arxiv: v2 [math.oc] 17 May 2018

Transcription

1 Geometric Adaptive Control for a Quadrotor UAV with Wind Disturbance Rejection Mahdis Bisheban, and aeyoung Lee arxiv: v [math.oc 7 May 08 Abstract his paper presents a geometric adaptive control scheme for a quadrotor unmanned aerial vehicle, where the effects of unknown, unstructured disturbances are mitigated by a multilayer neural network that is adjusted online. he stability of the proposed controller is analyzed with Lyapunov stability theory on the special Euclidean group, and it is shown that the tracking errors are uniformly ultimately bounded with an ultimate bound that can be abridged arbitrarily. A mathematical model of wind disturbance on the quadrotor dynamics is presented, and it is shown that the proposed adaptive controller is capable of rejecting the effects of wind disturbances successfully. hese are illustrated by numerical examples. I. INRODUCION Quadrotor unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have been utilized for various applications, such as aerial manipulation, search and rescue, and have been led to numerous research and developments. o complete outdoor flight missions successfully, it is required that the quadrotors are able to fly under wind disturbances reliably. However, it is challenging to accurately control quadrotor UAVs in a windy condition [. Several studies has been conducted to understand wind effects on a quadrotor. More specifically, wind affects the thrust and torque magnitude, and the drag force acting on the quadrotor. Also it causes blade flapping. For example, expressions for the thrust and drag force are presented in [ for forward flights, and it is shown that if relative wind is more than 4 to 7ms, the hover model deteriorates. In [3, the effects of horizontal wind on the blade flapping are studied. In [4, it is discussed that it is critical to identify the drag and contact forces separately to detect collision or to estimate wind. In [5, [6, computational geometric approaches for system identification of the rigid body and quadrotor dynamics are proposed, to estimate the unknown model parameters. o reject the undesired effects of wind disturbances, different approaches have been taken. In [7, computational intensive aerodynamic expressions have been solved off-line, and a look-up table to estimate wind forces and moments in real-time has been used for control in simulation. In [8, controllers are introduced in terms of the power and current on the motor to reach the desired thrust based on the aerodynamic power and motor model. he method is used to reject axial wind effects experimentally, while measurement of current, voltage and rotor speed are required during flight. While these methods depend on an accurate, estimated model of wind effects, other controllers have been proposed to compensate the unknown un-modeled dynamics. For example, an adaptive controller based on the neural network is presented in [9 for hovering flights, which is robust against sinusoidal disturbances in simulations. Later, a nonlinear PID controller on the special Euclidean group is proposed in [0 to reject unknown, fixed uncertainties. In [, controllers and trajectories are designed to reach desired states. o compensate for un-modeled dynamics, controllers are tuned from successive experimental trials data. Considering that models which are trained from off-line data may not perform well with new wind conditions, a controller based on neural network which learns on-line is proposed in [. he drag force and blade flapping effects as well as an unknown disturbance term for un-modeled dynamics are considered in the model, while attitude is represented with Euler angles. his paper aims to present a geometric adaptive nonlinear controller based on the neural network to compensate for unknown un-modeled dynamics of a quadrotor UAV. his paper extends the controller proposed in [3, with two three-layer neural networks for the coupled position and attitude dynamics. he controller is able to compensate for the unstructured disturbances in real-time, as the parameters of the neural network are adjusted online according to adaptive control laws. he quadrotor dynamics are studied directly on the special Euclidean group, namely SE(3) to avoid singularities and complexities associated with Euler angles, or the ambiguities of quaternions. his is particularly useful for the quadrotor to perform nontrivial aggressive maneuvers in uncertain environments. hrough mathematical analysis of the Lyapunov function on SE(3), it is shown that the tracking errors are uniformly ultimately bounded with an ultimate bound that can be reduced arbitrarily up to any desired accuracy. We further present a comprehensive aerodynamic model of wind fields on a quadrotor, including the variations in thrust and torque magnitude, blade flapping effects and the drag force. With numerical results, it is shown that the controller can compensate for the un-modeled dynamics caused by wind disturbances, so to follow the desired trajectories successfully without any prior knowledge of the aerodynamics. In short, the main contribution of this paper is constructing a geometric adaptive controller on SE(3) with the neural network to compensate unstructured disturbances acting on the both of the position dynamics and the attitude dynamics. Next, the efficacy of the proposed controller is validated by a comprehensive aerodynamic model of wind gusts.

