Proceedings of the ASME 2011 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences &

Computers and Information in Engineering Conference

IDETC/CIE 2011
August 29-31, 2011, Washington, DC, USA

DETC2011/MESA-47851

DRAFT: AUTONOMOUS FLYING UNDER 500 USD BASED ON RC AIRCRAFT

Long Di and YangQuan Chen

Center for Self-Organizing and Intelligent Systems

Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering
Utah State University
Logan, Utah 84322
long.di@aggiemail.usu.edu, yangquan.chen@usu.edu

ABSTRACT aerodynamic research, etc. With an experienced RC pilot, they

Radio control (RC) aircrafts have been favorite toys of avi-
ation hobbyists for years. Because of their simple configura-
tions and low expense, they can also be used for reconnaissance
and surveillance with information-gathering devices under com-
mands of a skillful human pilot. However, control with human in
the loop not only degrades the reliability of flight performance,
but also bring restrictions in endurance and accuracy. In order to
resolve these issues and extend the usage of RC aircrafts, getting
them capable of autonomous navigation is a preferred solution.
This paper reports our approach by designing and integrating an
autonomous system on a regular RC aircraft to achieve full au-
tonomy while keeping the additional costs almost equivalent to
the cheap RC platform. The current platform will be briefly pre-
sented, the system architecture and major components will be in-
troduced, and detailed autonomous demonstration flight results
will be provided at the end.
can even be used for reconnaissance and surveillance purposes.
Although RC aircrafts have potentials in many areas, their relia-
bility and many other aspects are affected by the fact that there
are always humans in the control loop. When the RC aircraft
is far away from the pilot, it is difficult for the pilot to identify
the instantaneous attitudes and altitude. Therefore, the aircraft
has to always stay in a certain range where the pilot’s line of
sight can reach. When the RC aircraft is flying, there is no feed-
back to the pilot, such as when the fuel will be drained, how well
the actuators perform, etc, which are all based on pilot’s accu-
mulated experience. The most critical drawback of RC aircrafts
is their fail-safe features. If any component malfunctions and
jeopardizes the safety of the aircraft, only the pilot can save the
situation and prohibit the plane of getting damage. If the aircraft
crashes in an open area, it causes more challenges for people to
retrieve it because there is no GPS position feedback available.

Keywords: low-cost inertial sensors, attitude heading ref-
erence system, autopilot, unmanned aerial vehicle.
INTRODUCTION
Many people like flying RC aircrafts because they are inex-
pensive to obtain, easy to assemble and joyful to control. RC
aircrafts not only bring the hobbyist similar experience as flying
real airplanes, but also can be used in many applications, such
as stunt flight show, flying targets for military shooting training,
For the purposes of resolving the drawbacks and extend-
ing the usage of RC aircrafts, converting them into unmanned
aerial vehicles (UAVs) by installing navigation and communica-
tion units is a reasonable approach. However, most autonomous
navigation units available in the current market are not really ap-
plicable to cheap RC platforms because of their higher costs [1].
Therefore, designing and integrating an autonomous system on
an RC aircraft that can both improve its autonomy and maintain
the overall cost as low as possible becomes the preferred solu-
tion. Many other researchers have made efforts towards this di-

