Design of Active Yaw Gaze-Locking Control  for Quadcopters in Tower Orbital Inspection

Faqihza Mukhlish; Izma Alhazmi  Herdian; Ihsan M. Fauzan

doi:10.5614/joki.2027.19.1.1

Authors

Faqihza Mukhlish Engineering Physics, Faculty of Industrial Technology, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Bandung 40132, Indonesia ; Center for Instrumentation Technology and Automation, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Bandung 40132, Indonesia
Izma Alhazmi Herdian Center for Instrumentation Technology and Automation, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Bandung 40132, Indonesia ; Instrumentation and Control, Faculty of Industrial Technology, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Bandung 40132, Indonesia
Ihsan M. Fauzan Robotics, College of Computing and Mathematical Sciences, Khalifa University, United Arab Emirates

Keywords:

quadcopter, geometric vector field, active yaw gaze-locking, 3D photogrammetry, wind compensation

Abstract

Close-range 3D photogrammetric inspection of tall towers with quadcopters is degraded by wind, which pushes the vehicle off its scanning orbit and changes the camera-to-structure distance. Conventional flight controllers track a time-parameterized trajectory, so wind-induced lag must be corrected in both space and time. This paper presents a cascaded geometric vector field (VF) guidance law combined with active yaw gaze-locking for helical tower scanning. The VF decouples spatial convergence from timing, an outer velocity PI loop rejects wind through its integral action by tilting the vehicle into the wind, and the yaw channel is dedicated to keeping the camera pointed at the tower axis. In 6-DoF simulations with a 4.5 m/s mean wind, gusts, and Dryden turbulence, 30 paired Monte Carlo runs with PSO-tuned gains show that the VF reduces the mean cross-track error by 70.6% relative to PID trajectory tracking and by 48.3% relative to nonlinear guidance logic (NLGL), and reduces the stand-off distance variation by 65.8% (p < 0.001). Because the gaze-locking law uses the measured position, the camera pointing error remained about 0.8° for all guidance laws, showing that pointing accuracy is set by the yaw loop and is decoupled from path following.

References

V. V. An, T. L. Mien, and N. V. Binh, “A comprehensive survey of UAV control algorithms: Integrating classical methods with artificial intelligence for enhanced trajectory tracking,” AIMS Electron. Electr. Eng., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 26–53, 2026. https://doi.org/10.3934/electreng.2026002

F. Nex et al., “UAV in the advent of the twenties: Where we stand and what is next,” ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens., vol. 184, pp. 215–242, Feb. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2021.12.006

C. V. Nguyen, M. T. Nguyen, H. T. Tran, M. L. Trinh, H. M. La, and H. T. T. Nguyen, “Trajectory Tracking Control for a Quadcopter under External Disturbances,” Eng. Technol. Appl. Sci. Res., vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 17620–17628, 2024. https://doi.org/10.48084/etasr.8449

Y. Alshawabkeh, A. Baik, and A. Fallatah, “As-Textured As-Built BIM Using Sensor Fusion, Zee Ain Historical Village as a Case Study,” Remote Sens., vol. 13, no. 24, p. 5135, Dec. 2021. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/rs13245135ht

M. Navabi and H. Mirzaei, “Robust Optimal Adaptive Trajectory Tracking Control of Quadrotor Helicopter,” Lat. Am. J. Solids Struct., vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 1040–1063, Jun. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1590/1679-78253595

B. Rubí, R. Pérez, and B. Morcego, “A Survey of Path Following Control Strategies for UAVs Focused on Quadrotors,” J. Intell. Robot. Syst., vol. 98, no. 2, pp. 241–265, May 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10846-019-01085-z

F. Zhu et al., “Swarm-LIO2: Decentralized Efficient LiDAR-Inertial Odometry for Aerial Swarm Systems,” IEEE Trans. Robot., vol. 41, pp. 960–981, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1109/TRO.2024.3522155

A. Baharuddin and M. A. Mohd Basri, “Trajectory Tracking of a Quadcopter UAV using PID Controller,” Elektr.- J. Electr. Eng., vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 14–21, Aug. 2023. https://doi.org/10.11113 /elektrika.v22n2.440h

