6

The Development of a Hardware-in-the-Loop

Simulation System for Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
Autopilot Design Using LabVIEW
Yun-Ping Sun

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Cheng Shiu University,

Taiwan
1. Introduction

This chapter describes a continuing research on design and verification of the autopilot system
for an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) through hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) simulation. UAVs
have the characteristics of small volume, light weight, low cost in manufacture, high agility
and high maneuverability without the restriction of human body physical loading. Equipped
with the on-board autopilot system an UAV is capable of performing out-of-sight missions
that inspires scientists and engineers with a lot of innovative applications. Not only in the
military but also in the civil, the applications of UAVs are in full bloom. Apparently one of the
key challenge of UAV research and development is its autopilot system design.
For the purpose of designing an autopilot, the technology of hardware-in-the-loop simulation
plays an important role. The concept of HIL simulation is that a stand-alone personal
computer is used to simulate the behavior of the plant, several data-acquisition devices are
exploited to generate the real signals, and the prototype controller can be tested in real-time
and in the presence of real hardware. HIL simulation presents a new challenge of control
engineering developers as the correctness of a real-time model not only depends upon the
numerical computation, but the timelines with which the simulation model interacts with
external control equipment that is the major difference between HIL simulation and numerical
simulation. Due to the useful feature, HIL simulation is applicable to solve many problems in
engineering and sciences effectively (Shetty & Kolk, 1997; Ledin, 2001).
HIL simulation provides an effective technique for design and test of autopilot systems.
Using HIL simulation the hardware and software at subsystem level perform the actual
input/output signals and run at real time so that the test target (e.g. prototype controller) is
working as if in real process. This provides the ability to thoroughly test subsystems under
different working loads and conditions; therefore, engineers can correct and improve their
original designs early in the development process. The advantages of HIL simulation are
reducing the risk in test and shortening the development time. Especially HIL simulation is
suitable for critical or hazardous applications.
(Cosic et al., 1999) used TMS320C40 DSP to set up a HIL simulation platform for a semiautomatic guided missile system. (Carrijo et al., 2002) applied HIL simulation to test the onboard computer on a satellite launcher vehicle for motion and attitude control. (Sun et al.,
2006; Sun et al., 2008a; Sun et al., 2009; Sun et al., 2010) developed the HIL simulation system
to evaluate the performance of UAV autopilot that was employed different control laws.

110

LabVIEW - Practical Applications and Solutions

Some valuable applications in traffic control (Bullock et al., 2004) and UAV design (Cole et
al., 2006; Salman et al., 2006) using HIL simulation can be found.
The hardware arrangement of HIL simulation includes a personal computer used to
simulate the behavior of an UAV plant, several plug-in data-acquisition (DAQ) devices used
to acquire/generate the specific real input/output signals, and the embedded control
system used to execute the control laws and send control signals to real hardware.
The software development environment for HIL simulation in this work is LabVIEW.
LabVIEW is a graphical programming language widely adopted throughout industry and
academia as a standard for data acquisition and instrument control software. LabVIEW
provides an intuitive graphical programming style to create programs in a pictorial form
called a block diagram that allows users to focus on flow of data within applications and
makes programming easy and efficiency. Additionally, LabVIEW can command plug-in
DAQ devices to acquire or generate analog/digital signals. In combination of LabVIEW and
DAQ devices, a PC-based or embedded control system can communicate with the outside
real world, e.g., take measurements, talk to an instrument, send data to another subsystem.
These features are very helpful in building a HIL simulation system for UAV autopilot
design. As a matter of fact, LabVIEW is not the only software development environment for
HIL simulation, but based on the enumerated advantages it is certainly a nice choice.
In this chapter we are going to apply different control methods to accomplish the design of
UAV autopilot, and compare their results in HIL simulations using LabVIEW. The chapter is
organized as follows. Section 2 describes the dynamic model of an UAV. Section 3 outlines
the HIL simulation system architecture and introduces hardware and software development
environment LabVIEW. Section 4 focuses on stability augmentation system design. Section 5
focuses on autopilot system design including pitch attitude hold mode, velocity hold mode,
roll attitude hold mode and heading angle hold mode. Section 6 concludes this chapter.

2. Dynamics model of an UAV

The MP2000UAV (Fig. 1) is a low-cost and small-volume unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV).
Its physical properties are wingspan 1.75 m, length 1.4 m, wing area 0.5116 m2, wing chord
0.29 m, and weight 3.84 kg. MP2000UAV equipped with a 40 in3, 1 HP, 2 cycle glow engine
and a miniature autopilot is capable to carry out autonomous operations.

