1 / 21

Cooperative Control of UAVs

Cooperative Control of UAVs. A mixed-initiative approach. Ltn. Elói Pereira Portuguese Air Force Academy E-mail: etpereira@emfa.pt. Summary. AFA project on UAVs; Cooperative Control of UAVs in mixed initiative environments; Military and Civil applications;

mvirginia
Download Presentation

Cooperative Control of UAVs

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Cooperative Control of UAVs A mixed-initiative approach Ltn. Elói Pereira Portuguese Air Force Academy E-mail: etpereira@emfa.pt

  2. Summary • AFA project on UAVs; • Cooperative Control of UAVs in mixed initiative environments; • Military and Civil applications; • Formalism for Allocation and Exchange vehicles within teams; • Example: Load Balancing between teams; • Testbed description; • Conclusions and future work.

  3. ANTEX – Portuguese Air Force Project on UAVs • Development of UAVs platforms to use as technologies demonstrators in several fields as: • Scientific Research; • Defense; • Civil applications… • Give Air Force know how in operation of UAVs; • To promote R&D initiatives with others organizations: • Faculty of Engineering of Porto University; • Technical Lisbon University; • University of California at Berkeley; • University of Victoria; • University FAF Munich; • Ecoles d'officiers de l'Armée de l'air (internship of two cadets)

  4. Process Communicate Sense Execute Kill Plan Cooperatively Assess Kill Process Sense Cooperative Control of UAVs • Vehicles exchange information and commands in a network, changing their dependencies, states and mission roles to achieve a common goal; Source: [MICA Project]

  5. Sensors Mixed Initiative • Planning procedure and execution control must allow intervention by experienced human operators. • Essential experience and military insight of these operators cannot be reflected in mathematical models • It is impossible to design vehicle and team controllers that can respond satisfactorily to every possible contingency. In unforeseen situations, these controllers ask the human operators for direction. [Pravin et al.] The Commander is an actuator Plant Better Performance Better Decisions Better Info Decision & Control Commander/ Operator Battlespace Decision Aids Courses of Action Embedded Hierarchy Better status knowledge Measured status Estimation Source: [MICA Project]

  6. Military and Civil Applications • Research topic that has been attracting the attention of control, communications and computer science researchers; • Possible applications with large societal impact are raising interest outside the scientific community; • Military missions: • Combat; • Reconnaissance; • Surveillance; • Patrol; • Civil missions: • Forest inspections; • Security; • Environmental applications;

  7. Example: Strike Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD) mission • MICA – Mixed-Initiative Control of Automata Teams (DARPA); • Mission: Attack of the Blue force of UAV against Red's ground force of SAM sites and radars Primary targets sms14 sls7 sls8 sms11 Maneuvers: • Follow_path • Loitter • Attack_jam sms17 sls6 sms15 sms12 sls5 sms13 Blue base J. Borges de Sousa, T. Simsek e P. Varaiya, “Task planning and execution for UAV teams”, Proceedings of the Decision and Control Conference, Bahamas, 2004

  8. Example • Execution control Primary targets Team A sms14 Leg 6 sls7 sls8 sms11 Leg 1 sms17 sls6 sms15 Team B sms12 sls5 sms13 Blue base J. Borges de Sousa, T. Simsek e P. Varaiya, “Task planning and execution for UAV teams”, Proceedings of the Decision and Control Conference, Bahamas, 2004

  9. Example • Execution control Primary targets Attack segment sms14 Leg 6 sls7 sls8 sms11 Leg 1 sms17 sls6 sms15 sms12 sls5 sms13 Attack segment Blue base J. Borges de Sousa, T. Simsek e P. Varaiya, “Task planning and execution for UAV teams”, Proceedings of the Decision and Control Conference, Bahamas, 2004

