Modeling and Hover Control of a Novel Unmanned

Coaxial Rotor/Ducted-Fan Helicopter

*


Hongqiang Wang, Daobo Wang and Xinwen Niu Haibin Duan
College of Automation Engineering School of Automation Science and Electrical Engineering
Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, China Beijing, China
{wanghq, dbwangpe }@nuaa.edu.cn, leonniu@hotmail.com hbduan@buaa.edu.cn


*
This work is partially supported by the Aeronautics Basic Science Foundation of China under Grant No. 2006ZC51039 to Haibin Duan.
Abstract - In this paper, we consider the problem of
controlling a novel rotor/ducted-fan helicopter. After some
qualitative introduction on the new arrangement helicopter and
its flight behavior, we establish the nonlinear model of the
helicopter using a top-down principle based on Newton-Euler
equations. Then the linearized model for the helicopter in hover
is derived in order to perform analysis and controller design. By
observing the helicopter response to control inputs, we found that
the coaxial ducted-fan has very different crossed-coupling
characteristics in comparison with conventional helicopter, that
is, the strong couplings between pitch and roll as well as vertical
to yaw. This is mainly caused by the special coaxial and axial
symmetric arrangement. Finally, a hover controller is designed
for the helicopter by means of robust H-infinity control
methodology. The selection of the weighting matrices in the
process of H-infinity design is also discussed. Simulation results
demonstrate the validity of the analysis and control design.

Index Terms Unmanned helicopter, ducted, modeling,
crossed-coupling, H-infinity

I. INTRODUCTION
Unmanned helicopters (UAHs) have an advantage in
maneuverability compared to other aircrafts due to their
particular dynamical features of vertical takeoff and landing
(VTOL) and hover. They can accomplish many tasks that
other aircrafts cant meet in a wide variety of important
applications in both civilian and military sectors, such as
experimental data collection, fire suppression, surveillance,
reconnaissance, scouting missions. Research in the area of
UAHs autopilot controllers design has become one of the
hotspots in aeronautical industry. The main difficulties of
designing autopilot controllers for UAHs stem from their
complicated dynamics which can be characterized generally as
unstable, nonlinear, underactuated and highly uncertain. In
spite of these challenges, lots of researchers devoted into the
study of designing UAHs feedback controllers in the past
several decades and a good deal of important contributions
have been made.
In the early years, much of the helicopter research
concentrated on the conventional synthesis techniques, such as
LQG/LQR, eigenstructure assignment, gain-scheduling and so
on.
Among the conventional approaches, gain-scheduling is
one of the most favorites. Helicopter nonlinear model is
linearized at a series of operating trim points and at each point
a controller gain is determined. Separate sets of gain tables are
incorporated in the flight to adjust the controller according to
some typical flight parameters such as Mach number, altitude
or other parameter determining vehicle states. Gain scheduling
is a successful method and used widely in practice. The
deficiency of this method lies in that the selection of the trim
points is experiential. In general, the number of the trim points
is very large in order to ensure stability. And for large
maneuver flight, gain scheduling is lack of flexibility.
Robust H

