Stabilisation, tracking and disturbance rejection control design for the UAS-S45 Bálaam
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The stabilisation and control mechanisms of an Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) must be properly designed to ensure acceptable flight performance. During their operation, these mechanisms are subjected to unknown and random environmental effects, making it imperative that all available information should be taken into consideration during the mechanisms’ design process (e.g. system dynamics, actuators, flight conditions and certain criteria requirements such as phugoid and short modes for longitudinal dynamics, and roll subsidence, spiral and Dutch-roll modes for lateral dynamics) in order to guarantee flight stability. Therefore, this paper introduces a novel methodology for the stabilisation and control of the UAS-S45 Bálaam, designed and manufactured by Hydra Technologies. This methodology uses composite controllers that combine feedback Linear Quadratic Regulators (LQR) and Proportional Integral Feed-Forward (PI-FF) compensation controller for stabilisation and tracking tasks, respectively. Furthermore, a Generalised Extended State Observer was implemented to provide robustness to the closed loop dynamics by introducing disturbance compensation. Furthermore, an Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS) was adopted to perform a gain scheduling by computing the gains of each composite controller for certain unknown trim conditions within a given flight domain. Finally, several numerical assessments were performed to highlight the efficiency of the proposed methodology.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it