On the Development of a Small Hand-held

Multi-UAV Platform for Surveillance and

Monitoring
Gustavo S. C. Avellar

, Goncalo D. Thums

, Rog erio R. Lima

,
Paulo Iscold

, Leonardo A. B. T orres

and Guilherme A. S. Pereira

Graduate Program in Electrical Engineering,

Mechanical Engineering Department,

Electronics Engineering Department,

Electrical Engineering Department
Federal University of Minas Gerais
Av. Ant onio Carlos 6627, 31270-901, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil
Emails: {

gustavoavellar,

iscold,

gpereira}@ufmg.br
{

rlima,

torres}@cpdee.ufmg.br,

goncalodt@yahoo.com.br
AbstractThis paper addresses the ongoing process of
development of a small hand-held multiple unmanned
aerial vehicle platform for surveillance and monitoring.
The project cover all phases of development, from aero-
dynamic design and mechanical assembly, through ne
tuning low level control loops and design of an attitude
and heading reference system, up to implementation of
navigation algorithms and nally ight testing. Commer-
cial hardware is used to speed up development, allowing
the team responsible for implementing the navigation
algorithms to execute and test while the team responsible
for the aerodynamics and electronics can design and
compare results.
I. INTRODUCTION
Small Unnamed Aerial Vehicles (SUAVs) are
a class of robotic airships, which equipped with
cameras and special sensors, can be used in several
applications. The importance of these vehicles has
grown continuously in the last years, especially for
military and reconnaissance purposes, particularly
in operations where the tasks are dangerous or
tedious for human pilots. A special type of SUAV
is constituted by hand launched xed-wing air
vehicles that can be easily operated by a single
user in an outdoor environment. For this vehicles,
several applications exist, such as forest re moni-
toring [1], multispectral agricultural remote sensing
and crop management [2], urban environment mon-
itoring [3], real time mapping of disaster areas [4],
power line inspection [5] and many others.
The main objective of this paper is to describe
the development of a hand-held multiple SUAV
platform for surveillance and monitoring. At the
Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), the
Research and Development of Autonomous Vehi-
cles (PDVA) group has been designing, building
and operating this kind of aircraft since 2004 [6],
[7], and, motivated by a national fund, started
in 2010 to develop new platforms and control
and guidance strategies that allow a group of
autonomous xed-wind vehicles to cooperate in
the coverage of large areas in minimal time. This
platform has many relevant applications to Brazil,
such as environment monitoring, aiming nature
preservation, and aiding authorities to ght against
drug trafcking.
Over the past decade, several research groups
from all over the world have endeavored to develop
xed wing UAV platforms like the one that is being
developed by the PDVA group at UFMG. MIT re-
searchers have designed a platform of eight UAVs
to test coordination and control algorithms [8].
Low level control commands are executed by
CloudCaps Piccolo commercial autopilot. Plan-
ning and guidance high level algorithms run at the
ground control station (GCS), where also occurs all
inter UAV communications. Stanford DragonFly
UAV Platform consists of two UAVs entirely de-
veloped by their research group, including the au-
2013 International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems (ICUAS)
May 28-31, 2013, Grand Hyatt Atlanta, Atlanta, GA
978-1-4799-0817-2/13/$31.00 2013 IEEE 405
Fig. 1. UAV Development: From the standard Zagi (back) to the
current platform (front).
topilot. The platform is used to test a real time op-
erating system, as well as experimental validation
of single UAV hybrid control and multiple UAV
collision avoidance [9]. Both, low level control
and high level guidance and navigation algorithms
run on the same hardware. This is similar to the
solution we are adopting in our system. As in MIT
platform, inter UAV communication is done by
the GCS. Berkeley UAV platform was developed
to test vision-based navigation, obstacle avoidance
and collaborative patrolling algorithms [10]. They
use the same autopilot hardware as MITs, but high
level navigation and guidance algorithms run on a
PC104 hardware onboard each UAV.
The unmanned aerial system presented in this
paper consists of a group of SUAVs equipped with
a on-board Gumstix computer and ground control
station software and hardware, as well as navi-
gation and guidance algorithms. In the following
sections each subsystem will be detailed and some
experimental results shown.
II. DEVELOPMENT
A. Aircraft Aerodynamic Design
Aiming a simple operation and a very simple
design, we have chosen to use ying wing aerial
platforms. For preliminary tests, a modied version
of the well-known Zagi ying wing was devel-
oped (Fig. 1). This aircraft has no rudders and ele-
vators. Ailerons are combined in a control surface
called elevon. In order to keep the wing load under
practical limits that assure good ight qualities, a
bigger version of this wing was designed. It must
be noticed that a ying wing design is not scalable,
due the fact that the airframe center of gravity
(CG) position is not proportional to the size of the
airplane. Typically, the CG moves backward when
the scale is increased. In order to keep a proper CG
position, the sweep angle of the wing was changed.
A new sweep angle is determined in order to keep
the CG in a position so that the wing will have null
pitch moment in a predetermined airspeed, with no
elevons deection, what should guarantee minimal
drag.
As the main purpose of this project is the
development of a surveillance UAV, the desired
airspeed must be the maximum endurance airspeed
(maximum C
3/2
L
/C
D
), where C
L
is lift coefcient
and C
D