1 c 2011 by ASME
Copyright
rection, such as [2] [3] [4]. The system integrations generally
involve both aerospace and electrical expertise, and if people
just purchase off-the-shelf autopilot and avionics systems, they
are usually not only expensive but also not open-source, which
means it is impossible for the researchers to test their own algo-
rithms or implement new functions. If people decide not to pur-
chase off-the-shelf RC aircrafts but build their own RC testbed,
the whole design process will involve considerations in aerody-
FIGURE 1. Fixed-wing with Tail RC Aircraft [5].
namics and stability, and before equipping it with all the avionics
and payloads, it has to prove its capability of stable RC flights,
which will bring extra cost and testing time.
of a UAV platform, the advantage is its flexibility and commodi-
In order to achieve the goal stated above, this paper will
ous internal space, which is able to arrange and encapsulate all
show our systematic approaches on developing a low-cost RC
the avionics and various payloads. However, it usually needs a
aircraft based UAV system, focusing on the RC platform selec-
runway to take off and land, and the gas engine also generates
tion, system integration, surveys on additional alternative hard-
pollution and causes potential safety issues.
ware and flight performance analysis. The main objective of this
RC sailplanes are also known as RC gliders, but unlike other
paper is to provide other UAV researchers or UAV practitioners
RC aircrafts, they do not require propulsion from motors. Based
a possible solution scheme on low-cost UAV development for
on the lift generated from wind blowing and warm rising air, they
research and civilian uses.
are able to perform sustainable flight. They can be produced us-
The main contents of the paper are organized as follows:
ing different materials, such as wood, foam and plastic. An RC
Section 2 provides our evaluations on the selection of an RC
glider example is shown in Figure 2. Due to its speciality, RC
aircraft. In Section 3, our UAV platform and airborne system
sailplane has a long and narrow fuselage that causes inconve-
are introduced by focusing on the major components and then
nience for avionics arrangement, and weight is a critical concern
gives an explanation on the current system architecture. A survey
that prohibits the glider to carry a variety of payloads. Most im-
on other alternative low-cost navigation solutions is presented in
portant of all, the flight performance of RC sailplanes is closely
Section 4. After that, detail flight results are shown in Section 5.
related to the weather conditions, which introduces many uncer-
Finally Section 6 concludes this paper and gives future improve-
tainties. Therefore, RC sailplanes are not an appropriate platform
ment suggestions.
for UAV development.

PLATFORM SELECTION
RC aircrafts carry radio receiver, motor and servos, and they
are remotely controlled by a hand-held transmitter. When the
joystick position on the transmitter changes, the receiver also
correspondingly adjusts the control surfaces so the aircraft can
follow the command from the pilot. There are several different
types of RC platforms available in the market and they can be
divided into following categories.
FIGURE 2. RC Sailplane [6].
(1) Fixed-wing with tail aircraft;
(2) Flying wing aircraft;
(3) Sailplane;
RC rotary aircrafts have different configurations, aerody-
(4) Rotary aircraft.
namics and control settings in comparison with RC fixed-wing
Most RC aircrafts are fixed-wings with tail. These aircrafts aircrafts. Instead of using control surfaces such as rudder and
have all the conventional control surfaces, such as elevator, rud- elevator to manipulate the attitudes, rotary aircrafts only rely on
der and ailerons, so that they can perform close to full-sized air- rotors to achieve fully flight control. RC rotary aircrafts can uti-
planes. A typical fixed-wing with tail RC aircraft is shown in lize various power sources such as electrical batteries, nitro, gas,
Figure 1. They also have wide ranges in size, and one common etc. The advantage of using this type of design for UAV devel-
feature for these RC aircraft is that they usually use gas engines opment is their ability to hover, take off and land vertically, and
to achieve high speed and great maneuverability. This type of RC move in tiny steps, so they can not only be applied to outdoor use
aircraft is generally made of wood or metal and they often appear but also indoor applications. The drawback of this RC platform
in flight shows for RC aviation hobbyists. For the development is that it is more fragile than other designs, and both endurance

2 c 2011 by ASME
Copyright
and stability are also critical issues that affect its performance.
Figure 3 shows an RC helicopter.

FIGURE 4. Flying Wing Raw Airframe.

FIGURE 3. RC Rotary Aircraft [7].

RC flying-wing aircraft is a special fixed-wing design with-

out tail and there is no obvious division between the fuselage and
the wings. Since it does not have a tail, there are no rudder and el-
evators. Its roll and pitch angle controls are achieved through the
elevons, which is a combination of elevator and ailerons. Com-
pared with traditional RC aircrafts, it introduces less drag and FIGURE 5. Component Placement.
consequently has higher fuel efficiency [8]. However, it is in-
herently more difficult to control and less manoeuvrable because
of the tailless configuration. Most RC flying-wing aircrafts are
made of foam and they generally use electrical motors and bat-
teries as power source. After comparing all four types of RC
aircrafts, the flying-wing design seems to have the most poten-
tial to satisfy the requirements of low-cost UAV development.

SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
Current UAV Platform Description
As explained in the previous section, the RC flying wing was
chosen to be our UAV development platform. One of the leading FIGURE 6. 48” UAV Layout.
RC flying wing manufacturers in the market is Zagi, which pro-
duces different configurations of airframes and all radio control
required accessories [1]. However, due to cost reasons, we de- ure 6 and the specification for the 48” UAV is listed in the table
cided to design our own UAV platform based on a raw airframe below.
without any accessories from the Unicorn Wings.
The airframe is made of EPP (Expanded Polypropylene) TABLE 1. 48” UAV Testbed Specification.
foam, and we use strapping tape to cover the whole surface so the Weight 3.3lb or 1.5kg
main body is well protected. When the two pieces are glued to- Endurance Capability 45 minutes
gether, the wingspan is about 48 inches (122 cm). Figure 4 shows Cruise Speed 15 m/s
the raw airframe. After calculating the central gravity point and Control Inputs Elevons & throttle
balancing all the accessories, we can find the near-optimal posi- Operational Range 5 miles
tion for each component. Figure 5 shows the placement of all the Operating Battery Voltage 10.5V-12.5V
components on the raw airframe. Once everything is ready to be Operating Temperature 14 -104◦ K
installed, we go through a detailed self-made construction man-
ual and place all the flying accessories such as electrical motor
and servos, autopilot, RC receiver, wireless communication unit
and navigation unit in the airframe. A finished 48” flying-wing Compared with other UAV systems, this 48” flying-wing
UAV that is ready for autonomous navigation is shown in Fig- UAV platform has following positive specialities:

3 c 2011 by ASME
Copyright
 TABLE 2. UAV COST TABLE. TABLE 3. AUTOPILOT COMPARISON.
Component Cost(USD) Autopilot Micropilot Cloud Cap Procerus Paparazzi
RC Units MP2028 Piccolo SL Kestrel V2.4 TWOG
Airframe 69.95 Cost(k USD) 5 N/A 5 0.125
Motor Controller 41.99 Size(cm) 10x4x1.5 13x5.9x1.9 5.1x3.5x1.2 4x3x0.95
Electrical Motor 79.90 Weight(g) 28 110 17 8
Servos 43.98 CPU 3MIPS 40MHz 29MHz 32-Bit ARM7
RC Receiver 29.95 Vin(volts) 4.2-26 5-30 -0.3-16.5 6.1-18
Batteries 218.97
Power 140mA 4w 500mA N/A
Total 484.74
(6.5V) (3.3 or 5V)
Automation Units
Memory N/A 448KB 512KB 32KB
Autopilot 125
GPS receiver 87.90
Modem 179
IMU 99.99
Total 491.89

(1) Light weight. The main material built of this airframe is

foam and tape, and the total weight of the main body is less
than 3.5 lb (1.59 kg), which leaves extra capacity for payload
weight given its current motor lift.
(2) Runway free. The UAV uses a bungee to take off and fea-
tures belly landing, therefore it does not need a dedicated
runway to operate.
(3) Durability. The UAV has flown for numerous hours under
different weather conditions with nothing to be modified.
The material is resilient to temperature changes and because
all the cables are embedded into the foam, they get great
preservation from wearing out.
(4) Safety. The main body of the UAV is soft so it can absorb
most impact and protect the on-board avionics that are se-
cured inside the wing. Because of its small size and weight,
and since it uses electrical power, there is little risk of injur-
ing people or damaging properties.
(5) Flexibility. The foam structure makes it easy to cut and cre-
ate spaces for supplementary batteries and new payloads.
All the avionics can be moved around to create a better aero-
dynamics for the airframe.
(6) Open-source solution. The autopilot and navigation units
are all based on open-source projects, and with support
of the community, people share ideas and resolve others’
questions, so it becomes more convenient and solid for our
project development. Other researchers can also get easy
access to the resources and improve their own designs.
(7) Low cost. Based on the open-source software and hardware,
it reduces significant amount of investment on the basic ex-
ploitation. All the on-board components are selected regard-
ing price and performance to achieve the desired low-cost
scenario. The component costs are summarized in Table 1
with a separation of the RC units and automation units.
FIGURE 7. Paparazzi TWOG Autopilot.
Paparazzi Autopilot and GCS
The autopilot is the brain of a UAV. It plays an essential role
in autonomous navigation by collecting and processing sensor
data then generating commands to the actuators for correct guid-
ance of the UAV. In order to choose a suitable autopilot that satis-
fies our requirements, several available commercial-off-the-shelf
(COTS) autopilots [9] [10] [11] [12]are surveyed and compared
in Table 2.
Table 2 indicates that Procerus Kestrel and Micropilot
MP2028 are small, light-weight and powerful autopilot choices.
However, they are both closed-source and their prices exceed our
cost range. Closed-source means we are only able to manipulate
the standard functions and the internal software is inaccessible,
which will prevent us from implementing new flight control al-
gorithms and integrating other hardware. The Paparazzi TWOG
is an open source autopilot including complete software support.
The open source settings make it a flexible, effective and inex-
pensive solution for low-cost UAV platform development [13].
They also reserve options for other hardware to be integrated into
the system so that more functions can be activated. The same au-
topilot has been used on many other platforms and long hours of
successful autonomous flights have proven its robustness [14].
Moreover, an advanced flight controller has been designed and
implemented based on the same software and hardware [15]. The
accomplished test results also demonstrate the capability and po-
tential of this autopilot. A sample TWOG is shown in Figure 7.
Although the Paparazzi autopilot can function indepen-
dently from the ground control station (GCS), the received sen-
sor data can be interpreted by the autopilot and transmitted to the

