14-th IFAC Symposium

May 18-20, on Turkey

2016. Istanbul, Control in Transportation Systems
May
14-th
14-th18-20,
IFAC
IFAC 2016. Istanbul,
Symposium
Symposium on
on Turkey
Control
Control in Transportation Systems
14-th
May IFAC Symposium
18-20, 2016. Istanbul, Control in
on Turkey Transportation
in Available
Transportation Systems
Systems
online at www.sciencedirect.com
May 18-20,
May 18-20, 2016.
2016. Istanbul,
Istanbul, Turkey
Turkey

ScienceDirect
Control
Control System Design
Design of
IFAC-PapersOnLine
System aa Vertical
of 49-3 (2016) 267–272Take-off and Landing
Vertical Take-off and Landing
Control
Control System
System Design
Design
Control System Design of
Fixed-Wing
of
Fixed-Wing a
a Vertical
Vertical
of a Vertical UAV
UAV Take-off
Take-off and
Take-off and Landing
and Landing
Landing
Fixed-Wing
Fixed-Wing
Fixed-Wing UAV
UAV
UAV
Ferit ÇAKICI*
Ferit ÇAKICI*
M. Kemal LEBLEBİCİOĞLU**
Ferit ÇAKICI*
M. Kemal LEBLEBİCİOĞLU**
Ferit
Ferit ÇAKICI*
ÇAKICI*
M.
M. Kemal LEBLEBİCİOĞLU**

