: Control Techniques for Responsive Space & Uncertain Systems Call 0017

BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT BAA-VS-07-03Air Force Research Laboratory/Space Vehicles DirectoratePROPOSAL CALL ANNOUNCEMENT CALL 0017BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT TITLE: Space Components Technology Open 5 Year Broad Agency Announcement.BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT NUMBER: BAA-VS-07-03; Topic Area # 2 PROPOSAL CALL ANNOUCEMENT (CALL) TITLE: Control Techniques for Responsive Space & Uncertain SystemsPROPOSAL CALL ANNOUNCEMENT (CALL) NUMBER: 0017TECHNICAL POINT OF CONTACT: The technical point of contact for this CALL is Dr. Lawrence Robertson, AFRL/RVSV, Kirtland AFB, NM, Phone 505-846-7787, Fax 505-846-7787, Email [email protected]. CONTRACTING POINTS OF CONTACT: The contracting points of contact for this CALL are: Contract Specialist: Ms. Tara Bond, Det 8 AFRL/RVKV, Kirtland AFB, NM, Phone 505-846-4967, Fax 505-846-7041, Email [email protected], or Contracting Officer: Ms. Jeannie Barnes, Det 8 AFRL/RVKV, Kirtland AFB, NM, Phone 505-846-4695, Fax 505-846-7041, Email [email protected] DESCRIPTION: There are three basic need areas: (1) Adaptive Control Techniques for Responsive Launch Vehicle Ascent Guidance and Control, (2) Responsive Space Attitude Determination and Control – Reducing Guidance, Navigation and Control System Design and (3) Uncertainty Accommodating Control. These areas are described below. Note that an offeror may bid on one, two, or all three areas. However, offerors must submit separate technical/cost proposals and should clearly delineate each specific area. 1. Adaptive Control Techniques for Responsive Launch Vehicle Ascent Guidance and Control. The Air Force’s needs for achieving operationally responsive access to space will require a responsive launch capability. Executing time-critical missions will require far greater autonomy, flexibility, and capability of the guidance systems than currently exist for launch vehicles. The driving motivation for this research is that the challenges for realizing a responsive launch capability lie not only in hardware and operations, but also equally in software and algorithms. Traditionally, launch guidance and control (G&C) software and related parameters are designed for a specified launch mission (launch site, range constraints, etc.), payload, and targeting, or insertion, condition. This is a time-consuming process, done well in advance of the launch mission. Until the technical challenges associated with update and design of G&C algorithms and software on a short notice are satisfactorily addressed, on-demand responsive launch will not be possible even for a vehicle already on the launch pad. Application of both optimal control theories and adaptive control theories, combined with innovative numerical methods, will play a central role in advancing launch vehicle G&C technology necessary to meet the goals of responsive launch.The objectives of this effort are to:• Establish the degree of pre-mission planning and lead time required with the current launch vehicle ascent technology, and identify the portion attributable to G&C.• Identify candidate adaptive/optimal launch vehicle guidance and control algorithms and develop algorithm enhancements where appropriate.• Establish well defined evaluation criteria to assess candidate algorithms.• Develop testing scenarios and conduct simulations to demonstrate the benefits of adaptive/optimal closed-loop launch vehicle guidance and control technology.2. Responsive Space Attitude Determination and Control – Reducing Guidance, Navigation and Control System DesignThe Department of Defense is currently interested in reducing Guidance, Navigation and Control System Design and Integration Time for responsive space missions. The reduction of satellite design and integration time will allow for quicker replacement of failed satellites, improving communication and imaging capabilities. One of the primary concepts for achieving this is to reduce the amount of time available for ground-based calibration of satellite hardware and software. This leads to the following GNC algorithm tasks.1) On-orbit actuator alignment estimation2) On-orbit inertia estimation3) On-orbit sensor alignment estimation4) Control in the presence of actuator alignment errors, inertia errors and unknown disturbances5) Rapid tuning of estimation algorithms6) Rapid tuning of control algorithmsIn addition to explaining a solution methodology, proposals for all tasks should address how the method will be tested along with metrics used to determine when a method has been shown successful. This should include determination of sensitivities to error sources not explicitly accounted for by the developed methodology. Existing approaches (if applicable) should be noted and included in the testing plan to demonstrate superiority of new methodology. Personnel qualifications should be provided, outlining relevant experiences and publications. A final report will be provided which