4 c 2011 by ASME
Copyright
GCS through a wireless communication device. The Paparazzi
GCS software is part of the Paparazzi open-source project and is
one of the most powerful tools available. Its concise graphic user
interface (GUI) offers an incredible simplicity to monitor and
control the UAV. When new commands are sent, it will display
them in the console box and generate voice messages to notify
the operator. It also shows the UAV status in great detail, such FIGURE 8. Ardu IMU.
as the ground speed, battery voltage, throttle percentage, flight
mode, communication quality and so on. The 2D map window
of the GCS is another important segment. It displays the prede- It can update up to 4Hz and it has been integrated into the Ardu
fined waypoints in the flight plan and highlights the path of the IMU.
UAV. The flight plan can be modified to meet new mission re-
quirements and the UAV can automatically terminate its mission
System Integration and Architecture
if an unforeseen problem occurs. The Paparazzi GCS is granted
The integration of the current platform has been completed
with a higher level of control authority to guarantee its effective-
by combining the open-source Paparazzi autopilot and the Ar-
ness. By collaborating with the on-board autopilot, the GCS can
duIMU. Besides, an air pressure sensor that can measure wind
guide the UAV to accomplish diverse flight tasks.
speed and provide feedback for closed-loop speed control has
also been designed and implemented for the same system using
Low-Cost Navigation Unit the ADC port. A system block diagram is shown in Figure 9.
The Ardu IMU is designed to accept GPS information for yaw
In order to achieve reasonable navigation performance, at-
titude estimation with high fidelity is indispensable. Accurate
orientation measurement is crucial for the flight controller to sta-
bilize the whole UAV system and ensure smooth autonomous
flight performance. Inertial measurement units (IMUs) are pop-
ular electronic devices on UAVs and they play an important role
in attitude estimation because of their high accuracy. GPS is an-
other important navigation sensor because it can measure posi-
tion, altitude, velocity and course angles of an UAV. By combin-
ing IMU and GPS, it can provide most essential data for UAV
autonomous navigation. However, most commercial IMUs are
quite expensive due to the high quality hardware and sophisti-
cated algorithms. For the purpose of balancing performance and
cost, we decided to research on low-cost sensor solutions.
With the development of low-cost inertial and GPS sensors,
there have been several inexpensive IMUs and GPS available in
the current market. Relying on less sophisticated algorithms, FIGURE 9. System Block Diagram.
they work similarly to the expensive commercial sensing systems
while the price is less than 200 US dollars [16]. Even though
their accuracy is incomparable to the commercial ones, they are drift correction and direct parsing all the navigation data to the
sufficient for low-cost UAV development. One of the low-cost TWOG autopilot through its UART port. In order to quantify the
navigation units combines Ardu IMU and uBlox GPS. Ardu IMU performance of Ardu IMU, a logging system based on Gumstix
was originally introduced by DIYDRONE and it prices at only Verdex microcomputer has also been designed so that the entire
100 US dollars [16]. It consists of a 3-axis accelerometer which inertial sensor and GPS data can be saved into a SD card for
is used to measure linear accelerations and a 3-axis gyroscope further data analysis. Gumstix Verdex is also able to parse the
that is used to measure the angular velocity. The processor is navigation data to the autopilot while that is an optional setting.
Arduino-compatible that runs the filtering and parsing code. Fig- The two configurations for Ardu IMU are shown in Figure 10.
ure 8 shows a sample Ardu IMU. In order to estimate the orienta- In order to utilize the sensor data from Ardu IMU, both airborne
tion angles, a direction cosine matrix (DCM) complementary fil- code and IMU parsing code follow the same Ugear format, which
ter is implemented [17] and it can output attitude estimates with a was created for the AggieAir platform [18]. Using this protocol,
frequency of around 50Hz. The uBlox GPS receiver is a popular there is no need to modify the Paparazzi airborne code, so any
solution for navigation because it is inexpensive and powerful. IMU that wants to communicate with the autopilot just needs