* Electrical and Electronics Engineering M. Kemal LEBLEBİCİOĞLU**
KemalDepartment,
LEBLEBİCİOĞLU**
 Middle East Technical University, Ankara
* Electrical and Electronics Engineering Department,  Middle East Technical University, Ankara
* Electrical and Electronics Turkey, (e-mail:
Engineering feritcakici@yahoo.com.tr)
Department, Middle East Technical University, Ankara
* Electrical and Electronics Turkey, (e-mail:
Engineering feritcakici@yahoo.com.tr)
Department, Middle
* Electrical
** Electricaland andElectronics
Electronics Engineering
Engineering
Turkey, (e-mail:
Department,
Department, MiddleEast
Middle
feritcakici@yahoo.com.tr) EastTechnical
East TechnicalUniversity,
Technical University,Ankara
University, Ankara
Ankara
** Electrical and Electronics Engineering
Turkey,
Turkey, (e-mail:
(e-mail: Department, Middle
feritcakici@yahoo.com.tr)
feritcakici@yahoo.com.tr) East Technical University, Ankara
** Electrical and Turkey,
Electronics Engineering (e-mail:
Department,kleb@metu.edu.tr)
Middle East Technical University, Ankara
**
** Electrical
Electrical and and Electronics Turkey, (e-mail:
Electronics Engineering
Engineering Department,
Department,kleb@metu.edu.tr)
Middle
Middle East East Technical
Technical University,
University, AnkaraAnkara
Turkey, (e-mail:
Turkey, (e-mail: kleb@metu.edu.tr)
(e-mail: kleb@metu.edu.tr)
kleb@metu.edu.tr)
Turkey,
Abstract: In this study, design and implementation of control system of a vertical take-off and landing
Abstract: In this study, design and implementation of control system of a vertical take-off and landing
(VTOL)
Abstract: unmanned
In aerialdesign
vehicle (UAV) with level flight capability is considered. The platform structure
(VTOL)
Abstract:
includes In this
Abstract:unmanned
In
both this
this
study,
aerialdesign
study,
study,
multirotor
vehicle
design
and
and
and
and
fixed-wing
implementation
(UAV) with level flight
implementation
implementation
(FW)
of
of control
of
conventional control
system
capability
control system
system
aircraft
of
of aaa vertical
is considered.
of
control vertical
vertical
surfaces;
take-off
The platform
take-off
take-off
therefore
and landing
structure
andnamed
and landing
landingas
(VTOL)
includes
(VTOL) unmanned
both
unmanned aerial
multirotor
aerial vehicle
and
vehicle (UAV)
fixed-wing
(UAV) with
(FW)
with level flight
conventional
level flight capability
aircraft
capability is considered.
control
is surfaces;
considered. The
The platform
therefore
platform structure
named
structureas
(VTOL)
VTOL-FW. unmanned
The aerial
proposed vehicle
method (UAV)
includeswith level flight
implementation capability
of is considered.
multirotor and The
airplane platform structure
controllers and
includes
VTOL-FW.
includes both
both multirotor
The proposed
multirotor and
and fixed-wing
method
fixed-wing (FW)
includes
(FW) conventional
implementation
conventional aircraft
of control
multirotor
aircraft control surfaces;
and airplane
surfaces; therefore named
controllers
therefore named as
and
as
includesofboth
design an Themultirotortoand
algorithm fixed-wing
switch between (FW)them conventional
in achievingaircraft transitionscontrol surfaces;
between therefore
VTOL and FW named as
flight
VTOL-FW.
design
VTOL-FW. of an The proposed
algorithm
proposed to method
switch
method includes
between
includes implementation
them in achieving
implementation of multirotor
transitions
of multirotor and
between
and airplane
VTOL
airplane controllers
and FW
controllers and
flight
and
VTOL-FW.
modes. Thus, The proposedUAV’s
VTOL-FW methodflight includes implementation
characteristics are of multirotor
expected to be and airplane
improved by controllers
enabling and
agile
design
modes. of an
Thus, algorithm
VTOL-FW to switch between them in achieving transitions between VTOL by and FW flight
design
design
maneuvers,of
of an algorithm
anincreasing
algorithm to UAV’s
to switch
survivability
flight characteristics
switch between
between them
them in
and exploiting infull are expected
achieving
achieving
flight transitions
transitions
envelope
to be improved
between
between
capabilities. VTOL
VTOL enabling
and
and FW agile
FW flight
flight
modes.
maneuvers,
modes. Thus, VTOL-FW
increasing UAV’s
survivability flight
and characteristics
exploiting full are
flight expected
envelope to be improved
capabilities. by enabling agile
modes. Thus, VTOL-FW UAV’s flight characteristics are expected to be improved by enabling agile
Thus, VTOL-FW UAV’s flight characteristics are expected to be improved by enabling agile
maneuvers,
Keywords:
© 2016, IFAC Aircraft
increasing control,
(International autopilot,
survivability
Federation and mathematical
exploiting
ofexploiting
Automaticfull modelling,
full flight
Control) control,
envelope PID control,
capabilities. VTOL, UAV.
maneuvers,
Keywords:
maneuvers, increasing
Aircraft
increasing survivability
control, autopilot,
survivability and
and mathematical
exploiting flight Hosting
flight
modelling,
full envelope
control,
envelope bycapabilities.
Elsevier
PID control,
capabilities. Ltd. All
VTOL,rightsUAV.reserved.
Keywords: Aircraft control, autopilot, mathematical  modelling,
modelling, control,
control, PID PID control,
control, VTOL,
VTOL, UAV.
Keywords: Aircraft
Keywords: Aircraft control,
control, autopilot,
autopilot, mathematical
mathematical  modelling, control, PID control, VTOL, UAV.
UAV.
verified in flight tests by Anderson et al. (2008). Kubo (2006)
1. INTRODUCTION  verified in flight tests by Anderson et al. (2008). Kubo (2006)
1. INTRODUCTION  showed
verified that
in a tailsitter
flight tests UAV
by could
Anderson achieve
et al. transitions
(2008). Kubo between
(2006)
1. INTRODUCTION showed
verified
verified that
in
in a tailsitter
flight
flight tests
tests UAV
by
by could achieve
Anderson
Anderson et
et al.
al. transitions
(2008).
(2008). Kubo
Kubo between
(2006)
(2006)
Aerial vehicles have 1.
1. proved
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION their usefulness in military level
showed flight
that and
a hover
tailsitter in
UAV shorter
could time using
achieve slats and
transitions flaps
between by
Aerial vehicles have proved their usefulness in military showed level
showed flight
