SYSTEM MODELLING AND PID CONTROL SYSTEM OF FOUR
ROTOR HELICOPTER
Saurav Kumar Singh
Department of Electrical and Electronics
Engineering, SRM University,
Kattankulathur, Tamil Nadu, India
sauravkumarsingh@srmuniversity.co.in
Dipti Ranjan Biswal
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
SRM University, kattankulathur, Tamil
Nadu, India
diptiranjanbiswal@srmuniversity.co.in
Abstract
Four Rotor helicopter as the name suggests has
four rotors .The controls system for such a craft is
complex, as it requires the synchronization of four
individual motors. These motors must be closely
controlled in order to account for variations
between the motors (one motor slightly more
powerful than the others will upset the equilibrium
of the craft), and in order to effectively dampen
external disturbance. We incorporated in our
vehicle a closed loop PID control system which
measured in-flight dynamics via three gyroscopes
and one accelerometer.
A controller took these sensor inputs and
performed PID control on the four motors by
varying PWM signals sent to each of the motors.
By sending the PWM signals of required duty cycle
the attitude control of the FRUAV is done. The
result of our project is an advanced prototype for
autonomous flight. Though the controls is hindered
by unreliable operation of the gyroscopes and
accelerometers..Future work will allow
refinements in the control system hardware that
will ultimately lead to stable, undeterred flight.
1. Introduction
Today’s integrated technology has opened many
new areas of application for unmanned aerial
vehicles (UAVS). Completing complex and risky
missions without any on board human involvement
is the biggest advantage of UAVS.
In many applications, vertical take off
and landing (VTOL) vehicles, also known as rotor
craft vehicles, are preferred over fixed wing
vehicles because of their higher manoeuvrability.
Amit Kumar
Department of Electrical and Electronics
Engineering, SRM University,
Kattankulathur, Tamilnadu, India
srm.amit@gmail.com
Sanjay Kumar Kar
Senior Lecturer Department of
Mechanical Engineering, SRM University,
Kattankulathur, Tamil Nadu, India
kar_sanjaya@rediffmail.com
Also they require less launching and landing
support compare to fixed wing vehicles.
Task such as exploration of unknown territories,
formation flying, intelligence gathering etc, require
rotor craft UAV to be capable of flying very close
to other flying or stationary object UAV are also
can used as surveillance system. Unmanned aerial
vehicles (UAVs) are crafts capable of flight
without an onboard pilot.
They can be controlled remotely by an
operator, or can be controlled autonomously via
pre-programmed flight paths. Such aircraft have
already been implemented by the military of many
countries for recognizance flights. Further use for
UAVs by the military, specifically as tools for
search and rescue operations, warrant continued
development of UAV technology.
A quad-rotor helicopter is an aircraft
whose lift is generated by four rotors. Control of
such a craft is accomplished by varying the speeds
of the four motors relative to each other. Quad-
rotor crafts naturally demand a sophisticated
control system in order to allow for balanced flight.
Uncontrolled flight of a quad-rotor would be
virtually impossible by one operator, as the
dynamics of such a system demand constant
adjustment of four motors simultaneously.
The state of the art in quadrotor control
has drastically changed in the last few years. The
number of projects tackling this problem has
considerably and suddenly increased. Most of these
projects are based on commercially available toys
like the Draganflyer, modified afterwards to have
more sensory and communication capabilities.
Only few groups have tackled the FRUAV design
problem, and even fewer did it in the optimal way
(simultaneous consideration of design and control)
for a quadrotor. However, none of these systems
was built based on a clear and systematic design
optimization methodology. The goal of our project
was to design and construct a quad-rotor vehicle
capable of indoor flight and hover. Through the use
of an PID control system, this vehicle would be
capable of autonomous operation, including take-
off, hover, and landing capabilities, through pre-
programmed flight.
In practical applications, the position in
space of the UAV is generally controlled by an
operator through a remote-control system, while
the attitude is automatically stabilized via an
onboard controller. The attitude controller is a
important feature since it allow the aircraft to
maintain a hovering condition and , hence, prevent
the vehicle from crashing when pilot performing
some desired movement. A lot of control design
has been proposed by several reasearchers “Figure.1.Four rotor helicopter”
(refrences).In this paper we did the mathematic
modelling in terms of the rotation matrix, linear 2.1. Modelling with Euler formalism
velocity, force along each axis, moment of inertial
and design of PID closed control loop for
autonomous hovering of the quadrotor.

