Evolutionary Autopilot Design Approach for UAV Quadrotor by Using GA

  • M. ZarebEmail author
  • W. Nouibat
  • Y. Bestaoui
  • R. Ayad
  • Y. Bouzid
Research Paper


This paper presents an off-line design strategy of an intelligent 3D autopilot of Micro-UAV Quadrotor. It consists of hybridization between two fuzzy controllers for the x and y motions and four PID classical controllers for the attitude/altitude motions. Genetic algorithms are used to adapt and optimize the value of the six controllers' parameters to achieve the best performance and decrease the consumed energy. Also, in order to ensure the global optimum control parameters, genetic algorithm named Bi-GA is used to automatically configure the two GAs using for the tuning process. This design strategy can be used to different types of Quadrotor (with cross or X configuration). Initially, in order to get the controller parameters, simulation tests are made on a commercial Quadrotor named AR.Drone V2. Finally, these parameters values are tested in an experiment using the robot operating system. The results of these experimentations confirm the effectiveness of using genetic algorithms in the design of intelligent PID autopilot.


Mini-UAV Fuzzy control Autopilot Genetic algorithms 


  1. Ahn YM, Block DJ, Sreenivas RS (2015) Autonomous navigation and localization of a quadrotor in an indoor environment. J Aerosp Inf Syst 12(12):699–709Google Scholar
  2. Aloui S, Pags O, Hajjaji AE, Chaari A, Koubaa Y (2011) Improved fuzzy sliding mode control for a class of MIMO nonlinear uncertain and perturbed systems. Appl Soft Comput 11(1):820–826Google Scholar
  3. Azar AT, Serrano FE (2018) Fractional order sliding mode pid controller/observer for continuous nonlinear switched systems with pso parameter tuning. In: International conference on advanced machine learning technologies and applications. Springer, pp 13–22Google Scholar
  4. Azar AT, Serrano FE, Vaidyanathan S (2018) Proportional integral loop shaping control design with particle swarm optimization tuning. In: Advances in system dynamics and control. IGI Global, pp 24–57Google Scholar
  5. Babaei A, Mortazavi M, Moradi M (2011a) Classical and fuzzy-genetic autopilot design for unmanned aerial vehicles. Appl Soft Comput 11(1):365–372Google Scholar
  6. Babaei AR, Mortazavi M, Moradi MH (2011b) Fuzzy-genetic autopilot design for nonminimum phase and nonlinear unmanned aerial vehicles. J Aerosp Eng 25(1):1–9Google Scholar
  7. Babu V M, Das K, Kumar S (2017) Designing of self tuning pid controller for ar drone quadrotor. In: 2017 18th international conference on advanced robotics (ICAR). IEEE, pp 167–172Google Scholar
  8. Beard R (2008) Quadrotor dynamics and control rev 0.1Google Scholar
  9. Bijani V, Khosravi A (2018) Robust pid controller design based on h theory and a novel constrained artificial bee colony algorithm. Trans Inst Meas Control 40(1):202–209Google Scholar
  10. Bingul Z, Karahan O (2018) Comparison of pid and fopid controllers tuned by pso and abc algorithms for unstable and integrating systems with time delay. Optim Control Appl Methods 39(4):1431–1450MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Blondin M-J, Sanchis J, Sicard P, Herrero J (2018) New optimal controller tuning method for an avr system using a simplified ant colony optimization with a new constrained nelder-mead algorithm. Appl Soft Comput 62:216–229Google Scholar
  12. Bodrumlu T, Soylemez M T, Mutlu I (2016) Modelling and control of the qball x4 quadrotor system based on pid and fuzzy logic structure. In: 13th European workshop advanced control and diagnosisGoogle Scholar
  13. Bonyadi MR, Michalewicz Z (2017) Particle swarm optimization for single objective continuous space problems: a review. Evolut Comput 25(1):1–54Google Scholar
  14. Bošković M, Rapaić M, Jeličić Z (2018) Particle swarm optimization of pid controller under constraints on performance and robustness. Int J Electr Eng Comput 2(1):1–10Google Scholar
  15. Bouabdallah S (2007) Design and control of quadrotors with application to autonomous flying. Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne, SwisslandGoogle Scholar
  16. Bouabdallah S, Noth A, Siegwart R (2004) Pid vs lq control techniques applied to an indoor micro quadrotor. In: 2004 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS) (IEEE Cat. No.04CH37566), vol 3, pp 2451–2456Google Scholar