that and
a hover
tailsitter
thatoptimal
a tailsitter in
UAV shorter
UAV couldcould time using
achieve
achieve slats and
transitions
transitions flaps
between
between by
(combat,
Aerial deployment
vehicles have of
proved units,
their patrolling,
usefulness surveillance,
in military using
level an
flight and hover controller.
in shorter Hogge
time (2008)
using slats demonstrated
and flaps by
(combat,
Aerial deployment
vehicles have of
proved units,
their patrolling,
usefulness surveillance,
in military using
level an
flight optimal
and hover controller.
in shorter Hogge
time (2008)
using slats demonstrated
and flaps
flaps by
Aerial vehicles etc.)
reconnaissance,
(combat,
have and
deployment
proved
of civil their
units,areas usefulness in
(transport,surveillance,
patrolling, search and level
military using
flightmanoeuvres
transitionan
and hover inofshorter
optimal controller.a UAV time
Hogge withusing
onlyslats
(2008) one and
propulsion
demonstrated
by
reconnaissance, etc.) andof transition manoeuvres of a UAV with only one propulsion
(combat, deployment
(combat,fire-fighting,
rescue, deployment of civil
etc.) units,
units,
of
areas
various
(transport,surveillance,
patrolling,
patrolling,
applications
search and using
surveillance,
over a using an
system
transition
an
usingoptimal
optimal
control
manoeuvres
controller.
controller.
surfaces.
of
Hogge
Hogge
Tumble-stall (2008) demonstrated
(2008)manoeuvres
demonstrated are
reconnaissance,
rescue,
reconnaissance,
hundred fire-fighting,
etc.)
fire-fighting,
reconnaissance, etc.)
years, while
and
etc.)civil
and
etc.) enhancing
and civil
civil
areas
of various
areas
areas
(transport,
applications
(transport,
(transport,
their capabilities
search
search
search overand
overover and
time,
system
anda transition
transition
implemented
using
manoeuvres
in achieving of aaa UAV
control surfaces.
manoeuvres of UAV
UAV
with
with only
Tumble-stall
with
transitions only
only
one
one
propulsion
manoeuvres
one propulsion
propulsion
by manoeuvres
Green
are
(2005),
rescue,
hundred
rescue, years, while
fire-fighting, etc.)
enhancing
etc.) of of various
their
of mission applications
capabilities
various requirements. over
applications over time,
over a system
implemented
system using control
in
using control
control surfaces.
achieving
surfaces. Tumble-stall
transitions
Tumble-stall by Green
manoeuvres are
(2005),
are
rescue, fire-fighting,
and fulfilling etc.)
ever-changing various applications UAVs aa system implemented
using
Anathkrishnan in(2008) surfaces.
achievingand Jung Tumble-stall
(2010) by
transitions
manoeuvres
utilizing
Green dynamic are
(2005),
hundred
and
hundred years,
fulfilling
years, while
while enhancing
ever-changing
enhancing their
mission
their capabilities
requirements.
capabilities over
over time,
UAVs
time, Anathkrishnan
implemented in(2008)
achievingand Jung (2010)
transitions utilizing
by Green dynamic
(2005),
hundred
offer years,
a unique set while enhancing
of advantagesmission their
compared capabilities over
to piloted aircrafts time, implemented
inversion methods.in achieving
A state transitions
machine by
is designed Green (2005),
by dynamic
Osborne
and
and fulfilling
offer a unique set
fulfilling ever-changing
of advantagesmission
ever-changing compared
mission requirements. UAVs
to piloted aircrafts
requirements. UAVs Anathkrishnan
inversion
Anathkrishnan methods. (2008)
(2008) A stateand
and Jung
machine
Jung (2010)
(2010) utilizing
is designed
utilizing by dynamic
Osborne
and
with fulfilling
smaller, ever-changing
safer and lighter platforms. requirements.
Future UAVs UAVs are Anathkrishnan
(2007) and Çakıcı(2008) (2011) andfor Jung (2010)
transitions utilizing
between dynamic
the flight
offer
with aa unique
smaller, set
saferof advantages
and lighter compared
platforms. to piloted
Future UAVsaircrafts
are inversion
(2007)
inversion and methods.
Çakıcı
methods. A
A state
(2011)
state machine
for is
transitions
machine is designed
between
designed by
by Osborne
the flight
offer
expected unique
offer a unique
to set
perform of
set ofmuchadvantages
advantages
more compared
compared
extended to piloted
to piloted
missions with aircrafts
aircrafts
higher inversion
modes, methods.
where the A state
states were machine
defined isasdesigned
hover, by Osborne
level, Osborne
hover-
with smaller,
expected to safer
perform and
much lighter
more platforms.
extended Future
missions UAVs
with are
higher (2007)
modes,
(2007) and
where
and Çakıcı
the
Çakıcı (2011)
states
(2011) werefor
for transitions
defined
transitions as between
hover,
between the
level,
the flight
hover-
with smaller,
with smaller, safer
manoeuvrability safer and
and
andmuchhigher lighter
lighter platforms.
platforms.
degrees Future
of autonomy. UAVs
Future UAVs are (2007) are to-level and
and Çakıcı (2011) for
level-to-hover. transitions control
Backstepping between the flight
technique flight
is
expected to
manoeuvrability performandmuch more
highermore extended
degrees missions
of autonomy. with higher modes,
to-level where the
and level-to-hover.states were defined
Backstepping as hover, level,
controllevel,
techniquehover-is
expected
expected to to perform
perform much more extended
extended missions
missions with higher modes,
with higher modes,
studied
to-level
where
where
by
and Wang the
theetstates
states
al.
level-to-hover.
were
were
(2008) defined
defined
for a as
as hover,
hover,
coaxial-rotor
Backstepping control
level,
tailsitter
technique
hover-
hover-
UAV is
manoeuvrability
Various
manoeuvrability and
capabilities
and higher
like
higher degrees
VTOL,
degrees of autonomy.
hover,
of level
autonomy. flight and studied
to-level by
and Wang et al.
level-to-hover. (2008) for a coaxial-rotor
Backstepping control tailsitter
technique UAV is
manoeuvrability
Various capabilities and higher
like VTOL,degrees of hover, level flight and to-level
autonomy. and
studied
and level-to-hover.
successfully
by Wang simulated
et al. (2008)
Backstepping
hover,
for a
control
level flight
coaxial-rotor and technique
transitions.
tailsitter UAV
is
transitions
Various between
capabilities hover
like and and
VTOL, level flight
hover, can
level be expected
flight and successfully
