THE PHOENIX PROJECT Coordinated Flight of Multiple Unmanned Vehicles Michael P. Anthony Lab for Control and Automation Princeton University Princeton,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
AUTOMATIC FLIGHT CONTROL SYSTEM (AFCS)
Advertisements

Aircraft Controls.
MicroCART Micro processor C ontrolled A erial R obotics T eam Abstract MicroCART is a group of EE/CprE students tasked with developing an autonomous helicopter.
Design Presentation Spring 2009 Andrew Erdman Chris Sande Taoran Li.
 PROFESSOR KUNG  GROUP MEMBERS: JEEVEN HUGH, AARON KELLEY, AKRAM GERIES, BRAD LONG, MICHAEL LADAS.
Aircraft Control Surfaces and Components. Aircraft Components and Control Aircraft range from simple home-built machines to complex fighter jets All aircraft.
Aircraft Control Surfaces and Components
HELICOPTER CONTROL USING THE VICON MOTION CAPTURE SYSTEM GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY NOAH ALLEN KUNAL AMARNANI 22 OCTOBER 2008.
SD-May1014 Team: Michael Peat, Kollin Moore, Matt Rich, Alex Reifert Advisors: Dr. Nicola Elia and Dr. Phillip Jones.
Boy Scouts Aviation Merit Badge Control Surfaces.
AIRCRAFT HANDLING Part 7 Aerobatics and Formation Flying.
Pre-Solo Training Program
Autonomous Quadrocopter Proposal Brad Bergerhouse, Nelson Gaske, Austin Wenzel Dr. Malinowski.
THE PHOENIX PROJECT Coordinated Flight of Multiple Unmanned Vehicles Michael P. Anthony & Christopher M. Gerson Lab for Control and Automation Princeton.
Parth Kumar ME5643: Mechatronics UAV ATTITUDE AND HEADING HOLD SYSTEM.
Project Status Update II R09230: Open Architecture, Open Source Unmanned Aerial Vehicle for Imaging Systems A. Benjamin Wager (ME) B. Michael Skube (ME)
Image Processing of Video on Unmanned Aircraft Video processing on-board Unmanned Aircraft Aims to develop image acquisition, processing and transmission.
March 10, Dynamics & Controls 2 PDR Michael Caldwell Jeff Haddin Asif Hossain James Kobyra John McKinnis Kathleen Mondino Andrew Rodenbeck Jason.
Launch Readiness Review MinnSpec University of Minnesota Bryce Schaefer, Chris Woerhle, Art Graf
Aircraft Response to Control Input Data Collection System Presenter: Curtis Cutright Advisor: Dr. Michael Braasch Project Sponsor: JUP.
CL A Coordinated Flight of Uninhabited Air Vehicles Olivier Laplace Princeton University FAA/NASA Joint University Program Quarterly Review - April, 2001.
1 The Phoenix Project: Coordinated Flight of Multiple Unmanned Aerial Vehicles David F. Lieb ’03 & Mark R. Siano ‘03 Princeton University Professor Robert.
Computer Data Acquisition and Signal Conversion Chuck Kammin ABE 425 March 27, 2006.
1 How does an aircraft fly?. 2 First of all – An aircraft needs one or more engines to move forward.
TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATOR OF 7-CHANNEL DIGITAL FLIGHT DATA RECORDER AS AVIONICS TEACHING AID USING STATIC MODEL AIRCRAFT Authors 1. Wg Cdr Nikhil Verma,
1)Aileron 2)Elevator 3)Rudder Aileron Ailerons can be used to generate a rolling motion for an aircraft. LOCATION: Ailerons are small hinged sections.
ABEM Terrameter LS Field-proven Imaging system measuring Resistivity, time-domain IP and SP.
Results of NASA/DARPA Automatic Probe and Drogue Refueling Flight Test Keith Schweikhard NASA Dryden Flight Research Center
Team Dominate(d?) The Machine.
Optimal Nonlinear Neural Network Controllers for Aircraft Joint University Program Meeting October 10, 2001 Nilesh V. Kulkarni Advisors Prof. Minh Q. Phan.
Digitization When data acquisition hardware receives an analog signal it converts it to a voltage. An A/D (analog-to-digital) converter then digitizes.
IMPROVE THE INNOVATION Today: High Performance Inertial Measurement Systems LI.COM.
Design Team # 4 Design of low cost flight computer for unmanned aerial vehicles Status Report # 4 Ryan Morlino Chris Landeros Sylvester Meighan Stephen.
OUT OF CONTROL Forces on a plane in flight.. Plane Flying FORCES ON A PLANE IN FLIGHT.
Uncontrolled copy not subject to amendment
Radio Operations and Aircraft Control Matt Winit Fern Prairie Modelers AMA #1921
Introduction to Control / Performance Flight.
THE PHOENIX PROJECT Coordinated Flight of Multiple Unmanned Vehicles Michael P. Anthony & Christopher M. Gerson Lab for Control and Automation Princeton.
Principles of Flight Chapter 3 – Stability and Control.
Uncontrolled copy not subject to amendment Principles of Flight Learning Outcome 2 Understand how the stability and manoeuvrability of an aeroplane are.
Board Meeting DCA04MA045 Flight Data Recorder (FDR) L-3 Communications Fairchild F-800 Recorded about 25 hours of data 56 parameters verified Left aileron.
Presented by:- Suman Kumar. INTRODUCTION : Quad-rotor helicopters are emerging as a popular unmanned aerial vehicle configuration because of their simple.
Smart Icing Systems Review, June 19-20, Aircraft Autopilot Studies Petros Voulgaris Vikrant Sharma University of Illinois.
CL A UAV Control and Simulation Princeton University FAA/NASA Joint University Program Quarterly Review - October, 2000.
Design Team # 4 Design of low cost flight computer for unmanned aerial vehicles Status Report # 5 Ryan Morlino Chris Landeros Sylvester Meighan Stephen.
Ex. 6 - Straight-and-Level Flight Ex. 6 – Straight-and-Level Flight.
Full Mission Simulation Test Report RocketSat CU Boulder
AUTOMATIC FLIGHT CONTROL SYSTEM (AFCS)
X-Pilot: Autopilot Solutions C. Edwards, J. Lasseigne, W. Overstreet, B. Penland X-pilot flight testing X-pilot groundstation demonstrating waypoint navigation.
Autonomous Quadcopter Andrew Martin, Baobao Lu, Cindy Xin Ting Group 37 TA: Katherine O'Kane.
Aircraft Auto Pilot Roll Control System
KNU RTLAB A Real-Time Linux System For Autonomous Navigation And Flight Attitude Control Of An Uninhabited Aerial Vehicle Charles E. Hall, Jr. Mechanical.
Beard & McLain, “Small Unmanned Aircraft,” Princeton University Press, 2012, Chapter 4: Slide 1 Chapter 4 Forces and Moments.
Chapter 5 Linear Design Models.
Dynamics & Controls PDR 2
FlySpy Patent Liabilities Analysis
Uncontrolled copy not subject to amendment
Four Forces of Flight Lift Weight Thrust Drag
FBW – Introduction The FBW architecture was developed in 1970’s
AUTOPILOT The autopilot or automatic pilot is a system of automatic controls that holds the aircraft on any selected magnetic heading & returns the aircraft.
Aircraft Controls.
DYNAMICS & CONTROL PDR 1 TEAM 4
Aircraft Controls.
Team One Dynamics and Control PDR 2 10 March, 2005
stages control devices thrust arrangement
Image Acquisition and Processing of Remotely Sensed Data
Pre-Solo Training Program
President of Eco-Trust Society
Dynamics & Controls PDR 2
Functional Decomposition: Part 1
Presentation transcript:

