2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.automatica.2015.08.015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mechanics, control and internal dynamics of quadrotor tool operation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
26
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 55 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A further issue arising during the mechanical assembly of an FH is where to place the gripper on the UAV. Regarding the quadrotor, the rigid tool should be positioned above and not below the aerial vehicle [50]. However, although this solution is to be preferred from a theoretical point of view for the internal stabilization of the FH, it raises some problems in practical applications where it would be difficult for an FH to grasp an object by approaching it from below.…”
Section: Flying Handsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A further issue arising during the mechanical assembly of an FH is where to place the gripper on the UAV. Regarding the quadrotor, the rigid tool should be positioned above and not below the aerial vehicle [50]. However, although this solution is to be preferred from a theoretical point of view for the internal stabilization of the FH, it raises some problems in practical applications where it would be difficult for an FH to grasp an object by approaching it from below.…”
Section: Flying Handsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this circumstance, relative larger forces, such as Coriolis and centrifugal force, will be act on the connected base as well as the RAR body simultaneously. The same phenomenon also appears in the operation in touch with external environment [16] . Hence, an additional six-axis force sensor is installed between the manipulator base and the RAR body to measure these time-varying forces, shown in Fig.3.…”
Section:  Six Axis Force/torque Sensormentioning
confidence: 68%
“…concluded that the CG should lie close to, but slightly above the propeller plane for the best disturbance rejection [18]. This preference is further supported in [19], which stated that quadcopters under a proportional-integral-derivative (PID) controller are more stable when the load is placed directly on top of the airframe, especially for robotic payload carrying tasks [20]. Moreover, the PID controller can handle CG offset from the yaw axis more easily by when the CG is placed above the propeller plane.…”
Section: Conflicting Constraints Of Cg Location and Efficient Aermentioning
confidence: 91%