# American Institute of Mathematical Sciences

doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021009
Online First

Online First articles are published articles within a journal that have not yet been assigned to a formal issue. This means they do not yet have a volume number, issue number, or page numbers assigned to them, however, they can still be found and cited using their DOI (Digital Object Identifier). Online First publication benefits the research community by making new scientific discoveries known as quickly as possible.

Readers can access Online First articles via the “Online First” tab for the selected journal.

## A control parametrization based path planning method for the quad-rotor uavs

 1 College of Electrical Engineering, Sichuan University, Sichuan 610065, China 2 School of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Sichuan University, Sichuan 610065, China

* Corresponding author: jiyuandong@aliyun.com

Received  July 2020 Revised  October 2020 Early access January 2021

Fund Project: The first author is supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under grant 62071317, in part by the Science and Technology on Space Intelligent Control Laboratory under grant KGJZDSYS-2018-03, in part by the Sichuan Science and Technology Program under grant 2019YJ0105, and in part by the Strategic Rocket Innovation Fund

A time optimal path planning problem for the Quad-rotor unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) is investigated in this paper. A 3D environment with obstacles is considered, which makes the problem more challenging. To tackle this challenge, the problem is formulated as a nonlinear optimal control problem with continuous state inequality constraints and terminal equality constraints. A control parametrization based method is proposed. Particularly, the constraint transcription method together with a local smoothing technique is utilized to handle the continuous inequality constraints. The original problem is then transformed into a nonlinear program. The corresponding gradient formulas for both of the cost function and the constraints are derived, respectively. Simulation results show that the proposed path planning method has less tracking error than that of the rapid-exploring random tree (RRT) algorithm and that of the A star algorithm. In addition, the motor speed has less changes for the proposed algorithm than that of the other two algorithms.

Citation: Jinlong Guo, Bin Li, Yuandong Ji. A control parametrization based path planning method for the quad-rotor uavs. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021009
##### References:

show all references

##### References:
The quad-rotor UAV and the coordinate systems
Control Parametrization
An Illustration of the Local Smoothing Technique
Example 1: the planned path of the UAV with Algorithm 1
Example 1: the optimal states
Example 1: the optimal control inputs
Example 2: the planned path of the UAV with Algorithm 1
Example 2: the optimal states
Example 2: the optimal control inputs
Example 3: The planned path of UAV with Algorithm 1
Example 3: the optimal states
Example 3: the optimal control inputs
Example 3: The planned path of UAV with RRT
Example 3: The planned path of UAV with A star
The structure of PD controller
Example 4: the tracking trajectory of the UAV with Algorithm 1
Example 4: the tracking trajectory of the UAV with RRT
Example 4: the tracking trajectory of the UAV with A star
Example 4: the motor speed
Algorithm 1: an iteration algorithm for solving Problem $P(p)$
 Initialization: Set $\varepsilon=\varepsilon_0$, $\gamma=\varepsilon/3$ and $\varepsilon_{min}=10^{-3}\varepsilon_0$. Step 1. Solve the Problem $P_{\varepsilon, \gamma}(p)$ for the optimal solution $K_{\varepsilon, \gamma}^{*}$}. Step 2. For each $i$, check the feasibility of $g_{i}({\bf x}(t))\ge 0$ with $K_{\varepsilon, \gamma}^{*}$. Step 3. If all the constraints in Step 2 are satisfied, then go to the Step 5. Otherwise, go to the Step 4. Step 4. Set $\gamma=\gamma/2$ and go to Step 1. Step 5. Set $\varepsilon=\varepsilon/10$, $\gamma=\gamma/10$, and go to Step 1. Stopping criterion: Algorithm 1 stops when $\varepsilon\leq\varepsilon_{min}$.
 Initialization: Set $\varepsilon=\varepsilon_0$, $\gamma=\varepsilon/3$ and $\varepsilon_{min}=10^{-3}\varepsilon_0$. Step 1. Solve the Problem $P_{\varepsilon, \gamma}(p)$ for the optimal solution $K_{\varepsilon, \gamma}^{*}$}. Step 2. For each $i$, check the feasibility of $g_{i}({\bf x}(t))\ge 0$ with $K_{\varepsilon, \gamma}^{*}$. Step 3. If all the constraints in Step 2 are satisfied, then go to the Step 5. Otherwise, go to the Step 4. Step 4. Set $\gamma=\gamma/2$ and go to Step 1. Step 5. Set $\varepsilon=\varepsilon/10$, $\gamma=\gamma/10$, and go to Step 1. Stopping criterion: Algorithm 1 stops when $\varepsilon\leq\varepsilon_{min}$.
Parameters of the UAV
 $L$ $0.2\ m$ $M$ $1.5\ kg$ $g$ $9.8\ m/ s^{2}$ ${I}_{x}$ $0.0075\ kg\cdot m^2$ ${I}_{y}$ $0.0075\ kg\cdot m^2$ ${I}_{z}$ $0.013\ kg\cdot m^2$ ${K}_{1}, {K}_{2}$ $0.06\ N/m/s$ ${K}_{3}$ $0.09\ N/m/s$ ${K}_{4}, {K}_{5}$ $0.002\ N/m/s$ ${K}_{6}$ $0.1\ N/m/s$ $C$ $10^{-7}$ ${K}_{v}$ $1.5\times10^{-5}\ N/m/s$
 $L$ $0.2\ m$ $M$ $1.5\ kg$ $g$ $9.8\ m/ s^{2}$ ${I}_{x}$ $0.0075\ kg\cdot m^2$ ${I}_{y}$ $0.0075\ kg\cdot m^2$ ${I}_{z}$ $0.013\ kg\cdot m^2$ ${K}_{1}, {K}_{2}$ $0.06\ N/m/s$ ${K}_{3}$ $0.09\ N/m/s$ ${K}_{4}, {K}_{5}$ $0.002\ N/m/s$ ${K}_{6}$ $0.1\ N/m/s$ $C$ $10^{-7}$ ${K}_{v}$ $1.5\times10^{-5}\ N/m/s$
 [1] Ryan Loxton, Qun Lin, Volker Rehbock, Kok Lay Teo. Control parameterization for optimal control problems with continuous inequality constraints: New convergence results. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2012, 2 (3) : 571-599. doi: 10.3934/naco.2012.2.571 [2] Yi Gao, Rui Li, Yingjing Shi, Li Xiao. Design of path planning and tracking control of quadrotor. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021063 [3] Canghua Jiang, Zhiqiang Guo, Xin Li, Hai Wang, Ming Yu. An efficient adjoint computational method based on lifted IRK integrator and exact penalty function for optimal control problems involving continuous inequality constraints. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2020, 13 (6) : 1845-1865. doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2020109 [4] M. Alipour, M. A. Vali, A. H. Borzabadi. A hybrid parametrization approach for a class of nonlinear optimal control problems. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2019, 9 (4) : 493-506. doi: 10.3934/naco.2019037 [5] Yuefen Chen, Yuanguo Zhu. Indefinite LQ optimal control with process state inequality constraints for discrete-time uncertain systems. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2018, 14 (3) : 913-930. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2017082 [6] Changjun Yu, Shuxuan Su, Yanqin Bai. On the optimal control problems with characteristic time control constraints. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/jimo.2021021 [7] Piermarco Cannarsa, Hélène Frankowska, Elsa M. Marchini. On Bolza optimal control problems with constraints. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2009, 11 (3) : 629-653. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2009.11.629 [8] M. H. Shavakh, B. Bidabad. Time-optimal of fixed wing UAV aircraft with input and output constraints. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/naco.2021023 [9] Bin Li, Xiaolong Guo, Xiaodong Zeng, Songyi Dian, Minhua Guo. An optimal pid tuning method for a single-link manipulator based on the control parametrization technique. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - S, 2020, 13 (6) : 1813-1823. doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2020107 [10] IvÁn Area, FaÏÇal NdaÏrou, Juan J. Nieto, Cristiana J. Silva, Delfim F. M. Torres. Ebola model and optimal control with vaccination constraints. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2018, 14 (2) : 427-446. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2017054 [11] Eduardo Casas, Fredi Tröltzsch. Sparse optimal control for the heat equation with mixed control-state constraints. Mathematical Control & Related Fields, 2020, 10 (3) : 471-491. doi: 10.3934/mcrf.2020007 [12] Claus Kirchner, Michael Herty, Simone Göttlich, Axel Klar. Optimal control for continuous supply network models. Networks & Heterogeneous Media, 2006, 1 (4) : 675-688. doi: 10.3934/nhm.2006.1.675 [13] Stanisław Migórski. A note on optimal control problem for a hemivariational inequality modeling fluid flow. Conference Publications, 2013, 2013 (special) : 545-554. doi: 10.3934/proc.2013.2013.545 [14] Martin Brokate, Pavel Krejčí. Optimal control of ODE systems involving a rate independent variational inequality. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2013, 18 (2) : 331-348. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2013.18.331 [15] Changjie Fang, Weimin Han. Stability analysis and optimal control of a stationary Stokes hemivariational inequality. Evolution Equations & Control Theory, 2020, 9 (4) : 995-1008. doi: 10.3934/eect.2020046 [16] Leszek Gasiński. Optimal control problem of Bolza-type for evolution hemivariational inequality. Conference Publications, 2003, 2003 (Special) : 320-326. doi: 10.3934/proc.2003.2003.320 [17] Ellina Grigorieva, Evgenii Khailov, Andrei Korobeinikov. Parametrization of the attainable set for a nonlinear control model of a biochemical process. Mathematical Biosciences & Engineering, 2013, 10 (4) : 1067-1094. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2013.10.1067 [18] Shanjian Tang, Fu Zhang. Path-dependent optimal stochastic control and viscosity solution of associated Bellman equations. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems, 2015, 35 (11) : 5521-5553. doi: 10.3934/dcds.2015.35.5521 [19] Mourad Azi, Mohand Ouamer Bibi. Optimal control of a dynamical system with intermediate phase constraints and applications in cash management. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2021  doi: 10.3934/naco.2021005 [20] Alexander Tyatyushkin, Tatiana Zarodnyuk. Numerical method for solving optimal control problems with phase constraints. Numerical Algebra, Control & Optimization, 2017, 7 (4) : 481-492. doi: 10.3934/naco.2017030

2020 Impact Factor: 1.801