  10. Example • Execution control Primary targets Attack segment sms14 Leg 6 Leg 7 sls7 sls8 Precedes Safe path sms11 Leg 1 sms17 sls6 Leg 2 sms15 sms12 Safe path sls5 sms13 Blue base Attack segment J. Borges de Sousa, T. Simsek e P. Varaiya, “Task planning and execution for UAV teams”, Proceedings of the Decision and Control Conference, Bahamas, 2004

  11. Example • Execution control Primary targets Subtask 2 Leg 8 sms14 Leg 6 Leg 7 sls7 sls8 Precedes sms11 Leg 1 Subtask 1 Leg 5 sms17 sls6 Leg 4 Leg 2 sms15 Leg 3 sms12 sls5 sms13 Blue base

  12. Formalism for Allocation and Exchange vehicles within teams teams vehicles • Matrix formalism: • Initial Allocation of vehicles to teams • Transition-vehicle incident matrix • Final Allocation of vehicles to teams • The formalism could be used to design high level controllers in mixed-initiative environments Decision variables Team-transition incident matrix

  13. Load-balancing algorithm • Load-balance the number of vehicles within teams; • Heterogeneous vehicles • Different fuel reserves; • Different number of weapons; • Different types of payloads; • … • Performance Measure: Difference between the number of vehicles in the team and the number of vehicles initially planned for that team; • Problem is solved as a Binary Integer Programming (BIP) optimization problem.

  14. Example: Load-balancing • Five teams with different necessities; • Fuel constraints;

  15. Actual UAV system configuration Autopilot Avionics Sensors Ground Station Payload Devices Servos Neptus Command and Control Interface (FEUP) Autopilot Avionics Sensors Payload Devices Servos

  16. Advanced Configuration - Work in progress • Autopilot manages low-level flight control • PC-104 for higher-level tasks (vision processing, trajectory planning, coordinated between UAVs) Sensors Servos Autopilot Avionics Payload Devices PC-104 Ground Station Sensors Servos Autopilot Avionics Payload Devices PC-104 Aircraft Low level control and logging Payload High level Control and logging

  17. Vehicles ANTEX-X02 (AFA) Silver Fox (ACR) NOVA (AFA) Flying Wing (AFA) ANTEX-X03 (AFA) Lusitânia (FEUP)

  18. Operation of UAVs and Cooperative control simulation

  19. Conclusions and future work • Cooperative control of UAVs is a research field with large margin of progression and with possible applications with societal impact (dull, dirty and dangerous missions); • The intervention of the operator in the planning and execution control (mixed-initiative) is crucial in missions with large uncertainty, namely in military operations; • ANTEX developments in a near short term: • Operation with several UAVs; • Track and follow structures (rivers, roads…) based on vision payloads; • Autonomous landing; • Mid-term objective: • Operation with others types of unmanned vehicles (underwater, surface).

  20. Questions? Thank you for your attention

  21. Lusitânia UAV (FEUP) Maximum Take Off Weight 10 kg Wing Span 2.4 m Payload 5 kg Endurance 0.75h On board payload: wireless video camera Nova UAV (AFA) Maximum Take Off Weight 4 kg Wing Span 1.6 m Payload 0.5 kg Endurance 0.75h Flying Wing UAV (AFA) Maximum Take Off Weight 3 kg Wing Span 1.6 m Payload 0.2 kg Endurance 0.3h ANTEX-M X03 (AFA) Wing Span 6 m Maximum Speed 130 km/h Stall Speed 40 km/h Maximum Take Off Weight 100 kg Payload 30 kg Engine 22 hp Endurance/Fuel Capacity 0.3h/4L ANTEX-M X02 (AFA) Maximum Take Off Weight 10 kg Wing Span 2.4 m Maximum Speed 151 km/h Payload 4 kg Endurance/Fuel Capacity 0.3h/0.2L Silver Fox (ACR) Maximum Take Off Weight 12.2 kg Wing Span 2.4 m Maximum Speed 203 km/h Payload 2.27 kg Endurance/Fuel Capacity 10h/2.6L Vehicles Characteristics

More Related