2. Mathematical Modelling
The concept followed in this project for dynamics
modelling was to write physical equations and
identify only the dynamics of the actuators which
are important in case of the quadrotor. The model
developed in this project assumes the following:

a) The structure is supposed rigid.

b) The structure is supposed symmetrical.

“Figure.2. Modelling with
c) The centre of gravity and the body fixed
frame origin are assumed to coincide. Euler formalism”

d) The propellers are supposed rigid.

e) Thrust is proportional to the square of
propeller’s speed.
The helicopter is a complex mechanical system, it
collect numerous effect from aerodynamic to the
dynamic domain. The quadrotor should consider all
the effect i.e. aerodynamic effect and gyro effect.
Let us consider earth fixed frame of references E
and body fixed of frame B as seen in the following
fig. The airframe orientation in space is given by
the rotational matrix R from B to E.
In aerospace engineering the axes are directed as
for a craft moving in the direction i.e. x, y, z
direction. So the three angles are individually
called as roll, pitch, yaw in direction of x, y, z.
 ---(2.4)
Where,

u – linear velocity along x direction.

R(x, θ) – rotational around x axis
v- linear velocity along y direction.
R(y, ф) – rotational around y axis.
w- linear velocity along z direction.
R(z, ψ) – rotational around z axis.

--(2.1)
2.2. Aerodynamic forces
We know from Bernoulli's equation

---(2.2) P + ρgh + 0.5ρv2 = const.----(2.5)

We consider earth fixed frame E with the

orthogonal base(X, Y, Z) and the body
frame b with (x, y, z). If any point of B
experiences three rotations, one can
express any point on the body with respect
to earth reference by:

Where,
P = pressure at the point
---(2.3)
v = velocity of the fluid at the point
Where, ρ = density of the fluid
Ψ = Yaw angular displacement ( rotation about z-
h = height of the fluid
axis )
g = gravitational acceleration
Θ = Roll angular displacement ( rotation about x-
axis )
“Figure 3.2 Air flows throw a propeller generating
Φ = Pitch angular displacement ( rotation about y-
thrust”
axis )

Applying Bernoulli's equation for inflow motion

Derivation of the above equation gives the
three linear velocities along the three
directions or axis:
P=Pi+ 0.5 ρvi2----(2.6)
Where-
Pi-induced power of the propeller.
vi – induced velocity of the propeller.
 T- thrust from the propeller.
applying Bernoulli's equation for outflow motion A- Area of the propeller.
(Pi+ΔP) + 0.5 ρvi2 = P+ 0.5ρv2---(2.7) Ω – angular velocity of the propeller.

(or) ΔP = 0.5ρv 2 r – radius of the the propeller.

----(2.8) Induced velocity

λi = vi /Ωr = √(CT/2)-------(2.19)
We know from Newton's Second law of motion
where,
Force (Thrust) = rate of change of
momentum CT – co-efficient of thrust.
In the case of fluid dynamics the equation is
modified as, 2.3 YAW MOTION

Thrust = mass flow rate × change in velocity we know that

τ * Ω' = Tm-Td------(2.20)
Applying the above equation to our system we get
where Tm = torque developed by the motor