2 II. QUADROOR DYNAMICS UNDER WIND DISURBANCE A. Quadrotor Dynamics Consider a quadrotor aerial vehicle composed of four identical rotors and propellers located at the vertices of a square, which generate a thrust and torque normal to the plane of this square. We define an inertial reference frame { e, e, e 3 } and a body-fixed frame { b, b, b 3 }. he origin of the body-fixed frame is located at the center of mass of this vehicle, and its third axis is pointing downward. he configuration space of a quadrotor is the special Euclidean group SE(3), which is the semi-direct product of SO(3) = {R R 3 3 R R = I 3 3,det[R = +} and R 3. For given (R,x) SE(3), R SO(3) represents the linear transform of representation of a vector from the body-fixed frame to the inertial frame, and x R 3 denotes the location of the center of mass in the inertial frame. he kinematics equations are given by ẋ = v, () Ṙ = RˆΩ, () where v R 3 is the linear velocity in the inertial frame, and Ω R 3 corresponds to the angular velocity resolved in the body-fixed frame. he hat map : R 3 so(3) is defined such that ˆxy = x y and (ˆx) = ˆx for any x,y R 3. he inverse of the hat map is denoted by the vee map : so(3) R 3. Let r j R 3 be the location of the j-th rotor in the bodyfixed frame for j {,...,4}, defined as follows r = d h 0 d v, r = 0 d h d v, r 3 = d h 0 d v, r 4 = 0 d h d v where d h,d v R specify the horizontal and vertical distances from the origin of the body-fixed frame to the rotors. In the absence of the relative wind, thej-th rotor generate the thrust j e 3 when resolved in the body-fixed frame, where j R denotes the magnitude of thrust. Let the mass and the inertia matrix of the quadrotor be m R, and J R 3, respectively. he equations of motion are given by () () along with, (3) m v = U e, (4) J Ω+Ω JΩ = M e, (5) where U e,m e R 3 are the resultant force and the resultant moment acting on the quadrotor. Here, it is considered that U e is resolved in the inertial frame, andm e is resolved in the body-fixed frame. hese includes the effects of the gravity, the aerodynamic forces, and the perturbation of the thrust due to the wind disturbances, and are formulated as follows. B. Effects of Wind Disturbance Let v w R 3 be the velocity of the wind in the ambient atmosphere, resolved in the inertial frame. he relative wind ABLE I NOAIONS Notation Refers to ˆ hat mapˆ. : R 3 so(3) vee map. : so(3) R 3 estimated value estimation error value Frobenius norm of a matrix, and -norm of a vector λ m() minimum eigen value of a matrix λ M () maxmum eigen value of a matrix on the j-th rotor in the body-fixed frame, namely v wj R 3 is given by v wj = R (v w v)+ ˆΩr j [u j,u j,u 3j, (6) where the last two terms are caused by the motion of the quadrotor, and u j,u j,u 3j R denote the components of v wj. he external resultant force acting on the quadrotor is given by U e = mge 3 +D+RΣ 4 j= j d j, (7) where mge 3 is the gravitational force, and D R 3 corresponds to the drag which is assumed to act on the center of mass in the opposite direction to the relative velocity of the quadrotor with respect to the wind. For a positive drag coefficient C d R, it is given by D = C d v v w (v v w ). (8) he magnitude of the thrust for the j-th rotor is j = C j ρa p (r p ω j ), (9) where C j R is the thrust coefficient, and ρ R is the air density. he constants r p, A p = (πr p ), and ω j are the radius, the sweeping area, and rotating speed of the j-th rotor, respectively. In (7), the unit vector d j S is the direction of j-th rotor thrust resolved in the body-fixed frame. he effects of wind are composed of the induced velocity that determines the thrust coefficient, and the blade flapping