Design and Control of Delta: Deformable Multilinked Multirotor with Rolling Locomotion Ability in Terrestrial Domain

Kazuki Sugihara

{}^{1}

, Moju Zhao

{}^{2}

, Takuzumi Nishio

{}^{1}

, Kei Okada

{}^{1}

, and Masayuki Inaba

{}^{1}

Abstract

In recent years, multiple types of locomotion methods for robots have been developed and enabled to adapt to multiple domains. In particular, aerial robots are useful for exploration in several situations, taking advantage of its three-dimensional mobility. Moreover, some aerial robots have achieved manipulation tasks in the air. However, energy consumption for flight is large and thus locomotion ability on the ground is also necessary for aerial robots to do tasks for long time. Therefore, in this work, we aim to develop deformable multirotor robot capable of rolling movement with its entire body and achieve motions on the ground and in the air. In this paper, we first describe the design methodology of a deformable multilinked air-ground hybrid multirotor. We also introduce its mechanical design and rotor configuration based on control stability. Then, thrust control method for locomotion in air and ground domains is described. Finally, we show the implemented prototype of the proposed robot and evaluate through experiments in air and terrestrial domains. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first time to achieve the rolling locomotion by multilink structured mutltrotor.

Index Terms–Multimodal Locomotion; Multilinked Multirotor; Design Optimization; Thrust Control

I Introduction

In recent years, multimodal locomotion in robotics field have been investigated and adaptation to multiple domains have been achieved [1][2][3][4]. Aerial robot is also a field that has been developed and have the advantage of being able to extend robot’s maneuvering space into the air. In addition, manipulation in the air has also been achieved by deploying arms on aerial robots [5][6], and by transforming its entire body [7][8]. Multilink structured aerial robots have rotors in each links, and the rotors can be positioned around the center of gravity, allowing high manipulation capability. On the other hand, the energy consumption for flight is large. By enabling terrestrial locomotion, aerial robots can adapt to various environments, such as disaster sites, and perform tasks for a long period of time. Therefore, in this work, we aim to develop multilinked multirotor robot platform with deformation ability and locomotion ability on the ground and in the air as shown in Fig. 1.

Refer to caption — Figure 1: Aerial transformation and rolling terrestrial locomotion by Delta: DEformable multilinked multirotor with Locomotion ability in Terrestrial and Aerial domains.

Robots with capability of locomotion in the air and on the ground includes the legged, wheeled, and rolling types. In legged types, bipedal type and quadruped type have been proposed. In [9], two parallel link legs mechanism and quadrotor is combined. This robot can walk and fly in multiple environments, but it doesn’t have manipulation ability. Whole body flying humanoid have developed [10][11]. Locomotion on the ground and aerial motion with their dual arms have been achieved, however, the size is limited to small. Moreover, their centralized arrangement of rotors makes manipulation difficult because they can not exert wrench to compensate the wrench acting on the end-effector. Multilink quadruped robot equipped with distributed rotor performed aerial transformation and walking on the ground [12]. However, since only one leg is used as swing leg during walking, the walking motion is relatively slow and its large size makes it difficult to adapt to diverse environments.

In other studies, wheeled locomotion have been proposed [13][14]. Separated mechanisms in [13] for flight and for terrestrial locomotion are suitable for each mode. In [14], propellers are deployed inside the wheels and weight of mechanisms was reduced. However, these robots require actuators to drive their wheels, which would negatively affect its flight time due to their weight.

There are some quadrotors with circular shaped mechanism for rolling locomotion on the ground [15][16][17]. A novel quadrotor equipped with rolling cage which works as passive wheels has proposed and achieved air-ground hybrid locomotion [15]. Since the cage is rotatable freely relative to the quadrotor, the efficiency of transmitting thrust for propulsion is low, making it difficult to run over uneven terrain. In [16], quadrotor was equipped with a actively rotatable circular plate. However, it can generate thrust force in one direction, making it difficult to recover when it loses balance due to disturbance. In [17], rolling motion on the ground was achieved by aerial robot with variable pitch propellers build into a rigid circular frame. It can balance by thrust force, but there are difficulty in adaptation to uneven terrain due to its rigid frame and rolling motion based on drag moment of propellers. But this rolling method can be applicable to multiliked structure by distributing circular frames to each links. By using this method and deformation with multilinked structure, it is possible to adapt to complex terrain by transforming to suitable configuration or using multi-point contact with the environment. Therefore, we combine rolling motion with whole robot’s body for ground locomotion and multilink structure that is suitable for manipulation.

