AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
Powered by AMiner. Clicking this button will take you away from SciOpen.
Home Astrodynamics Article
Article Link
Cite
EndNote(RIS) BibTeX
Collect
Submit Manuscript
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Review Article

A review of space-object collision probability computation methods

College of Aerospace Science and Engineering, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha, 410073, China
Hunan Key Laboratory of Intelligent Planning and Simulation for Aerospace Missions, Changsha, 410073, China
Show Author Information

Graphical Abstract

Abstract

The collision probability computation of space objects plays an important role in space situational awareness, particularly for conjunction assessment and collision avoidance. Early works mainly relied on Monte Carlo simulations to predict collision probabilities. Although such simulations are accurate when a large number of samples are used, these methods are perceived as computationally intensive, which limits their application in practice. To overcome this limitation, many approximation methods have been developed over the past three decades. This paper presents a comprehensive review of existing space-object collision probability computation methods. The advantages and limitations of different methods are analyzed and a systematic comparison is presented. Advice regarding how to select a suitable method for different short-term encounter scenarios is then provided. Additionally, potential future research avenues are discussed.

Keywords

collision avoidanceastrodynamicscollision probabilityspace situational awareness

References

1

Luo, Y. Z., Yang, Z. A review of uncertainty propagation in orbital mechanics. Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 2017, 89: 23–39.
Crossref Google Scholar
2

Liou, J. C. Collision activities in the future orbital debris environment. Advances in Space Research, 2006, 38(9): 2102–2106.
Crossref Google Scholar
3
Flohrer, T., Krag, H., Klinkrad, H. Assessment and categorization of TLE orbit errors for the US SSN catalogue. In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance Technologies Conference, 2008.
4
Hoots, F., Starchville, T. Debris risk assessment process. In: Proceedings of the AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference and Exhibit, 2008: AIAA 2008–6269.https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2008-6269
Crossref
5
Liou, J. C., Anilkumar, A. K., Bastida, B., Hanada, T., Sharma, R. K. Stability of the future LEO environment. In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Space Debris, 2013.
6

Letizia, F., Colombo, C., Lewis, H. G. Collision probability due to space debris clouds through a continuum approach. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2015, 39(10): 2240–2249.
Crossref Google Scholar
7

Kessler, D. J., Cour-Palais, B. G. Collision frequency of artificial satellites: The creation of a debris belt. Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics, 1978, 83(A6): 2637–2646.
Crossref Google Scholar
8

Levin, G. M., Hauck, F. H., Shawcross, P. J., Christiansen, E. L. Protecting the space shuttle from meteoroids and orbital debris. Space Debris, 2000: 231–237.
Google Scholar
9

Bérend, N. Estimation of the probability of collision between two catalogued orbiting objects. Advances in Space Research, 1999, 23(1): 243–247.
Crossref Google Scholar
10

Jenkin, A. B. Effect of orbit data quality on the feasibility of collision risk management. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, 2004, 41(4): 677–683.
Crossref Google Scholar
11

Hechler, M., van der Ha, J. C. Probability of collisions in the geostationary ring. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, 1981, 18(4): 361–366.
Crossref Google Scholar
12

Takahashi, K. Collision between satellites in stationary orbits. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, 1981, AES-17(4): 591–596.
Crossref Google Scholar
13

Chobotov, V. A. Classification of orbits with regard to collision hazard in space. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, 1983, 20(5): 484–490.
Crossref Google Scholar
14

Kessler, D. J. Orbital debris issues. Advances in Space Research, 1985, 5(2): 3–10.
Crossref Google Scholar
15

McKnight, D. S., Anz-Meador, P. D. Historical growth of quantities affecting on-orbit collision hazard. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, 1993, 30(1): 120–124.
Crossref Google Scholar
16
Khutorovsky, Z., Boikov, V., Kamensky, S. Direct method for the analysis of collision probability of artificial space objects in LEO: Techniques, methods and applications. In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Space Debris European Space Agency, 1993: 491–499.
17

Uriot, T., Izzo, D., Simões, L. F., Abay, R., Einecke, N., Rebhan, S., Martinez-Heras, J., Letizia, F., Siminski, J., Merz, K. Spacecraft collision avoidance challenge: Design and results of a machine learning competition. Astrodynamics, 2021, 6(2): 121–140.
Crossref Google Scholar
18

Akella, M. R., Alfriend, K. T. Probability of collision between space objects. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2000, 23(5): 769–772.
Crossref Google Scholar
19

