Proceedings of the 42nd IEEE

Conference on k i s i o n and Control

Maui, Hawaii USA,December 2003

WeP06-3

Adaptive Altitude Control for a Small Helicopter in a Vertical Flying Stand

Alejandro Dzul
Instituto Tecnoldgico d e la Laguna
DivisiBn de Estudios de Posgrado e InvestigaciBn
Boulevard Revolucidn y Clzda Cuahuttmoc
27000 Torredn, Coahuila, M6xico
e-mail: dzul@hds.utc.fr

Rogelio Lozano and Pedro Castillo

Heudiasyc - U T C UMR 6599
Centre d e Recherches de Royallieu
B.P. 20529, 60205 Compikgne Cedex, France.
e-mail: rlozano@hds.utc.fr, castillo@hds.utc.fr

Abstract-In this paper, we focus on the design and implementation of a controller for a two degree-of-freedom system.
This system is composed of a small-scale helicopter which is
mounted on a vertical platform. The model is based on Lagrangian formulation and the controller is obtained by classical
pole-placement techniques for the yaw dynamics and adaptive
pole-placement for the altitude dynamics. Experimental results
show the performance of such a controller.

1. INTRODUCTION
In the past few years, flight control problems for small
unmanned helicopters has attracted the attention of control
researchers. The first control strategies for helicopters were
presented in [5], [ 8 ] , [ll]. They basically assumed a linear
model obtained for a particular operating point, the model
parameters have been obtained by means of identification
techniques as the CIFER technique [lo]. Weilenmann and
Geering [ l l ] have worked with a small-scale helicopter
mounted on top of a platform that allowing six degree-offreedom (DoF) flight conditions in a 2-m cube, the mathematical model was linearized around the hover position.
Recently, [6] presents a modelling technique that combines
a first-principles non-linear model and system identification
techniques (called MOSCA), this method is shown to be
useful to calculate the model parameters when the helicopter
is completely instrumented (IMU, GPS, etc).
The helicopter control team at the University of Technology of CompiBgne, France, aims at controlling the flight
of a small-scale helicopter in the three-dimensional space.
However, in order to gain insight into the modelling of the
helicopter, the aerodynamic effects, the ground effect, the
various interfaces and the sensors, we have built a vertical
flying stand that allows the helicopter to move freely in the
vertical axis as well as to turn around the vertical axis (i.e.
the yaw). This means that the pitch and roll are mechanically
constrained lo be zero. The vertical platform is depicted in
figure 1.
A full model of the helicopter mounted on this platform
was obtained in [21 using a Lagrangian formulation and
including the aerodynamic effects. This model has three DoF
which are the altitude, the yaw and the rotor displacement.
We have carried out a set of experiments to validate such
a model. The resulting model is, in general, nonlinear since
some of the parameters depend on the square of the main
rotor velocity. It is clear that when the helicopter evolves in