Robots equipped with thrusters can use thrust force for stabilize their motions or propulsion. In [18], a biped robot with thrusters step over a large obstacles using thrust for balancing. In [19] and [20], they achieved ground locomotion by thrust. Since the center of mass were in the support polygon area of those of ground contact points, they did not necessary complex thrust control. In this work, we propose a thrust control framework to achieve stabilization and maneuvering. For the locomotion on the ground, contact force between the body and ground was considered to perform rolling motion stably. This control framework can switch the locomotion mode seamlessly.

The main contributions of this work are summarized as follows:

1.

We propose a design methodology, mechanical design, and rotor configuration method for a multilinked multirotor with rolling locomotion ability.
2.

We present an integrated thrust control framework for air and ground locomotion.
3.

We achieve the multiple type of locomotion by the proposed multirotor platform.

The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: The design methodology and mechanical design of each modules are presented in Sec. II. Modeling of the robot and optimized rotor configuration are also introduced in Sec. II. In Sec. III, we propose an integrated control framework for aerial and terrestrial locomotion. We then show the implemented prototype and experimental results in Sec. IV. Finally, conclusions are presented in Sec. V.

II Design

In this section, we introduce the design methodology and mechanical design of each modules of multilinked multirotor with rolling locomotion ability. Then, the modeling of the proposed robot and the rotor configuration including the optimization based on feasible torque by thrust are described.

II-A Design methodology

The robot platform in this work have multilinked structure and frames for protection of propeller and contact to the ground. The frames are distributed to each links and this enables to run through rough terrain by deformation to the suitable configuration depending on the environments. By using frames and thrust for propulsion, it does’t need additional actuator for rolling. In this part, we describe the design methodology in terms of the number of links and configuration of control DOF.

II-A1 Number of links

In multilinked aerial robots, mechanical rigidity decreases as the number of links increases, resulting in vibratory behavior in flight [21]. In this work, since a part of the body is in contact with the environment while rolling, unintended deflection is caused by the forces acting from the environment on a low-rigidity body. This deflection makes large modeling errors and control instability. The larger the size, the greater the contact force generated and the greater the load on the joint, which requires a heavy actuator capable of high torque and increases the risk of breakdowns. In addition, as the number of links increases, the distance between neighboring link frames increases, making stable rolling motion more difficult. Therefore, in this work, we aim to achieve a configuration with a small number of links and sufficient mechanical rigidity to perform tasks that include contact with the environment stably.

II-A2 Control DOF configuration

During flight, all links are in the horizontal plane so that the center of gravity of the body is within the support polygon area of the propellers. While rolling, the links are configured to be on the vertical plane to make contact with frames and ground. The transition to the attitude for each locomotion mode requires a control input to exert the torque around the center of gravity of the body. It is also necessary to be able to exert thrust in the direction required for each locomotion mode. In aerial robots, there are several ways to increase the number of control inputs, such as increasing the number of rotors or enabling to change the direction of thrust force. Increasing the number of rotors will result in the larger size, which can lead a decrease in mechanical rigidity. In this work, by using the thrust vectoring mechanism that can change the direction of thrust, we can ensure a sufficient number of control inputs and enable to exert force in the direction required for each locomotion mode.

Considering the requirements for a small number of links, the robot in this work is three-link body with one rotor on each link, and each rotor is have a thrust vectoring freedom around the link. In this configuration, total control input is 6 and this makes it possible to compensate the wrenches generated at the ground contact point during rolling locomotion and at the end-effectors during aerial manipulation.

II-B Mechanical design

The mechanical design of each link is shown in Fig. 2(a). Each link consists of a pipe connected with other link by a single-degree-of-freedom joint as shown in Fig. 2(b). The frames for contact to the ground are distributed to each link and their size are larger enough to avoid collision with propellers. The outer surfaces of the three frames form a circle when each joint angle is $120\text{\,}\mathrm{d}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}% \mathrm{s}$ and three links form an equilateral triangle as shown in Fig. 2(e). Note that there are slits on opposite sides and the ends are shortened to prevent the frames of neighboring links from colliding with each other due to the movement of joints.