effects that alters the direction of the thrust. First, he thrust coefficient C j R and the inflow ratio λ j R, which is the induced air velocity divided by the tip speed, are given by C j = sc lα [θ 0( 3 + µ x j ) (λ j +µ zj ), (0) C j λ j =, () µ +(λ xj j +µ zj ) where s = N bc πr p R is the solidity ratio which is the blade area approximated by N b cr p divided by the blade sweeping area πr p. Here, c is the blade chord, and N b is the number of blades. he constants C lα,θ 0 R are the blade lift curve slope and blade pitch angle respectively [4. he advance ratio parallel and perpendicular to the rotor plane are given

3 by µ xj = u j +u j ω j r p, () µ zj = u 3 j ω j r p. (3) he expressions for the thrust coefficient C j and the inflow ratio λ j are implicit, and can be computed using Newton s iterative method [4. Next, as the result of the blade flapping, the direction of the j-th rotor thrust changes from e 3 to d j = sinα u j u j j +u j sinα u j u j j +u j cosα j, (4) resolved in the body-fixed frame, where α j is the blade flapping angle of the j-th rotor, resulting in the force component in the b b plane. his angle is approximated with α j = C α u j +u j, (5) where C α R is the fixed flapping angle coefficient [5, [6. he external resultant moment consists of the moments due to the rotor thrusts, the blade flapping, and the reaction torques, i.e., M e =Σ 4 j= r j j d j +( ) j+ Q j d j + N b K βα j (d j e +d j e ), (6) Q j =C Qj ρa p r p (r p ω j ), (7) where K β R is the stiffness of the rotor blade [5, [4 and C Qj R is the torque coefficient given by C Qj = C j (λ j +µ zj )+ C D 0 s (+3µ x 8 j ), (8) where C D0 R is the blade drag coefficient [4. III. GEOMERIC ADAPIVE CONROLLER In this section, we present a geometric adaptive control system for a quadrotor to reject the effects of wind disturbances without the knowledge of the aerodynamic model presented in Section II-B. A. Simplified Dynamic Model We first formulate a simplified dynamic model for the control system development, where the effects of wind are considered as unstructured, unknown disturbances to the quadrotor. In other words, it is assumed that j = C ω j, Q j = C Q ω j C Q j, (9) D = 0, d j = e 3, (0) where j,q j R are the magnitude of the thrust and torque of the j-th rotor respectively. he constants C,C Q R are the identical constant thrust and torque coefficients for all rotors, and C Q R describes the reactive torque based on the rotor thrust. Here, the superscript is used to distinguish the model parameters which is used for controller from the model parameters presented in Section II-B. he corresponding resultant force and moment are given by U e = mge 3 fre 3, () M e = Σ 4 j=r j je 3 ( ) j+ Q je 3, () where f = Σ 4 j= j R is the sum of four rotor thrusts. As we are aware that the model, which is used to design the controller in this section, is not accurate and differs from the physical quadrotor or the model presented in II-B, we consider two unknown terms, R 3 as the model errors. More precisely, the simplified dynamic model considered for the control system development is given by m v = U e, (3) J Ω+Ω JΩ = M e. (4) with the kinematics equations () (). B. racking Problem Formulation Suppose that there is a desired position trajectory of the quadrotor, namely x d (t) R 3 given as a smooth function of time. We wish to develop a control system such that the controlled trajectory errors are uniformly ultimately bounded. he proposed control system extends the geometric tracking control scheme presented in [3, by including a neuralnetwork based adaptive control term. he key idea is that by utilizing the universal function approximation property of a