0-7803-7924-1/03/$17.00 e2003 IEEE

the flying stand, the main rotor velocity varies only slightly.
Neglecting the rotor displacement leads to a system having
two inputs (main rotor thrust and tail rotor thrust) and two
outputs (altitude and yaw). It is natural to use the main rotor
thrust to control the altitude and the tail rotor thrust to control
the yaw. This suggested the use of a control algorithm based
on pole-placement techniques [l], [7] for each one of the
variables, i.e. altitude and yaw. Before computing the poleplacement controller, we compensate for the gravity term,
using the main rotor thrust, and compensate the coupling
terms in the yaw dynamic equation using the tail rotor thrust.
We have carried out the synthesis of a pole-placement
controller assuming the parameters as constant values. However, when validating the model using experimental data, we
have noticed some difficulties in estimating the values of
the leading coefficients in the dynamic equations, i.e. those
multiplying the control inputs. To take into account such
parameter uncertainties, we have used a Lyapnnov approach
to show that the proposed controller is robust with respect to
small uncertainties in the parameter values. Experiments have
shown that the proposed non-adaptive controller remains
stable, but presents a small oscillatory behavior and the
altitude fails to reach its desired value.
Controlling the altitude is important especially during takeoff and landing of the helicopter. In order to improve the
proposed altitude controller we have developed an adaptive
controller. The adaptation is only made on the leading
coefficient corresponding to the main rotor thrust. We have
used a Lyapunov analysis to prove that all the variables
remain bounded and the altitude and yaw converge to their
desired values.
We have noticed experimentally that it is very hard to
make the transition from a non-adaptive controller to an
adaptive one in which the estimates can move rapidly in
a large domain. For security reasons we have to introduce
some fixes in the adaptive controller to obtain a smooth
transition between a non-adaptive controller and an adaptive
controller. We have constrained the parameters to belong to
pre-specified intervals and we have introduced a gain into the
gradient adaptation algorithm [4] to reduce, if required, the
speed of adaptation of the parameters. The converge analysis
has been carried out including this two modifications.
Experimental results showed that the adaptive controller
improves the performance of the pole-placement algorithm.

2710

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on October 9, 2008 at 09:18 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

and F is the vector of generalized forces

.. .

El
1 1

F(u) =

7-

Fig. I .

Helicopter - vertical platform.

..

The adaptive controller is a direct type scheme using a

gradient type adaptation algorithm. The obtained results seem
useful for landing and taking-off of small helicopters.
The paper is organized as follows: Section I1 describes the
2 DoF system which is used in section I11 for the adaptive
control design. The performance of the proposed adaptive
controller is evaluated in real time experiments in section
IV. Some concluding remarks end this paper.
11. DYNAMIC MODEL

The model of a helicopter in a vertical flying stand (figure

1) can be obtained using a Lagrangian formulation [21,
[3]. Details on helicopter dynamics can be found in [9].
The vector of generalized coordinates (altitude, yaw and
and
blade rotor azimuth) is given by q = [ z 11
U = [ul u2IT represents the vector of the control inputs:
collective pitch and tail rotor collective respectively. The
vertical force, the yaw torque, the main rotor torque and
the rotor angular speed are denoted by fZ, T ~ rq
,
and
respectively. The ~ 'coefficients
s
below (where i = 1,...,15),
are related to physical (i = 1,..., 7) and dynamical (i =
8, ...,15) parameters of the helicopter. The dynamic model
has the following form:

*IT,

n i ( d @+ C(q,d@
+ G(q)

F(u),

+ cg$ ic10
( c l 4 + c13)ul + c1&2 + C l 5
C,C~U,

Cl1&2U2

The equation ( I ) considers the rotor displacement as a

DoF. However, we have experimentally observed that the
helicopter takes off at 1550 r.p.m. and that the rotor angular
speed remains practically constant for the vertical displacement allowed in the platform. From model ( I ) the equation
for z can be rewritten as follows:

m i = cs*'u1 -mg,

(6)
1550

where m is the helicopter mass (i.e. 7.5 kg), & %

r.p.m. is the rotor angular speed, u1 is the blades collective
pitch angle, g is"the gravitational acceleration and the term
Q& is neglected since this represents a very small value.
From the second and third rows of model (I), neglecting
c? and
since $ey are very small with respect to the others,
and solving for 11, we get:
2
( ~ 1 ~ c4)$
5

"

,i)
+ C13)ul f c14$'

= c ~ c ~ ~ $ ' (-u kz
-c4[(cll@
+Cl5],,

. .