The thrust vectoring mechanism is shown in Fig. 2(c). A timing belt connects the pulley fixed to the link and the pulley rotated by the rotational actuator fixed to the propeller side to transmit rotation. In the following, rotational angle of $i$ -th thrust vectoring mechanism is denoted as $\phi_{i}$ . The propeller rotation surface of $i$ -th rotor is inclined at an angle $\theta_{i}$ to the link. This enables to exert force in the direction of the long axis of the link. We optimized this angle $\theta_{i}$ to achieve stable control, which is described in detail in Sec. II-D.

II-C Conversion from thrust to wrench

We define the frame as shown in Fig. 3: world frame {W}, cog frame {cog}, $i$ -th link frame $\{L_{i}\}$ and contact point frame {cp}. The world frame is fixed on the ground and its $z$ axis is vertically upward. The origin of cog frame is at the center of gravity of robot and its $z$ axis is corresponding to that of $\{\textit{W}\}$ frame. The origin of $i$ -th link frame is located at the tip of each link and their $x$ axis is corresponding to the direction of $i$ -th link. The contact point coordinate express the contact point with ground plane and its rotation matrix is same with $\{cog\}$ frame. In the following ${}^{X}\bm{R}_{Y}$ denotes the rotation matrix that rotates a vector in $Y$ coordinate system to $X$ coordinate system.

The exerted force of $i$ -th rotor along to the each axis of $\{L_{i}\}$ are as follows,

${}^{\{L_{i}\}}\lambda_{i,x}$	$\displaystyle=\lambda_{i}\sin\theta_{i},$	(1)
${}^{\{L_{i}\}}\lambda_{i,y}$	$\displaystyle=-\lambda_{i}\cos\theta_{i}\sin\phi_{i},$	(2)
${}^{\{L_{i}\}}\lambda_{i,z}$	$\displaystyle=\lambda_{i}\cos\theta_{i}\cos\phi_{i},$	(3)

where $\lambda_{i}$ is thrust force of $i$ -th rotor. In (1)-(3), there are two control input variables: $\lambda_{i}$ and $\phi_{i}$ . We now define a new vector $\bm{\lambda}^{\prime}$ that aligns some of these components which include $\lambda_{i}$ and $\phi_{i}$ .

\bm{\lambda}^{\prime}=\begin{bmatrix}\cdots&{}^{\{L_{i}\}}\lambda_{i,y}&{}^{\{% L_{i}\}}\lambda_{i,z}&\cdots\end{bmatrix}.

(4)

The conversion from $\bm{\lambda}^{\prime}$ to wrench in the cog frame is a linear transformation as follows,

\begin{bmatrix}\bm{f}_{\lambda}\\ \bm{\tau}_{\lambda}\end{bmatrix}=\bm{Q}^{\prime}_{cog}\bm{\lambda}^{\prime},

(5)

\bm{Q}_{cog}^{\prime}=\begin{bmatrix}\bm{Q}_{trans,cog}^{\prime}\\ \bm{Q}_{rot,cog}^{\prime}\end{bmatrix},

(6)

	$\displaystyle\bm{Q}_{trans,cog}^{\prime}$	$\displaystyle=\begin{bmatrix}\cdots&{}^{\{cog\}}\bm{R}_{\{L_{i}\}}\begin{% bmatrix}0&0\\ 1&0\\ 0&1\end{bmatrix}&\cdots\end{bmatrix},$		(11)
	$\displaystyle\bm{Q}_{rot,cog}^{\prime}$	$\displaystyle=\begin{bmatrix}\cdots&\quantity(\quantity[\bm{p}_{i}\times]+% \sigma_{i}\bm{E}_{3})^{\{cog\}}\bm{R}_{\{L_{i}\}}\begin{bmatrix}0&0\\ 1&0\\ 0&1\end{bmatrix}&\cdots\end{bmatrix},$		(16)

where $\bm{p}_{i}$ , $\bm{f}_{\lambda}$ , and $\bm{\tau_{\lambda}}$ denote the position of the origin of the $i$ -th rotor in the {cog} frame, force and torque generated by thrusts acting on the cog. $\bm{p}_{i}$ are calculated from forward kinematics using joint angle vector $\bm{q}$ . $\begin{bmatrix}\cdot\times\end{bmatrix}$ is skew symmetric matrix of a three dimensional vector. $\sigma_{i}$ is a coefficient which represents the ratio of rotor thrust to drag moment around the rotational axis of the rotor.