control theory provides a rigorous way to

generate gains at trim points. Under the frame of robust
control, one can take uncertainties and performance
requirements into account during the stage of controller
design. However, the inherent conservation of this approach is
a fly in the ointment. Therefore, some other methods are
carried out to reduce the conservation, e.g. -synthesis and
quantitative feedback theory (QFT).
In recent decades, several theoretical developments have
given rise to the use of nonlinear control approaches,
including feedback linearization [1], nonlinear adaptive
control [2], trajectory linearization control (TLC) [3],
nonlinear dynamic inversion (NDI) [4], et cetera. Among
these methods, feedback linearization is the dominating one
and most of other linearization-based techniques can be regard
as its transformation. The basic idea behind feedback
linearization is to transform the nonlinear system into a linear
system by means of feedback and/or a coordinate
transformation; after this, a stabilizing state feedback is
designed. Though it is investigated in many applications,
feedback linearization suffers barrier when it is applied to
helicopter control because of the critically stable zero-
dynamics as well as large uncertainties and unmodeled
dynamics of the helicopter model [2].
Besides the methodologies addressed above, there have
already been many examples on neural networks (NN) in
helicopter flight control. In most of applications, neural
networks are used to either approximation or improve the
approximation of aircraft inverse dynamics or compensate for
the model error [1, 5], due to the generic approximate
1-4244-1531-4/07/$25.00 2007 IEEE. 1768
Proceedings of the IEEE
International Conference on Automation and Logistics
August 18 - 21, 2007, Jinan, China
capability and learning ability. Calise et al. contribute a lot in
the study of using neural network to augment flight controller
[6].
In this paper, we will consider the modeling and the
feedback control of a novel full-scale helicopter which is in a
rotor/ducted-fan coaxial arrangement.
Ducted-Fan helicopter is one entry of the family of
UAHs. Compared with other conventional helicopter, ducted
fan helicopter has higher aerodynamic efficiency, smaller size
and higher safety. Therefore, many ducted fan helicopters are
investigated in the past decades [4, 7]. The helicopter studied
in this paper differs from these ducted-fan helicopters in
arrangement that it has a coaxial rotor. The detail is presented
in Section II.
This paper is organized as follows. Section II is dedicated
to the modeling of the coaxial rotor/ducted-fan helicopter
(CRDFH) and mathematical model is derived from Newton-
Euler equations. Then the nonlinear model is linearized and
the analysis of open helicopter dynamic behavior in hover is
performed and result is given in Section III. In Section IV, we
design a controller based on robust H

control to stabilize the

hovering helicopter model and simulation results are given.
Conclusion is drawn in Section V.
II. HELICOPTER MODEL
In this section, we concern the modeling of CRDFH.
Firstly, the coaxial rotor/ducted-fan helicopter is introduced
briefly and a discussion on the flight characteristics is
addressed qualitatively. Finally, mathematical representation
of the helicopter dynamics model is derived using results from
helicopter aerodynamics and flight dynamics.
A. Introduction of the helicopter
Fig. 1 illustrates the principal configuration of the
helicopter CRDFH. The helicopter is in a coaxial
rotor/ducted-fan configuration and is axial symmetric with
respect to the rotation shaft. It is mainly composed of five
components: teetering rotor, ducted fan, duct fuselage, engine
and landing gear. (The engine and landing gear are omitted in
Fig. 1.) A fan is nested in the duct fuselage in order to produce
anti-torque as well as part of lift. The rotor and the ducted fan
counterrotate about the shaft at the same speed.
As shown in Fig. 1, the coaxial rotor/ducted-fan
helicopter is distinctive significantly in configuration with the
conventional single rotor/tail rotor helicopter, which leads to
different flight characteristics.
As for conventional helicopter, the yaw manoeuver is
achieved by means of changing the tail rotor collective pitch,
which consequently results in the change of torque acting on
the rotor rotation shaft. But for the coaxial rotor/ducted-fan
helicopter, yaw control is achieved by differential torque on
the ducted fan with respect to the main rotor. Besides, the lift
for vertical takeoff and landing on conventional helicopter is
produced by the main rotor primarily. For the coaxial