A. Maji, “Learning model predictive control with application to quadcopter trajectory tracking,” Master’s Thesis, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.diva-portal.org/1453324

B. Li et al., “Multi-UAV Trajectory Planning during Cooperative Tracking Based on a Fusion Algorithm Integrating MPC and Standoff,” Drones, vol. 7, no. 3, p. 196, Mar. 2023. https://doi.org/10.3390/drones7030196

D. R. Nelson, D. B. Barber, T. W. McLain, and R. W. Beard, “Vector Field Path Following for Miniature Air Vehicles,” IEEE Trans. Robot., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 519–529, Jun. 2007. https://doi.org/10.1109/TRO.2007.898976

Y. A. Kapitanyuk, A. V. Proskurnikov, and M. Cao, “A Guiding Vector-Field Algorithm for Path-Following Control of Nonholonomic Mobile Robots,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 1372–1385, Jul. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCST.2017.2705059

V. M. Goncalves, L. C. A. Pimenta, C. A. Maia, B. C. O. Dutra, and G. A. S. Pereira, “Vector Fields for Robot Navigation Along Time-Varying Curves in $n$-Dimensions,” IEEE Trans. Robot., vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 647–659, Aug. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1109/TRO.2010.2053077

X. Wang, S. Baldi, X. Feng, C. Wu, H. Xie, and B. De Schutter, “A Fixed-Wing UAV Formation Algorithm Based on Vector Field Guidance,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 179–192, Jan. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1109/TASE.2022.3144672

Z. Wang and Y. Luo, “Elliptical Multi-Orbit Circumnavigation Control of UAVS in Three-Dimensional Space Depending on Angle Information Only,” Drones, vol. 6, no. 10, p. 296, Oct. 2022. https://doi.org/10.3390/drones6100296

D. A. Lawrence, E. W. Frew, and W. J. Pisano, “Lyapunov Vector Fields for Autonomous Unmanned Aircraft Flight Control,” J. Guid. Control Dyn., vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 1220–1229, Sep. 2008. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.34896

E. M. Lee et al., “CEO-MLCPP: Control-Efficient and Obstacle-Aware Multi-Layer Coverage Path Planner for 3D Reconstruction with UAVs,” in Robot Intelligence Technology and Applications 7, vol. 642, J. Jo, H.-L. Choi, M. Helbig, H. Oh, J. Hwangbo, C.-H. Lee, and B. Stantic, Eds., in Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol. 642. , Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2023, pp. 27–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-26889-2_3

S. Zhang, C. Liu, and N. Haala, “Guided by model quality: UAV path planning for complete and precise 3D reconstruction of complex buildings,” Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinformation, vol. 127, p. 103667, Mar. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2024.103667

F. Nex and F. Remondino, “UAV for 3D mapping applications: a review,” Appl. Geomat., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–15, Mar. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12518-013-0120-x

R. Rysdyk, “Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Path Following for Target Observation in Wind,” J. Guid. Control Dyn., vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 1092–1100, Sep. 2006. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.19101

E. W. Frew, D. A. Lawrence, and S. Morris, “Coordinated Standoff Tracking of Moving Targets Using Lyapunov Guidance Vector Fields,” J. Guid. Control Dyn., vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 290–306, Mar. 2008. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.30507

P. B. Sujit, S. Saripalli, and J. B. Sousa, “Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Path Following: A Survey and Analysis of Algorithms for Fixed-Wing Unmanned Aerial Vehicless,” IEEE Control Syst. Mag., vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 42–59, Feb. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCS.2013.2287568

S. Park, J. Deyst, and J. P. How, “Performance and Lyapunov Stability of a Nonlinear Path Following Guidance Method,” J. Guid. Control Dyn., vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 1718–1728, Nov. 2007. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.28957

A. Shivam and A. Ratnoo, “Arcsine Vector Field for Path Following Guidance,” J. Guid. Control Dyn., vol. 46, no. 12, pp. 2409–2420, Dec. 2023. https://doi.org/10.2514/1.G007562

U.S. Departement of Defence, Flying Qualities of Piloted Aircraft, MIL-HDBK-1797. 1997.