Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T21:15:27.894Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An unmanned helicopter control with partial small body force compensation: Experimental results

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 July 2018

Bryan Godbolt  and
Alan F. Lynch Open the ORCID record for Alan F. Lynch [Opens in a new window]
Bryan Godbolt
Affiliation:
QinetiQ Target Systems, Medicine Hat, AB, Canada. E-mail: [email protected]
Alan F. Lynch*
Affiliation:
QinetiQ Target Systems, Medicine Hat, AB, Canada. E-mail: [email protected]
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

A generally accepted helicopter model used for control includes the effect of Small Body Forces (SBF) which couple the vehicle's rotational subsystem inputs to its translational dynamics. SBF result from tail rotor thrust and lateral forces due to main rotor flapping. It is well-known that SBF lead to a theoretically challenging stabilization problem for the tracking error dynamics. Hence, much of the existing work has neglected SBF in order to simplify control design. We design a controller that directly compensates the influence of the tail rotor component of the SBF. The design is validated in simulation and flight tests.

Keywords

Aerial RoboticsControl of Robotic SystemsRobot DynamicsMechatronic SystemsAutomation
Type
Articles
Information
Robotica , Volume 36 , Issue 10 , October 2018 , pp. 1436 - 1453
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Ahmed, B., Pota, H. R. and Garratt, M., “Flight control of a rotary wing UAV using backstepping,” Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control 20, 639–658 (2010).Google Scholar
2. Barczyk, M., Nonlinear State Estimation and Modeling of a Helicopter UAV. Ph.D. Thesis (Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, 2012).Google Scholar
3. Bisgaard, M., Modeling, Estimation, and Control of Helicopter Slung Load System. Ph.D. Thesis (Dept. of Control Engineering, Aalborg University, Denmark, 2007).Google Scholar
4. Bouabdallah, S., Design and Control of Quadrotors with Application to Autonomous Flying. Ph.D. Thesis (École Polytechnique Federale de Luasanne, Lausanne, Switzerland, 2007).Google Scholar
5. Bullo, F. and Murray, R. M., “Tracking for fully actuated mechanical systems: A geometric framework,” Automatica 35, 17–35 (1999).Google Scholar
6. Cabecinhas, D., Cunha, R. and Silverstre, C., “A nonlinear quadrotor trajectory tracking controller with disturbance rejection,” Control Eng. Practice 26, 1–10 (2014).Google Scholar
7. Cai, G., Chen, B. M. and Lee, T. H., “Unmanned Rotorcraft Systems,” In: Advances in Industrial Control (Springer-Verlag, London, UK, 2011).Google Scholar
8. Castillo, P., Lozano, R. and Dzul, A. E., Modelling and Control of Mini-Flying Machines (Springer-Verlag, London, UK, 2005).Google Scholar
9. Farrell, J. A., Aided Navigation: GPS with High Rate Sensors (McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, 2008).Google Scholar
10. Godbolt, B., Experimental Nonlinear Control of a Helicopter Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV). Ph.D. Thesis (Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, 2013).Google Scholar
11. Godbolt, B. and Lynch, A. F., “A Novel Cascade Controller for a Helicopter UAV with Small Body Force Compensation,” Proceedings of the American Control Conference, Washington, DC (2013) pp. 800–805.Google Scholar
12. Godbolt, B. and Lynch, A. F., “Physical Input Modelling and Identification for a Helicopter UAV,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Atlanta, GA (2013) pp. 890–896.Google Scholar
13. Godbolt, B., Vitzilaios, N., Bergen, C. and Lynch, A. F., “Helicopter UAV Control Validation Using Simulation and Experiment,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems, Atlanta, GA (2013) pp. 392–397.Google Scholar
14. Godbolt, B., Vitzilaios, N. I. and Lynch, A. F., “Experimental validation of a helicopter autopilot design using model-based PID control,” J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 70, 385–399 (2013).Google Scholar
15. He, Y., Pei, H. and Sun, T., “Robust tracking control of helicopters using backstepping with disturbance observers,” Asian J. Control 16 (5), 1387–1402 (2014).Google Scholar
16. Hoffman, K. and Kunze, R., Linear Algebra, 2nd ed. (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1971).Google Scholar