Fig. 1. Unmanned aerial vehicle MP2000UAV

The Development of a Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulation System for

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Autopilot Design Using LabVIEW

111

The dynamics of an aircraft obey the equations of motion derived by Newtons second law.
The forces and moments resulting from lift and drag, the control surface, the propulsion
system, and gravity govern the aircraft. A body-fixed coordinate system shown in Fig. 2 that
is fixed to center of mass and rotating with the aircraft is used to express these forces and
moments. The rigid body equations of motion in body-fixed coordinates can be derived as:
(Bryson, 1994; Cook, 2007)
m(U RV + QW ) = X mg sin + T cos
m(V + RU PW ) = Y + mg sin cos

(1)

 QU + PV ) = Z + mg cos cos T sin

m( W

I xx P ( I yy I zz )QR I xz ( R + QP ) = L
I yyQ ( I zz I xx )PR + I xz ( P 2 R 2 ) = M

(2)

I zz R ( I xx I yy )PQ + I xz (QR P ) = N
where
m
g
Iii
U, V, W
P, Q, R
X, Y, Z
L, M, N
T
,

= mass of the aircraft,

= gravitational acceleration per unit mass,
= moments and products of inertia in body-fixed axes,
= components of the velocity of c.m. (center of mass) in body-fixed frame,
= components of the angular velocity of the aircraft in body-fixed frame,
= components of the aerodynamic force about the c.m. in body-fixed frame,
= components of the aerodynamic moment in body-fixed frame,
= thrust force,
= Euler pitch and roll angles of the body axes with respect to horizontal,

= angle between thrust and body x-axis,

The equations of motion derived for a body-fixed coordinate system are nonlinear that is
difficult for analysis and design. In order to proceed for analysis and design they have to be
linearized using the small-disturbance theory (Nelson, 1998; Roskam, 2007). On the
assumption that the motion of the aircraft consists of small deviations about a steady flight
condition, all the variables in the equations of motion are replaced by a perturbation.
The linearized equations of motion for an aircraft that describe small deviations from
constant speed, straight and level flight can be divided into two fourth-order uncoupled sets
representing the perturbations in longitudinal and lateral motion as follows: (Nelson, 1998)
v Yv

p = Lv
r N
v

0
v Yv

p = Lv
r N
v

j 0

Yp
Lp
Np

1
Yp
Lp
Np

( u0 Yr ) g v 0

0 p L a
Lr
+

0 r N a
Nr

0
0 0

Y r

L r a

N r r
0

(3)

- ( u0 - Yr ) g v 0

0 p La
Lr
+

0 r N a
Nr

0
0 j 0

Yr

Lr a

N r r
0

(4)

112

LabVIEW - Practical Applications and Solutions

where
u, v, w
p, q, r
e

= perturbations of the linear velocity in body-fixed frame (unit: m/s),

= perturbations of the angular velocity in body-fixed frame (unit: deg/s),
= deflection of control surface, elevator (unit: deg),

= deflection of control surfaces, aileron (unit: deg),

= deflection of control surfaces, rudder (unit: deg),

th

= throttle setting,

and there are 13 dimensional stability derivatives in longitudinal model, including Xu , X w ,

Xe , Xth , Zu , Zw , Ze , Zth , Mu , M w , Mq , Me , Mth , and 14 dimensional stability

derivatives in lateral model, including Yv , Yp , Yr , Yr , Lv , Lp , Lr , La , Lr , N v , N p ,

N r , N a , N r to be determined (Nelson, 1998; Roskam, 2007).

r :rudder
e :elevator

L, M , N : Roll, Pitch, Yaw Moments

u, v, w : Forward, Side, Vertical Velocity
+

p, q, r : Roll, Pitch, Yaw Rate

, , : Roll, Pitch, Yaw Angle

YW
+

YB

a :aileron

M , q,

v O

L, p,

VT

: Angle of Attack

: Side Slip Angle

ZW
+

N , r,

X B , YB , Z B : body-axis coordinates
X W , YW , ZW : wind-axis coordinates

XW
+ XB

VT : true speed

ZB

Fig. 2. Definition of aircraft coordinates

These stability derivatives of MP2000UAV are estimated from flight test data in a straight
and horizontal flight condition, u 0 = 16 m/s at 80 m altitude and shown in Table 1 (Sun et
al., 2008b).