5 c 2011 by ASME
Copyright

 (a) Ardu IMU and Gumstix. (b) Ardu IMU Direct Parsing.
FIGURE 10. Two Configurations of Ardu IMU.
to convert its sensor outputs into a standard Ugear format, and
then the UAV can perform autonomous navigation based on that
IMU. By doing this way, the software is fully compatible with
other commercial IMUs owned by CSOIS.
In order to evaluate the performance of the Ardu IMU, we
also compared it with Microstrain GX2, a commercial IMU
priced around 1700 USD and it is stated that the dynamic ac-
curacy is about ±2o [19]. After several flight tests by purely
using the Gumstix logging function, the raw sensor data of both
IMUs was compared and it could be observed that the low-cost
sensors, especially the accelerators did have deficiency under vi-
bration conditions, which adversely affected the IMU accuracy.
While working on the software developing and modification, it
was also noticed that the Arduino software timer was not com-
pletely punctual although most of the time it stayed at 50Hz,
which led to occasional incorrect sensor outputs. Some thor-
ough ground testings have also been finished and find that the
estimation accuracy of the Ardu IMU is close to GX2. In order
to resolve the motor noise issue, a specially designed mounting
which not only tightly holds the IMU but also absorbs the vi-
bration is installed on the 48” UAVs so that the Ardu IMU can
send steady navigation senor data to the autopilot. After detail
studies on the characteristics of the Ardu IMU and successfully
integrating it with the Paparazzi TWOG autopilot, we have had
extensive flight tests, and test results have proved the steadiness
of the new system.
LOW-COST NAVIGATION SOLUTION SURVEY
Paparazzi TWOG autopilot and Ardu IMU represent the
most popular navigation solution for low-cost UAV development.
Some typical low-cost autopilots and IMUs available in the mar-
ket are selected and introduced to people who are interested.
ArduPilot is an autopilot developed by DIYDRONE. It
prices at 150 USD and is fully compatible with Ardu IMU [20].
It is also open-source for both hardware and software. People
have achieved autonomous flight experience using this autopilot.
Moreover, DIYDRONE provides many other sensor packages
with software ready, so they can be easily integrated with the
6 c 2011 by ASME
FIGURE 11. Low-cost Navigation Solutions [20] [21] [22] [23] [24].
Ardupilot to fulfill more functions. The ground station software
of this autopilot is not as good as Paparazzi, and its on-board
processor is insufficient for future airborne code development.
Paparazzi also has other autopilot options, such as the Tiny
series for fixed-wing UAVs, Lisa and Booz for quadrotor UAVs
[21]. They are all developed by the community and serve differ-
ent usages. Open-source and low-cost are common features of
all the autopilots.
Sparkfun has made several different low-cost IMUs similar
to the Ardu IMU. Razor IMU is a typical one. It prices at 125
USD and consists of gyros, accelerators and magnetometers [22].
It has an ATmega328 processor and shares similar open-source
software as the Ardu IMU. Unlike its counterpart, it does not
provide a GPS port. Therefore, it is more beneficial to purely
utilize its attitude sensor data.
CHIMU is another typical low-cost IMU. It is made by a
company called Ryan Mechatronics and prices at 299 USD for
the basic version and 349 USD for a temperature calibrated ver-
sion [23]. Unlike the two IMUs introduced before, it is actu-
ally an attitude heading reference system (AHRS) because of its
powerful on-board processing system. The company has also
designed a delicate GUI to manipulate the IMU with many addi-
tional options. However, this IMU is closed-source so it causes
more difficulties with integrating it with other autopilots. Due
to the price and closed-source aspects, there have not been many
feedbacks from users using CHIMU.
VectorNav VN-100 is probably the most expensive IMU
that still can be considered as a low-cost IMU. It prices at 500
USD and has additional costs for the development kit. Similar to
CHIMU, it is also an AHRS combining a 3-axis accelerometer,
3-axis gyroscope, 3-axis magnetometer, and a 32-bit processor
which runs an extend Kalman filter (EKF) with 200Hz update
rate [24]. So far it has been quantified regarding the accuracies,
which is statically < 1o for heading and < 0.5o for roll and pitch
angles.
Figure 11 shows all the low-cost autopilots and IMUs intro-
duced above.
Copyright
 40 roll pitch
desired 15 desired
30