THE PHOENIX PROJECT Coordinated Flight of Multiple Unmanned Vehicles Michael P. Anthony Lab for Control and Automation Princeton University Princeton, NJ, Professor Robert Stengel

Goals Long Term –Fleet of 4 Aircraft –Way Point Navigation –Coordinated Aerobatic Maneuvers Short Term –Lateral Data Acquisition –Lateral and Longitudinal Data Acquisition –Linear Control for Stabilization

The Hobbico Hobbistar 60 Advantages –Remote Pilot –Inexpensive –Almost Ready to Fly Disadvantages –Small Payload Phoenix 1

The Tattletale Model 8 A Small Data Logger Made by Onset Computers C Programmable 2 Interfaces –I/O Prototyping Board –PR-8 Prototyping Board

Stage 1: Lateral Data Collection Find Working Componenets Reprogram Tattletale for Data Collection Modification of Aircraft Data Collection System (Ouimet 14)

Modifications

The Flights Flight 1 –Steady Level Flight: turns only when neccesary to stay in range Flight 2 –Concentrating on Rudder Kicks and then Aileron Kicks and Rolls Flight 3 –More Kicks Followed by Tight Turns

Data- Flight TCR Cycles TCR Cycles TCR Cycles TCR Cycles Sample Number Yaw Gyro, Rudder Input, Roll Gyro, Aileron Input Flight 2- First 1000 of 6000 Samples

MATLAB Analysis System identification Toolbox –n4sid: creates a theta model of the system –th2ss: converts the theta model into a state space model –compare: graphs the given output data and the models output on the same graph Model based on Flight 3 –First 4 eigen values most important –Fifth and Sixth eliminate drift i i i i

Full Flight 3 Comparison- Roll

Full Flight 3 Comparison- Yaw

Limited Flight 2 Comparison- Roll

Limited Flight 2 Comparison- Yaw

8th Order Model- Roll

Stage 2 - Add Longitudinal Data Collection Add a Pitch Gyro Add a 3-way Accelerometer Add Elevator Input Add Throttle Input Fix Pressure Sensors

Stage 2- Switching to the PR-8 Advantages –12 Digital I/O Channels –7 A/D Channels –Holds Multiplexer and Op-Amps Disadvantages –Does not Readily Fit into Aircraft –Squishy Bus Connectors

Longitudinal Data Collection Problems –Accelerometers- may be broken –Pressure Sensors –Throttle Input- coding problem Progress –Rewired for payload space efficiency –Programming improvements –Purchase of new transmitter

What’s Next? Lateral and Longitudinal Data Collection Lateral and Longitudinal Data Analysis Linear Stabilization Control Addition of GPS Way Point Navigation Control

Special Thanks Professor Stengel: for allowing my involvement in this project Chris Gerson: for joining the project and helping with programming. Olivier Laplace: for helping with the data analysis Professor Leonard’s Dynamics Lab: for the use of their tools and their transmitter

BIBLIOGRAPHY Ouimet, Martin. Design of a Failure Tolerant Control System Using a Parity Space Approach. Princeton University Senior Thesis: Princeton, NJ, 1998.