is drag coefcient. Typically this value
occurs at lift coefcients very close to the stall
and the control of the UAV becomes much more
difcult, especially at turbulent conditions. In order
to guarantee better control characteristics, with a
good endurance, the sweep angle was adjusted
to the best glide ratio speed (maximum C
L
/C
D
).
During the operation, it is still possible to y
the airplane at low airspeeds, but not with null
command deection. After adjusting the sweep
angle, it is also checked if there is positive stability
margins using a non-linear vortex lattice method
code developed in-home [11].
The model was built using Styrofoam cut with
hot-wire and covered with polypropylene plastic
tape glued with contact glue. Some cavities were
cut on the Styrofoam using a CNC machine, in
order to place all equipment necessary for the
proposed mission. Flight tests determined that the
airplane had a very low critical utter speed due
to the lack of rigidity, the long wing-span and
the mass concentration close to the wing root. In
order to increase the critical utter speed, a spar
was added to the wing using two tapes of uni-
directional carbon ber, one on each side (upper
and lower) of the wing.
After some successful ight tests with this model
a further development was started. The idea was
to design and build a new wing with improved
aerodynamics characteristics. A new wing platform
406
was chosen, with higher aspect ratio. Also, the
fabrication process was changed and the wings,
in this case, were built on CNC cut molds using
ber glass, carbon ber and PVC rigid foam. This
fabrication process was more difcult and slower
than the previous one, but the surface quality
of the wing was increased, which improved the
aerodynamics performance. The utter problem
still prevailed and, in this case, the main problem
was the lack of rigidity on the wing spar through
the fuselage. The best aerodynamic performance
was evident, but also a reduction of the ight
quality of the airplane, which is not a problem
for the automatic control system. Regarding to
this, the main problem was the marginal lateral
control during low airspeed turns. In order to
improve this behavior, two wing-fences were added
near the elevons wing-span station. This solution
prevented the elevons to stall during low airspeed
turns, improving the ight with a non-noticeable
reduction of performance.
For both models developed, the aerodynamic
model was determined using a non-linear vortex
lattice method code developed in-home. The ad-
vantage of these procedures is the possibility to
predict the airplane behavior before and beyond
the stall, during symmetrical and non-symmetrical
ight conditions. As the model is a ying wing, the
vortex-lattice model is very reliable and just small
adjusts are necessary to take into consideration the
inuences of the small fuselage, wing-lets, and in
the second model case, the wing-fences.
B. Ground Control Station Software and Hardware
The ground control station is responsible for
coordinating the ight path of a single UAV or a
multiple UAV system. It also can run the navigation
algorithms and send heading and speed references
to the on-board controller in the UAV. The hard-
ware consists solely of a rugged laptop computer
connected via Serial RS-232 to a wireless modem
(Fig. 2).
Software development began with specication
of system requirements and the separation of func-
tionalities into modules. Each module has its inter-
faces to exchange information with other modules.
We developed a graphical interface which gathers
map data from Internet databases and allows users
to select waypoints to control multiple UAVs and
Fig. 2. Ground control station.
view their sensor data. The GCS uses Mavlink pro-
tocol [12] for communication. It is also possible to
choose from two other communication protocols,
Stanag 4586 and MicroPilot, through conversion.
Currently, we are using MicroPilot
HORIZON
mp
[13] ground control software,
so that the development of other areas of the
project will not be delayed. Horizon
mp
provides a
visual interface with a map in which is possible to
track UAV ight paths and monitor aircraft status.
In addition, it is also an interface to the autopilot,
allowing to dene waypoints and record telemetry
and sensor data.
C. Attitude and Heading Reference System
The rst stage of the development of an attitude
and heading reference system (AHRS) is state
estimation to perform ight path reconstruction.
We employed an unscented Kalman lter (UKF)
to determine biases associated to each sensor in
the inertial measurement unit and to reconstruct
UAV trajectory from low frequency GPS data. The
results were compared with an extended Kalman
lter, which was outperformed in all aspects [14].
In the next step of the sensor fusion algorithm,
sensor data must be processed by a DSP to estimate
UAV attitude and heading [15]. Three existing
attitude estimation algorithms were tested in a sim-
ulation environment and a new one was proposed.
The proposed algorithm, called mEKF-7s, is based
on the mEKF-4s algorithm, presented in [16]. Both
algorithms make compensations based on vehicle
accelerations, but only mEKF-7s estimates gyrom-
eters biases. In this way, sensors were modeled
to include error sources such as bias, scale factor,
407
cross-coupling sensitivity, misalignment, noise and
quantization. The proposed algorithm compensates
distortion in accelerometer readings due to dy-
namic maneuvers through angular rates, velocities
and accelerations obtained by derivation of GPS
position measurements.
The extended Kalman lter proposed was mod-
eled with seven states such that
x = f (x, u) +w
y = h(x) +v,
(1)
where x = [e
0
e
1
e
2
e
3
b
p
b
q
b
r
]
T
R
71
is the
system state vector in which the rst four elements
are the attitude quaternion representation and the
last three are gyro biases; u = [p q r]
T
R
31
is
the system input, composed by gyrometer readings;
y = [
m