  17. Boubertakh H (2017) Optimal stabilization of a quadrotor uav by a constrained fuzzy control and pso. In: MATEC web of conferences, vol 99. EDP Sciences, p 03001Google Scholar
  18. Bouzid Y, Siguerdidjane H, Bestaoui Y, Zareb M (2016) Energy based 3d autopilot for vtol uav under guidance and navigation constraints. J Intell Robot Syst 87:1–12Google Scholar
  19. Casana J, Kantner J, Wiewel A, Cothren J (2014) Archaeological aerial thermography: a case study at the chaco-era blue j community, New Mexico. J Archaeol Sci 45:207–219Google Scholar
  20. Castillo O, Amador-Angulo L (2018) A generalized type-2 fuzzy logic approach for dynamic parameter adaptation in bee colony optimization applied to fuzzy controller design. Inf Sci 460:476–496Google Scholar
  21. Chiou JS, Tran HK, Shieh MY, Nguyen TN (2016) Particle swarm optimization algorithm reinforced fuzzy proportional integral derivative for a quadrotor attitude control. Adv Mech Eng 8(9):1687814016668705Google Scholar
  22. Chunhua Z, Kovacs MJ (2012) The application of small unmanned aerial systems for precision agriculture: a review. Precis Agric 13(6):693–712Google Scholar
  23. Demir BE, Bayir R, Duran F (2016) Real-time trajectory tracking of an unmanned aerial vehicle using a self-tuning fuzzy proportional integral derivative controller. Micro Air Veh 8(4):252–268Google Scholar
  24. DJI (2018) Accessed 12 May 2018
  25. Eberhart RC, Shi Y (1998) Comparison between genetic algorithms and particle swarm optimization. In: International conference on evolutionary programming. Springer, pp 611–616Google Scholar
  26. Eiben AE, Smit SK (2011) Parameter tuning for configuring and analyzing evolutionary algorithms. Swarm Evolut Comput 1(1):19–31Google Scholar
  27. Engel J, Sturm J, Cremers D (2014) Scale-aware navigation of a low-cost quadrocopter with a monocular camera. Robot Auton Syst 62(11):1646–1656Google Scholar
  28. FAA (2016) FAA aerospace forecast fiscal years 2016–2036. Accessed 9 June 2018
  29. Fairchild C, Harman TL (2016) ROS robotics by example. Packt Publishing, BirminghamGoogle Scholar
  30. Fu C, Olivares-Mendez MA, Suarez-Fernandez R, Campoy P (2014) Monocular visual-inertial slam-based collision avoidance strategy for faibabaei, l-safe uav using fuzzy logic controllers. J Intell Robot Syst 73:513–533Google Scholar
  31. Fu C, Sarabakha A, Kayacan E, Wagner C, John R, Garibaldi JM (2016) A comparative study on the control of quadcopter uavs by using singleton and non-singleton fuzzy logic controllers. In: 2016 IEEE international conference on fuzzy systems (FUZZ-IEEE), pp 1023–1030Google Scholar
  32. Gaur M, Chaudhary H, Khatoon S, Singh R (2016) Genetic algorithm based trajectory stabilization of quadrotor. In: 2016 Second international innovative applications of computational intelligence on power, energy and controls with their impact on humanity (CIPECH). IEEE, pp 29–33Google Scholar
  33. Ho Y, Pepyne D (2002) Simple explanation of the no-free-lunch theorem and its implications. J Optim Theory Appl 115:549–570MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. Ho H, Wong Y, Rad A (2009) Adaptive fuzzy sliding mode control with chattering elimination for nonlinear SISO systems. Simul Model Pract Theory 17(7):1199–1210Google Scholar
  35. Houck CR, Joines J, Kay MG (1995) A genetic algorithm for function optimization: a matlab implementation. Ncsu-ie tr 95(09):1–10Google Scholar
  36. Ibarra L, Webb C (2016) Advantages of fuzzy control while dealing with complex/unknown model dynamics: a quadcopter example. In: New applications of artificial intelligence. IntechOpenGoogle Scholar
  37. Jiménez RL, Aguilar AG, De Velasco VLG (2018) Close loop step test used for tuning pid controller by genetic algorithms. Pistas Educ 36(112):81–98Google Scholar
  38. Joyce T, Herrmann JM (2018) A review of no free lunch theorems, and their implications for metaheuristic optimisation. In: Yang X-S (ed) Nature-inspired algorithms and applied optimization. Springer, pp 27–51Google Scholar
  39. Kespry (2018) Accessed 12 May 2018
  40. Mahtani A (2016) Effective robotics programming with ROS, 3rd edn. Packt Publishing, BirminghamGoogle Scholar
  41. Martinez A, Fernndez E (2013) Learning ROS for robotics programming. Packt Publishing, BirminghamGoogle Scholar
