Design of Responsive Space-Based Observation Systems with Integrated Collision Risk Consideration
Yifan CAI, Camilla COLOMBO
Abstract. The rapidly increasing density of Low-Earth Orbit (LEO) space and the growing demand for time-critical Earth Observation (EO) tasks introduce new challenges for constellation design. Traditionally, optimisation efforts have prioritised coverage performance and system cost, while collision risk has been evaluated only at later operational stages. However, in an increasingly congested orbital environment, this separation is no longer sustainable. This paper addresses constellation design as a three-objective optimisation problem, where responsiveness, system cost, and orbit collision risk are treated as equally important objectives. A modelling framework is formulated, in which responsiveness is measured by the average revisit interval over a set of spatially distributed events, cost is approximated through a satellite-count-based linear model, and collision risk is estimated through a composite debris background and conjunction-based proxy. Two optimisation scenarios are examined: (i) responsiveness–cost optimisation while computing but not minimising risk, and (ii) full three-objective optimisation including risk as one of the objectives. Results demonstrate that explicitly optimising risk reshapes the Pareto frontier, favouring design configurations that provide comparable responsiveness and cost with substantially reduced collision risk. These findings support incorporating sustainability considerations at the conceptual design stage of future responsive EO constellations.
Keywords
Constellation Design, Multi-objective Optimisation, Collision Risk, Space Sustainability
Published online 7/20/2026, 6 pages
Copyright © 2026 by the author(s)
Published under license by Materials Research Forum LLC., Millersville PA, USA
Citation: Yifan CAI, Camilla COLOMBO, Design of Responsive Space-Based Observation Systems with Integrated Collision Risk Consideration, Materials Research Proceedings, Vol. 69, pp 1125-1130, 2026
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21741/9781644904251-194
The article was published as article 194 of the book CEAS – AIDAA Conference 2025
Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license. Any further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
References
[1] Johnson C D. The Legal Status of Mega LEO Constellations and Concerns About Appropriation of Large Swaths of Earth Orbit. Handbook of Small Satellites, 2020, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20707-6_95-1
[2] Colombi J M, Stern J L, Wachtel S T, et al. Multi-Objective Parallel Optimization of Geosynchronous Space Situational Awareness Architectures. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, 2018, 55(6): 1453-1465. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.A34043
[3] Wagner K M, Black J T. Genetic-Algorithm-Based Design for Rideshare and Heterogeneous Constellations. Journal of Spacecraft and Rockets, 2020, 57(5):1021-1032. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.A34527
[4] Ebrahimi B, Nadoushan M J, Roshanian J. Optimal Design and Reconfiguration of Flower Constellations: An Application to Global Disaster Management. Acta Astronautica, 2022, 198:550-563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2022.06.043
[5] Petit A, Rossi A, Alessi EM. Assessment of the close approach frequency and collision probability for satellites in different configurations of large constellations. Advances in Space Research. 2021, 67(12):4177-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2021.02.022
[6] Zhang Y, Li B, Liu H, Sang J. An analysis of close approaches and probability of collisions between LEO resident space objects and mega constellations. Geo-spatial Information Science. 2022, 25(1):104-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/10095020.2022.2031313
[7] Huang S, Colombo C, Bernelli-Zazzera F. Multi-criteria design of continuous global coverage Walker and Street-of-Coverage constellations through property assessment. Acta Astronautica. 2021, 188:151-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2021.07.002
[8] Rossi A, Sánchez-Ortiz N, David E, Opromolla R, Grishko D. Future activities in the near-earth space in the face of ever-increasing space traffic. Acta Astronautica. 2024, 225:891-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2024.09.063
[9] Buchs R, Florin MV. Collision risk from space debris: Current status, challenges and response strategies. EPFL International Risk Governance Center. 2021.
[10] Lucken R, Giolito D. Collision risk prediction for constellation design. Acta Astronautica. 2019, 161:492-501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2019.04.003
[11] Cai Y, Gonzalo Gomez JL, Colombo C. Efficient high-dimensional multi-objective optimisation method for large-scale sensor taskin. In 75th International Astronautical Congress. 2024. https://doi.org/10.52202/078360-0085
[12] Wertz, J. R., editor, Mission Geometry; Orbit and Constellation Design and Management, Microcosm Press and Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001.
[13] Deb K, Pratap A, Agarwal S, Meyarivan TA. A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE transactions on evolutionary computation. 2002, 6(2):182-97. https://doi.org/10.1109/4235.996017