m

m
1]
T
R
41
is the augmented
orientation vector with the rst three elements
being Euler angles obtained from magnetometer
measurements and the projection of the gravity
vector as measured by the accelerometers, but
taking into consideration the correction associated
with aircrafts accelerated movements. Process and
measurement noises are represented by w and v;
f (x, u) is the dynamic equation, given by
f (x, u) =
1
2

e1(p bp) e2(q bq) e3(r br)

+e0(p bp) e3(q bq) + e2(r br)
+e3(p bp) + e0(q bq) e1(r br)
e2(p bp) + e1(q bq) + e0(r br)
0
0
0

(2)
and the output equation is as follows
h(x) =

tan
1

2(e
0
e
1
+e
2
e
3
)
e
2
0
e
2
1
e
2
2
+e
2
3

sin
1
(2(e
1
e
3
+ e
0
e
2
))
tan
1

2(e
1
e
2
+e
0
e
3
)
e
2
0
+e
2
1
e
2
2
e
2
3

e
2
0
+ e
2
1
+ e
2
2
+ e
2
3

. (3)
As mentioned earlier, the accelerometers read-
ings (a
x
, a
y
, a
z
) must be compensated to correct
the distortions caused by dynamic maneuvers. This
compensation is calculated from linear velocities
(U, V, W), linear accelerations (