II-D Configuration of rotors

II-D1 Arrangement of rotors

As described in Sec. II-A, the robot has three rotors and the rotational degrees of freedom of them around links. Although the number of control inputs in this configuration is 6, it is necessary to be able to exert enough torque by thrust around all axes for stable control. In this work, we determine the position of the rotors and the tilt angle of the propeller in each rotor, to achieve stable control in the flight and rolling state. Rolling state is in which the three frames make a circle, as shown in Fig. 4(a). Although the thrust vectoring mechanism can exert force to in the $y$ direction of $\{L_{i}\}$ coordinate system, the rotors should be placed as far away from the center of the link as possible, as shown in Fig. 2(d), because if the rotors are placed at the center of the link, there is little moment arm of force to contribute to rotation around the $z$ axis in Fig. 4(a).

II-D2 Optimization of propeller tilt angle

Under the arrangement of rotors shown in Sec. II-D1, the propeller tilt angles $\theta_{i}$ are optimized based on the maximization of feasible control torque as proposed in [22]. We define the feasible torque space considering thrust vectoring angles as follows,

\mathcal{V}_{T}\coloneqq\quantity{\bm{\tau}\in\mathbb{R}^{3}|\bm{\tau}=\sum_{i% =1}^{n}\sum_{j=1}^{3}\lambda_{\max}\alpha_{j}\bm{v}_{ij}},

(17)

where $\lambda_{\max}$ is the maximum thrust force and $\bm{v}_{ij}$ are three types of vector as follows,

	$\displaystyle\begin{bmatrix}\bm{v}_{i1}^{T}\\ \bm{v}_{i2}^{T}\\ \bm{v}_{i3}^{T}\end{bmatrix}^{T}=(\quantity[\bm{p}_{i}\times]+\sigma_{i}\bm{E}% _{3})^{\{cog\}}\bm{R}_{\{L_{i}\}}diag\quantity(S,C,C),$		(21)
	$\displaystyle S=\sin\theta_{i},\hskip 11.38109ptC=\cos\theta_{i},$		(22)

and $\alpha_{j}$ satisfy $0\leqq\alpha_{1}\leqq 1$ and $-1\leqq\alpha_{2},\alpha_{3}\leqq 1$ . The range of $\alpha_{j}$ means whether the rotor can exert force in both directions of the axis of $\{L_{i}\}$ coordinate system by thrust vectoring or not. And we linearize the components of rotational axis of rotors in $\bm{v}_{i2}$ and $\bm{v}_{i3}$ like as (2) and (3) for simplicity. Here, we redefine $\bm{v}_{i}$ comprising $\bm{v}_{ij}$ corresponding with a set $\mathcal{N}_{T}=\{1,2,\cdots,3n\}$ . The distance from the origin of the convex $\mathcal{V}_{T}$ to the plane along a normal vector $\bm{v}_{i}\times\bm{v}_{j}$ and the minimum feasible torque can be calculated as follows,

d^{\tau}_{ij}=\underset{k\in\mathcal{N}_{T}}{\sum}\|\dfrac{\quantity(\bm{v}_{i% }\times\bm{v}_{j})^{T}}{\|\bm{v}_{i}\times\bm{v}_{j}\|}\bm{v}_{k}\|\hskip 11.3% 8109pt\quantity(i,j\in\mathcal{N}_{T}),

(23)

\tau_{\min}=\lambda_{\max}\min d^{\tau}_{ij}\hskip 11.38109pt\quantity(i,j\in% \mathcal{N}_{T}).

(24)

We aim to maximize $\tau_{\min}$ for rolling motion. Moreover, the larger the tilt angles of the propellers, the smaller the force that can be generated in the vertical direction, which causes a decrease in power efficiency during flight, and the larger the force generated in the translational direction which causes a decrease in flight stability, so $\theta_{i}$ should not become too large. Then, we design the following optimization problem to get the optimal tilt angles,

\underset{\bm{\theta}}{\text{maximize}}\hskip 11.38109ptw_{1}\dfrac{\tau_{\min% }}{\lambda_{\max}}-w_{2}\|\bm{\theta}\|^{2}.

(25)

In this work, we used global optimization algorithm ISRES [23] to solve this problem. We set the weights as $w_{1}=4.0$ , $w_{2}=1.0$ , then, got the optimal tilt angles $\bm{\theta}^{opt}=\begin{bmatrix}-0.0728&0.179&-0.0802\end{bmatrix}$ rad. We assigned only the second rotor to rotate in the opposite direction to the others. This is the reason why the tilt angle of second rotor is larger than the other and its sign was reversed. The feasible control torque space with this tilt angle is shown in Fig. 4(b).

