Multicopter Failure Control Using Remaining Effectors in Flight

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing multicopters face limitations and risks due to effector failures, such as mechanical or electrical failures, which can lead to catastrophic loss of control and reduced safety and reliability, especially in adverse conditions.

Innovation Solution

A control method for multicopters that allows controlled flight by rotating and applying torque and thrust forces using remaining functional effectors, even with partial or complete effector failures, to maintain orientation and translational motion.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If effector redundancy (e.g., hexacopters and octocopters) is used to improve safety and reliability, then the vehicle can tolerate effector failures, but the device complexity and mass increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesafety and reliabilityVSAvoiddevice complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes the control parameters and equations of motion to accommodate effector failures. By dynamically adjusting the control algorithm to account for failed effectors, the system maintains reliability without requiring physical redundancy, thus avoiding increased device complexity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent extracts and removes the need for redundant effectors by implementing a control method that can operate with fewer functional effectors. The failed effectors are effectively taken out of the system while the control algorithm compensates for their absence, maintaining safety without the mass and complexity of redundancy

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

2Reliability

If effector encasement (e.g., shrouds, ducted fans) is used to improve safety, then collision risks are reduced, but the device complexity and mass increase

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovesafetyVSAvoiddevice complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts the safety function from physical encasement structures and implements it through control software. By detecting effector failures and adjusting control commands, the system provides safety without the mass and complexity of shrouds or ducted fans

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces the mechanical protection system (encasement structures) with a control-based protection system. The control algorithm detects failures and compensates through software, substituting mechanical complexity with computational control

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

3Reliability

If parachutes are used as safety backup to reduce catastrophic failure risks, then safety is improved, but the device complexity and mass increase

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovesafetyVSAvoiddevice complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts the safety backup function from physical parachutes and implements it through control software. The control system detects failures and executes controlled descent or landing procedures, replacing the need for parachute hardware and reducing device complexity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces the mechanical parachute system with a control-based safety system. The control algorithm manages failure scenarios through software control of the remaining effectors, substituting mechanical safety systems with intelligent control

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

4Adaptability or versatility

If human pilots are used to control multicopters in adverse conditions, then operational flexibility is maintained, but productivity and cost-effectiveness decrease

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveoperational flexibilityVSAvoidproductivity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent enables the multicopter to control itself through automated failure detection and compensation algorithms. The system monitors its own state, detects effector failures, and automatically adjusts control commands, providing operational flexibility without human intervention and improving productivity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

5Device complexity

If conventional control methods are used in case of effector failure, then the control system remains simple, but catastrophic loss of control occurs

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecontrol system simplicityVSAvoidcontrol stability
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements preliminary action by pre-calculating and storing modified control equations that account for various effector failure scenarios. When a failure is detected, the system switches to the appropriate pre-prepared control mode, maintaining stability without complex real-time calculations

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements feedback by continuously monitoring effector performance and system state, then adjusting control commands based on detected failures. The control algorithm uses feedback from sensors and system state to maintain stability, balancing complexity with reliability

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS12473076B2Controlled flight of a multicopter experiencing a failure affecting an effector
Publication Date: 2025.11.18 ETH ZURICH
  • US12473076B2 patent drawing
  • US12473076B2 patent drawing
  • US12473076B2 patent drawing

AI summary

According to a first aspect of the invention, there is provided a method for operating a multicopter experiencing a failure during flight, the multicopter comprising a body, and at least four effectors attached to the body, each operable to produce both a torque and a thrust force which can cause the multicopter to fly when not experiencing said failure. The method may comprise the step of identifying a failure wherein the failure affects the torque and/or thrust force produced by an effector, and in response to identifying a failure carrying out the following steps, (1) computing an estimate of the orientation of a primary axis of said body with respect to a predefined reference frame, wherein said primary axis is an axis about which said multicopter rotates when flying, (2) computing an estimate of the angular velocity of said multicopter, (3) controlling one or more of said at least four effectors based on said estimate of the orientation of the primary axis of said body with respect to said predefined reference frame and said estimate of the angular velocity of the multicopter. The step of controlling one or more of said at least four effectors may be performed such that (a) said one or more effectors collectively produce a torque along said primary axis and a torque perpendicular to said primary axis, wherein (i) the torque along said primary axis causes said multicopter to rotate about said primary axis, and (ii) the torque perpendicular to said primary axis causes said multicopter to move such that the orientation of said primary axis converges to a target orientation with respect to said predefined reference frame, and (b) such that said one or more effectors individually produce a thrust force along said primary axis.