digital simulations cannot generate realistic and complex space physical field environments. Furthermore, they primarily test the onboard software's processing logic of "data packets," failing to test the satellite's attitude and orbit control system's true dynamic response to real physical targets. Summary of the Invention

[0003] This invention provides a multi-satellite collaborative on-orbit testing system, method, medium, and product based on physical satellites to solve the problem of being unable to test the real dynamic response of satellite attitude and orbit control systems when facing real physical targets.

[0004] In a first aspect, the present invention provides a multi-satellite collaborative on-orbit testing system based on a physical satellite, comprising: a satellite under test for performing preset operations; a ground station for sending macroscopic test commands to a master test satellite; a master test satellite for receiving macroscopic test commands, generating corresponding collaborative control strategies based on the macroscopic test commands, and then distributing the collaborative control strategies to collaborative test satellites, and also for observing the satellite under test to obtain observation data, receiving test data sent by the collaborative test satellites, and then generating test results based on the observation data and test data; and at least one collaborative test satellite for receiving the collaborative control strategies, forming a preset configuration around the satellite under test according to the collaborative control strategies to test the satellite under test, and also for collecting test data and sending the test data to the master test satellite.

[0005] Secondly, this invention provides a multi-satellite collaborative on-orbit testing method based on a physical satellite, applied to the multi-satellite collaborative on-orbit testing system based on autonomous maneuvering of a physical satellite in the first aspect. The method includes: the satellite under test performing a preset operation; a ground station sending a macroscopic test command to a master test satellite; the master test satellite receiving the macroscopic test command and generating a corresponding collaborative control strategy based on the macroscopic test command, and then distributing the collaborative control strategy to the collaborative test satellite; the collaborative test satellite receiving the collaborative control strategy and forming a preset configuration around the satellite under test according to the collaborative control strategy to test the satellite under test; the collaborative test satellite collecting test data and sending the test data to the master test satellite; the master test satellite observing the satellite under test and obtaining observation data; and the master test satellite receiving the test data sent by the collaborative test satellite and generating test results based on the observation data and the test data.

[0006] In some optional implementations, the step of the main test satellite generating a corresponding cooperative control strategy based on macroscopic test commands includes: determining a corresponding preset configuration based on macroscopic test commands; calculating configuration parameters based on the preset configuration; determining test constraints; obtaining a dynamic model; creating a corresponding objective function based on the configuration parameters and test constraints, the objective function being used to optimize the calculation results of the dynamic model; and calculating a reference trajectory and thrust sequence that optimize the objective function value using the dynamic model and configuration parameters, the objective function value being the value calculated by substituting the generated reference trajectory and thrust sequence into the objective function, the reference trajectory and thrust sequence being part of the cooperative control strategy, the reference trajectory being used to control the operating trajectory of the cooperative test satellite, and the thrust sequence being used to control the propulsion system of the cooperative test satellite.

[0007] In some alternative implementations, determining test constraints includes: obtaining collision avoidance distance constraints for the cooperative test satellite; determining energy consumption constraints based on macroscopic test instructions, which limit the fuel consumption of the cooperative test satellite; and determining field-of-view constraints based on macroscopic test instructions, which limit the viewing direction of the cooperative test satellite.

[0008] In some optional implementations, obtaining the dynamic model includes: when the relative distance between the cooperative test satellite and the satellite under test is less than a preset threshold and the orbit of the satellite under test is a circular orbit, selecting a first model, which is used to simplify the relative motion between the cooperative test satellite and the satellite under test to linearization for calculation; when the relative distance between the cooperative test satellite and the satellite under test is greater than or equal to the preset threshold, or when the orbit of the satellite under test is an elliptical orbit, selecting a second model, which is used to retain the nonlinear characteristics of the relative motion between the cooperative test satellite and the satellite under test for calculation.

[0009] In some optional implementations, a corresponding preset configuration is determined according to the macroscopic test command, including: when the macroscopic test command is an all-around feature acquisition test, a first configuration is determined, which is used to make the cooperative test satellite distributed on a relative motion trajectory centered on the satellite under test, and the relative motion trajectory is a circle projected on the horizontal plane; when the macroscopic test command is an anti-interference communication test, a second configuration is determined, which is used to make the cooperative test satellite located at a preset distance in front of or behind the velocity vector direction of the satellite under test, and maintain relative stillness or oscillation along the trajectory with the satellite under test; when the macroscopic test command is a dynamic collision avoidance capability test, a third configuration is determined, which is used to make the cooperative test satellite move towards the satellite under test at a preset relative velocity outside the safety ellipsoid boundary of the satellite under test, and make the cooperative test satellite avoid the satellite under test at the critical point of the safety ellipsoid boundary.

[0010] In some optional implementations, the step of the main test satellite generating test results based on observation data and test data includes: fusing the observation data and test data to obtain fused data; calculating the deviation data between the fused data and the expected data; and determining the test results based on the deviation data.