Patera, R. P. General method for calculating satellite collision probability. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2001, 24(4): 716–722.
Crossref Google Scholar
20

Alfano, S. A numerical implementation of spherical object collision probability. The Journal of the Astronautical Sciences, 2005, 53(1): 103–109.
Crossref Google Scholar
21

Chan, K. F. Spacecraft Collision Probability. El Segundo, USA: The Aerospace Press, 2008.
22
Coppola, V. T. Including velocity uncertainty in the probability of collision between space objects. In: Proceedings of the AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference and Exhibit, 2012.
23
Dolado, J. C., Legendre, P., Garmier, R., Revelin, B., Pena, X. Satellite collision probability computation for long term encounters. In: Proceedings of the AAS/AIAA Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, 2011.
24

Yang, C. H., Zhang, H. Formation flight design for a LISA-like gravitational wave observatory via Cascade optimization. Astrodynamics, 2019, 3(2): 155–171.
Crossref Google Scholar
25
Chan, K. F. Short-term vs. long-term spacecraft encounters. In: Proceedings of the AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference and Exhibit, 2004: AIAA 2004–5460.https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2004-5460
Crossref
26

Alfriend, K. T., Akella, M. R., Frisbee, J., Foster, J. L., Lee, D. J., Wilkins, M. Probability of collision error analysis. Space Debris, 1999, 1(1): 21–35.
Crossref Google Scholar
27

Alfano, S. Review of conjunction probability methods for short-term encounters. Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, 2007, 127: 719–746.
Google Scholar
28

Patera, R. P. Space vehicle conflict probability for ellipsoidal conflict volumes. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2007, 30(6): 1819–1822.
Crossref Google Scholar
29

Patera, R. P. Satellite collision probability for nonlinear relative motion. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2003, 26(5): 728–733.
Crossref Google Scholar
30

Dolado-Perez, J. C., Pardini, C., Anselmo, L. Review of uncertainty sources affecting the long-term predictions of space debris evolutionary models. Acta Astronautica, 2015, 113: 51–65.
Crossref Google Scholar
31

Yang, Z., Luo, Y. Z., Zhang, J. Nonlinear semi-analytical uncertainty propagation of trajectory under impulsive maneuvers. Astrodynamics, 2019, 3(1): 61–77.
Crossref Google Scholar
32
Carpenter, J. R., Markley, F. L., Alfriend, K. T., Wright, C., Arcido, J. Sequential probability ratio test for collision avoidance maneuver decisions based on a bank of norm-inequality-constrained epoch-state filters. In: Proceedings of the AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference and Exhibit, 2011: AAS 11–437.
33
Chan, K. F. International space station collision probability. In: Proceedings of the AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference and Exhibit, 2008.https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2008-6774
Crossref
34

Alfano, S. Satellite conjunction Monte Carlo analysis. Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, 2009, 134: 2007–2024.
Google Scholar
35
De Vries, W. H., Phillion, D. W. Monte Carlo method for collision probability using 3D satellite models. In: Proceedings of the Advanced Maui Optical and Space Surveillance Technologies Conference, 2010.
36

Sabol, C., Binz, C., Segerman, A., Roe, K., Schumacher, P. W. Probability of collision with special perturbations dynamics using the Monte Carlo method. Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, 2012, 142: 1081–1093.
Google Scholar
37
Grande-Olalla, I., Sanchez-Ortiz, N., Pulido, J. A., Merz, K. Collision risk assessment and avoidance maneuvers: New tools CORAM for ESA. In: Proceedings of the 6th European Conference on Space Debris, 2013.
38

Yang, C., Kumar, M. An adaptive Monte Carlo method for uncertainty forecasting in perturbed two-body dynamics. Acta Astronautica, 2019, 155: 369–378.
Crossref Google Scholar
39

Binder, K., Heermann, D., Roelofs, L., Mallinckrodt, A. J., McKay, S. Monte Carlo simulation in statistical physics. Computers in Physics, 1993, 7(2): 156–157.
Crossref Google Scholar
40

Dagum, P., Karp, R., Luby, M., Ross, S. An optimal algorithm for Monte Carlo estimation. SIAM Journal on Computing, 2000, 29(5): 1484–1496.
Crossref Google Scholar
41
Dolado, J. C., Legendre, P., Garmier, R., Revelin, B., Pena, X. Satellite collision probability computation for long term encounters. In: Proceedings of the AAS/AIAA Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, 2012: 275–294.
42
Pastel, R. Estimating satellite versus debris collision probability via the adaptive splitting technique. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Computer Modeling and Simulation, 2011.
43

