Open Access

Sliding mode control design for the attitude and altitude of the quadrotor UAV

Ahmed Eltayeb
Ahmed Eltayeb
, 
Mohd Fua’ad Rahmat
Mohd Fua’ad Rahmat
 and 
Mohd Ariffanan Mohd Basri
Mohd Ariffanan Mohd Basri
   | Jul 01, 2020
International Journal on Smart Sensing and Intelligent Systems's Cover Image
About this article
Previous Article
Next Article
Cite
Article Category: Research-Article
Published Online: Jul 01, 2020
Page range: 1 - 13
Received: Aug 19, 2018
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21307/ijssis-2020-011
Keywords
© 2020 Ahmed Eltayeb et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Figure 1:

Quadrotor UAV configuration.
Quadrotor UAV configuration.

Figure 2:

Motions of the quadrotor UAV system.
Motions of the quadrotor UAV system.

Figure 3:

The block diagram of the feedback linearization (FBL).
The block diagram of the feedback linearization (FBL).

Figure 4:

Simulated switching (sign) function against error (erf) function.
Simulated switching (sign) function against error (erf) function.

Figure 5:

The attitude tracking by using the quadrotor’s nominal parameters for the conventional SMC, FBL, and proposed SMC controller.
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.
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.
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.
The control inputs of the quadrotor for the FBL controller.

Figure 9:

The control inputs of the quadrotor for the conventional SMC controller.
The control inputs of the quadrotor for the conventional SMC controller.

Figure 10:

The control inputs of the quadrotor for the proposed SMC controller.
The control inputs of the quadrotor for the proposed SMC controller.

Figure 11:

Pulse-type external disturbance applied to the quadrotor attitude control inputs.
Pulse-type external disturbance applied to the quadrotor attitude control inputs.

Figure 12:

Pulse-type external disturbance applied to the quadrotor altitude control inputs.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The control inputs of the quadrotor for conventional SMC controller with %100 added uncertainty in mass and external disturbances.

SMC controller parameters.

Parameter 𝝓 𝜽 𝝍 z
k 100 100 100 0.001
k1 10 10 10 10
k2 10 10 10 10

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

PID controller parameters for the linearized model.

Parameter z
P 30 30 30 60
I 8 8 8 20
D 8 8 8 80
eISSN:
1178-5608
Language:
English
Publication timeframe:
Volume Open
Journal Subjects:
Engineering, Introductions and Overviews, other
Journal RSS Feed