multilayer neural network, we mitigate the effects of the unknown disturbances by adjusting the weights of neural network according to an adaptive control law. More explicitly, the proposed control input for the total thrust f and torque M c are given by f = A Re 3, (5) A = k x e x k v e v mge 3 +mẍ d, (6) M c = k R e R k Ω e Ω +Ω JΩ J(ˆΩR R c Ω c R R c Ωc ), (7) where k x,k v,k R,k Ω are positive constants., are the adaptive control terms, and are defined in Section III-C. he matrix R c SO(3), and the vectors Ω c, Ω c R 3 are the computed rotation matrix, angular velocity, and its first derivative. he control moment M c is designed such that the actual rotation matrix R follows the computed rotation matrix R c. he three columns of R c are denoted by R c [b c,b c,b 3c, where b c,b c,b 3c S. o design R c, first, we set b 3c = A A for A defined in (6). his is to generate the total thrust to follow the given desired position trajectory. o ensure R c SO(3), b c must be orthogonal to b 3c. So, there is one-dimensional degree of choice to select b c which is actually the heading direction, more specifically the yaw angle. We define b d S such that b d b 3c 0. hen,

4 we restrict b c to be the projection of b d on the plane perpendicular to b 3c. More explicitly, R c = [b c b 3c, C C, A, A (8) C = b 3c b d, (9) It is assumed that A 0, δ, whereδ is positive, and the command acceleration is uniformly bounded such that mge3 +mẍ d + B, (30) for a given positive constant B. Next, the computed angular velocity is defined as Ω c = (R c Ṙc) (3) he control inputs given in (6) and (7) are also dependent of the tracking errors e x,e v,e R,e v R 3,Ψ R are defined as e x = x x d, (3) e v = v ẋ d, (33) e R = (R c R R R c ), (34) e Ω = Ω R R c Ω c, (35) Ψ(R,R c ) = tr[ I 3 3 R c R, (36) where Ψ is positive-definite about R = R c, that is a unique critical point in D 0 = {R SO(3) Ψ(R,R c ) < } [3. Having f and M c [M,M,M 3 determined by controller, the four rotor thrusts can be computed using 3 4 = 0 d h 0 d h d h 0 d h 0 C Q C Q C Q C Q C. Adaptive Neural Network Structure f. M M M 3 (37) In this section, we present how the adaptive control terms are defined in (6) and (7), which are the main contribution of this paper. According to the universal approximation theorem [7, a multilayer artificial neural network can approximate any continuous function up to an arbitrary accuracy. Specifically, there are ideal constant weight matrices W and V, and the number of hidden layers such that approximation of the function for a given desired positive accuracy ε N is given by (x nn ) = W σ(v x nn )+ε(x nn ), (38) where x nn is the input vector to the neural network, σ is the activation function, and the error satisfies ε(x nn ) ε N. Here, to compensate for the uncertainties, presented in (3) (4), we use two neural networks: one for the position dynamics and another for the attitude dynamics. hroughout the paper, the subscript i = is to refer to the position dynamics, and i = is to refer to the attitude dynamics. As we have no information about i in (3) (4), we use the estimates of the ideal weights in the control system such that i = W i σ( z i) where z i = V i x nni. he number of neurons in the first, second or hidden, and the last layers are denoted by N i,n i,n 3i respectively. hus, W i R N i +,N3 i, V i R N i +,N i,x nni R N i +. We define Z i = diag[w i,v i R N i +N i +,N i +N3 i and the errors in the neural network as follows W i = W i W i, Ṽ i = V i V i, Zi = Z i Z i. (39) he weights are bounded using the gradient projection method [8 such that W i W Mi, V i V Mi, Z i Z Mi, (40) where W Mi,W Mi,W Mi R +. he output error of the neural network i = i i is written