17. Hua, M. D., Contributions to the Automatic Control of Aerial Vehicles. Ph.D. Thesis (École Doctorale Science et Technologies de l'Information et de la Communication, Université Nice Sophia Antipolis, Nice, France, 2009).Google Scholar
18. Hua, M.-D., Hamel, T., Morin, P. and Samson, C., “Introduction to feedback control of underactuated VTOL vehicles: A review of basic control design ideas and principles,” Control Syst. Mag. 33, 61–75 (2013).Google Scholar
19. Johnson, W., Helicopter Theory (Dover, New York, NY, 1980).Google Scholar
20. Kannan, S., Adaptive Control of Systems in Cascade with Saturation. Ph.D. Thesis (School of Aerospace Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, 2005).Google Scholar
21. Kendoul, F., Fantoni, I. and Lozano, R., “Asymptotic Stability of Hierarchical Inner-Outer Loop-Based Flight Controllers,” Proceedings of the IFAC World Congress, Seoul, Korea (2008) pp. 1741–1746.Google Scholar
22. Khalil, H. K., Nonlinear Systems, 3rd ed. (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2002).Google Scholar
23. Koditschek, D. E., Application of a New Lyapunov Function to Global Adaptive Attitude Tracking,” Proceedings of the Conference on Decision and Control, Austin, TX (1988) pp. 63–68.Google Scholar
24. Koo, T. J. and Sastry, S., “Output Tracking Control Design of a Helicopter Model Based on Approximate Linearization,” Proceedings of the Conference on Decision and Control, Tampa, FL (1998) pp. 3635–3640.Google Scholar
25. Leishman, J. G., Principles of Helicopter Aerodynamics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2016).Google Scholar
26. Mahony, R. and Hamel, T., “Robust trajectory tracking for a scale model autonomous helicopter,” Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control 14, 1035–1059 (2004).Google Scholar
27. Marantos, P., Bechlioulis, C. P. and Kyriakopoulos, K. J., “Robust trajectory tracking control for small-scale unmanned helicopters with model uncertainties,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 25, 2010–2021 (2017).Google Scholar
28. Marconi, L. and Naldi, R., “Robust full degree-of-freedom tracking control of a helicopter,” Automatica 43, 1909–1920 (2007).Google Scholar
29. Mettler, B., Identification Modeling and Characteristics of Miniature Rotorcraft (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA, 2003).Google Scholar
30. Omari, S., Hua, M.-D., Ducard, G. and Hamel, T., “Nonlinear Control of VTOL UAVs Incorporating Flapping Dynamics,” Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Tokyo, Japan (2013) pp. 2419–2425.Google Scholar
31. Padfield, G. D., Helicopter Flight Dynamics: The Theory and Application of Flying Qualities and Simulation Modeling (John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, 2008).Google Scholar
32. Patel, R. V. and Toda, M., “Quantitative Measures of Robustness for Multivariable Systems,” Proceedings of the Joint Automatic Control Conference, San Fransisco, CA (1980). paper TP8-A.Google Scholar
33. Prouty, R. W., Helicopter Performance, Stability, and Control (Krieger Publishing Company, Malabar, FL, 1986).Google Scholar
34. px4. PX4 autopilot. Online, 2018. URL http://pixhawk.org. Accessed Feb. 27, 2018.Google Scholar
35. QGroundControl. QGroundControl. online, 2013. URL http://qgroundcontrol.org. Accessed Feb. 27, 2018.Google Scholar
36. Raptis, I. A., Valavanis, K. P. and Moreno, W. A., “A novel nonlinear backstepping controller design for helicopters using the rotation matrix,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 19, 465–473 (2011).Google Scholar
37. Shao, X., Liu, J., Cao, H., Shen, C. and Wang, H., “Robust dynamic surface trajectory tracking control for a quadrotor UAV via extended state observer,” Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control 28, 2700–2719 (2018).Google Scholar
38. Shuster, M. D., “A survey of attitude representations,” J. Astronaut. Sci. 41, 439–517 (1993).Google Scholar
39. Valavanis, K. and Vachtsevanos, G. J., eds., Handbook of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (Springer-Verlag, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2015).Google Scholar
40. van Nieuwstadt, M. J. and Murray, R. M., “Outer Flatness: Trajectory Generation for a Model Helicopter,” Proceedings of the European Control Conference, Brussels, Belgium (1997) pp. 325–330.Google Scholar
41. Xian, B., Zhao, B., Zhang, Y. and Zhang, X., “A low-cost hardware-in-the-loop-simulation testbed of quadrotor UAV and implementation of nonlinear control schemes,” Robotica 35, 588–612 (2015).Google Scholar