studied
studied by
by Wang
Wang simulated
et
et al.
al. (2008)
(2008) hover,
for
for
and Although available studies in this field are successfully a
a level flight
coaxial-rotor
coaxial-rotor and transitions.
tailsitter
tailsitter UAV
UAV
transitions
Various between
capabilities hover
like VTOL, level flight
hover, can
level be expected
flight and and successfully simulated
Various
from a UAV
transitions
capabilities
platform,
between
likeaccording
hover
VTOL, to
and level
hover,
mission level flight and Although
requirements. and
and available
successfully
successfully studieshover,
simulated
simulated in this
hover,
hover,
level
level
level
flight
field
flight
flight
and
are
and
transitions.
andsuccessfully
transitions.
transitions.
from a UAV
transitions
transitions platform,
between
between hover
hover according
and
and level
level to flight
mission
flight
flight
can be
be
be
expected
canrequirements.
can expected
expected implemented
implemented
Although on different
available
on studies
different
platform
in
platform this types,
field
types,
anare
an
aircraft that has
successfully
aircraft that has
When
from a VTOL
UAV and hovering
platform, are
according required,
to mission then rotary-wing
requirements. Although
Although
physically available
available
separated studies
studies
multirotor in
inandthis
this field
field
airplane are
are
control successfully
successfully
surfaces is
When
from a VTOL
from a suchUAV and
UAVasplatform, hovering
platform, are
according
according required,
to mission
to mission then rotary-wing
requirements.
requirements. implemented
physically on
separated different platform
multirotor and types,
airplane an aircraft
control that
surfaces has
is
aircraft
When VTOL helicopters,
and hovering multirotors
are required, and ducted
then fans
rotary-wing are implemented
implemented on
on different
different platform
platform types,
types, an
an aircraft
aircraft that
that has
has
aircraft
When such asand
VTOL helicopters,
hovering multirotors
are andthenducted not examined in demonstrating transition
fans are physically separated multirotor and airplane control surfaces is manoeuvres.
Whenoptimal.
most VTOL and
However,hoveringif are required,
endurance required,
is of then
first rotary-wing
rotary-wing
priority, then a not examined
physically in demonstrating transition
physically separated multirotor and airplane control surfaces is
separated multirotor and airplane manoeuvres.
control surfaces is
aircraft
most such
optimal. as helicopters,
However, multirotors
if endurance is ofandfirstducted
priority, fans
then are
aircraft
aircraft
fixed-wing such
such as
as
type helicopters,
helicopters,
will most multirotors
multirotors
likely be preferredand
and ducted
ducted
due to fans
fans
efficiency area not
are In
not examined
this in
study, design
examined in demonstrating transition
and implementation
demonstrating transition manoeuvres.
of control system of
manoeuvres.
most optimal.
fixed-wing
most optimal. typeHowever,
will
However, most if endurance
likely
if of be
endurance is of
preferred
is of first
of firstdue
first priority,
to then
efficiency
priority, a not
In examined
this study, in demonstrating
design and transition
implementation
then aa a VTOL aircraft with level flight capability is considered. The manoeuvres.
of control system of
most
of optimal.
level flight. However,
When both if endurance
these is
features are priority,
desired, then
fixed-wing
of level flight.
fixed-wing type
type will
When
will most
both likely
most of these
likely be
be preferred
features
preferred aredue
due to
desired,
to then a In
efficiency
efficiency In this
this study,
a VTOL aircraft
study, design
withand
design level
and implementation
flight capability
implementation of control
ofisof system
considered.
control systemThe of
of
fixed-wing
VTOL-UAV
of level
type
flight. withwill
When
most
level
both
likely
flight
of these
be preferred
capability
features
due
becomes
are
to efficiency
desired,thethen besta In a
this
proposed
VTOL
study,
method
aircraft
design
with
and
includes
level
implementation
implementation
flight capability
of
is
control system
multirotor
considered.
of
and
The
VTOL-UAV
of level flight.
flight. with
When level
both of flight
of capability
these features
features becomes
are fordesired,the best
thenoraa aairplaneproposed
a VTOL method
aircraft
VTOL aircraft withincludes
with andlevel implementation
flight
leveldesign capability
flight capability of
is multirotor
considered.
is considered. and
The
The
of level
option. VTOL When both
capability these
removes the needare desired,
runway then controllers of an algorithm to switch
VTOL-UAV
option.
VTOL-UAV VTOLwith level
capability
with level flight
level flightremoves capability
the need
capability becomes the best
for runway
becomes or proposed airplane
proposed method
controllers
method includes
and design
includes implementation
of an algorithm
implementation of
of multirotor and
to switch
multirotor and
VTOL-UAV
launch/recovery
option. VTOL
withequipment
capability
flight capability
and provides
removes the
becomes
flexibility
need for tothe
the
runway
best
best
operateor
proposed
between
airplane
method
them
controllers
includes
in achieving
and
implementation
transitions
design of between
an
of VTOL
algorithm
multirotor
to and and
FW
switch
launch/recovery
option. VTOL equipment
capability and
removesprovidesthe flexibility
need for to
runway operateor between
airplane
airplane them in
controllers
controllers achieving
and transitions
design
and design UAV’s of between
an VTOL
algorithm
of an algorithm to and FW
switch
to switch
option.
in any VTOL whereas
theatre, capability levelremoves
flight the need allows
capability for runway
efficient or flight between modes.
them Thus,
in VTOL-FW
achieving transitions flight
between characteristics
launch/recovery
in any theatre, whereasequipment leveland provides
flight flexibility
capability allowsto operate flight modes. Thus, VTOL-FW UAV’s flight VTOL and
characteristicsFW
launch/recovery
launch/recovery
range and equipment
equipment
endurance flight. and
and Anprovides
provides
aerial flexibility
flexibility
vehicle toefficient
to
designedoperate