[0011] In some optional implementations, the test result is determined based on the deviation data, including: if the deviation data exceeds the range defined by the safety threshold, the test is terminated and the collaborative test star is switched to a safety control mode; if the deviation data meets the preset convergence condition for ending the test, the test is terminated; if the deviation data does not exceed the range defined by the safety threshold and does not meet the preset convergence condition for ending the test, the collaborative control strategy is readjusted.

[0012] Thirdly, the present invention provides a computer-readable storage medium storing computer instructions for causing a computer to perform the method described in the first aspect or any corresponding embodiment thereof.

[0013] Fourthly, the present invention provides a computer program product, including computer instructions for causing a computer to perform the method described in the first aspect or any corresponding embodiment thereof.

[0014] The technical solution provided by this invention has the following advantages:

[0015] This invention constructs a multi-satellite collaborative on-orbit testing system based on physical satellites through the coordinated operation of the tested satellite, ground station, master test satellite, and collaborative test satellites, overcoming the limitations of existing ground simulation or digital simulation schemes. The ground station only undertakes the responsibility of issuing macroscopic commands, the master test satellite acts as the on-orbit command center, and the collaborative test satellites act as physical execution units. Through real physical maneuvers, a test configuration is formed. Compared to the logical deduction of digital satellites, this system can construct high-fidelity test scenarios in a real space environment, reproducing real physical field excitations such as multipath effects and Doppler shift, significantly improving the physical fidelity of the test environment. Simultaneously, the autonomous maneuvering and collaborative testing of the physical satellites can effectively verify the dynamic response of the tested satellite's attitude and orbit control system to real physical targets, solving the problem that existing technologies cannot verify real physical responses. This ensures that the test results accurately reflect the actual on-orbit performance of the satellite, providing more reliable on-orbit verification support for satellite functions, performance, and reliability. Attached Figure Description

[0016] To more clearly illustrate the specific embodiments of the present invention or the technical solutions in the prior art, the drawings used in the description of the specific embodiments or the prior art will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are some embodiments of the present invention. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained from these drawings without creative effort.

[0017] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of a multi-satellite collaborative on-orbit test system based on a physical satellite according to an embodiment of the present invention; Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the first step of a multi-satellite collaborative on-orbit testing method based on a physical satellite according to an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0018] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of the embodiments of the present invention clearer, the technical solutions of the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some embodiments of the present invention, not all embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without creative effort are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0019] It is understood that before using the technical solutions disclosed in the various embodiments of the present invention, users should be informed of the types, scope of use, and usage scenarios of the personal information involved in the present invention and their authorization should be obtained in accordance with relevant laws and regulations through appropriate means.

[0020] According to an embodiment of the present invention, a multi-satellite collaborative on-orbit testing system based on physical satellites is provided, such as... Figure 1 As shown, an embodiment of the present invention provides a multi-satellite collaborative on-orbit testing system based on a physical satellite, comprising: The satellite under test is used to perform preset operations; The ground station is used to send macroscopic test commands to the main test satellite; The main test satellite is used to receive macroscopic test commands, generate corresponding cooperative control strategies based on the macroscopic test commands, and then send the cooperative control strategies to the cooperative test satellite. It is also used to observe the satellite under test to obtain observation data, receive test data sent by the cooperative test satellite, and then generate test results based on the observation data and test data. At least one cooperative test satellite is used to receive the cooperative control strategy and form a preset configuration around the satellite under test according to the cooperative control strategy to test the satellite under test. It is also used to collect test data and send the test data to the main test satellite.

[0021] Specifically, the multi-satellite collaborative on-orbit test system based on physical satellites in this embodiment of the invention includes a satellite under test (SUT), a ground station, a primary test satellite (PTS), and at least one collaborative test satellite (CTS). The SUT is the test object whose functions, performance, and reliability are to be verified. The PTS is a physical satellite with high computing power, serving as the on-orbit command center for the collaborative test mission. The CTS is a physical satellite equipped with an independent propulsion system, attitude control system, and environmental simulation payloads (such as real signal transmitters and heat sources). The ground station serves only as the final monitoring and management center for the mission and does not participate in the real-time simulation process.

[0022] In practical applications, the ground station first sends a macroscopic test command to the PTS, such as "verify the SUT's anti-interference communication capability." Upon receiving this command, the PTS, leveraging its high computing power, calculates the relative motion control law and collision avoidance trajectory planning in real time, generates a corresponding cooperative control strategy, and distributes it to each CTS. Each CTS then initiates its propulsion system to perform physical orbit changes according to this cooperative control strategy, forming a preset physical geometry around the SUT. Subsequently, it uses its onboard environmental simulation payloads to test the SUT, specifically including realistic environment simulation and multi-dimensional entity detection. Realistic environment simulation involves the PTS and CTS applying realistic stimuli to the SUT using physical payloads under the predetermined configuration; for example, the CTS activates a signal transmitter or heat source to construct a realistic electromagnetic interference field or thermal radiation field, rather than injecting simulated data into the SUT. Multi-dimensional entity detection refers to using optical, radar sensors, and other components to collect the physical characteristics of the SUT from different angles.

