Development and Modeling of a Low-Cost Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Research Platform


This paper describes the development and modeling of a low-cost and reliable small unmanned aerial vehicle research platform for advanced control implementation. The platform is mostly constructed of low-cost commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components. The only non-COTS components are the airdata probes, which are manufactured and calibrated in-house. The airframe used is the commercially available radio-controlled (R/C) 6-foot Telemaster airplane from Hobby Express, chosen mainly for its adequately spacious fuselage and for being reasonably stable and sufficiently agile. One noteworthy feature of this platform is the use of two separate low-cost onboard computers for handling the data management/hardware interfacing and control computation. Specifically, the single board computer, Gumstix Overo Fire, is used to execute the control algorithms, whereas the open source autopilot, Ardupilot Mega, is mostly used to interface the Overo computer with the sensors and actuators. The platform supports multi-vehicle operations through the use of a radio modem that enables multi-point communications. As the goal of this platform is to implement rigorous control algorithms for real-time trajectory tracking and distributed control, it is important to derive an appropriate flight dynamic model of the platform, based on which the controllers will be synthesized. For that matter, the paper provides reasonably accurate models of the vehicle, servomotors, and propulsion system. Namely, the output error method is used to estimate the longitudinal and lateral-directional aerodynamic parameters from flight test data. The moments of inertia of the platform are determined using the simple pendulum test method, and the frequency response of each servomotor is also obtained experimentally. The Javaprop applet is used to obtain lookup tables relating airspeed to propeller thrust at constant throttle settings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. 1.

    Ardupilot Mega. Accessed 23 July 2014 (2014)

  2. 2.

    USA Standard Atmosphere. USA Government Printing Office, Washington (1976)

  3. 3.

    Arifianto, O.: A low-cost unmanned aerial vehicle research platform: Development, modeling, and advanced control implementation. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Aerospace and Ocean Engineering, Virginia Tech (2013)

  4. 4.

    Arifianto, O., Farhood, M.: Optimal control of fixed-wing uavs along real-time trajectories. In: 5th Annual DSCC and 11th MOVIC (2012)

  5. 5.

    Barlow, J.B., Rae, W.H., Pope, A., 3rd ed.: Low-speed wind tunnel testing. Wiley-Interscience (1999)

  6. 6.

    Bryer, D.W., Walshe, D.E.: Pressure probes selected for three-dimensional flow measurement. Reports and memoranda 3037, national advisory committee for aeronautics (1955)

  7. 7.

    Cabecinhas, D., Silvestre, C., Rosa, P., Cunha, R.: Path-following control for coordinated turn aircraft maneuvers. In: AIAA Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference and Exhibit (2007)

  8. 8.

    Craig, J.J., 2nd ed.: Introduction to robotics: mechanics and control. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc., MA, USA (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Dansker, O.D., Johnson, M.J., Selig, M.S., Bretl, T.W.: Development of the uiuc aero testbed: a large-scale unmanned electric aerobatic aircraft for aerodynamics research. In: (AIAA) Applied Aerodynamics Conference (2013)

  10. 10.

    Dominy, R.G., Hodson, H.P.: An investigation of factors influencing the calibration of five-hole-probe for three-dimensional flow measurements. J. Turbomach. 115, 513–519 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Dorobantu, A., Murch, A., Mettler, B., Balas, G.: System identification for small, low-cost, fixed-wing unmanned aircraft. J. Aircr. 50(4), 1117–1130 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Farhood, M.: Nonstationary LPV control for trajectory tracking: a double pendulum example. Int. J. Control. 85(5), 545–562 (2012)

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Farhood, M., Di, Z., Dullerud, G.E.: Distributed control of linear time-varying systems interconnected over arbitrary graphs. International Journal of Robust and Nonlinear Control. doi:10.1002/rnc.3081

  14. 14.

    Farhood, M., Dullerud, G.E.: Control of nonstationary LPV systems. Automatica 44(8), 2108–2119 (2008)

    MATH  MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Farhood, M., Dullerud, G.E.: Control of systems with uncertain initial conditions. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 53(11), 2646–2651 (2008)

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Fisher, R.A.: On the mathematical foundations of theoretical statistics. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Containing Papers of a Mathematical or Physical Character 222, pp. 309368. Accessed 23 July 2014 (1922)

  17. 17.

    Gibbs, B.P.: Advanced Kalman filtering, least-squares and modeling: A practical handbook. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Gracey, W.: Summary of methods of measuring angle of attack. Technical note 4351, national advisory committee for aeronautics (1958)

  19. 19.

    Green, M.W.: Measurement of the moments of inertia of full scale airplanes. NACA technical note (1927)

  20. 20.

    Hartley, R.F., Hugon, F.: Development and flight testing of a model based autopilot library for a low cost unmanned aerial systems. In: (AIAA) Guidance, navigation and control conference (2013)

  21. 21.

    Hepperle, M.: Javaprop - design and analysis of propellers.

  22. 22.

    J. E. Zeis, C.U.: Angle of attack and sideslip estimation using inertial reference platform. Master’s thesis, Air Force Institute of Technology (1988)

  23. 23.

    Jardin, M.R., Mueller, E.R.: Optimized measurements of unmanned-air-vehicle mass moment of inertia with a bifilar pendulum. J. Aircr. 46, 63–75 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Jategaonkar, R.V.: Flight Vehicle System Identification: a time domain methodology. Progress in astronautics and aeronautics. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (2006)

  25. 25.