The Development of a Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulation System for

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Autopilot Design Using LabVIEW

113

Xu

Xw

X e

Xth

Zu

Zw

Ze

Zth

Mu

-6.114

0.789

-0.273

2.936

8.952

-9.220

3.919

143.24

1.275

Mw

Mq

Me

Mth

Yv

Yp

Yr

Yr

Lv

-1.291
Lp

-1.366

-64.192
Lr

-0.374

-5.113

0.764

-1.264

-2.136

Lr

-1.699
La

Nv

Np

Nr

N a

N r

-2.656

-5.414

0.967

5.974

0.584

1.250

1.307

-0.191

-4.969

Table 1. Estimation results of dimensional stability derivatives

As a result, for the unmanned aerial vehicle MP2000UAV, the longitudinal equations of
motion in state-space form are:
u -6.113 0.7889
0
-9.8 u -0.273


w
8.952
-9.220
16
0 w 3.9191
=
+
q 1.2746 -1.290 -1.3656 0 q -1.699

0
1
0 0
 0

2.9361

143.24 e

-64.192 th

(5)

1.2636

5.9744 a

4.9689 r

(6)

and the lateral equations of motion in state-space form are:

v 0.373 5.113 15.236 9.8 v 0



p = 2.135 2.6564 5.4143 0 p + 0.9666
r 0.5837 1.2497
1.3069
0 r 0.191



1
0
0 0
0

where the maximum deflection angles of elevator, aileron, and rudder are 15, 6,
and 10.

3. HIL simulation system

Hardware-in-the-Loop (HIL) simulation is a kind of real-time simulation that the input and
output signals shows the same time dependent values as the real process. It is usually used
in a laboratory environment on the ground to test the prototype controller under different
working loads and conditions conveniently and safely. Compared with numerical
simulation, HIL simulation is more reliable and credible because numerical simulation is
often operated in ideal circumstances, without considering noise, disturbance, and some
practical problems often ignored which might result in fatal failure. HIL simulation has the
advantages of reducing the risk, shortening the developing time, and being well suitable for
critical and hazardous applications.
The concept of HIL simulation is described by Fig. 3. A typical HIL simulation system for
UAV autopilot design is composed of a stand-alone embedded real-time control system, a
personal computer, a servo unit, and a host PC. The hardware arrangement of HIL
simulation system is shown in Fig. 4. The graphical programming language LabVIEW is the
software development environment for data acquisition (DAQ) and instrument control in
performing HIL simulation.

114

LabVIEW - Practical Applications and Solutions

3.1 Embedded real-time control system (prototype controller)

The prototype controller is implemented by the National Instruments (NI) PXI real-time
embedded control system which includes:
Real-time Controller NI PXI-8184 RT: It is a stand-alone embedded real-time control
system. This system real-time computes the control output according to the implemented
control law and the error between command signal and feedback signal from sensor.
Multifunction DAQ device NI PXI-6259: It takes the responsibility on (1) acquiring the
analog feedback signal from the plant PC, (2) sending the analog control signal to the plant
PC and the host PC, (3) receiving the digital signal from the host PC to start/stop the PXI
system.

Real-Time Simulation

Plant
Servo

Prototype
Controller
Fig. 3. The concept of HIL simulation

Fig. 4. The hardware layout of a typical HILS system

The Development of a Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulation System for

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Autopilot Design Using LabVIEW

115

3.2 Personal computer (Plant)

The personal computer (PC) is used to simulate the dynamics of plant (UAV). The major
specifications are Intel Pentium 4-3.0 GHz CPU and 1 GB SDRAM. The I/O interfaces
include:
Multifunction DAQ device NI PCI-6040E: It takes the responsibility on (1) acquiring the
analog control signal from the PXI system or from the potentiometer on the servo unit that
represents the control surface angle, (2) receiving the digital signal from the host PC to
start/stop the plant PC.
Multifunction DAQ device NI PCI-6703: It takes the responsibility on sending the analog
state signal to the PXI system and the host PC.
3.3 Servo unit
Each servo unit contains two sets of servos, Futaba S3001, which is used to actuate the
control surface in UAV to generate the corrective torque in order to keep the desired
attitude. The rotational angle of servo is measured by potentiometer, model no. J50S,
manufactured by Copal Electronics Co., Ltd. in Japan.
3.4 Host PC
The host PC or notebook is used to monitor, synchronously digitally trigger, and display the
virtual aircraft instruments of UAV. The major specifications are Intel Core 2 Duo P84002.26 GHz CPU and 2 GB SDRAM. The I/O interfaces include:
Multifunction DAQ device NI USB-6212: It takes the responsibility on (1) acquiring the
analog state signal from the plant PC, (2) acquiring the analog control signal from the PXI
system, (3) and sending the digital signal to synchronously trigger the start/stop action of
the plant PC and PXI system.
3.5 Software development environment LabVIEW
To develop a HIL simulation system is not an easy work. The graphical programming
software LabVIEW streamlines the system building with a convenient environment to
integrate hardware and software seamlessly. LabVIEW is a graphical programming
language that has been widely adopted throughout industry and academia as the standard
for data acquisition and instrument control software. While other text-based languages
create lines of codes, LabVIEW provides an intuitive graphical programming style to create
programs in a pictorial form called a block diagram. Graphical programming allows users to
focus on flow of data within the applications that makes programming easy and efficiency.
A LabVIEW program, called virtual instrument (VI), has two main parts: a front panel and a
block diagram. The front panel is the interactive user interface of a VI that the appearance
and operation often imitates actual physical instruments. The block diagram is the VIs
source code and is the actual executable program. The components of a block diagram are
lower-level VIs, functions, constants, and program execution control structures. In addition,
LabVIEW can command plug-in DAQ devices to acquire or generate analog and digital
signals. You might use DAQ devices and LabVIEW to hook your computer up to the real
world, for example, to take measurements, talk to an instrument, send data to another
computer. It is very convenient to construct HIL simulation systems using LabVIEW. A lot
of valuable books (Larsen, 2011; Travis & Kring, 2007) provide more foundations,
programming skills, and applications for LabVIEW.

