1. Cascaded incremental nonlinear dynamic inversion for MAV disturbance rejection
- Author
-
G.C.H.E. de Croon, Qiping Chu, and Ewoud J. J. Smeur
- Subjects
FOS: Computer and information sciences ,0209 industrial biotechnology ,Engineering ,PID controller ,Thrust ,02 engineering and technology ,Incremental control ,Attitude control ,Computer Science - Robotics ,020901 industrial engineering & automation ,0203 mechanical engineering ,Linearization ,Control theory ,Disturbance rejection ,Electrical and Electronic Engineering ,020301 aerospace & aeronautics ,business.industry ,Wind gusts ,Applied Mathematics ,Inversion (meteorology) ,Control engineering ,Computer Science Applications ,Nonlinear system ,Windtunnel free flight ,Control and Systems Engineering ,Global Positioning System ,business ,Robotics (cs.RO) ,Quadrocopter ,Control methods - Abstract
Micro Aerial Vehicles (MAVs) are limited in their operation outdoors near obstacles by their ability to withstand wind gusts. Currently widespread position control methods such as Proportional Integral Derivative control do not perform well under the influence of gusts. Incremental Nonlinear Dynamic Inversion (INDI) is a sensor-based control technique that can control nonlinear systems subject to disturbances. It was developed for the attitude control of manned aircraft or MAVs. In this paper we generalize this method to the outer loop control of MAVs under severe gust loads. Significant improvements over a traditional Proportional Integral Derivative (PID) controller are demonstrated in an experiment where the quadrotor flies in and out of a windtunnel exhaust at 10 m/s. The control method does not rely on frequent position updates, as is demonstrated in an outside experiment using a standard GPS module. Finally, we investigate the effect of using a linearization to calculate thrust vector increments, compared to a nonlinear calculation. The method requires little modeling and is computationally efficient., Comment: 12 pages, 15 figures update: The transfer function in Eq. 12 was incorrect, this has been adjusted. All the conclusions are still valid
- Published
- 2018
- Full Text
- View/download PDF