10
20

10 5

Theta(degree)
Phi(degree)

0 0

−10
−5

−20
−10
−30
−15
−40

400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Time(s) Time(s)

FIGURE 12. Roll Angle Tracking. FIGURE 13. Pitch Angle Tracking.

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Altitude
Several flight tests have been performed and here we show 1500 desired

a series of flight test results collected in the Cache Junction re- 1480
search farm belonging to Utah State University. Both IMU and
1460
GPS sensor data were saved through Paparazzi’s logging func-

Altitude(m)
tion. From Figure 12 to Figure 16, we show the roll angle track- 1440

ing, pitch angle tracking, altitude tracking, course angle tracking 1420

and flight path, respectively. The results are all highlighted for 1400
the autonomous flight mode so that they can show the compre-
1380
hensive performance of this system. From Figure 12 and 13, it
can be observed that the roll channel tracks pretty well so that 1360

600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600

the UAV has consistent circling performance. The pitch chan- Time(s)

nel is not as well as the roll channel due to the flying-wing

design, but most of the time the UAV has sufficient ascending
and descending performance. Shown from Figure 14, its alti-
tude maintains close to the reference with small oscillation due
to wind disturbance. Figure 15 shows its actual course tracking
given the reference course from GPS and they are pretty close
to each other. The last figure shows the autonomous flight path,
which includes standby circling, line tracking and circling, and
autonomous landing. It can be observed that the circling is pretty
smooth and the line tracking is quite well. We have also tested
autonomous takeoff using the same UAV and the results are sat-
isfactory.
FIGURE 14. Altitude Tracking.
interested in this area. Comprehensive autonomous flight rests
are shown at the end to demonstrate the stability of the proposed
platform.
Future work includes implementing new filtering algorithms
such as EKF for the current IMU, comparing other low-cost
IMUs during flight tests and improving the speed control of Pa-
parazzi autopilot’s using the air pressure sensor.

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK
In this paper, we report our work by designing and inte-
grating a low-cost autonomous navigation system on a flying
wing RC aircraft to achieve satisfactory autonomous flight per-
formance. The current UAV platform is first introduced regard-
ing cost and advantages, then we focus on major avionic com-
ponents and explain the architecture for the integrated system.
An evaluation on various RC aircrafts for UAV platform devel-
opment is provided and a low-cost navigation solution survey
is also presented for UAV researchers and practitioners that are
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work is supported in part by the Utah Water Research
Laboratory (UWRL) MLF Seed Grant (2006-2011) on ”Devel-
opment of Inexpensive UAV Capability for High- Resolution Re-
mote Sensing of Land Surface Hydrologic Processes: Evapotran-
spiration and Soil Moisture.” The authors would like to thank Dr
Haiyang Chao, Austin Jensen and Daniel Morgan for the early
stage development on this project. The authors also want to thank
the people of DIYDRONE for their efforts on developing open-
source IMU projects and the Paparazzi UAV community for pro-
viding help during the project development.

7 c 2011 by ASME
Copyright
 ence 2005. Seville, Spain.
350 Course
desired
[5] Sample fixing-wing with tail RC aircraft. http:
300
//sc.rcplanet.com/common/images/products/
large/HAN4575-2.jpg.
250 [6] Sample RC sailplane. http://www.greatmodeldeals.
Course(degree)