[0023] The CTS (Center Satellite Transport System) collects relevant data during the testing process and feeds it back to the PTS (Physical Satellite Transport System). The PTS simultaneously observes the SUT's (System Under Test) operational status to acquire observation data. After receiving the test data from the CTS, the PTS combines its acquired observation data with comprehensive analysis to generate test results, which are then fed back to the ground station. This embodiment of the invention uses a physical satellite as the test execution entity, eliminating the need for digital satellite logic deduction and ground simulator simulations. It can construct high-fidelity test scenarios in a real space environment, reproducing real physical field excitations such as multipath effects and Doppler shift, effectively solving the problem of insufficient environmental physical fidelity in existing testing technologies. Simultaneously, leveraging the high computing power of the PTS and the physical maneuverability of the CTS, it can verify the real dynamic response of the SUT, avoiding the limitations of only testing onboard software data processing logic. This significantly improves the comprehensiveness and accuracy of on-orbit satellite testing, providing stronger assurance for the reliability of on-orbit satellite operation. Furthermore, the ground station only undertakes macro-management responsibilities, while the PTS and CTS achieve autonomous on-orbit collaboration, significantly improving the flexibility and efficiency of testing and better adapting to the diverse testing needs of different types of satellites.

[0024] According to an embodiment of the present invention, a method for multi-satellite collaborative on-orbit testing based on physical satellites is also provided. It should be noted that the steps shown in the flowchart in the accompanying drawings can be executed in a computer system such as a set of computer-executable instructions. Furthermore, although a logical order is shown in the flowchart, in some cases, the steps shown or described may be executed in a different order than that shown here.

[0025] This embodiment provides a multi-satellite collaborative on-orbit testing method based on physical satellites, which can be used in the aforementioned multi-satellite collaborative on-orbit testing system based on physical satellites. Figure 2 This is a flowchart of a multi-satellite collaborative on-orbit testing method based on a physical satellite according to an embodiment of the present invention. The flowchart includes the following steps: Step S201: The satellite under test performs a preset operation; Step S202: The ground station sends macroscopic test commands to the main test satellite; Step S203: The main test satellite receives the macro test command, generates the corresponding cooperative control strategy according to the macro test command, and then sends the cooperative control strategy to the cooperative test satellite. Step S204: The cooperative test satellite receives the cooperative control strategy and forms a preset configuration around the satellite under test according to the cooperative control strategy to test the satellite under test. Step S205: The collaborative test satellite collects test data and sends the test data to the main test satellite; Step S206: The main test satellite observes the satellite under test to obtain observation data; In step S207, the main test satellite receives the test data sent by the cooperative test satellite and generates test results based on the observation data and the test data.

[0026] For a detailed explanation of the relevant principles and beneficial effects, please refer to the descriptions in the above system embodiments; they will not be repeated here.

[0027] In some optional implementations, step S203 above includes: Step a1: Determine the corresponding preset configuration based on the macroscopic test instructions; Step a2: Calculate the configuration parameters based on the preset configuration; Step a3: Determine the test constraints; Step a4: Obtain the dynamic model; Step a5: Create the corresponding objective function based on the configuration parameters and test constraints. The objective function is used to optimize the calculation results of the dynamic model. Step a6: Calculate the reference trajectory and thrust sequence that optimize the objective function value using the dynamic model and configuration parameters. The objective function value is the value calculated by substituting the generated reference trajectory and thrust sequence into the objective function. The reference trajectory and thrust sequence belong to the cooperative control strategy. The reference trajectory is used to control the trajectory of the cooperative test satellite, and the thrust sequence is used to control the propulsion system of the cooperative test satellite.

[0028] Specifically, after receiving macroscopic test commands from the ground station (e.g., "verify the communication link stability of the satellite under test (SUT) in a multi-interference source environment"), the PTS determines a preset configuration based on the test requirements corresponding to the command. This preset configuration is a physical geometric configuration adapted to the test scenario, used to allow the CTS to form a targeted test layout. Based on the determined preset configuration, the PTS calculates specific configuration parameters. For example, if the preset configuration is a spatial circular projection formation, it is necessary to accurately calculate parameters such as the radius ρ of the configuration and the phase angle α corresponding to each CTS, providing a clear target basis for subsequent trajectory planning.

[0029] Next, the core test constraints were determined, primarily the collision avoidance distance constraint, and physical safety thresholds were set (e.g., This ensures that the spacing between the CTS and the SUT, as well as between the CTS and itself, meets safety requirements to avoid the risk of on-orbit collisions. Other test constraints need to be flexibly determined based on the actual test requirements.

[0030] Subsequently, PTS obtains an adapted dynamic model based on the actual needs of the test scenario. This model is used to accurately describe the relative motion law of CTS relative to SUT, providing a basis for trajectory calculation.

