Decentralized Autonomous Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Swarm Formation and Flight Control

  • Ihor SkyrdaEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 1007)


Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) have become more popular for usage due to the low cost of deployment and maintenance. Single UAV employment allows remote area monitoring and transferring different payloads to inaccessible or dangerous zones for human. In order to deal with flight tasks that are more complex, UAV swarms are applied. The main challenge of UAV swarm formation and flight control is to avoid vehicle collisions. In this case, artificial intelligence is responsible for flight performance in the airspace in such way that collision is avoided. The main requirements to the method, which will provide conflict-free maneuvers, are safety (collision avoidance), liveness (decentralized control, destination area reachability) and flyability (UAV flight performance constraints are satisfied). Artificial force field method fulfills all of these demands. It allows to detect a potential conflict between multiple UAVs in a swarm and other static or moving obstacles found in airspace, to provide collision resolution by changing UAVs flight parameters through maintaining minimum separation distance, including cases when manned vehicles are found in the same airspace. There can be distinguished by a wide range of obstacles: static (buildings, restricted areas and bed weather conditions) and dynamic ones (other UAVs, manned aircraft). Method allows keeping UAV swarm shape on the flight path, taking into account ground speed and turn bank angle values restrictions according to UAV’s flight performance characteristics.


Autonomous unmanned aerial vehicle Potential field Vortex field Swarm formation Fixed wing Three-dimensional space 


  1. 1.
    Boucher, P.: Domesticating the drone: the demilitarisation of unmanned aircraft for civil markets. Sci. Eng. Ethics 21, 1393–1412 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Debajit, D., Kumar, S.: A novel approach towards the designing of an antenna for aircraft collision avoidance system. AEU – Int. J. Electr. Commun. 71, 53–71 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kuchar, J.K., Yang, L.C.: A review of conflict detection and resolution modeling methods. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 1(4), 179–189 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Murray, R.M.: Recent research in cooperative control of multivehicle systems. ASME: J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 129(5), 571–583 (2007). Scholar
  5. 5.
    Geser, A., Muñoz, C.: A geometric approach to strategic conflict detection and resolution. In: Proceedings of the 21st Digital Avionics Systems Conference, vol. 1, pp. 6B1-1–6B1-11 (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Park, J.-W., Oh, H., Tahk, M.-J.: UAV collision avoidance based on geometric approach. In: Proceedings of the 2008 SICE Annual Conference, 20th-22nd August 2008, Tokyo, pp. 2122–2126 (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Matsuno, Y., Tsuchiya, T.: Probabilistic conflict detection in the presence of uncertainty. Air Traffic Management and Systems. LNEE, vol. 290, pp. 17–33. Springer, Tokyo (2014). Scholar
  8. 8.
    Borrelli, F., Subramanian, D., Raghunathan, A., Biegler, L.: MILP and NLP techniques for centralized trajectory planning of multiple unmanned air vehicles. In: Proceedings American Control Conference, pp. 5763–5768 (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chepizhenko, V.I.: Energy-potential method of dynamic objects polyconflicts guaranteed collision resolution. In: Cybernetics and Computer Engineering, no. 168, pp. 80–87 (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Leonard, N.E., Fiorelli, E.: Virtual leaders, artificial potentials and coordinated control of groups. In: Proceedings of the 40th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, vol. 3, pp. 2968–2973 (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nguyen, B.Q., et al.: Virtual attractive-repulsive potentials for cooperative control of second order dynamic vehicles on the Caltech MVWT. In: Proceedings of the American Control Conference, vol. 2, pp. 1084–1089 (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Khatib, O.: Real-time obstacle avoidance for manipulators and mobile robots. Int. J. Robot. Res. 5(1), 90–98 (1986). Scholar
  13. 13.
    Liu, X., Ge, S.S., Goh, C.H.: Formation potential field for trajectory tracking control of multi-agents in constrained space. Int. J. Control 90, 1–15 (2016)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yin, H., Cam, L.L., Roy, U.: Formation control for multiple unmanned aerial vehicles in constrained space using modified artificial potential field. Math. Model. Eng. Probl. 4(2), 100–105 (2017). Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ruibin, X., Gaohua, C.: Formation flight control of multi-UAV system with communication constraints. J. Aerosp. Technol. Manag. 8(2), 203–210 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pavlova, S.V., Pavlov, V.V., Chepizhenko, V.I.: Virtual Einstein force fields in synergy of navigation environment of difficult ergatic systems. In: Proceedings of the National Aviation University, no. 3, pp. 15–27 (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chepizhenko, V.I.: Synthesis of artificial gravitational fields virtual meters for the polyconflicts resolution in the aeronavigation environment. In: Proceedings of the National Aviation University, no. 2, pp. 60–69 (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Vadakkepat, P., Tan, K.C., Ming-Liang, W.: Evolutionary artificial potential fields and their application in real time robot path planning. In: Proceedings of the 2000 Congress on Evolutionary Computation, vol. 1, pp. 256–263 (2000).

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Aviation UniversityKyivUkraine

Personalised recommendations