Design and Experimental Validation of LQR-Based Altitude Regulation for a Tricopter UAV
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21831/jraee.v3i2.1972Keywords:
Tricopter, Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, Altitude Hold, Linear Quadratic Regulator, Disturbance RejectionAbstract
Altitude regulation is essential for maintaining stable hovering and supporting autonomous operation in tricopter unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), whose asymmetric propulsion and rear-rotor tilt mechanism introduce additional control challenges. This study designs, implements, and experimentally evaluates a Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR)-based altitude-hold controller for a Y- configured tricopter equipped with an inertial sensing module and a downward-facing ultrasonic range sensor for low-altitude feedback. Attitude stabilization was first evaluated using an indoor tuning rig before the complete system was tested under actual flight conditions. The altitude controller was evaluated at reference altitudes of 0.40, 0.85, and 1.25 m and under intentional downward disturbances at a reference altitude of 1.25 m. Across five disturbance trials, the system achieved a mean rise time of 0.513 ± 0.223 s, a mean settling time of 1.113 ± 0.313 s, and a mean steady- state error of 0.0344 ± 0.0069 m. Overshoot occurred in three trials and remained between 1.39% and 1.56%. Without intentional disturbances, steady-state errors of 0.0115, 0.0233, and 0.0064 m were obtained at reference altitudes of 0.40, 0.85, and 1.25 m, respectively. These results demonstrate that the proposed controller can maintain low-altitude hovering and recover from external vertical disturbances within the predefined performance requirements of the tested tricopter platform.
Downloads
References
[1] K. Telli, O. Kraa, Y. Himeur, A. Ouamane, M. Boumehraz, S. Atalla, and W. Mansoor, “A comprehensive review of recent research trends on unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs),” Systems, vol. 11, no. 8, Art. no. 400, 2023, doi: 10.3390/systems11080400.
[2] M. Ramp and E. Papadopoulos, “On modeling and control of a holonomic tricopter,” Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems, vol. 105, Art. no. 51, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s10846-021-01541-9.
[3] D. Abara, P. Bhowmick, and A. Lanzon, “A negative imaginary robust formation control scheme for networked multi-tilt tricopters utilizing an inner-loop sliding-mode control technique,” Automatica, vol. 169, Art. no. 111813, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.automatica.2024.111813.
[4] M. Rinaldi, S. Primatesta, and G. Guglieri, “A comparative study for control of quadrotor UAVs,” Applied Sciences, vol. 13, no. 6, Art. no. 3464, 2023, doi: 10.3390/app13063464.
[5] M. Okasha, J. Kralev, and M. Islam, “Design and experimental comparison of PID, LQR and MPC stabilizing controllers for Parrot Mambo mini-drone,” Aerospace, vol. 9, no. 6, Art. no. 298, 2022, doi: 10.3390/aerospace9060298.
[6] B. M. Nguyen, T. Kobayashi, K. Sekitani, M. Kawanishi, and T. Narikiyo, “Altitude control of quadcopters with absolute stability analysis,” IEEJ Journal of Industry Applications, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 562–572, 2022.
[7] J. Madeiras, C. Cardeira, and P. Oliveira, “Trajectory tracking of a quadrotor via full-state feedback control,” Aerospace Science and Technology, vol. 147, Art. no. 109013, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.ast.2024.109013.
[8] A. Sir Elkhatem and S. N. Engin, “Robust LQR and LQR-PI control strategies based on adaptive weighting matrix selection for a UAV position and attitude tracking control,” Alexandria Engineering Journal, vol. 61, no. 8, pp. 6275–6292, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.aej.2021.11.057.
[9] V. Pritzl, M. Vrba, C. Tortorici, R. Ashour, and M. Saska, “Adaptive estimation of UAV altitude in complex indoor environments using degraded and time-delayed measurements with time-varying uncertainties,” Robotics and Autonomous Systems, vol. 160, Art. no. 104315, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.robot.2022.104315.