[0031] Finally, combining the calculated configuration parameters and the determined test constraints, PTS creates the corresponding objective function. In an optional implementation, the objective function An optimization approach with anti-collision constraints is adopted:

[0032] In the formula, The state error vector (including position and velocity) represents the actual state of the CTS and the reference state in the reference trajectory. Represents the thrust consumption of the CTS thruster. and It is a weighted matrix. As a collision avoidance penalty, when the distance between any two satellites is less than a safety threshold, Approaching infinity, where The term is used to constrain the position and velocity deviations of the CTS relative to the SUT, ensuring configuration accuracy. This item is used to control the thrust consumption of the CTS thrusters to achieve energy-saving goals. This item is used to ensure that the state of the CTS when it reaches the destination is completely adapted to the target configuration. It is the penalty function, the endpoint state corresponding to the target configuration. include The CTS continuously monitors key parameters such as position, velocity, and attitude relative to the measured satellite SUT. If the CTS reaches its destination... Completely consistent with the preset target state. The value will be very small; if there is a deviation... The value will increase. This is achieved through the objective function provided in this embodiment of the invention. It can effectively optimize the calculation results of the dynamic model and achieve a balance between safety and performance.

[0033] PTS employs computational intelligent algorithms such as Model Predictive Control (MPC) or pseudospectral methods, combined with dynamic models and configuration parameters, to solve two-point boundary value problems. The specific analysis process involves setting the initial state of the CTS... (Right now Location of CTS at any given time The endpoint state corresponding to the target configuration. (Right now Target configuration at any time Substituting the values ​​into the dynamic equations and performing integration, if there are obstacles corresponding to the collision avoidance constraints, then the danger zone is "removed" from the solution space of the dynamic equations, and finally a path is found that bypasses the danger zone while ensuring the objective function... The minimum optimal path is then used to obtain the reference trajectory. The reference trajectory is used to determine the CTS's operating path, and the thrust sequence is used to control the start-up, shutdown, and thrust magnitude of the CTS propulsion system. Together, they constitute the core of the cooperative control strategy. Through this strategy, the PTS can accurately schedule the CTS to perform physical maneuvers, ensuring that it can accurately reach the predetermined position to form the test configuration, providing reliable support for the efficient conduct of subsequent cooperative tests.

[0034] In some alternative implementations, step a3 above includes: Step b1: Obtain the anti-collision distance constraints for the collaborative test satellite; Step b2: Determine energy consumption constraints based on macroscopic test instructions. Energy consumption constraints are used to limit the fuel consumption of the collaborative test satellite. Step b3: Determine the field of view constraint according to the macroscopic test instructions. The field of view constraint is used to limit the viewing direction of the cooperative test star.

[0035] Specifically, this embodiment of the invention mainly defines three constraints for CTS. Among them, it obtains the collision avoidance distance constraint for CTS and sets a physical safety threshold (e.g., ...) based on the safety requirements of on-orbit testing. This constraint is the core security guarantee for collaborative testing of physical satellites, and it is achieved through a collision avoidance penalty term in the objective function. For example, during an omnidirectional feature acquisition test, multiple CTSs form a spatial circular projection array around the SUT. If the real-time distance between two CTSs decreases to 0.8km, then... It will instantly approach infinity, forcing the optimization algorithm to immediately abandon the current trajectory planning scheme and regenerate a collision avoidance path that bypasses the danger zone, thus fundamentally preventing on-orbit collision accidents.

[0036] Secondly, energy consumption constraints are determined based on macroscopic test commands issued by the ground station. These constraints are used to precisely limit the CTS's fuel consumption to adapt to different mission scenarios. For example, when the command is "long-duration continuous anti-jamming communication test" and the CTS fuel is only 20% remaining (in a fuel-critical state), the constraint is used to define the range of thrust consumption of the CTS thrusters, thereby affecting the vector... Yes, it has an impact. The strategy analysis module introduces the pulse thrust assumption into the dynamics model and uses a multi-pulse Hohmann transfer algorithm to calculate the trajectory, replacing continuous thrust with a method of "short-duration pulse thrust acceleration and long-duration inertial glide". For example, the trajectory adjustment that originally required continuous thruster activation for 30 minutes is changed to three pulse thrust operations of 2 minutes each, with the rest of the time relying on inertial flight, significantly reducing fuel consumption and ensuring sufficient fuel supply throughout the test mission.

[0037] Third, the field-of-view constraints are determined based on the macroscopic test instructions. If the instructions require the CTS's sensors to always point towards the SUT (e.g., in test scenarios such as acquiring the SUT's solar array deployment status through optical sensors or monitoring the SUT's surface physical characteristics through radar), then attitude-orbit coupling constraints are added to the system state vector to expand the system state vector dimension. Simultaneously, the dynamic model is expanded to a six-degree-of-freedom model, and its attitude is planned concurrently with the CTS's position trajectory. Yes, it has an impact. For example, when the CTS moves from 5km to 5km ahead of the SUT, the model will calculate the adjustment parameters of pitch and yaw angles in real time to ensure that the sensor lens is always pointed at the SUT, avoiding the viewpoint shift caused by the movement of the CTS and ensuring the integrity and validity of the observation data.