116

LabVIEW - Practical Applications and Solutions

4. Stability augmentation system

In order to perform missions, the UAV has to be hold on or maneuvered to a specified
cruising speed, altitude, and attitude. A typical feedback system providing desirable
handling qualities for pilot/autopilot commands is called stability augmentation system
(SAS). Especially for an aircraft flying throughout an extended flight envelope, the stability
derivatives in Eq. (3) and (4) are expected to vary significantly. Because of the variation of
stability derivatives, the handling qualities also are going to change. SAS can be designed to
improve the handling qualities over its entire operational envelope (Nelson, 1998; Roskam,
2003; Kayton & Fried, 1969).
The stability augmentation system (SAS) is the inner loop of the flight control system (FCS)
that provides the desirable handling characteristics for pilots. The design parameter in the
SAS is the feedback gain that is determined by applying the root locus technique. The root
locus technique is a simple and powerful tool in classical control theory for determining, by
graphical plot, the detailed information about the stability and performance of a closed-loop
system knowing only the open-loop transfer function. The root locus plot shows the poles of
the closed-loop system in complex plane for every value of the feedback gain. The location
of the closed-loop system poles determine two important quantities, damping ratio and
natural frequency, that are closely related to the time-domain performance specifications
(Cook, 2007; Nise, 2008). According to the linear mathematical models of longitudinal
dynamics for the MP2000UAV, the SAS for pitch attitude control are at first designed by the
root locus technique in MATLAB and then are tested in HIL simulation.
4.1 Design of SAS
The pitch angle, one of the state variables in Eq. (3), is an appropriate output variable for
attitude control. Therefore the pitch angle is used as a feedback in SAS; it can be measured
by vertical gyro or attitude and heading reference system (AHRS).
The negative pitch-attitude-to-elevator transfer function from Eq. (2) for the MP2000UAV is:

-(s)
1.699(s + 4.7308)( s + 13.7827)
=
e (s) (s + 0.0106)( s + 8.854)(s + 3.917 j 2.4488)

(7)

The open-loop system has two real poles at 0.0106 , 8.854 , and a pair of stable complex
poles at 3.917 j2.4488 . The corresponding damping ratios and natural frequencies are
given in Table 2.
Poles
-0.0106
-3.917+j2.4488
-3.917-j2.4488
-8.854

Natural frequency
0.0106
4.6195
4.6195
8.8540

Damping ratio
1
0.8479
0.8479
1

Table 2. The natural frequency and damping ratio for open-loop poles
From the step response as shown in Fig. 5, it is obviously that the settling time is too long,
approximately 300 sec. As a result, the maneuverability is very poor. It is necessary to
design a SAS to enhance the handling quality. The block diagram for pitch-angle to elevator
feedback of SAS is shown in Fig. 6. The elevator deflection is produced in proportion to the
pitch angle and adding it to the pilots control input as:

The Development of a Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulation System for

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Autopilot Design Using LabVIEW

e = e_pilot + K

117

(8)

where e_pilot is that part of the elevator deflection created by the pilot. The gain K is the
design parameter.