Fig. 1 Coaxial rotor/ducted-fan helicopter configuration
rotor/ducted-fan helicopter, the lift is generated by not only
the main rotor but also the ducted fan. From these aspects, we
can see that the coaxial rotor/ducted-fan helicopter is similar
to conventional coaxial twin rotors helicopter greatly.
However, there still exist important differences between
the coaxial rotor/ducted-fan helicopter and the conventional
coaxial helicopter, primarily in the aspect of aerodynamics.
For the latter, the interactional aerodynamic effects between
the upper and lower rotors are dramatically serious. Especially
for the lower rotor, which is located in the strong downwash
of the upper, the wake effects of the upper rotor vary
significantly with flight speed. But for the coaxial
rotor/ducted-fan helicopter, the influence of the main rotor on
the fan is evidently alleviated due to the ducted arrangement.
All in all, it is the particularity of the coaxial rotor/ducted-
fan helicopter that motivates us to investigate the modeling
and control of this kind of helicopter.
B. Helicopter Model
To investigate the dynamic behavior of the novel coaxial
helicopter and design a controller for it, a representative
model that reacts in the same manner as a real helicopter is
indispensable. Though a very accurate model is preferred, the
complexity increases with the model accuracy and is intricate
for controller design. We use a top-down principle to model
the coaxial helicopter and consider the helicopter as a
combination of the dynamics of the rotor, the ducted fan and
the rigid body. The helicopter model is treated as a rigid body
incorporating with a force and moment generation process [8].
Rigid Body Dynamics
Let
e
denote an inertial system of coordinates in the
Euclidean space, and let
{ }
0 , , ,
b b b b
b
x y z = denote a body-
fixed coordinate frame attached to the center of gravity (COG)
(see Fig. 1).
The mathematic model of the helicopter can be derived
from Newton-Euler equations of a six degree of freedom (6
DOF) rigid body in the configuration space (3) SE , as
following [2]:

( )
( )
b b b b
b b b b
M MS
J S J
= +
= +
v v f

U
(1)
where J is the inertial matrix of the helicopter, M is the
mass,
T
[ , , ]
b
u v w = v and [ , , ]
b T
p q r = are the translational
1769
and angular velocity vectors of the helicopter in
b
,
respectively. [ , ]
b b b T
= F f U is the external wrench subjected
by the helicopter in
b
. Moreover, ( ) S < is a skew symmetric
matrix, and

3 2
3
3 1
2 1
0
( ) 0 for .
0
x x
S x x x x
x x
| |
|
= e
|

\ .
\ (2)
Let (3) R SO e denote the rotation matrix mapping
vectors expressed in
b
into vectors expressed in
e
, we have
the auxiliary equation
( )
b
R RS =

. (3)
Parameterize R with the orientation angles of the helicopter,
we get

c s c c c s s c c s s s
R c s s s s c c c s s s c
s s c c c
u | u | | u |
u | u | | u |
u | u | u
+ | |
| = +
|

\ .
(4)
where sin s = < < and cos c = < < , | , u and are the roll, pitch,
and yaw, respectively. Substituting (4) into (3), after some
rearrangement we obtain the state equation of the Euler
angles, col( , , ) | u O = , as

b
O = I

(5)
where

1
0
0
s t c t
c s
s c c c
| u | u
| |
| u | u
| |
| I =
|
\ .
(6)
where sin s = < < , cos c = < < and tan t = < < .
It is worth noticing that I is singular at 2 u t = . We
assume that ( 2, 2) u t t e to avoid the singularities of I .
This assumption is compliant with the real condition in normal
helicopter flight.
Force and Moment Generation
There are four control inputs in the coaxial rotor/ducted
fan helicopter: main rotor collective pitch (
0MR
u ), longitudinal
and lateral cyclic pitches (
lon
u ,
lat
u ), and ducted fan collective
pitch (
0, DF
u ). Let
MR
T and
DF
T denote the lifts generated by the
main rotor and the ducted fan, respectively. The direction of
the thrust
MR
T is governed by
lon
u and
lat
u by means of tilting
the swash plate, which consequently controls the pitch/roll
attitude and translational movement of the helicopter. The
magnitude of
MR
T and
DF
T are controlled by
0MR
u and
0, DF
u ,
respectively.
The external wrench
b
F can be written as the sum of the
contributions from the different helicopter components. The
resultant force
b
f acting on in the COG can is the sum of the
thrusts generated by the rotor and the ducted fan and
aerodynamic force generated by the duct fuselage. The
resultant torque
b
U about the COG consists of the torques
caused by the forces and that due to aerodynamic drag
generated by the rotor and the ducted fan. In hover or low
speed flight, the force and torque generated by the fuselage
can be ignored. Then, we have

