Application of electrical propulsion for an active debris removal system: a system engineering approach Original Research Article

One of the main challenge in the design of an active removal system for space debris is the high ΔV required both to approach space debris lying in different orbits and to de-orbit/re-orbit them. Indeed if the system does not target a number of objects during its lifetime the cost of the removal will be far too high to be considered as the basis of an economically viable business case. Using a classical chemical propulsion (CP) system, the ΔV is limited by the mass of propellant that the system can carry. This limitation is greatly reduced if electrical propulsion is considered. Electrical propulsion (EP) systems are indeed characterized by low propellant mass requirements, however this comes at the cost of higher electrical power and, typically, higher complexity and mass of the power supply system. Because of this, the use of EP systems has been, therefore, primarily limited to station keeping maneuvers. However in the recent past, the success of missions using EP as primary propulsion (e.g. GOCE, SMART-1, Artemis, Deep Spcae1, Hayabusa) makes this technology a suitable candidate for providing propulsion for an active debris removal system. This study case will provide the analysis of the possible application of electrical propulsion systems in such a context, presenting a number of possible mission profiles. This paper will start with the description of possible mission concepts and the assessment of the EP technology, comparing near-term propulsion options, that best fits the mission. A more detailed analysis follows with the relevant trade-off to define the characteristics of the final system and its size in terms of mass and power required. A survey of available space qualified EP systems will be performed with the selection of the best candidates to be used and/or developed for an active debris removal system. The results of a similar analysis performed for a classical CP system are then presented and the two options are compared in terms of total cost of the mission.