Mass flow rate = density * area * velocity Td = torque developed by the drag
we know that
= ρAvi----(2.9) Td = d Ω2-----(2.21)
Iz Ψ'' = - Σ Tm ------(2.22)
change in velocity = ( v∞ ˉ 0 ) = v∞
Tm= T2+T4-T1-T3 ------(2.23)
thrust = ρAviv∞----(2.10)
Iz Ψ'' = T1+T3-T2-T4-------(2.24)
thus
=τ(Ω1'+Ω3'-Ω2'-Ω4')+d(Ω12+Ω32-Ω42_Ω22)
ΔP=T/A=ρviv∞ -----(2.11)
we can neglect the first term because we consider
equating equation (2.8) & (2.11)
all motor to be same
v∞ = 2vi---------(2.12)
IzΨ''=d(Ω12+Ω32-Ω42-Ω22)-----(2.25)
T=2ρAvi2--------(2.13)
Where
therefore
Iz – moment of inertia around z direction.
vi = √w/2ρ ------(2.14)
Ω1,Ω2,Ω3,Ω4- angular velocity linked with four
propeller.
where,
2.4THRUST ANDVOLTAGE RELATIONSHIP
w = T / A = Disc loading
Let
Now kinetic energy per unit time
V = the input voltage
= 0.5 * (ρAvi) * v∞
T = thrust force
=2ρAvi3----(2.15)
η = efficiency of the motor
Since, power generated by the thrust is
= velocity of the induced air
=T*vi=T3/2√2ρg ----(2.16)
f = figure of merit of the propellor
Velocity of Rotor tip = Ωr
Electrical power input the Motor = I * V
Now defining the following co-efficients
η = efficiency of the motor
Thrust : CT = T /ρA(Ωr)2------(2.17)
Power output of the motor = η IV
Power: Cp= P /ρA(Ωr)3------(2.18)
We know that, Thrust power = T v
Where,
we have,
 Thrust power = f * output power of the motor
T vi= fη IV ----(2.26)
T3/2√2ρg=fη IV ----(2.27)
2.5 Modeling of Brushless motor
Using Novotny Abbas circuit model for the
Brushless Motor
B=KT/JmR
Taking Laplace Transform
S ωm (s)=-A ωm (s)+BV(s)-----(2.38)
ωm (s)/V(s)= B/(S+A) ------(2.39)
(S+A) ωm (s)= B V(s) -----(2.40)
ωm (s)/V(s)= B/(S+A) ------(2.41)

2.6 The Derived Dynamic Model:

(EQUATION OF MOTION)

“Figure.3.3.brushlessmotorcircuit diagram”

Applying KVL around the loop, we have

V=Ri+Ldi/dt+e -------(2.28) ----------(2.42)

Where,
Where-
Iz – moment of inertia around z direction.
v- voltage applied across bldc motor.
Iy – moment of inertia around y direction.
R – resistance of the motor winding.
Ix – moment of inertia around x direction.
I – current flowing through motor.
L – inductance of the motor winding. Neglecting the gyroscopic effect in the above
equation as there very small for hovering condition
We know that we have
T=KTi, -----(2.29)
e=V/K v -----(2.30)
Substituting in the previous equation we have
Ldi/dt=V-Ri-ωm/Kv------(2.31)
Where,
ωm – angular velocity of the motor.
------(2.43)
Kv – rpm/volt
Where,
Since L≈0
i=V/R- ωm /RKv-------(2.32)
Tm=KTi=KT[V/R- ωm /RKv] ------(2.33)
Since KV.KT=1
Tm= -KT2/R ωm +(KT/R) V ------(2.34)
Jm dwm/dt = -KT2/R ωm +(KT/R) V -----(2.35)
ώm = -KT2/RJm ωm +(KT/JmR ) V -----(2.36) Where-

ώm=-AWm+BV -----(2.37) Ti- thrust generated by ith rotor.

where A=KT2/RJm
 i = 1,2,3,4

Simplifying
3. Derivation of state equation From equation (2.47)