operateto are between
between
expected
flight
them
themto
modes.
in
in achieving
achieving
be
Thus, improved
VTOL-FW
transitions
transitions
by UAV’s between
between
enabling agile
flight
VTOL
VTOL and
and FW
manoeuvres,
characteristics
FW
in any
range theatre, whereas level flight capability allows efficient are expected to be improved by enabling agile manoeuvres,
in
in any and
any
possess
endurance
theatre,
theatre,
the whereas
whereas
strengths of
flight.
level
level
both
An aerial
flight
flight
a rotary
vehicle
capability
capability
and
designed
allows
allows
fixed-wing efficient
efficient to flight
aircraft flight modes.
modes.
increasing
are expected
Thus,
Thus, VTOL-FW
survivability,
to
VTOL-FW
providing UAV’s
UAV’s flight
redundancy characteristics
flight and
characteristics
exploiting
range
possess
range
range
will have
and
the endurance
and
and strengths offlight.
endurance
endurance
both
both aAn
flight.
flight.
of the advantageous An
An
aerial
rotary
aerial
aerial andvehicle
in one
fixed-wing
vehicle
vehicle
platform.
designed
designed
designed
to
aircraft
to
to are
increasing
are expected
full expected
flight envelopeto be
survivability,
to be
improved
providing
be capabilities.
improved
improved
by
by enabling
by redundancy
enabling
enabling
agile
agileand
agile
manoeuvres,
exploiting
manoeuvres,
manoeuvres,
possess
will have
possess thethe strengths
both of
the strengthsthe
strengths of of both
advantageous
of both a rotary
both aa rotary in
rotary and and
one fixed-wing
platform.
and fixed-wing
fixed-wing aircraftaircraft
aircraft increasingincreasing
full flight survivability,
envelope
increasing survivability, providing
capabilities.
survivability, providing redundancy
providing redundancy
redundancy and and exploiting
and exploiting
exploiting
possess
will
will
will
have
Transition
have
have
both
both
both
of
of
of
the
manoeuvres
the
the
advantageous
between hover
advantageous
advantageous
in
in
in
one
one
oneand level flight is of full
platform.
platform.
platform. full
full
flight
flight
flight
envelope
2. VTOL-FW
envelope
envelope
capabilities.
capabilities.
capabilities.UAV PLATFORM
Transition manoeuvres between hover and level flight is of 2. VTOL-FW UAV PLATFORM
primary concern for VTOL aircrafts thatandarelevel
capable of level 2.
Transition
primary
Transition
Transition
flight. T-wing
manoeuvres
concern for
manoeuvres
manoeuvres VTOL
tailsitter
between
between
between
UAV
hover
aircrafts
hover that
hover two
with andare capable
level
and level
counter
flight
flight
flightof is
is of
level
of VTOL-FW UAV
is of VTOL-FW UAV
rotating 2. VTOL-FW
2. platform (Fig.
VTOL-FW
VTOL-FW
platform (Fig.
UAV
UAV
UAV 1) PLATFORM
is constructed by multirotor
PLATFORM
1) PLATFORM
is constructed by multirotor
primary
flight.
primary concern
T-wing for VTOL
tailsitter UAVaircrafts
with that
two are capable
counter of level
rotating modification of a model airplane. Then, the byplatform is
primary concern
propellers concern
was one for
forofVTOL
VTOL
the aircrafts
pioneering that
that are
aircraftsstudies; capable
areStone
capable(2004aof
of level
level
and VTOL-FW
modification
VTOL-FW UAV
UAV of platform
a model
platform (Fig. 1)
airplane.
(Fig. 1) is
is constructed
Then, the by
constructed multirotor
byplatform
multirotor is
flight.
propellersT-wing
flight. T-wing was
T-wing onetailsitter
of the
tailsitter UAV
pioneering
UAVcontrol with two
studies;
with system counter
Stone
two counter
counter (2004arotating
and
rotating VTOL-FW
converted UAV
into platform
an UAV (Fig.
by 1)
addingis constructed
an autonomous multirotor
flight
flight.
2006b) has tailsitter
developed a UAV
flight with two including rotating
low- modification
converted
modification into of
of anaa UAV
model
model byairplane.
adding
airplane. Then,
an
Then, the
autonomous
the platform
platform is
flight
is
propellers
2006b)
propellershaswas one
one of
developed
was of the pioneering
a flight
the control
pioneering studies;
system
studies; Stone (2004a
including
Stone (2004a and
and modification
low- controller (Pixhawk) of a model airplane.
and sensors likeThen,
GPS, the platform is
magnetometers,
propellers
level and was one
mid-level of the pioneering
guidance studies;
controllers, Stone (2004a
utilizing and
linear converted
controller
converted into
(Pixhawk)
into an
an UAV
UAVand by
sensors
by adding
adding like an
an autonomous
GPS, magnetometers,
autonomous flight
flight
2006b)
level
2006b)and has developed
has mid-level aa flight
developed guidance flight control system
controllers,
control including
systemutilizing
including low-
low- converted
linear accelerometers, into an gyros,UAV by adding
pitot-static systeman autonomous
in Çakıcı flight
as magnetometers, et al.
2006b)
quadratic has developed a flight control system including low- controller
accelerometers, (Pixhawk) gyros,and sensors
sensors like
pitot-static system GPS,as magnetometers,
in Çakıcı et al.
level and
quadratic
level and regulator
mid-level and
regulator
mid-level and
classical
guidance
classical
guidance
controllers,
controllers,
controllers,
controllers,
which linear
utilizing
which
utilizing
were
were
linear
controller
controller
(2015). (Pixhawk)
(Pixhawk) and
and sensors like
like GPS,
GPS, magnetometers,
level and mid-level guidance controllers, utilizing linear accelerometers, (2015).
accelerometers, gyros,
gyros, pitot-static
pitot-static system
system as as in
in Çakıcı
Çakıcı et et al.
al.
quadratic
quadratic regulator and classical controllers, which were accelerometers, gyros, pitot-static system as in Çakıcı et al.
quadratic regulator
regulator and and classical
classical controllers,
controllers, which which were were (2015). (2015).
(2015).
Copyright © 2016 IFAC 267
Copyright
2405-8963 ©© 2016,
2016 IFAC
IFAC (International Federation of Automatic Control)267 Hosting by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Copyright
Peer review
Copyright ©© 2016
under
© 2016 IFAC
responsibility
2016 IFAC
IFAC of International Federation of 267
Automatic
267Control.
Copyright
10.1016/j.ifacol.2016.07.045 267
IFAC CTS 2016
268 Ferit ÇAKICI et al. / IFAC-PapersOnLine 49-3 (2016) 267–272
May 18-20, 2016. Istanbul, Turkey