Fig. 5. Step response of open-loop system

Fig. 6. The block diagram of SAS for pitch angle control

From classical control theory, the system response is determined by the pole location in
complex plane. The time-domain performance specifications such as peak time, percent
overshoot and settling time are functions of damping ratio and natural frequency of the
dominant poles. The duty of SAS is, therefore, to modify the damping ratio and natural
frequency by adjusting the value of feedback gain K so that the UAV is easier to control.
Studies have shown that to obtain a desirable transient performance such as a smaller
overshoot and a shorter settling time, the design specifications for damping ratio is
approximately 0.6-0.7 and natural frequency is larger than 2 rad/s.

118

LabVIEW - Practical Applications and Solutions

The root locus technique permits the designer to view the trajectories of the close-loop
system poles as the design parameter (feedback gain K) is varied. It is very convenient to
determine the value of K in SAS by applying the root locus technique. The root locus plot
constructed by using MATLAB for the pitch-attitude-to-elevator transfer function, Eq. (7), is
shown in Fig. 7.

Fig. 7. Root locus plot for SAS

It is noted that at K = 3 the damping ratio and natural frequency of the dominant poles
meets the specifications while the damping ratio is 0.6564 and natural frequency is 3.7915.
All the closed-loop system poles and the corresponding damping ratios and natural
frequencies are given in Table 3.
Poles
-2.5306
-2.489+j2.86
-2.489-j2. 86
-9.1904

Natural frequency
-2.5306
3.7915
3.7915
9.1904

Damping ratio
1
0.6564
0.6564
1

Table 3. The natural frequency and damping ratio for closed-loop poles
The dc gain (steady-state gain) of closed-loop system is -0.3313. It indicates that at steady
state the ratio of pitch angle to pilots control input is approximately one-third:
( )
1
e_pilot ( ) 3

(9)

In Fig. 8 the transient response shows a significant improvement that the settling time is
greatly reduced to 1.2 sec by employing SAS. At this stage, the performance of SAS is verified
by computer simulation that the desired handling quality for pilot command is achieved.

The Development of a Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulation System for

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Autopilot Design Using LabVIEW

119

Fig. 8. Step response of closed-loop system

4.2 HIL simulation results
In this section the prototype SAS is realized and implemented by the PXI real-time control
system, and the performance of SAS is examined by HILS experiment in real time and real
signal.
4.2.1 Pilot input on time-table experiment
The pilot control input according to schedule is defined as:
0, 0 t < 1

e_pilot (t) = 5, 1 t < 2

0, t 2

Fig. 9. The signal flow diagram of HIL simulation

(10)

120

LabVIEW - Practical Applications and Solutions

The signal flow diagram of HILS system is shown in Fig. 9. The LabVIEW virtual
instruments of the controller, plant, and host PC used to perform HILS experiment are
presented in Figs. 10-14. The sampling rate is 50 Hz.

Fig. 10. The LabVIEW block diagram of controller.

Fig. 11. The LabVIEW block diagram of plant

The Development of a Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulation System for

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Autopilot Design Using LabVIEW

Fig. 12. The LabVIEW block diagram of host PC

Fig. 13. The LabVIEW front panel of host PC (flight data)

121

122

LabVIEW - Practical Applications and Solutions

Fig. 14. The LabVIEW front panel of host PC (aircraft instruments)

4.2.2 Pilot-in-the-loop experiment
The pilot-in-the-loop (PIL) experiment is developed to test the performance of SAS when the
human pilot joins in the control loop. The pilots task is to control UAV pitch attitude to a
desired angle. The pilot looks at the virtual aircraft instruments displayed in the host PC
screen and tries to correct the error between the desired pitch angle and the actual pitch
angle. This process of pilot in control can be expressed as follows: (1) the pilots eyes watch
the pitch angle on the screen, (2) the pilots brain figures out the magnitude of the error, (3)
the pilots brain sends a signal to actuate the hand of pilot, (4) the pilots hand manipulates
the control stick to move the elevator, (5) the deflection of elevator changes the pitch angle
of the UAV. The operation of PIL experiment depicted in Fig 15 describes a compensatory
control situation: the pilot tries to maintain the desired pitch attitude by driving the pitch
angle error to zero with the assistance of SAS.

Fig. 15. The operation of pilot-in-the-loop experiment

The Development of a Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulation System for

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Autopilot Design Using LabVIEW

123

From the HIL simulation results of PIL experiment in Fig. 16-17, pilot control using SAS
demonstrates an excellent handling performance than that without using SAS. The effect of
SAS on improving the handling qualities of UAV is confirmed.