U,

V ,

W) and an-
gular velocities (p, q, r).
g
x
= a
x
[

U + (Wq V r)]
g
y
= a
y
[

V + (Ur Wp)]
g
z
= a
z
[

W + (V p Uq)].
(4)
U and V velocities are calculated from V
GPS
and

GPS
, which are ground speed and heading angle,
obtained from GPS receiver, as seen bellow
U = V
k
GPS
cos(
k
GPS
)
V = V
k
GPS
sin(
k
GPS
),
(5)
W is calculated from the nite differences of
altitude readings (h
GPS
) from the GPS receiver
W =
h
k
GPS
h
k1
GPS
T
GPS
. (6)
T
GPS
is the GPS update time. In the same way,

U,

V and

W are estimated from nite differences
such as

U =
U
k
U
k1
T
GPS
,

V =
V
k
V
k1
T
GPS
,

W =
W
k
W
k1
T
GPS
.
(7)
However, it is important to highlight that the
above procedure to estimate the vehicles acceler-
ation is very sensitive to the pseudo-random noise
in the GPS receiver data. GPS receivers that are ca-
pable to directly provide speed measurements from
phase carrier analysis should be preferred [17].
The AHRS system that we are developing
(Fig. 3), comprises of a sensor board equipped
with triaxial accelerometers, gyrometers and mag-
netometers, a barometer for high precision altitude
measurement and a differential pressure sensor for
air speed measurement. These sensors are con-
nected to a digital signal processor (DSP) over an
I
2
C bus gathering data at 50 Hz. The DSP receives
Fig. 3. Attitude and Heading Reference System (prototype).
408
GPS data from a GPS receiver through a serial RS-
232 port at 5 Hz.
At the current moment, the control system in
use is a MicroPilot 2128
g
, which was acquired
to allow us to test the airframe and navigation
algorithms in the same time that we developed
our own. It communicates with a ground control
station through an wireless modem and is capable
of autonomously y the aircraft by setting a series
of waypoints dened by the user.
D. Control System
Multi-loop cascading PID controllers are widely
adopted in UAVs. Fig. 4 shows the PID controllers
architecture used in MicroPilot. In this architecture,
the PID controllers are placed in a decentralized
conguration in which each control variable is di-
rectly associated with a PID controller. The reasons
for using this conguration is that the tuning and
re-tuning of the gains are simpler and the system is
tolerant to faults, which means that only the system
variable associated with the control loop is affected
by faults in the loop or the sensor associated to it.
For the longitudinal dynamics control of the
ight, the variables of velocity (V
T
) and pitch
angle () are in cascade conguration. The internal
loop is responsible for the aircraft stabilization
through elevator commands (u
elev
). The altitude
(H) is controlled through variations of power com-
mands (u
thr
) applied to the motor. For the lateral-
directional dynamics control, the variables of roll
angle () and course angle () are in cascade
conguration. The internal loop () generate com-
mands (u
ail
) for the ailerons surfaces. The position
of the rudder (u
rud
) is changed due the control
of the lateral acceleration (y
acc
) which have a
reference value equal to zero. Besides, the feed-
forward gains (K
R
and K
E
) are implemented in a
way to decrease the interaction between the control
variables.
Despite the fact that the above control structure
was designed for general xed wing aircrafts that
can employ rudders, the control structure was ac-
tually used in a tailless aircraft. In this case, the
control loop associated with rudder deection was
simply not used in our experiments. The immediate
consequence of this is that turns are performed
only by banking the aircraft wings, and there is
no attempt to make a so-called coordinated turn (a
V
A
N
T
PID PID
u
elev
u
thr
H

