东篱科研大数据发现系统（DRDS）

位置：成果数据库 > 期刊 > 期刊详情页

自适应定轨与约化动力定轨理论分析与比较

ISSN号：2095-4557
期刊名称：《测绘科学与工程》
时间：0
分类：P228.1[天文地球—大地测量学与测量工程;天文地球—测绘科学与技术]
作者机构：[1]地理信息工程国家重点实验室,陕西西安710054, [2]北京卫星导航中心,北京 100094, [3]西安测绘研究所,陕西西安 710054
相关基金：国家自然科学基金资助项目（41020144004,41274040）.

关键词：卫星轨道测定, 动学模型, 自适应定轨, 动力学定轨, 运动学定轨, satellite orbit determination, dynamic model, adaptive orbit determination, kinematic orbit determination, dynamic orbit determination

中文摘要：

卫星定轨的质量取决于卫星动力模型的精度和跟踪观测精度，同样取决于对这两类信息随机特性的了解，也取决于定轨方法对各种误差影响的控制能力。本文先分别介绍自适应定轨基本原理和约化动力法定轨的基本原理，然后对两种技术的基本性质进行了分析，比较其相似性和不同点。研究表明，自适应定轨和约化动力法定轨都选择某些参数来平衡卫星的动力学模型信息和观测信息对卫星状态参数的贡献，达到优化融合的目的。随着积分弧段的长度增加，两种技术都自动减弱动力模型信息的权重，以保持动力模型信息和观测信息的平衡，从而改进轨道参数估计的精度。自适应定轨技术仅引入一个参数调整随机模型，当然也可以依据需要引入多个分量自适应因子，而约化动力定轨法使用三个参数分别调整函数模型和随机模型，这正是两者的主要区别。

英文摘要：

The quality of the satellite orbit determination relies on the reliabilities of the corresponding dynamic model infor- mation and geometric measurements as well as their stochastic model information. The method of the orbit determination is also crucial in controlling the influences of the dynamic model and measurement errors on the state parameters of the satellite orbit. The principles of the adaptive orbit determination and the reduced dynamic orbit determination are introduced at first. The basic properties of the two methods are analyzed. Correspondingly, the similarities and differences between the two methods are pointed out. It shows that both of the adaptive and reduced dynamic orbit determination methods introduce some particular parameters to balance the contribution of the dynamic model information and the measurements on the orbit state parameters to realize some optimal data fusion. The two methods can automatically reduce the weights of the dynamic model information with the increase of the integration arc, in order to keep the optimal balance between the dynamic model information and measurements, and further more to improve the precision of the estimated state parameters of the orbit. Usually, only one adaptive factor is introduced by the adaptive orbit determination method, even though multiple adaptive factors for state components may also be introduced, while three parameters are usually introduced by the reduced dynamic orbit determination method, which is the main difference between the two methods.

同期刊论文项目