  42. Meyer DE, Lo E, Afshari S, Vaughan A, Rissolo D, Kuester F (2016) Utility of low-cost drones to generate 3d models of archaeological sites from multisensor data. SAA Archaeol Record Mag Soc Am Archaeol 16(2):22–24Google Scholar
  43. Mizumoto M (1995) Realization of pid controls by fuzzy control methods. Fuzzy Sets Syst 70(2–3):171–182MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  44. Nath UM, Dey C, Mudi RK (2017) Fuzzy-based auto-tuned imc-pid controller for level control process. In: Mandal J, Dutta P, Mukhopadhyay S (eds) International conference on computational intelligence, communications, and business analytics. Springer, pp 372–381Google Scholar
  45. Nath UM, Dey C, Mudi RK (2018) Fuzzy-tuned simc controller for level control loop. In: Bhattacharyya S, Sen S, Dutta M, Biswas P, Chattopadhyay H (eds) Industry interactive innovations in science, engineering and technology. Springer, pp 239–245Google Scholar
  46. Nisi K, Nagaraj B, Agalya A (2018) Tuning of a pid controller using evolutionary multi objective optimization methodologies and application to the pulp and paper industry. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 9:1–11Google Scholar
  47. Olivares Mendez MA, Mejias L, Campoy P, Mellado-Bataller I, Mondragon I (2012) Uas see-and-avoid using two different approaches of fuzzy control. In: 2012 international conference on unmanned aircraft systems (ICUAS’12)Google Scholar
  48. Özbek NS, Önkol M, Efe MÖ (2016) Feedback control strategies for quadrotor-type aerial robots: a survey. Trans Inst Meas Control 38(5):529–554Google Scholar
  49. Parrot (2018) Accessed 12 May 2018
  50. Passino KM (2005) Biomimicry for optimization, control, and automation. Springer, BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  51. PwC (2016) Clarity from above pwc global report on the commercial applications of drone technology. Accessed 9 June 2018
  52. Qiao WZ, Mizumoto M (1996) Pid type fuzzy controller and parameters adaptive method. Fuzzy Sets Syst 78(1):23–35MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  53. Quigley M, Conley K, Gerkey BP, Faust J, Foote T, Leibs J, Wheeler R, Ng AY (2009) Ros: an open-source robot operating system. In: ICRA workshop on open source softwareGoogle Scholar
  54. Remes B, Hensen D, van Tienen F, Wagter CD, van der Horst E, de Croon G (2013) Paparazzi: how to make a swarm of parrot ar drones fly autonomously based on gps. In: International micro air vehicle conference and flight competitionGoogle Scholar
  55. Santoso F, Garratt MA, Anavatti SG (2017) State-of-the-art intelligent flight control systems in unmanned aerial vehicles. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng 15(2):613–627Google Scholar
  56. Shahriari-kahkeshi M, Sheikholeslam F, Zekri M (2013) Design of adaptive fuzzy wavelet neural sliding mode controller for uncertain nonlinear systems. ISA Trans. 52(3):342–350Google Scholar
  57. Sun X, Cai C, Yang J, Shen X (2015) Route evaluation for unmanned aerial vehicle based on type-2 fuzzy sets. Eng Appl Artif Intell 39:132–145Google Scholar
  58. Tomáš K, Vojtěch V, Daniel F, Jan F (2011) AR-Drone as a platform for robotic research and education. Springer, Berlin, pp 172–186Google Scholar
  59. Vose MD, Darrell Whitley L (1995) The third workshop on foundations of genetic algorithms: held July 31 through August 2, 1994, in Estes Park, ColoradoGoogle Scholar
  60. West JS, Canning GGM, Perryman SA, Kevin K (2017) Novel technologies for the detection of Fusarium head blight disease and airborne inoculum. Trop Plant Pathol 42(3):203–209Google Scholar
  61. Wolpert DH, Macready WG (1997) No free lunch theorems for optimization. IEEE Trans Evolut Comput 1(1):67–82Google Scholar
  62. Yuneec (2018) Accessed 12 May 2018
  63. Zareb M, Ayad R, Nouibat W (2013) Fuzzy-pid hybrid control system to navigate an autonomous mini-quadrotor. In: 3rd international conference on systems and control, pp 906–913Google Scholar
  64. Zulu A, John S (2016) A review of control algorithms for autonomous quadrotors. CoRR, arXiv:abs/1602.02622

Copyright information

© Shiraz University 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LEPESA Laboratory, USTO-MBOranAlgeria
  2. 2.The University of MascaraMascaraAlgeria
  3. 3.IBISC LaboratoryUniversité d’Évry-Val-d’Essonne (UEVE)ÉvryFrance
  4. 4.Université Hassiba Benbouali de Chlef (UHBC)ChlefAlgeria
  5. 5.CSCS LaboratoryEcole Militaire Polytechnique (EMP)Bordi El bahriAlgeria

Personalised recommendations