V
T
+
-

V
T
ref
PID PD
+
-
ref
K
R
PID
K
E
+
-
y
acc
0
+
+
u
ail
u
rud
+
-

ref
+
-
V
T
H
ref
PI
+
-
H
y
acc

ref
+
+
| |
Fig. 4. PID controllers conguration for UAVs.
turning maneuver with zero sideslip angle).
It is important to notice that in this control
loop conguration, the elevator deection used to
control speed and motor throttle is used to control
altitude. A great advantage of this specic PID
controller conguration (Fig. 4), is that if the
motor looses power due to low battery charge, the
UAV can glide safely to the ground. This happens
because there is an electronic circuit that cuts
power to the motor when battery charge is low, but
still provides power to the servos and the autopilot
unit. Thus, speed is maintained even without motor
power, preventing the aircraft to enter into a stall
condition.
Normally, PID controller tunning is done by
changing the gains by trial and error during ight
tests, even for commercial products. In this strategy
there is a lack of systematic and consistent control
gains adjustment procedures, which implies in de-
velopment delays and increasing costs. Moreover,
the stability and performance for the system is not
guaranteed.
Our group developed a methodology in which
the optimal gains for the PID controllers are ob-
tained by multi-objective optimization. This min-
imizes properly chosen cost functions that incor-
porate local linear robust stability, together with
performance evaluation considering the nonlinear
system model [18]. In the procedure, it was used
the polytopic representation of model uncertainties
with the Lyapunov inequality equation [19] for the
robust analysis and the Genetic Algorithm NSGA-
II [20] as the optimization algorithm. Results ob-
tained indicate the effectiveness of the proposed
methodology.
409
Notice that not all controllers make use of
the three PID actions (proportional, derivative and
integral actions). Actually the goal is to have a
control structure that follows the same control
conguration used in the commercial product Mi-
croPilot, which seems to take into account the
specic characteristics of each individual control
loop to dene the most appropriate controller for
each case. For example, since there is a natural
integration associated with the rolling of the wings
and the change in heading, the controller employed
to kept a constant heading angle by banking the
wings is just a PD controller instead of a PID con-
troller. The other cases follow the same rationale.
E. Guidance and Navigation Algorithms
To guide the UAV, we use methodologies based
on vector elds. Basically, a function is dened
over the UAV workspace, and the evaluation of this
function on-the y gives a space vector whose ori-
entation is interpreted as the required attitude of the
vehicle and its magnitude is seen as the UAV speed.
The main advantages of these methodologies over
the traditional way-point based navigation emerges
from the fact that they are closed-loop approaches.
This gives the methodology some robustness to
localization and actuation errors. Also, we have
shown in our early work [7] that vector elds
cause the UAV to follow smoother trajectories
than the ones in way-point navigation strategies.
This characteristic is very important in tasks that
rely on images from an on-board camera. Vector
200 150 100 50 0 50 100 150 200 250
200
150
100
50
0
50
100
150
Longitude (meters)
L
a
t
i
t
u
d
e

(
m
e
t
e
r
s
)


Desired path
UAV path
Fig. 5. Top view of the UAV path from takeoff (center) to mission
accomplishment. The arrows represent the vector eld.
eld methods are also very interesting once it
is frequently easy to formally prove convergence
of the method using standard Lyapunov stability
theorems [21].
In this project we have proposed a navigation
methodology where the vector eld that guides
the UAV makes it follow time-varying closed
curves [22]. The closed curves are dened by the
intersection of two functions in three dimensions.
The resulting eld is continuous and can be written
as the sum of three terms. The rst term, that
can be written as a composition of gradients of
the functions that dene the curve to be followed,
is responsible to attract the UAV to the target
curve. The second term, orthogonal to the rst one,
makes the UAV circulate the curve, while the third
one compensates for the time-varying nature of
the curve. We have shown that this eld makes
the UAV asymptomatically converge to the target
curve while circulating it. Although this eld have
been used before to guide quadrotors [23], in this
paper we show, for the rst time, its behavior when
guiding xed-wing UAVs.
The algorithm proposed by [24] was tested in
one of our test aircraft. The mission was to make
a hand-held takeoff, reach an altitude of 150 meters
while circulating a circumference with 150 meter
radius (Fig. 5). One can see that the UAV gets
close to the circumference, but never really reaches
it. This seems to be a consequence of the lack
of integral action in the closed loop associated
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Time (seconds)
D
i
s
t
a
n
c
e

(
m
e
t
e
r
s
)


Distance reference
Measured Distance
Fig. 6. Difference between aircraft distance relative to the origin
and the desired distance.
410
85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Time (seconds)
H
e
a
d
i
n
g

(
d
e
g
r
e
e
s
)