Jones, B. A., Doostan, A. Satellite collision probability estimation using polynomial chaos expansions. Advances in Space Research, 2013, 52(11): 1860–1875.
Crossref Google Scholar
44
Jones, B. A., Doostan, A., Born, G. Conjunction assessment using polynomial chaos expansions. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Symposium and Space Flight Dynamics: JPL, 2012.
45
Ghrist, R., Plakalovic, D. Impact of non-Gaussian error volumes on conjunction assessment risk analysis. In: Proceedings of the AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, 2012: AIAA 2012–4965.https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2012-4965
Crossref
46

Armellin, R., Morselli, A., di Lizia, P., Lavagna, M. Rigorous computation of orbital conjunctions. Advances in Space Research, 2012, 50(5): 527–538.
Crossref Google Scholar
47

Morselli, A., Armellin, R., di Lizia, P., Bernelli Zazzera, F. A high order method for orbital conjunctions analysis: Monte Carlo collision probability computation. Advances in Space Research, 2015, 55(1): 311–333.
Crossref Google Scholar
48

Morselli, A., Armellin, R., di Lizia, P., Bernelli Zazzera, F. A high order method for orbital conjunctions analysis: Sensitivity to initial uncertainties. Advances in Space Research, 2014, 53(3): 490–508.
Crossref Google Scholar
49

Vittaldev, V., Russell, R. P. Space object collision probability via Monte Carlo on the graphics processing unit. The Journal of the Astronautical Sciences, 2017, 64(3): 285–309.
Crossref Google Scholar
50

Jones, B. A., Parrish, N., Doostan, A. Postmaneuver collision probability estimation using sparse polynomial chaos expansions. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2015, 38(8): 1425–1437.
Crossref Google Scholar
51

Adurthi, N., Singla, P. Conjugate unscented transformation-based approach for accurate conjunction analysis. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2015, 38(9): 1642–1658.
Crossref Google Scholar
52

Zhang, S., Fu, T., Chen, D. F., Cao, H. W. Satellite instantaneous collision probability computation using equivalent volume cuboids. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2020, 43(9): 1757–1763.
Crossref Google Scholar
53
Foster, J. L., Estes, H. S. A parametric analysis of orbital debris collision probability and maneuver rate for space vehicles. NASA/JSC-25898, 1992.
54

Patera, R. P. Method for calculating collision probability between a satellite and a space tether. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2002, 25(5): 940–945.
Crossref Google Scholar
55

Patera, R. P. Calculating collision probability for arbitrary space vehicle shapes via numerical quadrature. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2005, 28(6): 1326–1328.
Crossref Google Scholar
56

Bai, X. Z., Chen, L. Research on calculational method of collision probability between space objects. Journal of Astronautics, 2008, 29(4): 1435–1442, 1456. (in Chinese)
Google Scholar
57

Bai, X. Z., Chen, L. A rapid algorithm of space debris collision probability based on space compression and infinite series. Acta Mathematicae Applicatae Sinica, 2009, 32(2): 336–353.
Google Scholar
58

Bai, X. Z., Chen, L. Explicit expression and influencing factor analysis of collision probability between space objects. Chinese Journal of Space Science, 2009, 29(4): 422–431. (in Chinese)
Google Scholar
59

Xu, X. L., Xiong, Y. Q. A research on collision probability calculation of space debris for nonlinear relative motion. Acta Astronautica Sinica, 2011, 52(1): 73–85. (in Chinese)
Google Scholar
60

Xu, X. L., Xiong, Y. Q. Analysis of the applicability of collision probability algorithms for nonlinear relative motion. Science China Physics, Mechanics and Astronomy, 2013, 56(5): 1041–1046.
Crossref Google Scholar
61

Xu, X. L., Xiong, Y. Q. A method for calculating probability of collision between space objects. Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics, 2014, 14(5): 601–609.
Crossref Google Scholar
62

Serra, R., Arzelier, D., Joldes, M., Lasserre, J. B., Rondepierre, A., Salvy, B. Fast and accurate computation of orbital collision probability for short-term encounters. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2016, 39(5): 1009–1021.
Crossref Google Scholar
63

García-Pelayo, R., Hernando-Ayuso, J. Series for collision probability in short-encounter model. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2016, 39(8): 1904–1912.
Crossref Google Scholar
64

Maron, M. J. Numerical Analysis: A Practical Approach. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1982.
65