[0038] In some alternative implementations, step a4 above includes: Step c1: When the relative distance between the cooperative test satellite and the satellite under test is less than a preset threshold and the orbit of the satellite under test is a circular orbit, the first model is selected. The first model is used to simplify the relative motion between the cooperative test satellite and the satellite under test into a linear form for calculation. Step c2: When the relative distance between the cooperative test satellite and the satellite under test is greater than or equal to a preset threshold, or when the orbit of the satellite under test is an elliptical orbit, the second model is selected. The second model is used to retain the nonlinear characteristics of the relative motion between the cooperative test satellite and the satellite under test for calculation.

[0039] Specifically, when the relative distance between the CTS and the SUT is less than a preset threshold (e.g., 10 km), and the SUT's orbit is circular, the first model is selected. This first model is a dynamic model used to simplify the relative motion between the collaborative test satellite and the tested satellite into a linearized form for calculation. In this embodiment of the invention, the first model specifically employs the Hill-Clohessy-Wiltshire (HCW) equations. Its core feature is that, based on the assumption of a circular orbit for the SUT, it linearizes the relative motion between the CTS and the SUT. The model form is as follows: in This is to test the actual thrust vector generated by the satellite thrusters of each entity. This represents the system state vector, including relative position and relative velocity. It enables high-precision trajectory calculation with simplified computational logic, making it particularly suitable for test scenarios requiring precise formation keeping and short-range maneuvers. For example, when executing Command A for omnidirectional feature acquisition, multiple CTSs need to form a spatial circular projection formation around the SUT and maintain a fixed relative distance of 5km. The HCW equation can quickly calculate the motion trajectory of each CTS, ensuring the stability of the formation configuration and the accuracy of the observation perspective.

[0040] When the relative distance between the CTS and the SUT is greater than or equal to a preset threshold (e.g., 10km), or when the SUT's orbit is an elliptical orbit (with a large orbital eccentricity), the second model is selected to retain the nonlinear characteristics of the relative motion between the collaborative test satellite and the tested satellite for calculation. In this embodiment of the invention, the second model can specifically be selected as the Tschauner-Hempel (TH) equation or the Relative Orbit Elements (ROE) model. Its core feature is that it fully considers the influence of orbital eccentricity, retains the nonlinear characteristics of the relative motion between the CTS and the SUT, and the calculation accuracy is more in line with complex orbital environments. It is suitable for large-scale maneuvering test scenarios, such as when performing a mission to travel from a standby point 50km away to a test point, the CTS needs to perform a long-distance orbital transfer, or the SUT is running on an elliptical orbit with a large difference between the apogee and perigee distances. The TH equation or ROE model can accurately characterize the complex trajectory of relative motion, while supporting fuel-optimal strategy solutions. It maximizes fuel savings while ensuring maneuver accuracy, meeting the needs of long-cycle collaborative testing.

[0041] Through the embodiments of the present invention, the model and the test scenario are accurately adapted. For the short-distance circular track scenario, a linear model is adopted to simplify the calculation process and improve the trajectory planning efficiency while ensuring the calculation accuracy. For the long-distance or elliptical track scenario, a nonlinear model is adopted to ensure the accuracy of trajectory calculation in complex environments, thus solving the problem that a single model is difficult to adapt to different scenarios.

[0042] In some alternative implementations, step a1 above includes: Step d1: When the macroscopic test command is an all-round feature acquisition test, the first configuration is determined. The first configuration is used to make the cooperative test satellites distributed on the relative motion trajectory centered on the satellite under test. The relative motion trajectory is projected as a circle on the horizontal plane. Step d2: When the macroscopic test command is an anti-interference communication test, the second configuration is determined. The second configuration is used to make the cooperative test satellite located at a preset distance in front of or behind the velocity vector direction of the satellite under test, and to keep it relatively stationary or oscillating along the track with the satellite under test. Step d3: When the macroscopic test command is a dynamic collision avoidance capability test, the third configuration is determined. The third configuration is used to make the cooperative test satellite move towards the test satellite at a preset relative velocity outside the safety ellipsoid boundary of the test satellite, and make the cooperative test satellite avoid the test satellite at the critical point of the safety ellipsoid boundary.

[0043] Specifically, in some optional implementations, embodiments of the present invention provide a specific logic for determining different preset configurations based on different macroscopic test instructions.

[0044] When the ground station issues a macroscopic test command for omnidirectional feature acquisition (e.g., verifying the deployment status of the SUT solar array, omnidirectional thermal radiation characteristics, etc.), the corresponding preset configuration is determined as the first configuration. This first configuration is a spatial circular projection formation, which adopts a three-dimensional encirclement strategy. The goal is to maximize the coverage of the observation view and maintain a constant relative distance between each CTS and the SUT. In practical applications, multiple CTSs will be distributed on a relative motion trajectory centered on the SUT. The projection of this trajectory on the horizontal plane is circular. This enables 360-degree all-around observation of the SUT, ensuring comprehensive acquisition of physical feature data from different directions of the SUT, and fully verifying its mechanical deployment performance or the performance of its thermal control system in a real space environment.