Reference heading
Measured heading
Fig. 7. Comparison between reference and measured headings.
with the control of the heading angle (Fig. 4).
In this case, the heading angle reference increases
continuously to enforce the circulation of the circle,
and the aircrafts natural integration between a
given banking angle and the corresponding change
in heading is insufcient to guarantee zero tracking
error (Fig. 7). This problem is similar to the non-
zero steady state error exhibited by Linear Time-
Invariant systems with only one pure integration
(one pole at the origin) when subjected to ramp-
like inputs.
We have adapted the vector eld based approach
to the coverage of curves by large groups of xed
wing UAV. They were modeled as spheres with
an associated nonholonomic kinematic model with
minimum forward speed constraint. Under certain
assumptions, it is possible to guarantee that the
UAVs will converge and circulate the curve while
avoiding inter-robot collisions [25]. Next steps of
the research will include testing this methodology
with teams of up to 5 UAVs.
III. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK
This paper presented the current development
of a platform of multiple small unmanned aerial
vehicles for surveillance and monitoring. The air-
frame design, autopilot project, and control and
guidance algorithms were also presented. Data
from real ight tests were used to show some of
the characteristics of the proposed system. A movie
showing the main results of the project to date can
be found at: http://coro.cpdee.ufmg.br/movies/uav/.
Future work includes the integration of the
AHRS hardware and the Gunstix computer into
a compact printed circuit board, thus substituting
MicroPilot autopilot. Also, MicroPilot Horizon
mp
GCS software will be replaced by a new soft-
ware developed in-home. This new software will
be responsible for supervision, control and data
logging tasks during ights, as well as mission
planning and execution. Finally, our main goal is
the development and testing of new navigation and
guidance algorithms concerning multiple SUAVs
cooperation and collision avoidance.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors are grateful to Financiadora de
Estudos e Projetos (FINEP), Fundac ao de Am-
paro ` a Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais
(FAPEMIG), Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvi-
mento Cientco e Tecnol ogico (CNPq) and
Coordenac ao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de
Nvel Superior (CAPES) in Brazil for the nancial
support. P. Iscold, L. T orres, and G. A. S. Pereira
hold scholarships from CNPq.
REFERENCES
[1] P. Sujit, D. Kingston, and R. Beard, Cooperative forest re
monitoring using multiple UAVs, in 46th IEEE Conference
on Decision and Control, 2007, pp. 48754880.
[2] A. Jensen, T. Hardy, M. McKee, and Y. Chen, Using a
multispectral autonomous unmanned aerial remote sensing
platform (AggieAir) for riparian and wetlands applications,
in IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Sym-
posium (IGARSS), 2011, pp. 34133416.
[3] R. Rangel, K. Kienitz, and M. Brand ao, Development of
a multi-purpose portable electrical UAV system, xed and
rotative wing, in IEEE Aerospace Conference, 2011, pp. 19.
[4] J. Neto, R. da Paix ao, L. Rodrigues, E. Moreira, J. dos
Santos, and P. Rosa, A surveillance task for a UAV in a
natural disaster scenario, in IEEE International Symposium
on Industrial Electronics (ISIE), 2012, pp. 15161522.
[5] J. Zhang, L. Liu, B. Wang, X. Chen, Q. Wang, and T. Zheng,
High speed automatic power line detection and tracking
for a UAV-based inspection, in International Conference
on Industrial Control and Electronics Engineering (ICICEE),
2012, pp. 266269.
[6] M. F. M. Campos, P. Iscold, L. A. B. T orres, and L. A.
Aguirre, SiDeVAAN - Simulac ao e desenvolvimento de
veculos a ereos aut onomos e n ao-tripulados, in Anais do