, ,
b b b b
MR DF G
b b b b b b
MR DF D MR D DF GYRO
= + +
= + + + +
f f f f
U U U U U U
(7)
where
b
MR
f ,
b
DF
f and
b
G
f are the forces generated by the rotor,
the ducted fan and the gravity, respectively.
b
MR
U ,
b
DF
U ,
,
b
D MR
U ,
,
b
D DF
U and
b
GYRO
U are the torques caused by the thrusts, the
counter torques by the drags on the rotor and the ducted fan,
and the gyroscopic torque, respectively.
Decompose the forces and the torques along the three axes
in
b
, we can express them as

1
1
1 1
,
1.5
, ,
,
1.5
, ,
0 0
, 0 , 0 ,
0
0 ( ) ,
( )
0
0 ( ) ,
( )
(
MR s
b b b T
MR MR s DF G
DF MR s s
b b b b
D MR MR MR MR
Q MR MR Q MR
b b b b
D DF DF DF DF
Q DF DF Q DF
b
GYRO MR
T sa
T sb R
T Mg T ca cb
S p
T
S p
T
J
o |
o |
| | | | | |
| | | = = =
| | |

\ . \ . \ .
| |
|
= =
|
+
\ .
| |
|
= =
|
+
\ .
=
f f f
f
f
U U
U U
U )
0
DF
q
J p
| |
| O
|
\ .
(8)
where
1s
a and
1s
b are the longitudinal and lateral tilt of the tip
path plane of the rotor with respect to the shaft, which are
controlled by longitudinal and lateral cyclic of the rotor.
MR
J and
DF
J are the inertial momentums,
b
MR
p and
b
DF
p the
positions of the centre of the rotor and the fan in
b
,
respectively. O is the constant rotation speed.
, Q i
o and
, Q i
| ,
{ } , i MR DF e , are coefficients expressing the relationships
between the thrusts and the anti-torques [9],
The thrusts,
MR
T and
DF
T , can be calculated based on the
so-called global momentum theory or more refined blade
element theory as shown in [9], while in this paper, they are
obtained from wind tunnel experiment by means of
identification, as in [10].
The simultaneous differential equations combined by (1),
(3), (5) and (7), form the overall mathematical model of the
coaxial rotor/ducted fan helicopter.
III. HELICOPTER DYNAMICS ANALYSIS
In this section, the linearized model of the hovering
helicopter is presented. Then the linearized system is utilized
to perform flight dynamics analysis.
A. Linearized model
As shown in Section II, the nonlinear model of the
coaxial rotor ducted/fan helicopter is intricate and offers very
little insight into the helicopter dynamics because of
complicated dynamical couplings between the forces and the
torques on the 6-DOF rigid body of the helicopter and its main
1770
rotor and ducted fan. In order to reduce the complexity, small
perturbation theory and Taylor series expansion are used to
linearize the open helicopter in hover.
The linearized model for the hovering helicopter is
derived based on the nonlinear differential equations given
previously, as

p p p p p
p p p p p
x A x B u
y C x D u
= +
= +

(9)
where
4
[ , , , , , , , , ]
T
p
x u v w p q r | u = e\ is the state vector,
4
0, 0,
[ , , , ]
T
p MR lat lon DF
u u u u u = e\ the input vector.
p
A is the
system matrix,
p
B is the control matrix.
p
A ,
p
B ,
p
C and
p
D
are of appropriate dimensions and are given in the Appendix.
B. Open Helicopter Dynamics Analysis
The stability of the system (9) is determined by the signs
of the real parts of eigenvalues of the matrix
p
A . The
eigenvalues are given by