The system in the state space form can be written U1 = b (Ω12+Ω22+Ω32+Ω42)

as U2= c (Ω42-Ω22)
U3= c (Ω12-Ω32)
X' = function(X, U) U4= d (Ω12+Ω22+Ω32+Ω42)
The following quantities are chosen to be the state
4.1 Control using PID Technique
of the system
The model is written as :
 The angular displacements (Ψ, Θ, Φ) , these
Ix Φ'' = lU2------(2.51)
are the output given by the two accelerometer,
Iy Ө”=lU3-------(2.52)
magnetometer.
Iz Ψ'' = U4------(2.53)
 The angular speeds (Ψ', Θ', Φ'), these are the
l – distance b/w the motor and centre of the
output of the gyros.
vehicle.
 x,y,z,x',y',z' are the linear displacement and
If we include in (4.1), the rotor dynamics and
velocity.
rewrite the model in Laplace domain we obtain:
The inputs are
Φ (s) = B2bl / s2(s+A)2Ix (u42(s) − u22(s))----(2.54)
U1 = (T1+T2+T3+T4)/M -------(2.44)
U2 = l(T4-T2)/ Ix ------(2.45) Ө (s) = B2bl / s2(s+A)2Iy (u32(s) – u12(s))---(2.55)
U3=l(T1-T3)/Iy -------(2.46)
U4=( -T1+T2-T3+T4)/ Iz ------(2.47) Ψ (s) = B2d / s2(s+A)2Iz (−1)i+1 ∑ui2(s)---(2.56)
Now,
From (2.44),(2.45),(2.46),(2.47) and (2.25) Where A and B are the coefficients of the
U1 = b(Ω12+Ω22+Ω32+Ω42)------(2.47) linearized rotor dynamics ,
U2= c(Ω42-Ω22)------(2.48)
U3=c(Ω12-Ω32)-----(2.49) Applying Laplace Transform in Equation (2.51),
U4=d(Ω12+Ω22+Ω32+Ω42)-----(2.50 (2.52) and (2.53) we get

Φ(s) = (l / s2Ix) U2(s)----(2.57)

4. Control strategy
Ө(s)= (l/s2Iy) U3(s)-----(2.58)
In this paper we are going to develop a control
Ψ (s) = 1 / s2Iz U4 (s)-----(2.59)
strategy which can suitably solve our attitude,
altitude and position control problem for a “Four
Rotor Unmanned Aerial Vehicle”. For this purpose
we have analyzed all the possible system control After substituting the numerical values gives:
methods and then arrived at a conclusion that out of
all conventional control methods PID control is Φ (s) = (12.533 / s2) U2 (s) ----(2.60)
suitable for the all the three controls of a four rotor Ө (s) = (12.533 / s2) U3 (s)------(2.61)
UAV. Ψ (s) = (37.979 / s2) U4 (s)------(2.62)

The derived MIMO model, constituted of 4.2.Quadrotor Parameters for Simulation

translational and rotational subsystem, is “Table.1.Four rotor helicopter parameters”
dynamically unstable. Since the system is non
linear, we have to first linearize it before the Name Value
application of PID controller to the subsystems. l=Distance of the motor 33cm
The stability of the control design will be analysed from the centre
by Lyapunov global stability theorem. W=Length and breadth of 15cm
the central hub=
The inputs from equation (2.43 ) are h =Height of the motor 2cm
Jm 7.5×10-4 kgm2
U1 = (T1+T2+T3+T4)/M (vertical force input) KT 1/1000
U2 = l (T4-T2)/ Ix (Roll input)
U3= l (T1-T3)/ Iy (Pitch input) A 4.83×10-3
U4= (-T1+T2-T3+T4)/ Iz (Yaw input) B 4.33
IY 0.02035 kgm2 Transfer Function = = (12.533 / s2)------(2.64)
Iz 0.02633 kgm2
Ix 0.02035 kgm2 const1, const2, const3 values are varied until the
required PID gains are obtained.

5. Simulation result

Tuning Of the PID Controller

For the tuning of the PID controller we are using
MATLAB programming. We write a m-file
program and run it in command window to get the
stabilized output of the closed loop PID controller.
We use trial and error method to get the tuning
parameters of PID controller (Kp, Kd, Ki) by
putting different values of the tuning parameters.