Simp osio Brasileiro de Automac ao Inteligente, 2007.
[7] P. Iscold, G. Pereira, and L. T orres, Development of a
hand-launched small UAV for ground reconnaissance, IEEE
Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, vol. 46,
no. 1, pp. 335348, jan. 2010.
[8] E. King, Y. Kuwata, M. Alighanbari, L. Bertuccelli, and
J. How, Coordination and control experiments on a multi-
vehicle testbed, in Proceedings of the American Control
Conference, vol. 6, 2004, pp. 53155320.
411
[9] R. Teo, J. S. Jang, and C. Tomlin, Automated multiple UAV
ight - the Stanford Dragony UAV program, in 43rd IEEE
Conference on Decision and Control, vol. 4, 2004, pp. 4268
4273.
[10] J. Tisdale, A. Ryan, M. Zennaro, X. Xiao, D. Caveney,
S. Rathinam, J. Hedrick, and R. Sengupta, The software
architecture of the Berkeley UAV Platform, in Proceedings of
the IEEE International Conference on Control Applications,
2006, pp. 14201425.
[11] L. A. T. de Vargas and P. Iscold, A fast aerodynamic
procedure for a complete aircraft design using the know airfoil
characteristics, SAE Technical Papers, 2006.
[12] L. Meier. (2009) MAVlink micro air vehicle communication
protocol. [Online]. Available: http://qgroundcontrol.org/
mavlink/start
[13] MicroPilot Horizon
mp
Users Manual 3.4.
[14] B. O. Teixeira, L. A. T orres, P. Iscold, and L. A. Aguirre,
Flight path reconstruction a comparison of nonlinear kalman
lter and smoother algorithms, Aerospace Science and Tech-
nology, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 6071, 2011.
[15] R. Lima and L. T orres, Performance evaluation of attitude
estimation algorithms in the design of an AHRS for xed wing
UAVs, in Brazilian Robotics Symposium and Latin American
Robotics Symposium (SBR-LARS), 2012, pp. 255260.
[16] D.-M. Ma, J.-K. Shiau, I. Wang, Y.-H. Lin et al., Attitude
determination using a mems-based ight information measure-
ment unit, Sensors, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 123, 2011.
[17] L. Serrano, D. Kim, and R. B. Langley, A single gps receiver
as a real-time, accurate velocity and acceleration sensor, in
Proceedings of the 17th International Technical Meeting of the
Satellite Division of the Institute of Navigation (ION GNSS,
2004, pp. 20212034.
[18] G. D. Thums, L. A. B. T orres, and R. M. Palhares, Metodolo-
gia de sintonia PID multimalha para veculos a ereos n ao
tripulados: Din amica longitudinal, in Anais do XIX Congresso
Brasileiro de Autom atica, 2012.
[19] S. Boyd, L. E. Ghaoui, E. Feron, and V. Balakrishnan, Linear
Matrix Inequalities in System and Control Theory, 1st ed.
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 1994.
[20] K. Deb, Multi-Objective Optimization using Evolutionary Al-
gorithms, 1st ed. John Wiley and Sons, 2001.
[21] E. Frew, D. Lawrence, C. Dixon, J. Elston, and W. Pisano,
Lyapunov guidance vector elds for unmanned aircraft ap-
plications, in American Control Conference, 2007, pp. 371
376.
[22] V. M. Goncalves, L. C. A. Pimenta, C. A. Maia, B. C. O.
Dutra, and G. A. S. Pereira, Vector elds for robot navigation
along time-varying curves in n-dimensions, IEEE Transac-
tions on Robotics, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 647659, August 2010.
[23] V. M. Goncalves, L. C. A. Pimenta, C. A. Maia, G. A. S.
Pereira, B. C. O. Dutra, N. Michael, J. Fink, and V. Kumar,
Circulation of curves using vector elds: Actual robot ex-
periments in 2d and 3d workspaces, in IEEE International
Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2010, pp.
11361141.
[24] V. M. Goncalves, C. A. Pimenta, L. C .and Maia, and G. A. S.
Pereira, Articial vector elds for robot convergence and
circulation of time-varying curves in n-dimensional spaces,
in American Control Conference, 2009, pp. 20122017.
[25] M. M. Goncalves, L. C. Pimenta, and G. A. S. Pereira, Cov-
erage of curves in 3D with swarms of nonholonomic aerial
robots, in Proceedings of the 18th IFAC World Congress,
vol. 18, 2011, pp. 10 36710 372.
412