0
0.977
0.173
( )
0.174 0.472i
0.291 0.413i
0.538 0.073i
p
A
(

(
=

(


. (10)
Thus, we can conclude that the helicopter in hover is highly
unstable because of the four eigenvalues with positive real
part.
Fig. 2 shows the open coaxial rotor/ducted-fan helicopter
response to the control inputs
0MR
u ,
lon
u ,
lat
u and
0, DF
u ,
respectively. We can observe that the response of the open
helicopter diverge rapidly. Besides, the open helicopter
exhibits very strong coupling characters. The upper-right and
lower-right figures in Fig. 2 show the response to one degree
lateral and longitudinal cyclic step inputs, respectively. It can
be seen that the cross-coupled response after one second, i.e.
q to
lat
u and p to
lon
u , has a similar magnitude for both pitch
and roll in the present case about 6~7

/s per degree of cyclic.

This is due to the axial symmetric arrangement of the
helicopter. Moreover, the yaw motions are coupled with the
vertical channel dramatically as shown in the upper-left figure,
in which about 26

/s yaw angular rate r appears after one

second due to one degrees main rotor collective pitch. We
can also notice that the ducted fan collective pitch
0, DF
u has
an effect on the vertical velocity w , since the change of
0, DF
u
will result in the variation of the thrust acting on the
helicopter.
The observation given above offers us an intuitional
understanding to the hover dynamics of the coaxial
rotor/ducted-fan helicopter. The key natural features of the
open helicopter can be listed as
Unstable dynamics
Strong cross-couplings between pitch and roll
Strong coupling of vertical to yaw

Fig. 2 Open coaxial rotor/ducted-fan helicopter response. Angular rates (p, q,
r) are in units of degrees per second, translational velocities (u, v, w) in meters
per second, and attitude angular ( , , | u ) are in degrees.
Moderate coupling of yaw to vertical
Gentle coupling of yaw to vertical
Trivial coupling for other channels.
In a word, it is necessary to design a controller to stabilize
the helicopter system and alleviate or even eliminate the cross-
couplings between channels in order to ensure the flight safety
as well as high level handling qualities.
IV. CONTROL DESIGN
In this section, we will design a state feedback
stabilization control law by applying robust control H

theory
for the coaxial rotor/ducted fan helicopter under hover and
low speed condition.
A. Problem Formulation
As discussed in Section II and III, several issues must be
taken into account in the helicopter control system design.
First of all, controller to be designed should be able to
stabilize the open system because of the unstability of the
hovering helicopter dynamics. Secondly, robustness must be
considered, since the reduced mathematical helicopter model
unavoidably has uncertainty due to the empirical
representation of aerodynamic forces and moments as well as
experimental approximation. Thirdly, for high performance
helicopters, excellent performance requirements should be
achieved, such as tracking performance and disturbance
rejection capability, as prescribed in aeronautical design
standard, ADS-33E.
Fig. 3 shows the system structure utilized in the helicopter
control design, in the form of closed-loop interconnection.
G is the open helicopter plant, K is the to-be-designed
controller, r is the reference input signal, d is a disturbance
at the plant input, n is measurement noise, y is the measured
tracking error, i.e. ( ) ' y r y n = . Output signals are
weighted by the weighting matrices
1
W ,
2
W and
3
W ,
respectively.
1771

Fig. 3 General closed-loop interconnection.

Fig. 4 General closed-loop interconnection.
It is straightforward to arrive at the following input-
output description of the open-loop interconnection
corresponding to the system in Fig. 3.