FW Control Elements VTOL Control Elements �� (�⁄� ), Vertical Velocity

Rudder Prop.1

�� (�⁄� ), Horizontal Velocity

Elevator Prop.2

Prop.0 Prop.3

Ailerons Prop.4

VTOL Mode Transition Mode FW Mode

(VTOL control (All control (FW control
Wing Fuselage elements are elements are elements are
active) active) active)

Fig. 2. Flight envelope of VTOL-FW UAV.

of the aircraft in a MATLAB graphical user interface (Fig. 3)

environment that is specifically developed for the initial
design, analysis, control system design, mission planning and
Fixed Components
flight simulations of aircrafts. Initially, every main component
like fuselage, wings, control surfaces and propellers are
Fig. 1. Control elements of VTOL-FW UAV. modelled using aerodynamical principles stated by McRuer
(1973), Leishman (2006), Allerton (2009) and Çakıcı (2009),
Main components of the aircraft contributes to forces and for the whole flight envelope including post-stall conditions.
moments acting on the vehicle in flight. Fuselage causes drag Then, these model’s outputs are combined considering
in negative direction of airflow, caused by motion. FW aircraft’s geometry in calculating total forces and moments.
propulsion system (Prop.0) provides thrust to balance drag, Equations of motion, defined by Craig (1989), are formed as a
while main wing provides lift to overcome gravitational force set of nonlinear equations (1), using Newton’s 2nd law of
and ailerons, rudder and elevator provide roll, pitch and yaw forces, Euler’s formula for moments and kinematic
motions as in a conventional airplanes. VTOL propulsion relationships defined in body frame.
systems (Prop.1-4) provide lift, roll, pitch and yaw motions by
�̇ = �(�, �, �) (1)
changing the rotational speeds of the propellers, as in a
multirotor. where x: state variables, u: control variables, t: time.
Flight mode of VTOL-FW UAV is determined according to
vertical and horizontal velocities of the aircraft in full flight
envelope (Fig. 2), that covers both VTOL and FW regions.
When both of the vertical and horizontal velocities are small
in magnitude, the aircraft operates in VTOL mode with VTOL
control elements activated. As horizontal velocity is increased
the aircraft enters the FW mode by enabling FW control
elements. Intersectional region is used for switching between
VTOL and FW modes, by changing active control elements.
3. MATHEMATICAL MODELLING
The complexity of dynamics of aerial vehicles, makes
obtaining accurate mathematical models for a large portion of
flight envelope a difficult problem. VTOL-FW UAV platform
is modelled by using the real physical specifications

Fig. 3. Model of VTOL-FW UAV.

268
 IFAC CTS 2016
May 18-20, 2016. Istanbul, Turkey Ferit ÇAKICI et al. / IFAC-PapersOnLine 49-3 (2016) 267–272 269
4. LINEAR ANALYSIS
Linear analysis of VTOL-FW UAV is performed by
examining stability and controllability of the linearized system
dynamics for trim states.
A trim state is defined as the equilibrium point, where the rates
of the aerodynamic state variables are zero, when the resultant
forces and moments are in balance. The trimming problem
concerns the determination of control commands
����� , ���� , ���� , ���� �, which maps to control variables
[���� , ���� , ���� , �� , � , � , � , � ], and aerodynamical
variables [�, �, �, �, �, �, �, �] that are required to hold the
aircraft in equilibrium for a set of prescribed variables
[�, �� , �� , �� ]. The trim conditions are obtained by solving a
constrained optimization problem, defined by Nocedal (2006)
as the following:
Minimize ‖��̇ ‖,
�� , � subject to � ̇ = ��� , � , �� given � ̇ , (2)
� � � �
where �� = [�, �, �, �, �, �, �, �],
�� = [�, �� , 0, �� ],
� = ����� , ���� , ���� , ���� �, and
���� , �� , �� is the equations of motion.
Inspection of all prescribed operation points reveals that the
trim condition could not be established for all of the points of
interest, which reveals the limits of the flight envelope for each
flight mode (Fig. 4). An important observation is that the trim
conditions of VTOL and FW flight modes have an intersection
at level velocities between 12 and 16 m/s. This intersection
region is used for transition between modes, when the system
is made closed-loop stable with dedicated controllers.
VTOL Mode
Transition Mode
(intersecting trims)
FW Mode
Trim is found. Trim is not found.
Fig. 4. Trim conditions of VTOL-FW UAV.
Linearized system dynamics are obtained in state-space form
(3), for the trim points using small perturbation theory and
Taylor’s series expansion of equations of motion (1).
�̇ = �� + �� (3)
where
� = [�, �, �, �, �, �, �, �], 8x1 vector,
� = ����� , ���� , ���� , ���� �, 4x1 vector,
269
�: is 8x8 matrix and
�: is 4x4 matrix.
Stability analysis (Fig. 5) of the linearized dynamical system
of VTOL-FW UAV shows that the aircraft is unstable in both
modes. When a measure of stability is defined as the distance
of the largest unstable pole in the right-hand s-plane to
marginal stability line, the aircraft becomes more unstable in
VTOL mode and less unstable in FW mode, as the horizontal
velocity is increased. Analysis of the aircraft’s dynamic modes
proves that the aircraft demonstrates similar characteristics to
an airplane in FW mode and to a multirotor in VTOL mode.
Also, the controllability analysis shows that the aircraft is
controllable in all of the trim points of both modes, which
makes the controller design of the system possible.
VTOL Mode
FW Mode
Stable Unstable
Fig. 5. Stability of VTOL-FW UAV.
5. CONTROL SYSTEM DESIGN
A closed loop-control system is expected to stabilize the
system, reject disturbances, reduce sensitivity to parameter
variations, track reference, provide robustness to uncertainties,
and be implementable for real world applications.
Additionally, VTOL-UAV control system should make the
aircraft follow guidance commands.
A control system architecture (Fig. 6) is proposed that controls
the aircraft in different flight modes. The inputs of the control
system are obtained from guidance commands, and the outputs
are defined as ����� , ���� , ���� , ���� � which tell the aircraft to
roll, pitch, yaw or change throttle, regardless of the active
operation mode, which are then transformed into control
element’s commands through a control mixer.
Although different control techniques could be used in
designing a controller for VTOL-FW UAV, Proportional-
Integral-Derivative (PID) controller design technique is
utilized, for its ease of applicability on the real world
problems. Also, PID controller relies on measurements, which
are made available through sensors, and does not rely on the
underlying process which often contains unknowns,
uncertainties and disturbances. Major drawback of this method
is that it does not guarantee optimal control or closed-loop
system stability, requiring tuning for satisfactory performance.
IFAC CTS 2016
270
May 18-20, 2016. Istanbul, Turkey Ferit ÇAKICI et al. / IFAC-PapersOnLine 49-3 (2016) 267–272

In practice, a controller is as good as how well it is tuned.