200
com/rc\_model\_pics/4523.jpg.
[7] Sample RC rotary aircraft. http://ep.yimg.com/ca/I/
150 yhst-94582326164583\_2142\_22340202.
100
[8] Bolsunovsky, A., Buzoverya, N., Gurevich, B., Denisov, V.,
Dunaevsky, A., Shkadov, L., Sonin, O., Udzhuhu, A., and Zhuri-
50
hin, J., 2001. “Flying wing - problems and decisions”. Aircraft
0
Design, 4, pp. 193–219.
400 600 800 1000
Time(s)
1200 1400 1600 [9] MicroPilot MP2028 Autopilot. http://www.micropilot.
com/products-mp2028g.htm.
[10] Cloud Cap Technology The Piccolo SL autopilot. http://
FIGURE 15. Course Angle Tracking.
www.cloudcaptech.com/piccolo\_sl.shtm.
[11] Procerus Technology Kestrel V2.4 autopilot. http://www.
x 10
6
procerusuav.com/productsKestrelAutopilot.
4.63 php.
Circling [12] Paparazzi ”Tiny WithOut Gps” TWOG autopilot. http://
4.6299 Circling
paparazzi.enac.fr/wiki/Twog\_v1.
4.6299 [13] Brisset, P., Drouin, A., Gorraz, M., Huard, P. S., and Tyler, J.,
Straight line
2006. “The Paparazzi solution”. In Proc. of MAV. Sandestin,
utm north(m)

4.6298
Florida.
4.6297
[14] Brisset, P., March, 2010. The Paparazzi UAV System.
4.6297
Autonomous landing
ftp://www.inc.eng.kmutt.ac.th/pornpoj/
4.6296 Quadrotor/PascalBrisset\_InfoIndustrielle\
4.6296
_Paparazzi.pdf.
Circling [15] Chao, H., Luo, Y., Di, L., and Chen, Y. Q., 2010. “Roll-Channel
4.6296
4.181 4.182 4.183 4.184 4.185 4.186
Fractional Order Controller Design for a Small Fixed-Wing Un-
utm east(m) 5
x 10 manned Aerial Vehicle”. Control Engineering Practice, 18(7),
pp. 761–772.
FIGURE 16. Flight Path. [16] DIYDRONE ArduIMU . http://diydrones.com/
profiles/blogs/arduimu-now-available.
[17] Premerlani, W., and Bizard, P. Direction Cosine Matrix IMU:
REFERENCES Theory. http://gentlenav.googlecode.com/files/
[1] Chao, H., Cao, Y., and Q.Chen, Y., August 2007. “Autopi- DCMDraft2.pdf.
lots for Small Fixed Wing Small Unmanned Air Vehicles: [18] Chao, H., Jensen, A. M., Han, Y., and Chen, Y. Q., 2009. Geo-
A Survey”. In Proc. of the 2007 IEEE International Con- science and Remote Sensing. IN-TECH, ch. AggieAir: Towards
ference on Mechatronics and Automation, pp. 3144–3149. Low-cost Cooperative Multispectral Remote Sensing Using Small
Harbin, China. Unmanned Aircraft Systems, pp. 467–490.
[19] Microstrain 3DM-GX2. http://www.microstrain.com/
[2] McLain, T. W., and Beard, R. W., June 30-July 2, 2004.
3dm-gx2.aspx.
“Unmanned Air Vehicle Testbed for Cooperative Control [20] DIYDRONE Ardupilot. http://store.diydrones.com/
Experiments”. In Proc. of the 2004 American Control Con- product\_p/br-0013-01.htm.
ference. Boston, Massachusetts. [21] Paparazzi Autopilots. http://paparazzi.enac.fr/
[3] Clothier, R., Harrison, A., Dusha, D., McManus, I., Greer, wiki/Autopilots.
D., and Walker, R., March 13-17, 2005. “Development [22] Sparkfun Razor IMU. http://www.sparkfun.com/
of a Low-cost UAV System for Civilian Airspace Integra- products/9623.
tion Trials”. In AIAC-11 Eleventh Australian International [23] CHIMU Micro AHRS. http://www.ryanmechatronics.
Aerospace Congress. Melbourne, Australia. com/index.htm.
[4] Jung, D., Levy, E. J., Zhou, D., Fink, R., Moshe, J., Earl, [24] VectorNav VN-100. http://www.vectornav.com/
A., and Tsiotras, P., December 12-15, 2005. “Design and index.php.
Development of a Low-Cost Test-Bed for Undergraduate
Education in UAVs”. In Proc. of 44th IEEE Conference on
Decision and Control, and the European Control Confer-

8 c 2011 by ASME
Copyright