Leader-Follower Quadcopter Formation Control Under Cyber-Attack
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Conventional control schemes for quadcopter formations lack safety constraints and resilience against cyber-attacks, leading to potential operation failures and unsafe maneuvers.
Innovation Solution
A method and system using leader-follower formation control with affine transformations, stress matrices, and actor-critic learning to ensure quadcopters maintain safe formation maneuvers while resisting cyber-attacks, employing distributed sliding mode control and Nussbaum functions to handle input gain corruption.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If conventional control schemes are used for quadcopter formations, then formation shape acquisition and stability are guaranteed, but safety constraints are overlooked leading to potential operation failures
Solution Approach 1:
The control system is segmented into a leader quadcopter that receives flight instructions and calculates formation maneuvers, and follower quadcopters that receive and execute maneuvers. This segmentation allows the complex control problem to be divided into manageable parts while maintaining overall formation safety through distributed decision-making.
Solution Approach 2:
The leader quadcopter pre-calculates formation maneuvers based on flight instructions before execution. By performing preliminary calculations of safe formation trajectories and maneuvers, the system ensures safety constraints are built into the control plan before the formation actually executes the movements, preventing operation failures.
2Adaptability or versatility
If formation control performance is prioritized without safety boundaries, then maneuverability is improved, but reliability degrades when safety boundary is exceeded
Solution Approach 1:
The leader quadcopter continuously monitors flight instructions and formation state, using feedback to adjust formation maneuvers in real-time. This feedback mechanism ensures that maneuvers remain within safe boundaries while maintaining adaptability to different flight scenarios, preventing reliability degradation when boundaries are approached.
Solution Approach 2:
The formation control system dynamically adjusts maneuver parameters based on real-time conditions and safety constraints. By making the control system dynamic rather than static, the quadcopters can adapt their maneuvers to maintain both high maneuverability and reliability, adjusting their behavior as safety boundaries are approached.
3Adaptability or versatility
If affine formation maneuver control is implemented to achieve scaling, translation, and rotation simultaneously, then maneuver freedom is increased, but control complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The leader quadcopter acts as an intermediary that receives high-level flight instructions and translates them into specific affine formation maneuvers for followers. This intermediary role simplifies the control architecture by centralizing the complex affine transformation calculations in the leader, while followers execute pre-calculated maneuvers, reducing overall system complexity despite increased maneuver freedom.
Data Source
AI summary
A method and system for controlling the flight of a plurality of quadcopters includes communicating a flight instruction from a user to a leader quadcopter. The method includes calculating a leader formation maneuver and a follower formation maneuver with a leader-follower formation controller configured to use affine transformations and stress matrices to convert a flight instruction into a leader formation maneuver and a follower formation maneuver. The method may include communicating the follower formation maneuver from the leader quadcopter to a follower quadcopter. The method may include executing the leader formation maneuver on the leader quadcopter. The method may include executing the follower formation maneuver on the follower quadcopter.