contains the mathematical development of the new algorithm(s) along with all simulation results demonstrating their capabilities. The results will include any comparisons made to existing methods. One section of the final report will contain only the equations and associated descriptions needed to implement the algorithms in flight software.3. Uncertainty Accommodating ControlTwo problems are to be addressed. The first problem is to predict performance and robustness using measured system uncertainty captured in frequency response function data from multiple tests under varying conditions. The second is to design a control law based on these metrics. As the measured system uncertainty does not generally conform to a bounded probability density function, we intend to focus on probabilistic metrics such as the probability of meeting a performance goal, and the probability of closed loop stability. For control law design, an existing controller may be used as an initial design point and optimized.Proposals must address the research challenge discussed above. The degree to which the proposal documents an understanding of the challenges, and an approach to addressing the challenges, will be considered in the ranking of proposals. Also, personnel qualifications will play a role in proposal ranking. Key personnel should document their qualifications and experience in the proposal. Publications are one way for personnel to document their expertise in the proposal.Deliverables will include: Monthly status reports will document the technical and financial progress of the effort. Annual report: all algorithms developed, software, models, and simulations will be documented and delivered as part of the annual report.References for Area 3:1. Franklin, Powell, and Workman. Digital Control of Dynamic Systems. Addison-Wesley, 3rd edition, December 1997.2. Dorato, Abdallah, and Cerone. Linear Quadratic Control, An Introduction. Krieger Publishing Company, July 2000.3. Subrahmanyam. Finite Horizon H∞ and Related Control Problems. Birkhauser, 20074. Cohen-Tannoudji, Diu, and Laloe. Quantum Mechanics. John Wiley & Sons, 2006.5. Zhou, Doyle, and Glover. Robust and Optimal Control. Prentice Hall, 1996.6. Babuška, Carter, Lane, and Lacy. FRF correlation and error metrics for plant identification. In AIAA Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, Austin, TX, April 2005.7. K. D. Bell, R. L. Moser, M. K. Powers, and S. R. Erwin. Deployable optical telescope ground demonstration. In Proceedings of the SPIE, pages 559–567, Munich Germany, July 2000.8. R. S. Erwin, K. N. Schrader, R. L. Moser, and S. F. Griffin. Experimental demonstration of precision control of a deployable optics structure. Journal of Vibration and Acoustics, 124(3):441–450, July 2002.9. R. J. Fuentes, K. N. Schrader,M. J. Balas, and R. S. Erwin. Direct adaptive disturbance rejection and control for a deployable space telescope, theory and application. In American Control Conference, pages 3980–3985, Arlington VA, June 2001.10. J. B. Hoagg, S. L. Lacy, and D. S. Bernstein. Broadband adaptive disturbance rejection for a deployable optical telescope testbed. In Proceedings the American Control Conference, pages 4953–4958, Portland OR, June 2005.11. S. Huybrechts, P. Wegner, A. Maji, B. Kozola, S. Griffin, and T. Meink. Structural design for deployable optical telescopes. In 2000 IEEE Aerospace Conference Proceedings, pages 367–372, Big Sky, MT, March 2000.12. S. L. Lacy, V. Babuˇska, K. N. Schrader, and R. J. Fuentes. System identification of space structures. In Proceedings of the American Control Conference, pages 2335–2340, Portland OR, June 2005.13. K. N. Schrader, R. H. Fetner, M. J. Balas, and S. R. Erwin. Sparse-array phasing algorithm based on recursive estimation of fringe contrast. In Proceedings of the SPIE, pages 146–157, Waikoloa, HI, August 2002.14. K. N. Schrader, R. H. Fetner, J. H. Donaldson, R. J. Fuentes, and S. R. Erwin. Integrated control system development for phasing and vibration suppression for a sparse-array telescope. In Proceedings of the SPIE, pages 134–135, Waikoloa, HI, August 2002.15. K. N. Schrader, R. H. Fetner, S. F. Griffin, and S. R. Erwin. Development of a sparseaperture testbed for opto-mechanical control of space-deployable structures. In Proceedings of the SPIE, pages 384–395,Waikoloa, HI, August 2002.16. Astrom and Wittenmark. Adaptive Control. Addison-Wesley 1995.17. VanZwieten, Bower, and Lacy. Data-based control of a free-free beam in the presence of uncertainty. In American Control Conference, New York City, NY, July 2007.18. P. K. Stevens, “A generalization of the nyquist stability criterion,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 26, no. 3, p. 664–669, 1981.19. Lacy, S., Babuska, V., Input-Output Data Scaling for System Identification, in 14th IFAC Symposium on System Identification. 2006, IFAC: Newcastle, Australia.20. Chen, C.-T., Linear Systems Theory and Design 3rd edition. 