(7)

where the term -kg& comes from an angular velocity

feedback of the gyro control system for the tail dynamics
of the helicopter. This angular velocity feedback is part of
the helicopter and has not been removed.
To simplify, equations (6) and (7) can be rewritten as

i =

klul

-kz,

(8)

k3u2

- k4& - k5u1 - k6,

(9)

where

(1)

where A! represents the inertia matrix

. c1

c4

C is the Coriolis matrix

0
C(q,@)
.=

o
[ O0

"1

0
+c2cos~(c3*) c4

[:

M(q) =

(2)

c5

cgsin(2c3@)*2 cgsin(2c3*)&
-c6 sin(2c39)11,
0

(3)

G denote the vector of conservative forces

(4)

The rotation motion of the yaw dynamics is controlled by

a classical pole-placement method, it is computed in (9) in
such a way that

= 4 7 1 1 - ks(11, -

271 1

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on October 9, 2008 at 09:18 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

d),

(16)

where k7 and lis are positive constants and Gd is the desired

yaw angle. Therefore, uz is given by
U2

-[(k4 - k 7 ) 4
k3

where

+ ks

k 5 ~ 1

-ks(!b - !bd)l.

Defining

(17)

The vertical position can also be controlled by using

pole-placement. However, altitude control is critical specially
when laking-off or landing the helicopter. We have noticed
in practice that it is hard to estimate the coefficient k l in
equation (8). Notice that kl is related with cs that is an
estimated constant [2]. We can at most estimate an upper
bound and a lower bound for the value of kl. When performing real-time experiments with a helicopter, preventing
accidents is the main concern. Introducing an jntegrd in the
control loop represents risks. Furthermore, the integral action
does not converge when the desire altitude is time-varying.
We therefore concluded that an adaptive controller should be
used to stabilize the altitude of the helicopter.

ali

QZ

+k, (6-

&I

= qi

a1

-1,

ii2

-1.

= Ak1 [ c q i

+ a2 ( z - z')]
(32)

x1 =

(33)

2-2,

j.,

= i,

(34)

22

i.

(35)

Then, (32) can be rewritten as:

(19)

+ a2 (2 - z d ) +e,

2).

+ Akl [ali+ a2( z - zd)]

where 8 is given in (22). Define the following state variables:

x = Ax+Bu,

We use the following pole-placement control law :

U1

(27)
(28)

-kie,

(18)

+ Aki.

(z - zd)

+ i + (Z - zd)

where
=

a2i1.

Then, equation (29) becomes:

In this section, we propose an adaptive controller for the

altitude of the helicopter. We will assume that the parameter
k l in (8) belongs to an interval [%I- Ak,, kl
Akl], where
kl and Akl are known. In other words, we will consider the
second order system:

ki

ai%,,

Let us choose without loss of generality:

DESIGN

= klul - kzl

a2

Then, equation (24) can be rewritten as .

111. ADAPTIVE ALTITUDE ROBUST CONTROL

a1

(20)

(36)

where

where a1 and a2 %e positive constants, zd is a constant

desired altitude and '6 represents the estimate o f .

[ .']

-1

-1

Define the parameter error

zi

then

+ 012 (Z - z')]

Akl [ali

- ki8.

(40)

Consider the next candidate Lyapunov function:

-e.

(23)

Introducing (19) and (20) into (18) we obtain:

z =

(El

+ A h ) aii

+kiB

+ + Aki)
(E1

- k2.

a 2 (2

- zd)

(24)

1 kleZ
= 2Px+--,

2 0

where io > 0 is a coefficient used to regulate the parameter

adaptation rate and P E Rzx2is the following positivedefinite matrix, which has been arbitrarily chosen as:

From (19) and (21) we get

e-Ae

5 B<B+As,

(25)

2712

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on October 9, 2008 at 09:18 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

[::I

Using (36), the time derivative of V is given by

V

+ xTP(Ax + Bu)

(ATxT BTo) P x

k188 .

t-

Assume that the parameter uncertainty Akl satisfies the

constraints:

A k l ( ~ ~ 14 U 2 ) < 2 - E ,
Akl(kYl 2'22) < 2 - E .