1 1 1 1 1
2 2
3 3 3
0 0 0
0 0
z W W W WG d
z W n
z W W G r
u y I I I G
( ( (
( ( (
=
( ( (
( (

(11)
Let
1 2 3
[ , , ]
T
z z z z = and [ , , ]
T
w d n r = , the open-loop system
interconnection described by (11) can be transformed into a
more compact form, as

11 12
21 22
( ) ( )
( )
( ) ( )
P s P s z w w
P s
y u P s P s u
( ( ( (
= =
( ( ( (

. (12)
The general closed-loop interconnection is then obtained by
closing the loop as
u Ky = . (13)
The corresponding closed-loop interconnection is described
by Fig. 4.
Let
,
( , )
z w
T P K denote the input-output description of the
closed-loop interconnection, we have

1
, 11 12 22 21
( , ) [ ( ) ]
z w
T P K P P K I P K P

= + (14)
In order to meet the control objectives stated in previous
paragraph, the following inequations should be satisfied

,
2
( , ) 1, for all 1
z w
T P K w

s s , (15)
Then the helicopter control design problem is formulated to a
general H

control problem as follows: Try to find a

controller K such that K stabilizes P and satisfies
,
( , ) 1
z w
T P K

s .
Let S , T and R denote the sensitivity, complementary
sensitivity and control input function of the system described
by Fig. 3, i.e.
1
( ) S I GK

= + ,
1
( ) T GK I GK

= + and
1
( ) R K I GK

= + . The inequations in (15) are equivalent to

1 2 3
1, 1, 1 WS W R WT s s s . (16)
Hence the problem stated by (15) is re-formulated to a
weighted H

mixed sensitivity problem.

B. Controller Design
To solve the weighted H

mixed sensitivity problem in

(15), it is crucial to selection appropriate weighting matrices
for S , T and R .
As well known, the singular value Bode plots of S , T
and R play an important role in robust control system design.
The sensitivity matrix S determines the disturbance
attenuation of the closed-loop system, which is due to the fact
that S is the closed-loop transfer function from disturbance
d to output y . The control input matrix R stands for the
response caused by the noise n . Meanwhile, R and T are
related to the robustness of the closed-loop system with
respect to the unstructured uncertainties.
As shown in (15),
1
W ,
2
W and
3
W are used to
weighting S , R and T , respectively, in order to prioritize the
behaviour of the helicopter in the frequency content.
Furthermore, the weighting matrices introduce normalization
to the optimization problem.
Selection of
1
W
The weighting matrix
1
W reflects the handling qualities
requirements to the closed-loop system. Generally,
1
W is
chosen to be diagonal and composed of frequency dependent
functions determined by system bandwidth, response time,
overshooting and ability of disturbance attenuation. In
helicopter flight controller design,
1
W are chosen according to
the rotorcraft performance specification ADS-33E. ADS-33E
request that the bandwidth for pitch, roll and yaw be 5 rad/sec,
vertical be 1 rad/sec, and tracking error less than 1%. Hence
1
W is set as

1
1 0.2 100
, ,
100 1 20 1
0.2 100 0.2 100
,
20 1 20 1
s s
W diag
s s
s s
s s
+ +
=

+ +

+ +
`
+ +
)
(17)
Selection of
2
W
The weighting matrix
2
W is used to weight the control
input signals. It can be considered as the limitation of actuator
position, velocity and acceleration. Besides,
2
W indicates
constraint to system additive perturbation.
2
W is set as
2
{0.85, 0.85, 0.85, 0.75} W diag = .
Selection of
3
W
The selection of
3
W is concerned with the bound of
multiplicative uncertainty that can be stabilized by the
controller. In general, the weighting matrix
3
W can be
determined by means of experiment, finding a high-pass
function to include all the multiplicative uncertainty. Here
3
W is chosen as
1772

Fig. 5 Closed-loop helicopter system input response.

3 4
0.2 1.4
118.1
s
W I
s
+
=
+

Based on the weighting matrices chosen above, the
H

optimal controller is obtained with the help of MATLAB

software.
Fig. 5 shows the input response of the closed-loop
helicopter system. It can be seen from the figure that the
H

controller stabilizes the coaxial rotor/ducted-fan

helicopter system well, and the crossed-couplings between
different channels are evidently rejected. The controller
designed by the H

approach is proven to be a success.