III Modeling and Control

In this section, we show the kinematics model of the proposed robot platform. Then, we propose the thrust control system as shown in Fig. 5. The control framework includes the flight control which consists of attitude control and position control of cog, and control for ground motion with gravitational force compensation and quadratic programming considering contact force as constraints.

III-A Kinematics Model

In this work, we apply the quasi-static assumption for joint motion, or velocity and acceleration of joints are considered to be zero. From the kinematics model depicted in Fig. 3 and Newton-Euler equations, translational and rotational motions of cog are described as follows,

	$\displaystyle m\ddot{\bm{r}}=-m\bm{g}+^{\{W\}}\bm{R}_{\{cog\}}\bm{f}_{\lambda}% +^{\{W\}}\bm{R}_{\{cp\}}\bm{f}_{c},$		(26)
	$\displaystyle\bm{I}\dot{\bm{\omega}}=-\bm{\omega}\times\bm{I}\bm{\omega}+\bm{% \tau}_{\lambda}-^{\{cp\}}\bm{p}_{\{cog\}}\times\bm{f}_{c},$		(27)

where $m$ , $\bm{r}$ , $\bm{g}$ , $\bm{I}$ , $\bm{\omega}$ are the mass of the robot, the position of the {cog} frame in the world frame, the gravitational vector, inertia matrix of the body expressed in cog frame, and the angular velocity of the body. ${}^{\{cp\}}\bm{p}_{\{cog\}}$ and $\bm{f}_{c}$ are the position of {cog} frame w.r.t {cp} frame and contact force expressed in {cog} frame.

III-B Flight Control

In flight control, we ignore the contact force to the ground, so consider $\bm{f}_{c}$ as $\bm{0}$ .

III-B1 Attitude Control

As proposed in [24], the target torque in the cog frame can be calculated as follows,

	$\displaystyle\bm{\tau}^{des}_{\lambda}=\bm{I}$	$\displaystyle\quantity({\color[rgb]{0,0,0}\bm{K}}_{\tau,p}\bm{e}_{R}+{\color[% rgb]{0,0,0}\bm{K}}_{\tau,i}\int\bm{e}_{R}\differential t+{\color[rgb]{0,0,0}% \bm{K}}_{\tau,d}\bm{e}_{\omega})$
		$\displaystyle+\bm{\omega}\times\bm{I}\bm{\omega},$		(28)

	$\displaystyle\bm{e}_{R}=\dfrac{1}{2}\quantity[\bm{R}^{T}\bm{R}_{des}-\bm{R}^{T% }_{des}\bm{R}]^{\lor},$		(29)
	$\displaystyle\bm{e}_{\omega}=\bm{R}^{T}\bm{R}_{des}\bm{\omega}_{des}-\bm{% \omega},$		(30)

where ${\color[rgb]{0,0,0}\bm{K}}_{\tau,*}\in\mathbb{R}^{3\times 3}$ are PID gain diagonal matrices and $\quantity[*]^{\lor}$ is the inverse of a skew map. Here, we expressed ${}^{\{W\}}\bm{R}_{\{cog\}}$ as $\bm{R}$ for simplicity.

III-B2 Position Control

The target force in the cog frame can be calculated as follows,

	$\displaystyle\bm{f}^{des}_{\lambda}=m\bm{R}^{-1}\quantity({\color[rgb]{0,0,0}% \bm{K}}_{f,p}\bm{e}_{\bm{r}}+{\color[rgb]{0,0,0}\bm{K}}_{f,i}\int\bm{e}_{\bm{r% }}\differential t+{\color[rgb]{0,0,0}\bm{K}}_{f,d}\dot{\bm{e}}_{\bm{r}}),$		(31)
	$\displaystyle\bm{e}_{\bm{r}}=\bm{r}_{des}-\bm{r},$		(32)

where ${\color[rgb]{0,0,0}\bm{K}}_{f,*}\in\mathbb{R}^{3\times 3}$ are PID gain diagonal matrices.