= xT (ATP + P A ) x

+ BTvPx + xTPBv

(56)

Introducing (55) and (56) into (54), we get

v 5

k166

+- a
=

(55)

(43)

-c42-(2-

zd)

(57)

Using La Salle theorem we conclude that

xT (ATP+ P A ) x

+ 2xTPBu + -,k lPS 8

(45)

where

as t - o o
(58)
2 -* 0
as t h o o
(59)
From (41) and (57) it follows that z , i and 6 are bounded.
However, notice that 6 may not belong to the interval As, 8 + A@]in which f? is known to lie. Experiments have
iz

[e

shown that if we use

8 in

(53) directly in the control law

(ZO), it produces large oscillations in the altitude and the

Then, equation (45) becomes (see also (23j, (33j-W) and

(40))

i/

-22: - ZX;

-2i?

k,68
+ 2x121 + 4XzW + P

(48)

- 2 (2 - z d ) 2 + 2 [ ( z- z d )
+2t] [ a k l [a14+ a 2 ( 2 - z"] - k16]

+-kl88
P

experiments have to be stopped before convergence of the

altitude to the desired value. In order to avoid this problem
we will project the estimate of 8 into the interval [9-A,,$+
As]. The projection procedure should he such that V in (57)
still verifies V 2 0. Let us consider again the following term
in the RHS of (52):

k,S (y
where

y = -P(Z
We know that

(49)

= - 2 2 - 2 (2 - z d )

Indeed, we require the following

verified:

Equation (50) can be rewritten as

2

5 - 2 2 - 2 ( z - zd)

+ Akl ( z - 2")

(a,+ 4 4

+2 4 + -

[ ( z- t d )

(t-S)(y-,B)

(e+6-B)(y-e)

(52)

= -p(z(r-rd)+4t).

(53)

Now, equation (52) becomes

5 -2i2

- 2 (2 - z d )

+ Akl ( z - 2'))'

+Akli2(5al + 2 4 .

(a,

+ 4a2)
(54)

(63)
50,

(64)

he.

(65)

Both conditions C1 and C2 will be verified if 6 is chosen

in the following way

y f o r 6~ [ s - A , , S + A s ]
f m y > O and 8 = e - A s
0 for y < O and B = s - A s
(66)
0 f o r y > O and O = $ + A , j
y f o r y < O and 8 = e + A g
Therefore, y e conclude that t 4 tdwhen t goes towards
As].
infinite, and 8 E [S - As.
y

conditions to he

(61 S

Consider the parameter estimation law

(WO

(62)

where

+Ak1i2(5al + Z C Y ~ )

[z

(61)

Using the equation (22). condition C1 can be expressed as

q-8)

4 1 6

+4k)

(50)

Using the fact that

(2-zd)

S - A, 5 0 5 e + As.

+ A h ( t - z d ) (2a2) Akli2(4al)
+Akl ( z - z d ) i ( 2 a l 4an)
- k 1 6 [ 2 [ ( z - z d ) + 2 i ] + d ]P '

- 8) ,

s+

2713

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on October 9, 2008 at 09:18 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

IV. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

In this subsection, the performance of the proposed adaptive controller is examined and compared to that of a classical
pole-placement controller.

A . Hardware
The radio-controlled helicopter used is a VARlO 1.8 diameter rotor with a 23 m3gasoline internal combustion engine.
The radio is a Graupner MC-20. The venical displacement
is measured by a linear optical encoder and the yaw angle
is obtained through a standard angular encoder. The radio
and the PC (INTEL Pentium 3) are connected using data
acquisition cards (ADVANTECH PCL-818HG and PCL726). In order to simplify the experiments, the control inputs
can be independently commuted between the automatic and
the manual control modes. The connection in the radio is
directly made to the joystick potentiometers for the gas and
yaw controls. The vertical displacement of the helicopter in
the platform varies from 1.8 to 2.5 m. Otherwise it can turn
free!y around the vertical axis. The angular velocity feedback
-k+ is carried out by the intemal gyro control system of the
helicopter.

