Figure 1:
Quadrotor UAV configuration.
Figure 2:
Motions of the quadrotor UAV system.
Figure 3:
The block diagram of the feedback linearization (FBL).
Figure 4:
Simulated switching (sign) function against error (erf) function.
Table 1.
Parameters of the quadrotor model.
| Description | Symbols | Values | Units |
|---|---|---|---|
| The quadrotor’s mass | m | 65 × 10−2 | kg |
| x-axis inertia | Ix | 7.5 × 10−3 | kgm2 |
| y-axis inertia | Iy | 7.5 × 10−3 | kgm2 |
| z-axis inertia | Iz | 1.3 × 10−2 | kgm2 |
| Thrust coefficient | b | 3.13 × 10−5 | Ns2 |
| Drag coefficient | d | 7.5 × 10−7 | Nms2 |
| Inertia of the rotor | Jr | 6 × 10−5 | kgm2 |
| Length of the arm | l | 23 × 10−2 | m |
Figure 5:
The attitude tracking by using the quadrotor’s nominal parameters for the conventional SMC, FBL, and proposed SMC controller.
Figure 6:
The altitude tracking by using the quadrotor’s nominal parameters for the conventional SMC, FBL, and proposed SMC controller.
Figure 7:
The tracking errors in the altitude by using the quadrotor’s nominal parameters for conventional SMC, FBL, and the proposed controllers.
Figure 8:
The control inputs of the quadrotor for the FBL controller.
Figure 9:
The control inputs of the quadrotor for the conventional SMC controller.
Figure 10:
The control inputs of the quadrotor for the proposed SMC controller.
Figure 11:
Pulse-type external disturbance applied to the quadrotor attitude control inputs.
Figure 12:
Pulse-type external disturbance applied to the quadrotor altitude control inputs.
Figure 13:
The quadrotor’s attitude using the conventional SMC, FBL, and the proposed SMC controllers with the added %100 uncertainty in mass along with the external disturbance.
Figure 14:
The quadrotor’s attitude tracking errors using the conventional SMC, FBL, and the proposed SMC controllers with the added %100 uncertainty in mass along with the external disturbance.
Figure 15:
The quadrotor’s altitude using the conventional SMC, FBL, and the proposed SMC controllers with the added %100 uncertainty in mass along with the external disturbance.
Figure 16:
The quadrotor’s altitude tracking errors using the conventional SMC, FBL, and the proposed SMC controllers with the added %100 uncertainty in mass along with the external disturbance.
Figure 17:
The control inputs of the quadrotor for FBL controllers with %100 added uncertainty in mass and the external disturbances.
Figure 18:
The control inputs of the quadrotor for the proposed SMC controllers with %100 added uncertainty in mass and the external disturbances.
Figure 19:
The control inputs of the quadrotor for conventional SMC controller with %100 added uncertainty in mass and external disturbances.