III-C Ground Control

III-C1 Standing up on the ground

Contact forces with the ground ( $\bm{f}_{c}$ ) must be considered in ground control. Particularly in the process of standing up, the moment around the cog generated by the contact force prevents the body from rotating. Therefore, during ground control thrust is not considered in the cog coordinate system, but in the contact point coordinate system. When controlling in the cog coordinate system, it is necessary to estimate the contact force and generate torque to compensate for it, but when controlling in the contact point coordinate system, the distance between the center of control and the acting point of contact force is zero, and the moment of rotation has not to be considered. Instead, it is necessary to consider the moment around the contact point generated by gravity, which can be easily estimated from the attitude of the body.

Considering the moment due to gravity in addition to the PID control, the target torque to be generated around the ground contact point is as follows,

	$\displaystyle\bm{\tau}^{des}_{cp}=\bm{I}_{cp}\quantity({\color[rgb]{0,0,0}\bm{% K}}_{\tau,p}\bm{e}_{R}+{\color[rgb]{0,0,0}\bm{K}}_{\tau,i}\int\bm{e}_{R}% \differential t+{\color[rgb]{0,0,0}\bm{K}}_{\tau,d}\bm{e}_{\omega})$
	$\displaystyle+\bm{\omega}\times\bm{I}_{cp}\bm{\omega}+^{\{cp\}}\bm{p}_{\{cog\}% }\times m\bm{g},$		(33)

where $\bm{I}_{cp}$ is inertia matrix expressed in contact point frame.

For translational force, contact force is considered as constraints. In the $x$ and $y$ direction, the exerted force should be less than the static friction force to prevent slipping, and in the $z$ direction, the exerted force should not be greater than its own weight to prevent it from floating. We designed the optimization problem based on the quadratic programming with the objective of minimizing the exerted thrust as follows,

$\displaystyle\underset{\bm{\lambda}^{\prime}}{\text{minimize}}$	$\displaystyle\quantity\|\bm{\lambda}^{\prime}\|^{2},$	(34)
subject to	$\displaystyle\bm{\tau}^{des}_{cp}=\bm{Q}^{\prime}_{rot,cp}\bm{\lambda}^{\prime},$	(35)
	$\displaystyle\bm{f}_{cp}=\bm{Q}_{trans,cp}^{\prime}\bm{\lambda}^{\prime},$	(36)
	$\displaystyle\quantity\|f_{cp,x}\|<\mu\quantity(mg-f_{{\color[rgb]{0,0,0}cp,}z}),$	(37)
	$\displaystyle\quantity\|f_{cp,y}\|<\mu\quantity(mg-f_{{\color[rgb]{0,0,0}cp,}z}),$	(38)
	$\displaystyle f_{cp,z}<mg,$	(39)

where $\mu$ , $f_{cp,x}$ , $f_{cp,y}$ , $f_{cp,z}$ are coefficient of friction, and $x$ , $y$ and $z$ segment of $\bm{f}_{cp}$ . $\bm{Q}{\color[rgb]{0,0,0}{}^{\prime}}_{trans,cp}$ and $\bm{Q}{\color[rgb]{0,0,0}{}^{\prime}}_{rot,cp}$ are conversion matrix from thrust to force and torque acting on contact point coordinate system respectively. They are calculated from forward kinematics using joint angle vector $\bm{q}$ like as (11) and (16). (37) and (38) are simplified constraints on friction and exerted force.

III-C2 Rolling

Note that while rolling, the $x$ axis of the $\{cog\}$ is in the direction of rolling, and the $y$ axis is corresponding to the rotational axis of rolling. During rolling, the position of each rotor relative to the ground contact point vary with its rolling phase. Besides, there is no need to generate large amount of thrust while controlling on the ground. Because of these reasons, the target thrust vectoring angle using the result of (34)-(39) can vary significantly while rolling. In the worst case, it move back and forth by nearly 180 degrees. However, there are limitations to the thrust vectoring speed. If the changes in vectoring angles are too large, it is difficult to track the target angles. Therefore, the torque around the rotational axis of rolling is mainly controlled by the changing thrust force and the attitude around other axes is mainly controlled by thrust vectoring. In this case, all propellers are turned outward to exert sufficient wrench in each direction. Hence, in addition to (35)-(39), we add the following constraints on thrust vectoring angles,

0<\phi_{i}<\pi\hskip 14.22636pt(i=1,\cdots,n),

(40)

These constraints lead nonlinearity, however, from the model of each link depicted in Fig. 3, it is possible to add constraints corresponding to (40) as follows,

^{\{L_{i}\}}\lambda_{i,y}<0\hskip 14.22636pt(i=1,\cdots,n).