as i = W i i) σ ( z i ) z i + W i ( z i ) z i w i, (4) w i = W i σ ( z i )z i Wi O i ε(x nni ), (4) O i = σ(z i ) σ( z i ) σ ( z i ) z i, (43) where z i = Vi x nni, z i = Ṽ i x nni, and σ : R N i R N i +. σ(z i ) = [,ς,...,ς Ni contains the sigmoid activation functions ς k = +e, where k,...,n z k i and z k s are the elements of the vector z i, and σ (z i ) = [0, ς z,..., ςn i z Ni, where ς k z k = ς k ( ς k ). One can show w i is bounded such that (Ci w i C i + Z i +C 3i x i +C 4i x i ), (44) where C ki,k,...,4 are positive constants [9. he input to the neural networks are defined as x nni = [,x i,x i, (45) x = x, x = v, (46) x = E(R), x = Ω, (47) where E(R) = [θ,φ,ψ contains the Euler angles from the rotation matrix R. In the proposed adaptive control system, the neural network weights are updated according to W i = γ wi [σ(z i )a i σ (z i )z i a i κ i γ wi Wi, (48) V i = γ vi x nni [σ (z i ) Wi a i κ i γ vi Vi, (49) a = e v +c e x, a = e Ω +c e R, (50) where γ wi, γ vi and κ i are the positive design parameters. he stability properties of the proposed control system are summarized as follows. Proposition Consider the control force f and moment M c defined at (5), (7). Suppose that the initial condition satisfies Ψ(R(0),R d (0)) ψ <, (5) e x (0) < e xmax, (5) for fixed constants ψ and e xmax. For any positive constants k x,k v, we choose positive constants

5 c,c,k R,k Ω,γ w,γ w,γ v,γ v,κ,κ such that they satisfy (8), (98), and (7) (9) become positive-definite. hen, all of the tracking errors of the quadrotor UAV, as well as the neural network weight errors are uniformly ultimately bounded with the ultimate bound that can be abridged arbitrary through (). Proof: he proof is presented in Appendix. o see the definition of uniformly ultimately bounded errors refer to [0. A. Identities APPENDIX In this section, selected identities that are used throughout the proof are presented. For any A R 3 3,x,y R 3, c,c,c 3 R, tr [ yx = x y, (53) x+y x + y, (54) c x +c x = c x c [x c c + c c c x + c, c (55) c x c xy c 3 y c x +c xy c 3 y. (56) A positive-definite function denoted by V 0i, and its derivative, which are used in the subsequent stability analysis, are defined as V 0i = [ tr W γ i Wi + tr [Ṽ wi γ i Ṽ i, (57) vi V 0i = γ wi tr [ W i Wi + γ vi tr [Ṽ i Ṽ i, (58) where W i, Ṽi are defined in (39). Next, we find the upper bound of the following expression, defined as B i B i a i ( i )+ V 0i. (59) he error dynamics of the neural network weights from (39) are give by W i = Wi, Ṽ i = Vi. (60) We substitute (48) (49) in (60), and the result in (58), then using (4), B i is rewritten as B i = a i { W i [σ(z i) σ (z i )z i W i σ (z i ) z i +w i } [ + tr W i [σ(z i )a i σ (z i )z i a i +κ i Wi + tr [Ṽ i {x nni [σ (z i ) Wi a i +κ i Vi }. (6) Applying (53), it reduces to B i = κ i tr [ Z i Zi +a i (w i ). (6) he following is hold for tr [ Z i Zi tr [ Z i Zi = tr [ Z i Z i tr [ Z i Zi Z i Z Mi Z i. (63) (55) implies Z i +Z Mi Z i Z i + Z M i. (64) Since σ, σ 0.5, it can be shown that the upper bound for (43) is O i +0.5Ṽi x nni. (65) From (40), the upper bound of (4) is xnni w i 0.5V Mi Wi +W Mi O i +ǫ i. (66), Since x nni + x i + x i, Z i Wi Zi Ṽi, (40), and substituting O i, we get w i C i +C i Z i (+ x i + x i ), (67) where C i 0.5(V Mi +W Mi ), C i W Mi +ǫ i. Substituting (64) and (66) in (6) results in B i κ i Z i + κ izm i + a i {C i +C i Z i (+ x i + x i )}. (68) B. Position Error Dynamics In this section, we analyze the error dynamics for the position tracking command, which will be integrated with the attitude error dynamics in Appendix D for the stability proof of the complete dynamics. aking derivative of (3) (33) and substituting () and (3), the error dynamics are defined as ė x = e v, (69) me v = mge 3 fre 3 mẍ d. (70) Define X R 3 as f X e 3 R c Re [(e 3Rc Re 3 )Re 3 R c e 3, (7) 3 where e 3 R c Re 3 > 0 [3. Equation (70) is rewritten as f mė v = mge 3 mẍ d e 3 R c Re R c e 3 X. (7) 3 Since b 3c = R c e 3 = A A, f = A Re 3, we can conclude that f = ( A R c e 3 ) Re 3, therefore f e R c e 3 = A. (73) 3 R c Re 3 hen substituting (73), (6) in (7), the velocity error dynamics is given by mė v = k x e x k v e v X. (74) Next, we find the upper bound of X. From (73), A = f. e 3 RRe3R ce 3 Rc e 3 is the unit vector, so A = c f. e Consequently, the norm of X can be written 3 R c as Re3 X = A [(e 3 R c Re 3 )Re 3 R c e 3. (75)

6 Also, it is shown that [(e 3 R c Re 3 )Re 3 R c e 3 er β <, where β = ψ ( ψ ) [3. Substituting (6) and (30), the upper bound of X is given by X (k x e x +k v e v +B ) e R. (76) For a non-negative constant c, the Lyapunov function for the position dynamics is chosen as V = k xe xe x + me ve v +mc e xe v +V 0, (77) where V 0 is given by (57). It is straightforward to show λ m (M ) Z +V 0 V λ M (M ) Z +V 0, (78) where M = [ kx mc, M mc m = [ kx mc, mc m (79) Z = [ e x, e v. (80) If c is sufficiently small such that kx c < m, (8) then M,M are positive-definite. aking derivate of the Lyapunov function results in V =k x e v e x +(e v +c e x ) mė v +mc e v e v + V 0, (8) where V 0 is given by (58). Substituting (74) to (8), and rearranging it result in V =(mc k v )e ve v c k x e xe x c k v e xe v (e v +c e x ) X (e v +c e x ) + V 0. (83) Since (50), the last term of the above expression is the same as (59). Substituting its equivalent expression given by (68), and substituting (76) result in V (k v ( β) mc )e ve v c k x ( β)e xe x +c k v (+β) e x e v κ Z + κ ZM + a {C +C Z (+ x + x )} + e R {B (c e x + e v )+k x e xmax e v }, (84) where e x e xmax, for a fixed positive constant e xmax, is used for simplifying multiplication of the three vectors, e R e x e v. It is assumed that the desired trajectory is bounded such that x d x dmax, ẋ d v dmax, where x dmax, v dmax > 0. hese as well as (3) (33), and (46) imply x e x + x dmax, x e v + v dmax. Substituting these in (84), expanding a, and using (54) result in V (k v ( β) mc )e ve v c k x ( β)e xe x +c k v (+β) e x e v κ Z + κ ZM +C e v +C 3 e v +C 4 e v Z +c (C e x +C 3 e x ) +C 4 e x Z +(+c )C 3 e x e v + e R {B (c e x + e v )+k x e xmax e v }, (85) where C W M +ǫ, C 0.5(V M +W M ), C 3 C Z M, C 4 C (+x dmax +v dmax ). Using (55), and defining k vβ k v ( β) mc C 3 and k xβ k x ( β) C 3, the following expressions are rearranged as k xβ e x e x +C e x k x β e x e x + C k xβ, (86) k vβ e v e v +C e v k v β e v e v + C k vβ, (87) Substituting (86) (87) into (85) results in V c k xβ e x e x k v β e v e v κ Z +k xv e x e v +C 4 e v Z +c C 4 e x Z +C 5 + e R {c B e x +(B +k x e xmax ) e v }, (88) where k xv = c [( + β)k v + C 3 + C 3, C 5 = cc k xβ + C k vβ + κz M. C. Attitude Error Dynamics Here, we analyze the error dynamics for the attitude tracking command. he attitude error dynamics are defined as ė R = (tr[ R R c I3 3 R R c )e Ω C(R c R)e Ω, (89) Je Ω = k R e R k Ω e Ω, (90) Ψ(R,R c ) = e Re Ω,, (9) C(R c R). (9) Equations (89) and (9) (9) are presented in [3, and (90) is derived from taking derivative of (35) and substituting (4) and (7). For a non-negative constant c, the Lyapunov function for the attitude dynamics is defined as V = e ΩJe Ω +k R Ψ(R,R c )+c e RJe Ω +V 0, (93) where V 0 is given by (57), and e R Ψ(R,R c ) e R, (94) ψ with ψ = k R [ e Ω(0) Je Ω (0) + k R Ψ(R(0),R c (0)). he bounds of V are λ m (M ) Z +V 0 V λ M (M ) Z +V 0, (95) where M = [ k R c λ MJ c λ MJ λ mj,m = [ kr ψ c λ MJ c λ MJ λ MJ (96),

