Design and Experimental Comparison of PID, LQR and MPC Stabilizing Controllers for Parrot Mambo Mini-Drone
Parrot Mambo mini-drone is a readily available commercial quadrotor platform to understand and analyze the behavior of a quadrotor both in indoor and outdoor applications. This study evaluates the performance of three alternative controllers on a Parrot Mambo mini-drone in an interior environment, i...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2022-06-01
|
| Series: | Aerospace |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2226-4310/9/6/298 |
| _version_ | 1797491086141161472 |
|---|---|
| author | Mohamed Okasha Jordan Kralev Maidul Islam |
| author_facet | Mohamed Okasha Jordan Kralev Maidul Islam |
| author_sort | Mohamed Okasha |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Parrot Mambo mini-drone is a readily available commercial quadrotor platform to understand and analyze the behavior of a quadrotor both in indoor and outdoor applications. This study evaluates the performance of three alternative controllers on a Parrot Mambo mini-drone in an interior environment, including Proportional–Integral–Derivative (PID), Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR), and Model Predictive Control (MPC). To investigate the controllers’ performance, initially, the MATLAB<sup>®</sup>/Simulink™ environment was considered as the simulation platform. The successful simulation results finally led to the implementation of the controllers in real-time in the Parrot Mambo mini-drone. Here, MPC surpasses PID and LQR in ensuring the system’s stability and robustness in simulation and real-time experiment results. Thus, this work makes a contribution by introducing the impact of MPC on this quadrotor platform, such as system stability and robustness, and showing its efficacy over PID and LQR. All three controllers demonstrate similar tracking performance in simulations and experiments. In steady state, the maximal pitch deviation for the PID controller is 0.075 rad, for the LQR, it is 0.025 rad, and for the MPC, it is 0.04 rad. The maximum pitch deviation for the PID-based controller is 0.3 rad after the take-off impulse, 0.06 rad for the LQR, and 0.17 rad for the MPC. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-10T00:42:10Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-9d8f8cbc7c054e10ad4dbb1dd9982e12 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2226-4310 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-10T00:42:10Z |
| publishDate | 2022-06-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Aerospace |
| spelling | doaj.art-9d8f8cbc7c054e10ad4dbb1dd9982e122023-11-23T15:05:21ZengMDPI AGAerospace2226-43102022-06-019629810.3390/aerospace9060298Design and Experimental Comparison of PID, LQR and MPC Stabilizing Controllers for Parrot Mambo Mini-DroneMohamed Okasha0Jordan Kralev1Maidul Islam2Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, College of Engineering, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain P.O. Box 15551, United Arab EmiratesDepartment of Systems and Control, Faculty of Automatics, Technical University of Sofia, 1700 Sofia, BulgariaDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Kuliyyah of Engineering, International Islamic University Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur 53100, MalaysiaParrot Mambo mini-drone is a readily available commercial quadrotor platform to understand and analyze the behavior of a quadrotor both in indoor and outdoor applications. This study evaluates the performance of three alternative controllers on a Parrot Mambo mini-drone in an interior environment, including Proportional–Integral–Derivative (PID), Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR), and Model Predictive Control (MPC). To investigate the controllers’ performance, initially, the MATLAB<sup>®</sup>/Simulink™ environment was considered as the simulation platform. The successful simulation results finally led to the implementation of the controllers in real-time in the Parrot Mambo mini-drone. Here, MPC surpasses PID and LQR in ensuring the system’s stability and robustness in simulation and real-time experiment results. Thus, this work makes a contribution by introducing the impact of MPC on this quadrotor platform, such as system stability and robustness, and showing its efficacy over PID and LQR. All three controllers demonstrate similar tracking performance in simulations and experiments. In steady state, the maximal pitch deviation for the PID controller is 0.075 rad, for the LQR, it is 0.025 rad, and for the MPC, it is 0.04 rad. The maximum pitch deviation for the PID-based controller is 0.3 rad after the take-off impulse, 0.06 rad for the LQR, and 0.17 rad for the MPC.https://www.mdpi.com/2226-4310/9/6/298parrot mini-drone controlPIDLQRMPCtrajectory trackingflight test |
| spellingShingle | Mohamed Okasha Jordan Kralev Maidul Islam Design and Experimental Comparison of PID, LQR and MPC Stabilizing Controllers for Parrot Mambo Mini-Drone Aerospace parrot mini-drone control PID LQR MPC trajectory tracking flight test |
| title | Design and Experimental Comparison of PID, LQR and MPC Stabilizing Controllers for Parrot Mambo Mini-Drone |
| title_full | Design and Experimental Comparison of PID, LQR and MPC Stabilizing Controllers for Parrot Mambo Mini-Drone |
| title_fullStr | Design and Experimental Comparison of PID, LQR and MPC Stabilizing Controllers for Parrot Mambo Mini-Drone |
| title_full_unstemmed | Design and Experimental Comparison of PID, LQR and MPC Stabilizing Controllers for Parrot Mambo Mini-Drone |
| title_short | Design and Experimental Comparison of PID, LQR and MPC Stabilizing Controllers for Parrot Mambo Mini-Drone |
| title_sort | design and experimental comparison of pid lqr and mpc stabilizing controllers for parrot mambo mini drone |
| topic | parrot mini-drone control PID LQR MPC trajectory tracking flight test |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2226-4310/9/6/298 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT mohamedokasha designandexperimentalcomparisonofpidlqrandmpcstabilizingcontrollersforparrotmambominidrone AT jordankralev designandexperimentalcomparisonofpidlqrandmpcstabilizingcontrollersforparrotmambominidrone AT maidulislam designandexperimentalcomparisonofpidlqrandmpcstabilizingcontrollersforparrotmambominidrone |