��
⎡ ̇ ⎤ ����
���� Tuning a PID control loop is the adjustment of its control
⎢ �� ⎥ ���� �
����
� parameters ��� , �� , �� �, to the optimum values for the desired
⎢��� ⎥ �� � ����
controlled response. The performance of the closed-loop
���
⎢��� ⎥ Ω��
⎣ ��� ⎦
���� system depends on the transient as well as the steady-state
Control behaviour and is usually specified in terms of the rise time,
Guidance Control settling time, percent overshoot and steady state error. When
Mixer
Ω� tuning a controller, a step change in the desired variable is
Ω� applied to the closed-loop system and the performance is
� � evaluated by the integral of time accumulated error of the
Ω�
Ω� response. In order to account for all of the performance
criteria, an optimization problem is defined (4) in tuning PID
controller parameters as:
�� � � � � � � � � �� �� �� �
�
Minimize ∫� � � |�� (�)|�� , (4)
�
� � , �� , ��
Fig. 6. Control system architecture of VTOL-FW UAV.
subject to �̇ = �(x, u),
Since VTOL-FW UAV is a multi-input multi-output where �� = ��� − �� ,
dynamical system, single-input single-output PID controllers ��� = ��,���� + ℎ(�),
are designed with sequential loop closure technique having 3 1, � ≥ �� ,
ℎ(�) = �
major loops: 0, � < ��,
� is the index of state variable.
 Inner loop is the fastest loop and responsible for the
fastest dynamics of the aircraft which tell the aircraft
to roll, to pitch, to yaw or to change throttle through VTOL-FW UAV has 3 basic modes of flight. The first one
acceleration commands in body frame, being the VTOL mode is essential for vertical take-off and
landing. When the aircraft’s total velocity is small, then it is
 Medium loop is responsible for controlling the operated in VTOL mode. When the aircraft’s velocity is high
orientation of the aircraft in vehicle carried frame, enough, FW mode is turned on for level flight. Also, the
where the inputs are the desired attitudes that depend controller has an AUTO mode, where the mode selector
on the mode of operation and the outputs are the decides on the mode of operation by examining state variables,
desired angular rates, which are transformed into with a hysteresis function.
body frame, as inputs for the inner loop.
6. FLIGHTS
 Outer loop, being the slowest loop, takes its inputs
from guidance law as desired velocities in the Earth Flight tests are performed in simulation and real-world
frame and calculates desired accelerations in vehicle environments, in order to verify VTOL-FW UAV’s flight
carried frame, which are then converted into desired characterics.
angles and throttle commands according to mode of A flight course of desired waypoints (Fig. 7), forming a
operation. A mode selector is defined in order to rectangle, is planned for simulation flight testing. Initiating
determine the mode of operation according to current flight from waypoint 1, the aircraft took off vertically in VTOL
state of the aircraft in the whole flight envelope (Fig. mode and started ascending towards waypoint 2. After
4). If the aircraft is operating in VTOL region then reaching waypoint 2, level velocity is increased in order to
the desired commands are determined by (4, 5 and 6), reach waypoint 3. As the velocity is increased further, the
and by (7, 8 and 9) when it is operating the in FW autopilot changed the mode to FW for level flight. When the
region: aircraft approaches to waypoint 3, the autopilot changed the
�� = ����� + ����(��� , �) (4) mode to VTOL again and the final waypoint is reached by
�� = ����� − ����(��� , �) (5) vertical landing.
���� = −��� (6)
�� = ����� + ����(��� , �) (7)
�� = ����� − ����(��� , �) (8)
���� = ��� (9)

where �� and �� are the desired angles,

����� and ����� are the trim angles,
��� , ��� and ��� are the desired accelerations,
� is the gravitational acceleration and,
���� is the throttle command.