V. CONCLUSION
In this paper, we focus on the modeling and control of a
novel helicopter. The main contribution of this paper is to
carry out a mathematical presentation for the coaxial
rotor/ducted-fan helicopter, which offers an environment for
flight dynamics analysis and control design. Besides, based on
the simulation result, we can conclude that: (1) The coaxial
rotor/ducted-fan shows very strong crossed-couplings
characters that are totally distinct from those of conventional
helicopter; (2) The selection of appropriate weighting matrices
is the crux of H

control; (3) The appropriate choices of the

weighting matrices are trial and error processes and remain
unsolved. There is still some room for optimization. (4)
Though H

technique is an effective control for the coaxial

rotor/ducted-fan helicopter, there is a need to investigate
further the effect of uncertainties on the flight performance.







APPENDIX
The matrices
p
A ,
p
B ,
p
C and
p
D in (9) are given as:
0.006 0.003 0 0.008 0.033 0 0 9.8 0
0.003 0.006 0 0.033 0.008 0 9.8 0 0
0 0 0.982 0 0 0.080 0 0 0
0.007 0.015 0 0.087 0.021 0 0 0 0
0.011 0.005 0 0.015 0.060 0 0 0 0
0.000 0 0.005 0 0 0.170 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
p
A
(
(

(

(
=
(

9 9 9 4
0.000 2.129 2.885 0
0.000 0.5206 9.993 0
-122.016 0 0 11.869
0.000 7.596 -5.608 0
, , . 0.000 3.858 5.226 0
26.003 0.000 0.000 10.772
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
p p p
B C E D O

(
(
(
(
(

(
= = =
(

(
(
(



REFERENCES
[1] S. Lee, C. Ha, and B. S. Kim, "Adaptive nonlinear control system design
for helicopter robust command augmentation," Aerospace Science and
Technology, vol. 9, pp. 241-251, 2005
[2] A. Isidori, L. Marconi, and A. Serrani, "Robust nonlinear motion control
of a helicopter," IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 48, pp.
413- 426, 2003.
[3] M. C. Mickle, R. Huang, and J. J. Zhu, "Unstable, nonminimum phase,
nonlinear tracking by trajectory linearization control," presented at
International Conference on Control Applications, IEEE, Tappei, Taiwan,
2004.
[4] C. M. Spaulding, M. H. Mansur, M. B. Tischler, R. A. Hess, and J. A.
Franklin, "Nonlinear Inversion Control for a Ducted Fan UAV," presented
at AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference, San Francisco, CA,
2005.
[5] R. Enns and S. Jennie, "Helicopter trimming and tracking control using
direct neural dynamic programming," IEEE Transactions on Neural
Networks, vol. 14, pp. 929- 939, 2003.
[6] A. J. Calise, "Neural networks in nonlinear aircraft flight control," IEEE
Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine, vol. 11, pp. 5-10, 1996.
[7] J. Fleming, T. Jones, W. Ng, P. Gelhausen, and D. Enns, "Improving
control system effectiveness for ducted fan VTOL UAVs operating in
crosswinds," presented at 2nd AIAA "Unmanned Unlimited" Systems,
Technologies, and Operations - Aerospace, Land, and Sea Conference,
Workshop and Exhibition, San Diego, CA, 2003.
[8] T. J. Koo and S. Sastry, "Output tracking control design of a helicopter
model based on approximate linearization," presented at Proceedings of
the 37th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, 1998.
[9] G. D. Padfield, Helicopter Flight Dynamics: The Theory and Application
of Flying Qualities and Simulation Modeling. Washington, USA: AIAA,
1996.
[10] J. Li, Z. Gao, Z. Tang, and Y. Lu, "Experimental Investigation on Lift and
Drag of Ducted Fan System," Journal of Nanjing University of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, vol. 36, 2004.
1773