7 Z = [ e R, e Ω, (97) with λ mj = λ m (J),λ MJ = λ M (J). Provided that c is sufficiently small to satisfy the following inequality, the matrices M,M are positive-definite, c < min{ kr λ mj λ MJ, k R }, (98) λ M ( ψ ) where ψ <. he time-derivate of the Lyapunov function is given by V =(e Ω +c e R ) Jė Ω +k R Ψ(R,Rc )+c ė RJe Ω + V 0, (99) where V 0 is given by (58). Substituting error dynamics (89) (9), (4), and (7), results in V = (e Ω +c e R ) ( k R e R k Ω e Ω ) +k R e R e Ω +c C(R c R)e Ω Je Ω + V 0. (00) From (56), (9), and J λ MJ, V c k R e Re R +c k Ω e R e Ω (k Ω c λ MJ )e Ωe Ω (e Ω +c e R ) ( )+ V 0. (0) Since (50), the last term of this expression is the same as (59). Substituting its equivalent expression given by (68), results in V c k R e Re R +c k Ω e R e Ω (k Ω c λ MJ )e Ωe Ω κ Z + κ ZM + a {C +C Z (+ E(R) + Ω )}. (0) It is assumed that δ and the desired trajectory is designed such that... x d δ 3, where δ, δ 3 > 0. hus m... x d + B. aking derivative of (6), it can be shown that Ȧ k x e v +k v ė v +B. (03) Since (8), Ṙ c = [ḃc,ḃc,ḃ3c, where ḃ c = ḃc b 3c +b c ḃ3c, (04) ḃ c = Ċ C + C(C. C) C 3, (05) ḃ 3c = Ȧ A + A(A. A) A 3. (06) Since (30), (03), and (06) ḃ3c k x e v +k v ė v +B B 3. (07) k x e x +k v e v +B It is assumed that the desired trajectory is designed such that ḃ d δ4, where δ 4 > 0. aking derivative of (9) and using (07), it can be shown that Ċ B 3 + δ 4. Since (9), (06), and C, (B 3 +δ 4 ), (08) ḃc From (04), (07) (08) ḃc 3B 3 +δ 4. (09) hus, from (07) (09), it can be shown that Ṙc B 4, where B 4 is positive. Since (), Ω c B 4. Since (35), Ω e Ω +B 4. E(R) E max, where E max is positive, and substituting these in (0), expanding a, using (54) result in V c k R e Re R +c k Ω e R e Ω (k Ω c λ MJ )e Ωe Ω κ Z + κ ZM +C e Ω +C 3 e Ω +C 4 e Ω Z ) +c (C e R +C 4 e R Z +c C 3 e R e Ω, (0) where C W M +ǫ, C 0.5(V M +W M ), C 3 C Z M, C 4 C ( + E max + B 4 ). Using (55), the following expressions are rearranged as k R e Re R +C e R k R e Re R + C k R, () k Ωβ e Ω e Ω +C e Ω k Ω β e Ω e Ω + C k Ωβ, () where k Ωβ = k Ω c λ MJ C 3. hen substituting () () in (0) V c k R e R e R k Ω β e Ω e Ω κ Z +k RΩ e R e Ω +C 4 e Ω Z +c C 4 e R Z +C 5. (3) where k RΩ = c (κ Ω +C 3 ), C 5 = cc k R + C k Ωβ + κz M. D. Stability Proof for Quadrotor Dynamics Here, we combine the position error dynamics and the attitude error dynamics to show the stability properties of the controlled quadrotor. he Lyapunov function is chosen as V = V +V, wherev,v are given by (77), (93). From (78) and (95), the bound on V is given by λ m (M ) Z +λ m (M ) Z +V 0 +V 0 V λ M (M ) Z +λ M (M ) Z +V 0 +V 0. (4) he upper bound can be rewritten as where V Z N Z + Z N Z + Z 3 N 3 Z 3, (5) c k R mc 0 N = m mc 0, 0 0 min{γ w,γ v } N ψ = c λ MJ 0 c λ MJ λ MJ 0, 0 0 min{γ w,γ v }

8 k x 0 0 N 3 = m 0 0, 0 0 ψ Z = [ e x, e v, Z, Z = [ e R, e Ω, Z, where ν = min{ λm(n) C5 λ M(N λ M(N λ M(N 3 )}. If V > ν, then V < 0. herefore, according to [0, e x,e v,e R,e Ω, Z and Z are bounded and converge exponentially to the set D + Z + Z C 5 }, () γ γ ν where γ = max{γ v,γ w }, γ = max{γ v,γ w }. By adjusting controller gains, the set can be made arbitrarily small. REFERENCES [ G. M. Hoffmann, H. Huang, S. L. Waslander, and C. J. omlin, Quadrotor helicopter flight dynamics and control : heory and experiment, in Proceedings of the AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference, vol., Hilton Head, South Carolina, August 007, pp. 0. [ R. Gill and R. D Andrea, Propeller thrust and drag in forward flight, in 07 IEEE Conference on Control echnology and Applications (CCA), Aug 07, pp [3 W. Craig, D. Yeo, and D. A. Paley, Dynamics of a rotor-pendulum with