270
 IFAC CTS 2016
May 18-20, 2016. Istanbul, Turkey Ferit ÇAKICI et al. / IFAC-PapersOnLine 49-3 (2016) 267–272 271
3 Transition
2
4
1
Transition Transition
VTOL Mode FW Mode VTOL Mode
Fig. 7. Simulation flight of VTOL-FW UAV.
Performing real flight (Fig. 8), with an identical mission
scenario used in simulation, resulted in similar results, as
expected. Starting in VTOL mode the aircraft ascendend
succesfully as a multirotor. Having a total electrical current
drawn from the battery around 40 A in VTOL mode, the power
consumption is decreased as the aircraft gained level velocity,
which allowed the main wings to provide lift. The current is
measured around 15 A when the aircraft is operated in FW
mode. Then, the final phase of the flight is accomplished by
changing mode to VTOL and vertical landing is performed
successfully.
Fig. 8. VTOL-FW UAV in real flight.
Calculations of power requirements to fly (Fig. 9) show that
VTOL-FW UAV power consumption is similar to a
comparable multirotor for hover and slow flight. By increasing
level velocity, multirotor’s power consumption slightly
increases due to the drag of the fuselage, but VTOL-FW
UAV’s power requirement decreases as wings begin to
provide lift. The required power starts to increase after 8 m/s
since more lift means more moment provided by
aerodynamical surfaces, where VTOL propellers consume
more power in trying to counteract elevator moment, instead
of countering gravity. As the velocity is increased, succeeding
steep increase of power in the VTOL mode, indicates the major
reason behind the need for transition to the FW mode.
271
Region
Fig. 9. Power requirements of different modes.
7. CONCLUSIONS
In this study, contstruction of a UAV with VTOL, hover and
level flight capabilities, VTOL-FW, and autopilot design is
considered. The aircraft demonstrates distinct flight
characteristics of a multirotor and a fixed-wing airplane on the
same platform. Although, controller design for a portion of
classical flight envelopes is a mature field, an aircraft
performing in a combined larger flight envelope requires a
special control system design that is capable of mode
switching. This controller is expected to fly the aircraft in
VTOL, FW modes and transitions between these modes.
One of the major problems in designing an air vehicle with
VTOL and level flight capabilities is the location of center of
gravity. An airplane requires center of gravity in front of the
aerodynamical center, and a multirotor requires center of
gravity close to aerodynamical center. Thus, this problem
becomes a trade-off between better hover and better level
flight. The aircraft fuselage remains mostly parallel to the
Earth’s surface in a large portion of its flight envelope. This
allows both VTOL and FW mode flight envelopes intersect
with each other, which makes the transition between these
modes easier by having close trim state conditions.
The aircraft is modeled for analysis, simulation and controller
design phases. Different PID controllers tuned for VTOL and
FW modes performed well in flying the aircraft like a
multirotor and airplane. Transitions between these modes are
achieved through mode switching by applying smoothed
control commands to control elements of different phases of
flight.
Simulation and real-world flight experiments proved the
applicability of the proposed method. VTOL-FW UAV is
expected to find usage areas in missions requiring VTOL,
hover and efficient level flight without the need for a runway
and launch-recovery equipments.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This work is supported by The Scientific and Technological
Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) under grant
114E149. Authors are grateful for this support.
IFAC CTS 2016
272
May 18-20, 2016. Istanbul, Turkey Ferit ÇAKICI et al. / IFAC-PapersOnLine 49-3 (2016) 267–272

REFERENCES
Anathkrishnan N. and Shim H. C. (2010). Controller Synthesis
and Application to Hover-to-Cruise Transition Flight of a
Tailsitter UAV, Idea Research and Development Ltd.,
Pune, India.
Anderson P. and Stone R. H. (2008). Flight Testing of the T-
Wing Tail-Sitter Unmanned Air Vehicle, Journal of
Aircraft, 45(2), 673-685.
Craig J. J. (1989). Introduction to Robotics, Addison-Wesley
Publication Corporation, USA.
Çakıcı F. (2009). Modelling, Stability Analysis and Control
System Design of a Small-Sized Tiltrotor UAV, M.S.
thesis, Dept. of Electrical and Electronics Engineering,
Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
Çakıcı F. and Leblebicioğlu M. K. (2011). Modelling and
Simulation of a Small-Sized Tiltrotor UAV, Transactions
of the Institute of Measurement and Control, 9(4), 35-45.
Çakıcı F., Ergezer H., Irmak U. and Leblebicioğlu M. K.
(2015). Coordinated Guidance for Multiple UAVs,
Transactions of the Institute of Measurement and Control,
0142, 3312.
Green W. E. and Oh P. Y. (2005). A MAV That Flies Like an
Airplane and Hovers Like a Helicopter, Proceedings of
the 2005 IEEE/ASME, International Conference on
Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics, Monterey, California,
USA.
Hogge J. V. (2008). Development of a Miniature VTOL
Tailsitter UAV, M.S. thesis, Dept. of Mechanical
Engineering, Brigham Young University, Utah, USA.
Jung Y. and Shim D. H. (2010). Controller Synthesis and
Application to Hover-to-Cruise Transition Flight of a
Tailsitter UAV, Proceedings of AIAA Atmospheric Flight
Mechanics Conference, Toronto, Canada.
Kubo D. (2006). Study on Design and Transitional Flight of
Tail Sitting VTOL UAV, 25th International Congress of
the Aeronautical, Hamburg, Germany.
Leishman, G. (2006). Principles of Aerodynamics, Cambridge
University Press, London, England.
McRuer D. (1973). Aircraft Dynamics and Automatic Control,
Princeton University Press, New Jersey, USA.
Nocedal. J. (2006). Numerical Optimization, Springer
Publication, Illinois, USA.
Osborne, S. R. (2007). Transitions Between Hover and Level
Flight for a Tailsitter UAV, M.S. thesis, Dept. of
Electrical and Computer Engineering, Brigham Young
University, Utah, USA.
Stone R. H. (2004). Control Architecture for a Tail-Sitter
Unmanned Air Vehicle, Proceedings of 5th Asian Control
Conference, Melbourne, Australia.
Stone R. H. (2006). The T-Wing Tail-sitter Unmanned Air
Vehicle from Design Concept to Research Flight Vehicle,
Institution of Mechanical Engineers: Journal of
Aerospace Engineering, 218, 417-433.
Wang X. and Lin H. (2012). Design and Control for Rotor-
Fixed Wing Hybrid Aircraft, Journal of Aerospace
Engineering, 225(1), 831-847.

272