!"#$!%"&'!%( )'*$!%( '+ ,'!"$'(- .*"'/%"&'! %!

0 123"#/3 4'(5 - 6'5 - 7

A Collision-Free Formation Reconfiguration Control Approach

for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles
Fidelis Adhika Pradipta Lie and Tiauw Hiong Go

Abstract: Formation flying of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) has gain a lot of interest
due to its many potential advantages. Flying in formation allows wider sensing coverage area
and in effect, this leads to improved surveillance and enhanced situational awareness. Also
flying in formation eases coordination and data fusion. This work uses a novel combination
of known techniques to address the reconfiguration control problem for fixed-wing UAVs.
The current premise is for the UAVs to assume their final target states within a specified time
interval while avoiding collisions with one another or with an obstacle during the process. To
achieve the mission, a reference trajectory is generated based on the two-point boundary val-
ues optimization of a double integrator. Sliding controller is then used to track the generated
reference trajectory. To avoid collisions, the area within the UAV’s sensor detection range is
modeled as a potential-like function that feeds control signals which varies with the distance
between the UAV and the obstacles (could be stationary or moving) nearby. Hence, altered
optimal trajectories could be generated online as the UAV avoids collision with another UAV
or other obstacles. Such controller is shown to be stable in the sense of Lyapunov. Some
simulations are performed to assess the performance of the reconfiguration control scheme.
The effects of the control parameters on the reconfiguration trajectories are also examined.

Keywords: Formation Reconfiguration, Collision Avoidance, Sliding Control, Unmanned

Aerial Vehicles

 
Nomenclature da = σi − σ j , Distance between 2 UAV
R UAV’s radius of detection
r UAV’s radius of avoidance
x, y, z Inertial location of the system
h = −z, Altitude (·)r Reference trajectory
V Velocity (·)c Control command
γ Flight path angle (˜·) = (·) − (·)r Tracking error
ψ Heading angle
τ(·) Autopilot response time constant
w State vector, Eq. (6)
σ Output vector, Eq. (7) 1. INTRODUCTION
Tf Final time for reconfiguration
J Cost function Formation flying of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles
H Hamiltonian (UAVs) has received considerable interest recently due
s Sliding manifold to its potential advantages. By flying in formation,
χ̃ Tracking error vector real-time sensing coverage area can be increased, hence
ueq Equivalent control vector improving surveillance capability and increasing situa-
k Sliding gain vector tional awareness. Also, flying in formation eases coor-
λ Sliding anifold time constant dination and data fusion. Further, it has been shown that
φ Sliding manifold boundary layer thickness flying in formation has an advantage aerodynamically in
L Lyapunov function terms of induced drag reduction ([1], [2]).
Γ Potential function The study of formation flying can be categorized into
two broad categories. The first category deals with for-
mation keeping, i.e. how to maintain the geometry of
a set of vehicles flying in formation in the presence of
Fidelis Adhika P. Lie and Tiauw Hiong Go are with School disturbances. Various methods have been proposed for
of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Nanyang Technologi-
cal University, Singapore 639798, Republic of Singapore (e-mail: this purpose such as using PID control ([2], [3]), linear
adhikalie@pmail.ntu.edu.sg, yongkigo@ntu.edu.sg) quadratic optimal control ([4]), robust nonlinear control