[0045] When the macroscopic test command is an anti-interference communication test (e.g., verifying the SUT's ability to suppress interference sources in a specific direction), the corresponding preset configuration is determined to be the second configuration. This second configuration is a tandem / tailed formation, which adopts a line-of-sight strategy. The aim is to keep the CTS always within a specific beamwidth of the SUT's receiving antenna (such as the sidelobe direction). Specifically, the CTS is deployed at a preset distance (such as 5km) in front of or behind the SUT's velocity vector direction and remains relatively stationary or oscillates slightly along the trajectory. This simulates continuous physical signal interference at a specific angle and accurately tests the anti-interference robustness of the SUT's communication link in real space channels.

[0046] When the macroscopic test command is a dynamic collision avoidance capability test (e.g., testing the autonomous response of the SUT to the approach of a non-cooperative target), the corresponding preset configuration is determined to be the third configuration, which is an intersecting orbit configuration. A collision interception strategy with safety bias is adopted. The CTS will move towards the SUT at a preset relative speed (e.g., 1 km / s) outside the safety ellipsoid boundary of the SUT (assuming the safety boundary at a certain location is set to 3 km). When it approaches the critical point of the safety ellipsoid boundary, the CTS will perform evasive maneuvers according to the preset program, thereby creating a real physical collision threat and forcing the SUT's attitude and orbit control system to trigger a real emergency collision avoidance response, thus comprehensively verifying the dynamic collision avoidance capability of the SUT.

[0047] The configuration selection method provided by this invention achieves precise matching between test commands and configurations, customizing exclusive physical layouts for different test requirements, ensuring the relevance and realism of test scenarios, and solving the problems of single and poor adaptability of traditional test configurations. Each configuration revolves around "real physical field excitation," constructing a test environment that fits actual application scenarios through the physical deployment of physical satellites. Compared to the logical scenarios of digital simulation, this method can more accurately verify the core functions and performance of the System Under Test (SUT). The configuration deployment logic provided by this invention is clear and highly operable. The Test System (PTS) can directly match the corresponding configuration scheme according to the command, without complex deduction, significantly improving test preparation efficiency and providing strong support for the diversified and efficient conduct of multi-satellite collaborative on-orbit testing.

[0048] In some optional implementations, step S207 above includes: Step e1: Perform data fusion on the observation data and test data to obtain fused data; Step e2: Calculate the deviation between the fused data and the expected data; Step e3: Determine the test results based on the deviation data.

[0049] Specifically, the PTS first performs multi-source data fusion processing on the observation data obtained by itself from the SUT (such as the SUT's attitude change, orbital position offset, surface temperature distribution, etc.) and the test data collected and uploaded by each CTS (such as electromagnetic interference signal strength, radar detection data, optical imaging data, etc.). For example, it calculates the arithmetic mean or weighted average for the same index in the observation data and test data. For different indexes, it can convert each index to the same scalar according to the preset coefficient and then sum them to obtain the evaluation score.

[0050] Meanwhile, by means of data calibration, redundant information removal, and complementary information integration, fused data that can comprehensively and accurately reflect the actual operating status of the SUT is obtained, avoiding evaluation bias caused by the limitations of a single data source.

[0051] The PTS compares the fused data with the preset expected data (i.e., the test index thresholds preset by the theoretical model, such as the communication bit error rate threshold, the upper limit of attitude pointing error, the stable range of thermal control temperature, etc.) in real time, and calculates the deviation data between the two. For example, the difference between the actual bit error rate and the expected bit error rate of the SUT in the anti-interference communication test, the difference between the actual attitude pointing error and the expected error, etc., accurately quantifying the gap between the actual performance of the SUT and the expected requirements. The PTS comprehensively judges the test results based on the calculated deviation data. If the deviation data exceeds the safety threshold (e.g., the SUT shows signs of attitude instability, the distance between the CTS and the SUT is less than the anti-collision red line, the SUT thermal control temperature exceeds the safe range, etc.), an emergency response is immediately triggered, the current test is stopped and the CTS is controlled to switch to the safety control mode to avoid on-orbit risks; if the deviation data meets the preset convergence conditions for ending the test (i.e., the deviations of all test indexes are within the allowable range and remain stable for a certain period of time), the test task is judged to be completed, confirming that the current test subject has achieved the expected goal.

[0052] The test result generation method of this invention employs multi-source data fusion technology, integrating dual data resources from PTS and CTS, effectively improving the comprehensiveness and reliability of the data. Compared to single-data evaluation methods, it significantly reduces the risk of misjudgment. Deviation quantification analysis based on preset expected data provides a clear basis for determining test results, avoiding the uncertainty of subjective judgment and improving the objectivity and accuracy of the test results. Layered decision-making based on deviation data ensures both the safety of on-orbit testing and the effective progress of the testing mission. It also provides precise guidance for optimizing subsequent collaborative control strategies, fully demonstrating the closed-loop adaptability and intelligence level of the testing system, and providing core support for the comprehensive and reliable verification of satellite on-orbit performance.