E. Experiment
The vertical speed i is computed from the
using the first order approximation

measurement

Fig. 3. Performance obtained for the adaptive control

The experiment considers the case of the stabilization of

the helicopter - platform dynamics for various values of the
altitude and yaw. The desired altitude and yaw are given by
the dotted lines in figures 2 and 3. .
Figure 2 shows the behavior of the altitude pole-placement
controller when applied to the RC helicopter in the vertical
flying stand for a non adaptive controller given by:
211

8.

The gain values

where T is the sampling period, T G
used for the control law are P = 0.01, A, = 0.22, 8 = 1.6,
a1 = 0.01 and a2 = 0.08. The values of the gains i n (S), (9)
and (16) are kl = 6.208, kz = 9.8, k3 = 179.07, k4 = 10,
ks = 46.308, k6 = 1269.76, k? = 0.1 and ks = 0.1.

20 . . ~: .......

. . . . . . . . . .
.
.

P
-?D

.
O

Tvnclrrl

. . . . . . .
..
.

~
L
Time Ism1

= 0.01 x i -0.08 x ( z - 2 d ) .

(68)

We can see that the non adaptive controller leads to oscillations and a considerable steady state emor in the altitude
dynamics. Figure 3 shows the performance of the adaptive
altitude controller when applied to the RC helicopter. Note
that we have no oscillations in the altitude dynamics and the
steady state error is zero or very small.
V. CONCLUSION
We have presented an adaptive control scheme based on
pole-placement. The algorithm controls the altitude dynamics
of a real small-scale helicopter. The control algorithm has
been proposed far a Lagrangian model of the RC helicopter.
The proposed strategy has been successfully applied to the
~ real
O helicopter in the flying stand.

VI. REFERENCES
[I] Astrom K. and Wittenmark B., Conipurer-controlled
Sysrenls :Theory and design, Prentice Hall, Information
and systems sciences series, third edition, 1997.
[2] J. C. Avila, B.Brogliato, A. Dznl and R. Lozano, Nonlinear modelling and control of helicopters, Anronlotica,
Vol 39, No. 9, pp 1583-1596, 2003.
[3] Fantoni I. and Lczano R., Non-linear Control for Underucruared Mechanical Systems, Springer, 2001.
[4] Johansson R., System Modeling & Idenfificufion,Prentice Hall, Information and system sciences series, 1993.

Fig. 2. Performance obtained with a non adaptive control.

2714

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on October 9, 2008 at 09:18 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.

[5] Jun M., Roumeliotis SI. and Sukhatme GS., State

Estimation via Sensor Modeling for Helicopter Control Using an Indirect Kalman Filter, Proceedings
of IEEURSJ International Conference on Intelligent
Robots and S)stems, pp. 1346-1353, October, Kyongju,
Korea, 1999.
[6] La Civita M., Messner W. and Kanade T., Modelling
of small-scale helicoDters with integrated first-Drincides
and system-identification techniques, Proceedings of
the 58th American Helicopter Society Annual Forum,
June 11-13, MontrCal, QuCbec, Canada, 2002.
Landau ID., Lozano R., MSaad M., Adaptive Control,
Springer-Verlag. Communications and Control ,Engineering Series, 1997.
Moms J., Van Nieuwstadt M. and Bendotti P., Identification and Control of a Model Helicopter in
Hover, Pmceedings of the American Control Conference ACC94, 1994.
Prouty R. W., Helicopter Perfomlance, Stubility and
Control, Krieger Pub. Co., 1990.
Tkchler M. and Cauffman M., Frequency-response
method for rotorcraft system identification: flight applications to BO-I05 coupled rotor/fuselage dynamics,
Journal of the American Helicopter Society, Vol 37, No.
3, pp 3-17, 1992.
Weilenmann M. and Geering H., A test bench for
rotorcraft hover control, Journal of Guidaiice, Control
and Dynanzics, (17):729-736, 1994.

2715

Authorized licensed use limited to: IEEE Xplore. Downloaded on October 9, 2008 at 09:18 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.