Fig. 16. PIL experiment without SAS

Fig. 17. PIL experiment with SAS

124

LabVIEW - Practical Applications and Solutions

5. Autopilot system
The function of stability augmentation system is to improve the flying qualities of an
airplane for pilot manual control. To lower pilot workload, particularly on long-range flights
or out-of-sight flights of UAV, most airplanes or UAVs are equipped with automatic flight
control systems or autopilots. The basic autopilot modes include pitch attitude hold mode,
airspeed hold mode, bank angle (roll attitude) hold mode and heading angle hold mode.
Normally pitch attitude is controlled by the elevator, airspeed is controlled by the engine
throttle, roll attitude is controlled by the aileron, and heading is controlled by the rudder.
Thus there are four feedback loops to achieve four different autopilot modes. Fig. 18 shows
the block diagram of pitch attitude hold mode in HILS experiment.

PXI System

PID

PC System
e

UAV

Fig. 18. The block diagram of pitch attitude control for autopilot in HILS experiment
5.1 PID controller design
The proportional-integral-derivative (PID) controllers are frequently used in practical
control systems owing to their simple structures and quite clear physical senses. Usually the
PID controller is described by the transfer function:
K PID (s) = K p +

Ki
+ Kds
s

(11)

where Kp, Ki, and Kd are gains to be determined to meet design requirements. Specifically,
the PID controller can be expressed by the form in time domain as:

1
u(t) = K p e(t) +
T
i

0 e()d + Td

de(t)

dt

(12)

where u is the controller output, e is the error between desired and actual output, Ti is
integral time, and Td is derivative time. Three important characteristics of PID controller are
described as follows: it provides feedback; it eliminates steady-state error through integral
action; it improves transient response by anticipating the future through derivative action.
In order to meet the design specifications on transient and steady-state response, PID
control is an ideal choice for autopilot design.
The PID controllers are designed by two phases. At first, the coarse PID gains are obtained
according to the well-known Ziegler Nichols tuning rules that provide an acceptable closed-

The Development of a Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulation System for

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Autopilot Design Using LabVIEW

125

loop response. Next, let the coarse PID gains be the initial guess, the Nonlinear Control System
Toolset in MATLAB/Simulink is applied to optimally determine the fine PID gains to meet
time domain specifications such as rise time, overshoot, settling time, steady state error, and
actuator constrain. The resulting PID gains in four feedback loops of autopilot are listed in
Table 4.
Kp

Ti

Td

-11.99

0.001118

0.005657

Velocity Loop

0.07506

0.03649

0.004805

Roll Attitude Loop

0.2571

0.003650

0.01531

Heading Loop

-1.9058

0.07574

-0.04379

Pitch Altitude Loop

Table 4. The PID Gains in Four Feedback Control Loops of UAV Autopilot.
5.2 HIL simulation results
In this section the prototype PID controller for each mode of autopilot is implemented by
the PXI real-time control system, and the performance is explored in HIL simulation. The
hardware arrangement of HIL simulation system is shown in Fig. 19. Figs. 20 and 21
represent the LabVIEW front panel and block diagram of UAV plant.

PCI-6602

PCI-6703
Personal Computer

Plant

SCB-68

SCB-68
Embedded Real-Time Controller

PXI-8184RT, PXI-6220, PXI-6602

Controller
Fig. 19. The Hardware Setup of HIL simulation for UAV autopilot

126

Fig. 20. LabVIEW front panel of UAV plant

Fig. 21. LabVIEW block diagram of UAV plant

LabVIEW - Practical Applications and Solutions

The Development of a Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulation System for

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Autopilot Design Using LabVIEW

127

The following LabVIEW front panel and block diagram windows shown in Fig. 22 represent
the prototype PID controller in pitch attitude hold mode of autopilot. It is noticed that the
values of PID gains in front panel are from Table 4 where the integral time Ti and the
derivative time Td are in minute available for LabVIEW PID function.

Fig. 22. LabVIEW front panel and block diagram window of PID controller
1.6
Computer Simulation in CT model
HIL Real-time Simulation in DT model (T=30ms)

1.4
1.2

(deg)

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

10

Time (sec)

Fig. 23. The unit-step response of PID controller in pitch attitude hold mode
Figs. 23-26 show the closed loop unit-step time response of PID controllers in pitch attitude
hold mode, velocity hold mode, bank angle hold mode and heading angle hold mode for