a small, stiff propeller in wind, in ASME 06 Dynamic Systems and Control Conference, vol., no. DSCC ASME, Oct. 06, pp. V0005A00 0. [Online. Available: [4. omic and S. Haddadin, Simultaneous estimation of aerodynamic and contact forces in flying robots: Applications to metric wind estimation and collision detection, in 05 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), May 05, pp [5 M. Bisheban and. Lee, Computational geometric system identification for the attitude dynamics on so(3), International Journal of Control, Automation and Systems, vol. 5, no. 6, pp , Dec 07. [Online. Available: Z 3 = [ e x, e v, e R [6, Computational geometric identification for quadrotor dynamics. in wind fields, in 07 IEEE Conference on Control echnology and he derivative of the Lyapunov function is V = V + V Applications (CCA), Aug 07, pp [7 N. K. ran, E. Bulka, and M. Nahon, Quadrotor control in a wind field, in 05 International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft From (88) and (3), it can be written as V Z N Z Z N Z Systems (ICUAS), June 05, pp Z 3 N [8 M. Bangura and R. Mahony, hrust control for multirotor aerial 3Z 3 +C 5, vehicles, IEEE ransactions on Robotics, vol. 33, no., pp , April 07. (6) [9 C. Nicol, C. J. B. Macnab, and A. Ramirez-Serrano, Robust neural network control of a quadrotor helicopter, in 008 Canadian where C 5 = C 5 +C 5, and Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering, May 008, pp. c k xβ kxv c C 4 [0 F. Goodarzi, D. Lee, and. Lee, Geometric nonlinear pid control N = kxv k vβ C 4, (7) of a quadrotor uav on se(3), in 03 European Control Conference (ECC), July 03, pp c C 4 C 4 κ [ D. Mellinger, N. Michael, and V. Kumar, rajectory Generation and c k R Control for Precise Aggressive Maneuvers with Quadrotors. Berlin, k RΩ c C 4 Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 04, pp [Online. N = k RΩ k Ωβ C 4, (8) Available: 5 c C 4 C 4 κ [. Dierks and S. Jagannathan, Output feedback control of a quadrotor c k xβ uav using neural networks, IEEE ransactions on Neural Networks, kxv c B vol., no., pp , Jan 00. N 3 = kxv c k vβ [3. Lee, M. Leok, and N. McClamroch, Geometric tracking control B k x e xmax. of a quadrotor aerial vehicle on SE(3), in Proceedings of the IEEE c c B B k x e k R Conference on Decision and Control, Atlanta, GA, Dec. 00, pp. xmax (9) [4 G. D. Padfield, Helicopter flight dynamics: the theory and application of flying qualities and simulation modelling. Blackwill Publishing, If c and c are chosen such that N, N, N 3 become 007. positive definite then the right hand side of the inequality [5 G. M. Hoffmann, H. Huang, S. L. Waslander, and C. J. omlin, Precision flight control for a multi-vehicle quadrotor helicopter testbed, reduces to Control Engineering Practice, vol. 9, no. 9, pp , 0. V νv +C 5, (0) [6 N. Sydney, B. Smyth, and D. A. Paley, Dynamic control of autonomous quadrotor flight in an estimated wind field, in Proceedings λm(n) λm(n3) of the IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, December 03, ), ), pp [7 F. W. Lewis, S. Jagannathan, and A. Yesildirak, Neural Network Control Of Robot Manipulators And Non-Linear Systems. CRC Press, 998. D = {e x,e v,e R,e Ω R 3, Z R N +N + N +N3 [8 P. A. Ioannou and J. Sun, Robust Adaptive Control. Upper Saddle, River, NJ, USA: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 995. Z R N +N + N +N3 ex + e v + e R + e Ω [9. Lee and Y. Kim, Nonlinear adaptive flight control using backstepping and neural networks controller, Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, vol. 4, no. 4, pp , 00. [0 H. K. Khalil, Noninear systems, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, vol., no. 5, pp. 5, 996.