The design requirements are

• Overshoot: Less than 10%

• Rise time: Less than 2 seconds
• Settling time: Less than 10 seconds “Figure.5.1. Amplitude vs Time curve for tunned
value of PID(const1=1,const2=1,2,const3=0.3)”
• Steady-state error: Less than 2%

The transfer function of a PID controller is:

Kp + Ki / s + Kd s = (Kd s2 + Kp s + Ki) / s-----(2.63)

The m- file program used for the tuning is given as

below:

de=0.2;

Kp=const1;

Kd=const2; “Figure.5.2. Amplitude vs Time curve for tunned

value of PID(const1=0.6,const2=2,const3=0.3)”
Ki=const3;

numo=[12.533];

deno=[1 0 0];

numpid=[Kd Kp Ki];

denpid=[1 0];

num1=conv(numo,numpid);

den1=conv(deno,denpid);

[numc,denc] = cloop(num1,den1); “Figure.5.3. Amplitude vs Time curve for tunned

value of PID const1=0.6,const2=1.2,const3=0.9)”
t=0:0.01:10;

step (de*numc,denc,t)

5.1.Output for Different Values of Tuning

Parameters:
Roll and Pitch Closed loop control
 By observing the graph accurate values of tuning
parameters are:

Kp=0.65 , Kd=0.8 , Ki=0.55

So putting the value of PID constant in

equation(2.54), (2.55), (2.56) as follows-

“Figure.5.4. Amplitude vs Time curve for tunned
value of PID const1=0.6, const2=1.2, const3=0.3)”
By observing the graphs for different values of Kp,
Kd, Ki; we get the accurate tuning parameters as:
(Kd s2 + Kp s + Ki) / s Φ (s) = B2bl / s2(s+A)2Ixx
(u42(s) − u22(s)) ------(2.67)
(Kd s2 + Kp s + Ki) / s Ө (s) = B2bl / s2(s+A)2Iyy (u32(s)
– u12(s)) ------(2.68)
(Kd s + Kp s + Ki) / s Ψ (s) = B d / s2(s+A)2Izz
2 2

Kp=0.6, Kd=1.2 and Ki=0.3 (−1)i+1 Σui2(s)------(2.69)

For Yaw Control:
Transfer function = (37.979 / s2)-----(2.66)
The m- file program used for the tuning is given as
below:
So we get the difference value in the two motor in
terms of frequency and it is easy to transfer into the
time domain, by iterating the above equations we
can achieve the hovering condition of a four rotor
helicopter.

de=0.2; 6. Conclusion
Kp=2; We have presented the system modelling and PID
control system for the four rotor helicopter. The
Kd=3;
result we got from the graph for the constant term
Ki=4; PID is going to use for reducing the error in the
control system which will results in hovering of the
numo=[37.979]; four rotor helicopter. Our upcoming interest is to
implement this control system in four rotor
deno=[1 0 0]; helicopter and also implementation of more sensors
for outside flying purpose.
numpid=[Kd Kp Ki];

denpid=[1 0];

num1=conv(numo,numpid);

den1=conv(deno,denpid);

[numc,denc] = cloop(num1,den1);

t=0:0.01:10; References
step (de*numc,denc,t)
[1]. Arda Ozgur Kivrak, “Design of control system
for a quadrotor flight vehicle equipped with inertial
sensor”, Atilim University. (December 2006)

[2]. Chirag amrutabhai Patel, “Building a test bed

for mini quadrotor unmanned aerial vehicle with
protective shroud”, Sardar Patel University. (India
2002)

[3].Gabriel M.Hofmann, Haomiao Huang and

“Figure 5.5 Amplitude vs time cure for tuned Claire J.Tomline, “Quadrotor helicopter flight
value of PID (const1=0.65,const2=0.8, dynamics and control”.
const3=0.55)”
[4]. P.Mckerrow, “Modelling the draganflyer four
rotor helicopter”, University of Wollongong.
(2004)

[5]. P.Pound and R.Mahon, “Design of four rotor

aerial robo”t, Australian National University.(2002)

[6]. Samir Bouabdallah, “Design and control of

quadrotors with application to autonomous flying”,
Ecole Polythenique Federal de Lausanne.
(December 2006)

[7]. Vincente Martinez, “Modelling of the flight

dynamics of a quadrotor helicopter”, Carnfield
University