128

LabVIEW - Practical Applications and Solutions

UAV autopilot. Apparently, the results of HIL simulation and computer simulation are very
close to each other. Fig. 23 exhibits an underdamped response in pitch control with 4 sec.
settling time, 30% overshoot, and no steady-state error; Fig. 24 also exhibits an
underdamped response (a little increase in damping ratio) in velocity control with 6 sec.
settling time, 35% overshoot, and no steady-state error; Fig. 25 also exhibits an
underdamped response (a bigger time constant) in roll control with over 25 sec. settling
time, 5% overshoot, and still no steady-state error; Fig. 26 exhibits an overdamped response
in heading control with 14 sec. settling time, no overshoot, and no steady-state error. From
the results in HIL simulation, PID controllers demonstrate very good performance.
2
Computer Simulation in CT model
HIL Real-time Simulation in DT model (T=30ms)

1.8
1.6
1.4

u (m/s)

1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

10

Time (sec)

Fig. 24. The unit-step response of PID controller in airspeed hold mode
1.4
Computer Simulation in CT model
HIL Real-time Simulation in DT model (T=30ms)

1.2

(deg)

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

10

20

30

40

50

Time (sec)

Fig. 25. The unit-step response of PID controller in bank angle hold mode

The Development of a Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulation System for

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Autopilot Design Using LabVIEW

129

1.4
Computer Simulation in CT model
HIL Real-time Simulation in DT model (T=30ms)

1.2

(deg)

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

10

20

30

Time (sec)

Fig. 26. The unit-step response of PID controller in heading angle hold mode
5.3 HIL simulation system including a servo unit
In this subsection the HIL simulation system with servo unit is taken into consideration. The
servo unit is described in section 3.3. The HIL simulation system with servo unit is
composed of three major parts: a Pentium 4 desktop personal computer (PC) system, a
National Instrument (NI) real-time PXI system, and a servo unit. The hardware arrangement
is shown in Fig. 27.

Plant

PCI-6040

SCB-68

Servo unit

PCI-6703
SCB-68

PXI-8184 RT Controller
PXI-6259, PXI-6602

Fig. 27. The hardware arrangement of HIL simulation system with a servo unit

130

LabVIEW - Practical Applications and Solutions

After receiving feedback signals by DAQ PXI-6259 from plant (PC system) that represent
UAV actual states, the real-time PXI system carries out the proportional-integral-derivative
(PID) algorithm, computes the control effort (control surface deflection angle and throttle
setting) for UAV flight control, and then generates pulse-width-modulation (PWM) signals
by DAQ PXI-6602 to control a real servo. Each servo unit consists of two Futuba-S3001
servos and two accurate potentiometers. The servo receives PWM signals from PXI system
and rotates to a specific angle. The resulting angle is measured by a potentiometer and fed
back to the plant through DAQ PCI-6040. Finally the PC system computes the dynamical
states of UAV based on the state-space model and outputs these analog signals to the PXI
system by DAQ PCI-6703. As a whole the PC system, PXI system, and servo unit constitute a
real-time closed-loop control system for UAV autopilot HIL simulation.
The HIL simulation results of PID controller for system including servo is denoted by the
solid line in Fig. 28. Apparently the performance becomes a little worse because the real
servo and potentiometer involved in HILS system result in so called unmodelled dynamics
that is not taken into consideration in controller design. This deterioration of controller
performance is revealed by HIL simulation not by numerical simulation. The PID controller
has to be tuned to obtain an acceptable performance. It clearly demonstrates that HIL
simulation is indispensable to controller design and verification.
1.6
Numerical simulation
HIL simulation without servo
HIL simulation with servo

1.4
1.2

(deg)

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

10

Time (s)

Fig. 28. The performance of PID controller for HIL simulation system including servo

6. Conclusion
With the growing importance of autonomous vehicles for industry, science, aerospace and
defense applications, engineers are encouraged to use HIL simulation methodology to
shorten development cycle, lower total cost and improve functional performance of the
vehicles. LabVIEW features an easy-to-use graphical programming environment and an
intuitive data flow programming style that makes the work of HIL simulation to be easier
and more efficiency. This chapter not only provides LabVIEW solutions to HIL simulation

The Development of a Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulation System for

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Autopilot Design Using LabVIEW

131

but also presents a complete analysis, design and HILS verification of UAV stability
augmentation system and autopilot.