1999, New York: Oxford University Press.21. McKelvey T., H.A., Ribarits T., Data Driven Local Coordinates for Mulitvariable Linear Systems and Their Application to System Identification. Automatica, 2004. 40: p. 1629-1635.22. Baillieul and Willems. Mathematical Control Theory. Springer 1998.23. Dickinson, Kailath, and Morf. Canonical matrix fraction and state-space descriptions for deterministic and stochastic linear systems. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, [19:6] p. 656-667, 1974.24. Akaike. Stochastic theory of minimal realization. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, [19:6] p. 667-674, 1974.25. Denham. Canonical forms for the identification of multivariable linear systems. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, [19:6] p. 646-656, 1974.26. Glover and Willems. Parameterizations of linear dynamical systems: Canonical forms and identifiability. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, [19:6] p. 640-646, 1974.27. Katayama, Tohru, Subspace Methods for System Identification, 2005, London, UK: Springer-Verlag28. Space Vehicle Modeling and Validation Final Report. Available on request.PROPOSAL DUE DATE AND TIME: The due date for proposals submitted in response to this CALL is by 12:00pm, MST, 26 January 2009. Proposals for any other technology area identified in the baseline BAA will not be accepted at this time unless a CALL for proposals in that specific area is open. Proposals received after the due dates and times shall be governed by the provisions of FAR 52.215-1(c)(3). CALL AMENDMENTS: Offerors should monitor FedBizOps/EPS http://www.fbo.gov and/or Grants.gov/FIND http://www.grants.gov for any additional notices to this CALL that may permit extensions to the proposal submission date or otherwise modify this announcement. ANTICIPATED TYPE OF CONTRACTS/INSTRUMENTS: The Air Force anticipates awarding Assistance Agreements as a result of this CALL but reserves the right to award the instrument best suited to the nature of research proposed. ANTICIPATED NUMBER OF AWARDS: The Air Force anticipates awarding One award in Area 1, two or more awards in Area 2, and one award in Area 3. However, the Air Force does reserve the right to make multiple awards or no awards pursuant to this CALL. ANTICIPATED FUNDING: Anticipated funding for this CALL (not per contract or award) is: Area 1: $80,000 – FY09, $80,000 – FY10, $80,000 – FY11Area 2: $300,000 – FY09, $400,000 – FY10-, $400,000 – FY11Area 3: $50,000 – FY09, $50,000 – FY10, $50,000 – FY11This funding profile is an estimate only and will not be a contractual obligation for funding. All funding (6.2) is subject to change due to government discretion and availability. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE: The anticipated period of performance for individual awards resulting from this CALL is 39 months in duration. The period of performance is to be proposed in the format “includes 36 months for technical effort and 3 months for Final Report preparation.”ANTICIPATED AWARD DATE: 27 July 2009.INTENT TO PROPOSE: Potential offerors are requested to advise the contracting point of contact if they intend to submit a proposal in response to this CALL. Such notification is merely a courtesy and is not a commitment by the offeror to submit a proposal.DELIVERABLES ITEMS: Source Software (algorithms and simulations), Quarterly Status Reports, Final Technical Report. Sections two and three also have specific requests with respect to the organization of the final technical report as well. OTHER RELEVANT INFORMATION:1. Program security classification for this CALL is Unclassified.2. ITAR, export control, DD Form 2345 is not anticipated.3. Government Furnished Property: None.4. GOVERNMENT OWNS ALL DATA RIGHTS/UNRESTRICTED DATA RIGHTS, NO FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS. NOTE THAT INCLUSION OF PROPRIETARY INFORMATION, PRODUCTS OR IR&D TO COMPLETE THE PROPOSED SOW IN PART OR IN FULL WILL NOT BE ALLOWED. PAST EFFORTS UNDER THIS CATEGORY CAN BE DISCUSSED IN THE PROPOSAL, BUT MUST NOT BE NECESSARY FOR THE CONTRACTOR TO ACTUALLY PRODUCE THE SOW DELIVERABLES IN PART OR IN FULL. APPLICABILITY OF BASELINE BAA: All requirements of BAA-VS-07-03 apply unless specifically amended and addressed in this CALL. For complete information regarding BAA-VS-07-03, refer to the initial opened-ended BAA. It contains information applicable to all CALLS issued under the BAA and provides information on the overall program, proposal preparation and submission requirements, proposal review and evaluation criteria, award administration, agency contacts, etc. Direct questions to the points of contact identified above.NOTICE FOR PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS: The website referenced in the Baseline BAA http://www.vs.afrl.af.mil/PK has moved. In order to access contracting information the new website is http://www.kirtland.af.mil/library/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=8124. Information for Model Contracts, Cost Proposal Instructions, Broad Agency Announcements, Wide Area Workflow and other Additional Information is located here.