    Jordan, T., Foster, J., Bailey, R., Belcastro, C.: Airstar: a uav platform for flight dynamics and control system testing. In: (AIAA) 25th Aerodynamic and Measurement Technology and Ground Testing Conference (2006)

  26. 26.

    Jung, D., Levy, E.J., Zhou, D., Fink, R., Moshe, J., Earl, A., Tsiotras, P.: Design and development of a low-cost test-bed for undergraduate education in UAVs. In: Proceedings of the 44th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, and the European Control Conference 2005, pp. 27392744. Seville, Spain (2005)

  27. 27.

    Kaminer, I., Pascoal, A., Hallberg, E., Silvestre, C.: Trajectory tracking for autonomous vehicles: An integrated approach to guidance and control. J. Guid. Control. Dyn. 21(1), 29–38 (1998)

    MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Kane, T.R., tai Tseng, G.: Dynamics of the bifilar pendulum. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 9, 83–96 (1967)

    MATH  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Klein, V., Morelli, E.A.: Aircraft system identification: theory and practice. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (2006)

  30. 30.

    Manaï, M., Desbiens, A., Gagnon, E.: Identification of a UAV and design of a hardware-in-the-loop system for nonlinear control purposes. In: Proceedings of the AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference (2005)

  31. 31.

    Drela, M.: AVL. Accessed 23 July 2014

  32. 32.

    McLain, T.W., Beard, R.W.: Unmanned air vehicle testbed for cooperative control experiments. In: Proceedings of the American Control Conference, vol. 6, pp. 53275331. Boston, MA (2004)

  33. 33.

    Miller, M.P.: An accurate method of measuring the moments of inertia of airplanes. NACA Technical Note (1930)

  34. 34.

    Morelli, E.: Real-time aerodynamic parameter estimation without air flow angle measurements. J. Aircr. 49(4), 1064–1074 (2012)

    MathSciNet  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Morrison, G.L., Schobeiri, M.T., Pappu, K.R.: Five-hole pressure probe analysis technique. Flow Meas. Instrum. 9, 153–158 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Motter, M.A., Logan, M.J., French, M.L., Guerreiro, N.M.: Simulation to flight test for a UAV controls testbed. In: Proceedings of the 25th AIAA Aerodynamic Measurement Technology and Ground Testing Conference. San Francisco, CA (2006)

  37. 37.

    Mulder, J.A., Chu, Q.P., Sridhar, J.K., Breeman, J.H., Laban, M.: Non-linear aircraft flight path reconstruction review and new advances. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 35, 673–726 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Murch, A.M., Paw, Y.C., Pandita, R., Li, Z., Balas, G.J.: A low cost small UAV flight research facility. In: Holzapfel, F., Theil, S. (eds.) Advances in Aerospace Guidance, Navigation and Control, pp 29–40. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Naughton, J.W., III, L.N.C., Settles, G.S.: A miniature, fast-response 5-hole probe for supersonic flowfield measurements. In: (AIAA) 30th Aerospace Sciences Meeting & Exhibit (1992)

  40. 40.

    Owens, D.B., Cox, D.E., Morelli, E.A.: Development of a low-cost sub-scale aircraft for flight research: the faser project. In: (AIAA) Aerodynamic Measurement Technology and Ground Testing Conference (2006)

  41. 41.

    Paul, A.R., Upadhyay, R.R., Jain, A.: A novel calibration algorithm for five-hole pressure probe. Int. J. Eng. Sci. Tech. 3, 88–95 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Pereira, E., Hedrick, K., Sengupta, R.: The C3UV testbed for collaborative control and information acquisition using UAVs. In: Proceedings of the American Control Conference, pp. 14661471. Washington, DC (2013)

  43. 43.

    Raol, J., Singh, J.: Flight mechanics modeling snd analysis. CRC Press (2009)

  44. 44.

    Salman, S.A., Sreenatha, A.G., Choi, J.Y.: Attitude dynamics identification of unmanned aerial vehicle. Int J Control. Autom. Syst. 4(6), 782–787 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Soule, H.A., Miller, M.P.: Experimental determination of the moments of inertia of airplanes. NACA Technical Report (1933)

  46. 46.

    Telionis, D., Yang, Y., Rediniotis, O.: Recent development in multi-hole probe (mhp) technology. In: 20th International Congress of Mechanical Engineering (2009)

  47. 47.

    Tischler, M.B., Remple, R.K.: Aircraft and rotorcraft system identification: engineering methods with flight test examples. Am. Inst. Aeronaut. Astronaut. (2006)

  48. 48.

    Tomas, M.: Tornado, Accessed 23 July 2014

  49. 49.

    V.Hoffer, N., Coopmans, C., Jensen, A.M., Chen, Y.: A survey and categorization of small low-cost unmanned aerial vehicle system identification. J. Intell. & Robot. Syst. 74(1–2), 129–145 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. 50.

    Walther, B.A., Moore, J.L.: The concepts of bias, precision and accuracy, and their use in testing the performance of species richness estimators, with a literature review of estimator performance. Ecography 28(6), 815–829 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. 51.

    Williams, J.E., Vukelich, S.R.: The USAF stability and control digital DATCOM volume 1 users manual. DTIC-MIL (1979)

Download references

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mazen Farhood.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Arifianto, O., Farhood, M. Development and Modeling of a Low-Cost Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Research Platform. J Intell Robot Syst 80, 139–164 (2015).

Download citation


  • Unmanned aerial vehicle
  • Small fixed-wing aircraft
  • Five-hole probe
  • Flight dynamic model
  • Time-domain system identification