[0053] In some alternative implementations, step e3 above includes: Step f1: If the deviation data exceeds the range defined by the safety threshold, the test is terminated and the collaborative test star is switched to safety control mode. Step f2: If the deviation data meets the preset convergence condition for ending the test, then the test ends. Step f3: If the deviation data does not exceed the range defined by the safety threshold and does not meet the preset convergence condition for ending the test, then the collaborative control strategy is readjusted.

[0054] Specifically, the PTS continuously monitors the matching of deviation data with safety thresholds. If the deviation data exceeds the range defined by the safety threshold, it means that there is a safety risk in the on-orbit test. For example, the SUT shows signs of attitude instability, the distance between the CTS and the SUT is less than the collision avoidance red line, or the key performance parameters of the SUT exceed the safe operating range. At this time, the PTS will immediately stop the current test process and issue safety control instructions to each CTS, control the CTS to start the collision avoidance maneuver and switch to the safety control mode. By adjusting the track position and maintaining a safe distance, the risk of on-orbit collision or equipment damage is avoided, thus ensuring the on-orbit safety of the entire test system.

[0055] If the deviation data meets the preset convergence condition for ending the test, that is, all test indicators have been traversed under the current configuration, and the deviation data corresponding to each indicator are stable within the preset allowable range and continue to reach the specified duration (e.g., 5 minutes), it indicates that the actual performance of the SUT fully meets the expected test requirements. At this time, the PTS determines that the current test item is completed, ends the test process, and starts the test data collection and download work, synchronizing the test results to the ground station.

[0056] If the deviation data does not exceed the range defined by the safety threshold, it indicates that the test process is safe and controllable. However, if the deviation data does not meet the preset convergence conditions for ending the test (such as some test index deviations not being reduced to the allowable range, index stability not meeting the standard, etc.), for example, if the SUT's anti-interference capability is too strong, the interference test will not achieve the expected results. At this time, the PTS will automatically trigger the dynamic adjustment mechanism to re-plan the cooperative control strategy, including adjusting the physical position of the CTS (such as instructing the CTS to approach to a closer distance to enhance the interference power), optimizing configuration parameters, or updating the thrust sequence. After the new cooperative control strategy is generated, it will be sent to the CTS. The CTS will start the engine to perform a trajectory change to realize the physical reconstruction of the test configuration. Then, the test will continue to verify the complete performance of the SUT.

[0057] By employing a hierarchical decision-making approach in this invention, safety management is prioritized. By promptly terminating tests and triggering the CTS safety mode, risks such as on-orbit collisions and equipment failures are fundamentally eliminated, ensuring the safe on-orbit operation of the test system and the System Under Test (SUT). Pre-defined convergence conditions are used as a clear basis for determining test completion, ensuring the validity and reliability of test results and preventing premature test termination when expectations are not met. For scenarios where convergence conditions are not met, the collaborative control strategy is automatically adjusted and the test configuration is reconstructed. This achieves closed-loop optimization of the test process without ground-based manual intervention, significantly improving the intelligence and adaptability of the test. It effectively solves the problems of rigid strategies and difficulty in adapting to the complex performance of the SUT in traditional testing, ensuring comprehensive and in-depth verification of the SUT's on-orbit performance and providing strong support for satellite reliability assurance.

[0058] This invention also provides a computer-readable storage medium. The methods described above according to embodiments of the invention can be implemented in hardware or firmware, or implemented as computer code that can be recorded on a storage medium, or implemented as computer code downloaded via a network and originally stored on a remote storage medium or a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium and then stored on a local storage medium. Thus, the methods described herein can be processed by software stored on a storage medium using a general-purpose computer, a dedicated processor, or programmable or dedicated hardware. The storage medium can be a magnetic disk, optical disk, read-only memory, random access memory, flash memory, hard disk, or solid-state drive, etc.; further, the storage medium can also include combinations of the above types of memory. It is understood that computers, processors, microprocessor controllers, or programmable hardware include storage components capable of storing or receiving software or computer code, which, when accessed and executed by the computer, processor, or hardware, implements the methods shown in the above embodiments.

[0059] A portion of this invention can be applied as a computer program product, such as computer program instructions, which, when executed by a computer, can invoke or provide the methods and / or technical solutions according to the invention through the operation of the computer. Those skilled in the art will understand that the forms in which computer program instructions exist in a computer-readable medium include, but are not limited to, source files, executable files, installation package files, etc. Correspondingly, the ways in which computer program instructions are executed by a computer include, but are not limited to: the computer directly executing the instructions, or the computer compiling the instructions and then executing the corresponding compiled program, or the computer reading and executing the instructions, or the computer reading and installing the instructions and then executing the corresponding installed program. Here, the computer-readable medium can be any available computer-readable storage medium or communication medium accessible to a computer.

[0060] Although embodiments of the invention have been described in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, those skilled in the art can make various modifications and variations without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention, and such modifications and variations all fall within the scope defined by the appended claims.