Patera, R. P. Collision probability for larger bodies having nonlinear relative motion. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2006, 29(6): 1468–1472.
Crossref Google Scholar
66
Coppola, V. T., Woodburn, J., Hujsak, R. Effects of cross correlated covariance on space-craft collision probability. In: Proceedings of the AAS/AIAA Spaceflight Mechanics Meeting, 2004: AAS 04-181.
67
Coppola V. T. Evaluating the short encounter assumption of the probability of collision formula. In: Proceedings of the 22nd AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, 2012.
68
Schaeffer, V., Laurens, S., Seimandi, P., Delmas, F. Collision probability through time integration implementation and operational results. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Space Operations, 2018: AIAA 2018-2720.https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2018-2720
Crossref
69

Alfano, S. Eliminating assumptions regarding satellite conjunction analysis. The Journal of the Astronautical Sciences, 2012, 59(4): 676–705.
Crossref Google Scholar
70
Alfano, S. Addressing nonlinear relative motion for spacecraft collision probability. In: Proceedings of the AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference and Exhibit, 2006: AIAA 2006-6760.https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2006-6760
Crossref
71
McKinley, D. Development of a nonlinear probability collision tool for the earth observing system. In: Proceedings of the 15th AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference and Exhibit, 2006: AIAA 2006–6295.https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2006-6295
Crossref
72

DeMars, K. J., Cheng, Y., Jah, M. K. Collision probability with Gaussian mixture orbit uncertainty. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2014, 37(3): 979–985.
Crossref Google Scholar
73

Vittaldev, V., Russell, R. P. Space object collision probability using multidirectional Gaussian mixture models. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2016, 39(9): 2163–2169.
Crossref Google Scholar
74

Shelton, C. T., Junkins, J. L. Probability of collision between space objects including model uncertainty. Acta Astronautica, 2019, 155: 462–471.
Crossref Google Scholar
75
Chan, K. F. Spacecraft collision probability for long-term encounters. In: Proceedings of the AIAA/AAS Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, 2003: AAS 21–604.
76

Luo, Y. Z., Liang, L. B., Wang, H., Tang, G. J. Quantitative performance for spacecraft rendezvous trajectory safety. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2011, 34(4): 1264–1269.
Crossref Google Scholar
77
Foster, J. The analytic basis for debris avoidance operations for the International Space Station. In: Proceedings of the 3rd European Conference on Space Debris, 2001.
78
Pulido, J. A., Sánchez, N., Poniente, R. D., Str, R.B., Gran De, I., Merz, K. ESA's collision risk assessment and avoidance maneuvers tool. ESA, 2013.
79
Information on https://physicstoday.scitation.org/do/10.1063/PT.5.026998/full/ (cited 30 Mar 2021).
80
Gavin, R. T. NASA's orbital debris conjunction assessment and collision avoidance strategy. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual AAS Rocky Mountain Guidance and Control Conference, 2010.
81
Phillips, M. R. Spacecraft collision probability estimation for rendezvous and proximity operations. M.S. Dissertation. Utah, Logan, USA: Aerospace Department, Utah State University, 2012.
82
Acciarini, G., Pinto, F., Metz, S., Boufelja, S., Baydin, A. G. Spacecraft collision risk assessment with probabilistic programming. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Machine Learning and the Physical Sciences, 2020.
83
Browns, A. C. Human spaceflight recent conjunctions of interest. In: Proceedings of the USSTRATCOM Conjunction Summary Message Workshop, 2010.
84

Luo, Y. Z., Liang, L. B., Niu, Z. Y., Tang, G. J. Safety-optimal linearized impulsive rendezvous with trajectory uncertainties. Journal of Aerospace Engineering, 2014, 27(6): 04014038.
Crossref Google Scholar
85

Sun, Z. J., Luo, Y. Z., Niu, Z. Y. Spacecraft rendezvous trajectory safety quantitative performance index eliminating probability dilution. Science China Technological Sciences, 2014, 57(6): 1219–1228.
Crossref Google Scholar
86

Sun, Z. J., Luo, Y. Z., Li, H. Y. Uncertainty-dependent warning threshold for spacecraft rendezvous collision probability. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, 2019, 55(1): 2–16.
Crossref Google Scholar
87

Richards, A., Schouwenaars, T., How, J. P., Feron, E. Spacecraft trajectory planning with avoidance constraints using mixed-integer linear programming. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2002, 25(4): 755–764.
Crossref Google Scholar
88

Wu, B. L., Wang, D. W., Poh, E. K., Xu, G. Y. Nonlinear optimization of low-thrust trajectory for satellite formation: Legendre pseudospectral approach. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2009, 32(4): 1371–1381.
Crossref Google Scholar
89

