{"title":"多旋翼无人机轨迹跟踪控制器设计","authors":"Robinson S. Alvarez-Valle, P. Rivadeneira","doi":"10.1109/CCAC.2019.8921246","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents the synthesis of controllers for a multi-rotor unmanned aerial vehicle with the goal to track trajectories, transforming its MIMO system representation into simpler structures based on SISO systems. Three control structures are provided to control the four outputs: x, y, z positions and the yaw angle. All the structures are based on decoupled control loops for each output described above. The first structure consists of classical controls, where the first two loops (x and y positions) use a third order transfer function control while the last two (z position and yaw angle) a PID/PD control. The second one uses for the first two loops a cascade control strategy based on a PD controllers. The third structure uses cascade control strategies with a PID-PID-PD-P control combination for the first two loops, while a PD-P combination for the last two. The control performance of each structure is assessed through simulation following changes of set points and a square trajectory. For a 1 [m] step change in x or y position, the system response has a setting time of around 5.7 [s, 4. 7[s], and 1.9 [s], with an overshoot of approximately 75.3%, 40.3% and 0.3% for each structure, respectively. For a 1 [m] change in z position, the setting time is 6.4 [s] and the overshoot is 24.9% for the first two structures. While for the last one, the setting time is 2.7 [s] without overshoot. Similar results are achieved for changes in the yaw angle. Finally, disturbances are included to test the robustness of the control strategies. Based on these results, the conclusion is that the third structure has the best performance.","PeriodicalId":184764,"journal":{"name":"2019 IEEE 4th Colombian Conference on Automatic Control (CCAC)","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Design of Controllers to Track Trajectories for Multi-rotor Unmanned Aerial Vehicles\",\"authors\":\"Robinson S. Alvarez-Valle, P. Rivadeneira\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/CCAC.2019.8921246\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper presents the synthesis of controllers for a multi-rotor unmanned aerial vehicle with the goal to track trajectories, transforming its MIMO system representation into simpler structures based on SISO systems. Three control structures are provided to control the four outputs: x, y, z positions and the yaw angle. All the structures are based on decoupled control loops for each output described above. The first structure consists of classical controls, where the first two loops (x and y positions) use a third order transfer function control while the last two (z position and yaw angle) a PID/PD control. The second one uses for the first two loops a cascade control strategy based on a PD controllers. The third structure uses cascade control strategies with a PID-PID-PD-P control combination for the first two loops, while a PD-P combination for the last two. The control performance of each structure is assessed through simulation following changes of set points and a square trajectory. For a 1 [m] step change in x or y position, the system response has a setting time of around 5.7 [s, 4. 7[s], and 1.9 [s], with an overshoot of approximately 75.3%, 40.3% and 0.3% for each structure, respectively. For a 1 [m] change in z position, the setting time is 6.4 [s] and the overshoot is 24.9% for the first two structures. While for the last one, the setting time is 2.7 [s] without overshoot. Similar results are achieved for changes in the yaw angle. Finally, disturbances are included to test the robustness of the control strategies. Based on these results, the conclusion is that the third structure has the best performance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":184764,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2019 IEEE 4th Colombian Conference on Automatic Control (CCAC)\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2019 IEEE 4th Colombian Conference on Automatic Control (CCAC)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/CCAC.2019.8921246\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2019 IEEE 4th Colombian Conference on Automatic Control (CCAC)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/CCAC.2019.8921246","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
针对多旋翼无人机,提出了一种以轨迹跟踪为目标的综合控制器,将多旋翼无人机的MIMO系统表示转化为基于SISO系统的更简单结构。提供了三个控制结构来控制四个输出:x, y, z位置和偏航角。所有结构都基于上述每个输出的解耦控制回路。第一个结构由经典控制组成,其中前两个回路(x和y位置)使用三阶传递函数控制,而最后两个回路(z位置和偏航角)使用PID/PD控制。第二个是对前两个回路使用基于PD控制器的级联控制策略。第三种结构采用级联控制策略,前两个回路采用PID-PID-PD-P组合控制,后两个回路采用PD-P组合控制。每个结构的控制性能通过模拟来评估随设定点和正方形轨迹的变化。对于x或y位置的1 [m]阶跃变化,系统响应的设定时间约为5.7 [s, 4]。7[s]和1.9 [s],每种结构的超调量分别约为75.3%,40.3%和0.3%。当z位置变化1 [m]时,前两种结构的设定时间为6.4 [s],超调量为24.9%。最后一种设定时间为2.7 [s],无超调。偏航角的变化也得到了类似的结果。最后,加入干扰来检验控制策略的鲁棒性。综上所述,第三种结构的性能最好。
Design of Controllers to Track Trajectories for Multi-rotor Unmanned Aerial Vehicles
This paper presents the synthesis of controllers for a multi-rotor unmanned aerial vehicle with the goal to track trajectories, transforming its MIMO system representation into simpler structures based on SISO systems. Three control structures are provided to control the four outputs: x, y, z positions and the yaw angle. All the structures are based on decoupled control loops for each output described above. The first structure consists of classical controls, where the first two loops (x and y positions) use a third order transfer function control while the last two (z position and yaw angle) a PID/PD control. The second one uses for the first two loops a cascade control strategy based on a PD controllers. The third structure uses cascade control strategies with a PID-PID-PD-P control combination for the first two loops, while a PD-P combination for the last two. The control performance of each structure is assessed through simulation following changes of set points and a square trajectory. For a 1 [m] step change in x or y position, the system response has a setting time of around 5.7 [s, 4. 7[s], and 1.9 [s], with an overshoot of approximately 75.3%, 40.3% and 0.3% for each structure, respectively. For a 1 [m] change in z position, the setting time is 6.4 [s] and the overshoot is 24.9% for the first two structures. While for the last one, the setting time is 2.7 [s] without overshoot. Similar results are achieved for changes in the yaw angle. Finally, disturbances are included to test the robustness of the control strategies. Based on these results, the conclusion is that the third structure has the best performance.