7. References
Bullock, D., Johnson, B., Wells, R. B., Kyte, M. & Li, Z. (2004). Hardware-in-the-Loop
Simulation. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, Vol. 12, No. 1,
(February 2004), pp. 73-89, ISSN 0968-090X
Bryson, A. E., Jr. (1994). Control of Spacecraft and Aircraft, Princeton University Press, ISBN 0691-08782-2, Princeton, New Jersey, USA
Carrijo, D. S., Oliva, A. P. & W. de Castro Leite Filho (2002). Hardware-in-the-Loop
Simulation development. International Journal of Modeling and Simulation, Vol. 22,
No. 3, pp. 167-175, (July 2002), ISSN 0228-6203
Cole, D. T., Sukkarieh, S. & Goktogan, A. H. (2006). System Development and
Demonstration of a UAV Control Architecture for Information Gathering Missions.
Journal of Field Robotics , Vol. 26, No. 6-7, (June-July 2006), pp. 417-440, ISSN 15564967
Cook, M. V. (2007). Flight Dynamics Principles (2nd Ed.), Elsevier, ISBN 978-0-7506-6927-6,
Oxford, UK
Cosic, K., Kopriva, I., Kostic, T., Samic, M. & Volareic, M. (1999), Design and
Implementation of a Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulator for a Semi-Automatic
Guided Missile System . Simulation Practice and Theory, Vol. 7, No. 2, (April 1999),
pp. 107-123, ISSN 1569-190X
Kayton, M. & Fried, W. R. (Editors). (1969). Avionics Navigation Systems, John Wiley & Sons,
ISBN 471-46180-6, New York, USA
Larson, R. W. (2011). LabVIEW for Engineers, Prentice-Hall, ISBN-13 978-0-13-609429-6, New
Jersey, USA
Ledin, J. (2001). Simulation Engineering, CMP Books, ISBN 157-820-0806, Lawrence, USA
Nelson, R. C. (1998). Flight Stability and Automatic Control (2nd Ed.), McGraw-Hill, ISBN 0-07115838-3, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Nise, N. S. (2008). Control Systems Engineering (5th Ed.), John Wiley & Sons, ISBN 978-0-47016997-1, New Jersey, USA
Roskam, J. (2007). Airplane Flight Dynamics and Automatic Flight Controls, Part I,
DARcorporation, ISBN-13 978-1-884885-17-4, Kansas, USA
Roskam, J. (2003). Airplane Flight Dynamics and Automatic Flight Controls, Part II,
DARcorporation, ISBN 1-884885-18-7, Kansas, USA
Salman, S. A., Puttige, V. R. & Anavatti, S. G. (2006). Real-Time Validation and Comparison
of Fuzzy Identification and State-Space Identification for a UAV Platform.
Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Conference on Control Applications, pp. 21382143, ISBN 0-7803-9797-5, Munich, Germany, October 4-6, 2006
Shetty, D. & Kolk, R. A. (1997). Mechatronics System Design, PWS Publishing Company, ISBN
053-495-2852, Boston, USA
Sun, Y. P., Wu, L. T. & Liang, Y. C. (2006). System Identification of Unmanned Air Vehicle
and Autopilot Verification via Hardware-in-the-Loop Real-time Simulation.
Proceedings of International Forum on Systems and Mechatronics, ISBN 986-688-904-1,
Tainan, Taiwan, December 6-8, 2006

132

LabVIEW - Practical Applications and Solutions

Sun, Y. P., Chu, C. Y., & Liang, Y. C. (2008a). Using Virtual Instruments to Develop an
Actuator-Based Hardware-in-the-Loop Test-Bed for Autopilot of Unmanned Aerial
Vehicle. Proceedings of SPIE-Fourth International Symposium on Precision Mechanical
Measurements, Vol. 7130, Part I, pp. 71301J-1-6, ISBN 9780819473646, Anhui, China,
August 25-29, 2008
Sun, Y. P., Wu, L. T. & Liang, Y. C. (2008b). Stability Derivatives Estimation of Unmanned
Aerial Vehicle. Key Engineering Materials, Vol. 381-382, pp. 137-140, ISSN 1013-9826
Sun, Y. P., Tsai, C. H. & Liang, Y. C. (2009). Fuzzy Logic Control Design and Verification of
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Autopilot via Hardware-in-the-Loop Simulation.
Proceedings of the 2009 International Symposium on Mechatronic and Biomedical
Engineering and Applications, pp. 156-164, ISBN 978-986-7339-508 , Kaohsiung,
Taiwan, November 5, 2009
Sun, Y. P., Tsai, C. H. & Liang, Y. C. (2010). Design and Implementation of a Stability
Augmentation System for an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Using Hardware-in-theLoop Simulation. Proceedings of the 2010 International Symposium on Mechatronic and
Biomedical Engineering and Applications, pp. 183-193, ISBN 978-986-7339-62-1,
Kaohsiung, Taiwan, November 9, 2010
Travis, J. & Kring, J. (2007). LabVIEW for Everyone: Graphical Programming Made Easy and Fun
(3rd Ed.), Prentice Hall, ISBN 0-13-185672-3, New Jersey, USA