Di Cairano, S., Park, H., Kolmanovsky, I. Model predictive control approach for guidance of spacecraft rendezvous and proximity maneuvering. International Journal of Robust and Nonlinear Control, 2012, 22(12): 1398–1427.
Crossref Google Scholar
90

Morgan, D., Chung, S. J., Hadaegh, F. Y. Model predictive control of swarms of spacecraft using sequential convex programming. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2014, 37(6): 1725–1740.
Crossref Google Scholar
91
Park, H., Zappulla, R., Zagaris, C., Virgili-Llop, J., Romano, M. Nonlinear model predictive control for spacecraft rendezvous and docking with a rotating target. In: Proceedings of the 27th AAS/AIAA Space Flight Mechanics Meeting, 2017: AAS 17-496.
92

Bombardelli, C. Analytical formulation of impulsive collision avoidance dynamics. Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy, 2014, 118(2): 99–114.
Crossref Google Scholar
93

Bombardelli, C., Hernando-Ayuso, J. Optimal impulsive collision avoidance in low earth orbit. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2015, 38(2): 217–225.
Crossref Google Scholar
94
Greco, C., Sanchez, L., Manzi, M., Vasile, M. A robust Bayesian agent for optimal collision avoidance maneuver planning. In: Proceedings of the 8th European Conference on Space Debris, 2021.
95

Mason, J., Stupl, J., Marshall, W., Levit, C. Orbital debris-debris collision avoidance. Advances in Space Research, 2011, 48(10): 1643–1655.
Crossref Google Scholar
96

Bonnal, C., McKnight, D., Phipps, C., Dupont, C., Missonnier, S., Lequette, L., Merle, M., Rommelaere, S. Just in time collision avoidance—A review. Acta Astronautica, 2020, 170: 637–651.
Crossref Google Scholar
97

Gonzalo, J. L., Colombo, C., di Lizia, P. Analytical framework for space debris collision avoidance maneuver design. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 2020, 44(3): 469–487.
Crossref Google Scholar
98

Wang, Y., Bai, Y. Z., Ran, D. C., Zhao, Y., Zhang, X., Chen, X. Q. The equal-collision-probability-surface method for spacecraft collision avoidance. Advances in the Astronautical Sciences, 2017, 161: 761–776.
Google Scholar
99

Wang, Y., Bai, Y. Z., Xing, J. J., Radice, G., Ni, Q., Chen, X. Q. Equal-collision-probability-curve method for safe spacecraft close-range proximity maneuvers. Advances in Space Research, 2018, 62(9): 2599–2619.
Crossref Google Scholar
100

Wang, Y., Chen, X. Q., Ran, D. C., Ou, Y. W., Ni, Q., Bai, Y. Z. Multi-equal-collision-probability-cure method for convex polygon-shape spacecraft safe proximity manoeuvres. Journal of Navigation, 2019, 72(2): 405–429.
Crossref Google Scholar
101

Wang, Y., Bai, Y. Z., Ran, D. C., Chen, Q., Ni, Q., Chen, X. Q. Dual-equal-collision-probability-curve method for spacecraft safe proximity maneuvers in presence of complex shape. Acta Astronautica, 2019, 159: 65–76.
Crossref Google Scholar
102

Hua, B., Huang, Y., Wu, Y. H., Chen, Z. M., Nicholas, D. Spacecraft formation reconfiguration trajectory planning with avoidance constraints using adaptive pigeon-inspired optimization. Science China-Information Sciences, 2019, 62(7): 70209.
Crossref Google Scholar
103

Hua, B., Sun, S. G., Wu, Y. H., Chen, Z. M. Path planning method for spacecraft formation reconfiguration based on CGAPIO. Journal of Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2021, 47(2): 223–230. (in Chinese)
Google Scholar
104

Xie, Y. C., Chan, K., Zhang, J. R. Collision probability of composite cubesats hovering in leader-follower configuration. Acta Astronautica, 2020, 168: 211–219.
Crossref Google Scholar
Astrodynamics
Volume 6 Issue 2,
June 2022
Pages 95-120
DOI: 10.1007/s42064-021-0125-x
Cite this article:
Li J-S, Yang Z, Luo Y-Z. A review of space-object collision probability computation methods. Astrodynamics, 2022, 6(2): 95-120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42064-021-0125-x

867

Views

17

Crossref

14

Web of Science

21

Scopus

1

CSCD

Altmetrics
Received: 24 May 2021
Accepted: 02 November 2021
Published: 05 April 2022
© Tsinghua University Press 2021
Return