Claims

1. A multi-satellite collaborative on-orbit testing system based on physical satellites, characterized in that, include: The satellite under test is used to perform preset operations; The ground station is used to send macroscopic test commands to the main test satellite; The main test satellite is used to receive the macroscopic test command, generate a corresponding cooperative control strategy according to the macroscopic test command, and then send the cooperative control strategy to the cooperative test satellite. It is also used to observe the satellite under test to obtain observation data, receive test data sent by the cooperative test satellite, and then generate test results based on the observation data and the test data. At least one of the aforementioned collaborative test satellites is used to receive the collaborative control strategy, and to form a preset configuration around the satellite under test according to the collaborative control strategy to test the satellite under test. It is also used to collect test data and send the test data to the main test satellite.

2. A multi-satellite collaborative on-orbit testing method based on physical satellites, characterized in that, The method, applied to the multi-satellite collaborative on-orbit testing system based on physical satellites as described in claim 1, comprises: The satellite under test performs preset operations; The ground station sends macroscopic test commands to the main test satellite; The main test satellite receives the macroscopic test command, generates a corresponding collaborative control strategy based on the macroscopic test command, and then sends the collaborative control strategy to the collaborative test satellite. The cooperative test satellite receives the cooperative control strategy and forms a preset configuration around the satellite under test according to the cooperative control strategy to test the satellite under test; The collaborative test satellite collects test data and sends the test data to the main test satellite; The main test satellite observes the satellite under test to obtain observation data; The main test satellite receives the test data sent by the cooperative test satellite and generates test results based on the observation data and the test data.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that, The steps of generating a corresponding collaborative control strategy based on the macroscopic test command by the main test satellite include: The corresponding preset configuration is determined according to the macroscopic test instructions; Calculate configuration parameters based on the preset configuration; Determine the test constraints; Obtain the dynamic model; A corresponding objective function is created based on the configuration parameters and the test constraints. The objective function is used to optimize the calculation results of the dynamic model. The reference trajectory and thrust sequence that optimize the objective function value are calculated using the dynamic model and configuration parameters. The objective function value is the value calculated by substituting the generated reference trajectory and thrust sequence into the objective function. The reference trajectory and thrust sequence belong to the cooperative control strategy. The reference trajectory is used to control the orbit of the cooperative test satellite, and the thrust sequence is used to control the propulsion system of the cooperative test satellite.

4. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that, The determination of test constraints includes: Obtain the anti-collision distance constraint for the cooperative test star; Energy consumption constraints are determined according to the macroscopic test instructions, and these constraints are used to limit the fuel consumption of the collaborative test satellite. The field of view constraint is determined according to the macroscopic test command, and the field of view constraint is used to limit the viewing direction of the cooperative test star.

5. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that, The acquisition of the dynamic model includes: When the relative distance between the cooperative test satellite and the satellite under test is less than a preset threshold and the orbit of the satellite under test is a circular orbit, the first model is selected. The first model is used to simplify the relative motion between the cooperative test satellite and the satellite under test into a linearized calculation. When the relative distance between the cooperative test satellite and the satellite under test is greater than or equal to the preset threshold, or when the orbit of the satellite under test is an elliptical orbit, the second model is selected. The second model is used to retain the nonlinear characteristics of the relative motion between the cooperative test satellite and the satellite under test for calculation.

6. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that, The step of determining the corresponding preset configuration according to the macroscopic test instructions includes: When the macroscopic test command is an all-round feature acquisition test, it is determined to be the first configuration. The first configuration is used to make the cooperative test satellites distributed on a relative motion trajectory centered on the satellite under test. The relative motion trajectory is a circle when projected onto the horizontal plane. When the macroscopic test command is an anti-interference communication test, it is determined to be the second configuration. The second configuration is used to make the cooperative test satellite located at a preset distance in front of or behind the velocity vector direction of the satellite under test, and to keep it relatively stationary or oscillating along the track with the satellite under test. When the macroscopic test command is a dynamic collision avoidance capability test, it is determined to be the third configuration. The third configuration is used to make the cooperative test satellite move towards the test satellite at a preset relative velocity outside the safety ellipsoid boundary of the test satellite, and to make the cooperative test satellite avoid the test satellite at the critical point of the safety ellipsoid boundary.

7. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that, The steps for the main test satellite to generate test results based on the observation data and the test data include: The observation data and the test data are fused to obtain fused data; Calculate the deviation between the fused data and the expected data; The test results are determined based on the deviation data.

8. The method according to claim 7, characterized in that, Determining the test result based on the deviation data includes: If the deviation data exceeds the range defined by the safety threshold, the test is terminated and the collaborative test star is switched to safety control mode. If the deviation data meets the preset convergence condition for ending the test, then the test ends. If the deviation data does not exceed the range defined by the safety threshold and does not meet the preset convergence condition for ending the test, the collaborative control strategy is readjusted.

9. A computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that, The computer-readable storage medium stores computer instructions for causing the computer to perform the method as described in any one of claims 2-8.

10. A computer program product, characterized in that, Includes computer instructions for causing a computer to perform the method of any one of claims 2-8.

Images