(41)

During rolling, we solved quadratic programming problem comprising (34)-(39) and (41).

III-C3 State transition

During standing up motion, a large force to compensate for its own weight is exerted, but when the body reach near vertical, its angular velocity can be too large to stop at the vertical state by thrust vectoring because there are limitations for rotating speed of thrust vectoring mechanism. This can cause it to fall in the opposite side. Therefore, different gains are set for standing and rolling modes, and the state is switched adaptively depending on the state of its body. In the standing up state described in Sec. III-C1, if the attitude is within the $\phi_{\alpha}$ from the vertically standing state, the state is switched to rolling mode described in Sec. III-C2

III-D Control Distribution

Control distribution part is a conversion from target wrench to target actuator input. In flight control mode, we obtained the target force and torque in the cog frame. Using (5), we calculate the $\bm{\lambda}^{\prime}$ as follows.

\bm{\lambda}^{\prime}=\bm{Q}^{{}^{\prime}-1}_{cog}\begin{bmatrix}\bm{f}_{% \lambda}^{des}\\ \bm{\tau}_{\lambda}^{des}\end{bmatrix}

(42)

In both of control mode, we calculate the control input for each actuators from $\bm{\lambda}^{\prime}$ , as follows.

	$\displaystyle{\color[rgb]{0,0,0}\lambda_{i}=\dfrac{\sqrt{{}^{\{L_{i}\}}\lambda% _{i,y}^{2}+^{\{L_{i}\}}\lambda_{i,z}^{2}}}{\|\cos\theta_{i}\|},}$		(43)
	$\displaystyle{\color[rgb]{0,0,0}\phi_{i}=\tan^{-1}\quantity(-\dfrac{{}^{\{L_{i% }\}}\lambda_{i,y}}{{}^{\{L_{i}\}}\lambda_{i,z}}).}$		(44)

IV Experiment

In this section, we introduce the implemented prototype and evaluate the feasibility through experiments.

IV-A Hardware Prototype

In this work, we developed a prototype of Delta as shown in Fig. 6 and the specifications are described in Table I. The maximum thrust of the each thruster consisting of T-Motor AT2814 KV900 and $9\text{\,}\mathrm{i}\mathrm{n}\mathrm{c}\mathrm{h}$ propeller is $26.5\text{\,}\mathrm{N}$ at $26.2\text{\,}\mathrm{V}$ . Servo motors for thrust vectoring were Dynamixel XL430-W250-T. For joint actuation, we used Dynamixel XH430-W350-R and doubly decelerated by a timing belt and pulleys. Each link consisted of carbon pipes to reduce weight and to provide sufficient rigidity. Outer frames for contact to the ground were made of cut styrofoam. The rest of the body were aluminum sheet and PLA.

TABLE I: Prototype Specifications

Whole Body
Attribute	Value
mass	$4.1\text{\,}\mathrm{k}\mathrm{g}$
radius of frame	$0.4\text{\,}\mathrm{m}$
lipo battery	$6\text{\,}\mathrm{S}$ $3.9\text{\,}\mathrm{A}\mathrm{h}$

Link Module
Attribute	Value
link length	$0.55\text{\,}\mathrm{m}$
joint reduction ratio	1:2
max joint torque	$6.8\text{\,}\mathrm{N}\mathrm{m}$

Vectorable Rotor
Attribute	Value
rotor KV	$900$
max rotor thrust	$26.5\text{\,}\mathrm{N}$
reduction ratio	1:1
max vectoring speed	$3.2\text{\,}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{d}\mathrm{/}\mathrm{s}$

In the second link, an onboard computer Khadas VIM4 with Arm Cortex-A73 (4cores $2.2\text{\,}\mathrm{G}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}$ ) and Cortex-A53 (4cores $2.0\text{\,}\mathrm{G}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}$ ) was deployed. Original MCU board called Spinal is also deployed to perform realtime attitude control. Each link is equipped with a small MCU board called Neuron, which sends target inputs to each actuator received from Spinal. Spinal and Neurons are communicating with control area network (CAN) protocol. The detail of this communication system is shown in [25]. The optimization problem shown in Sec. III-C was solved with OSQP solver in onboard computer. Besides, external motion capture system (sampling rate: $100\text{\,}\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}$ ) was used to estimate the state of the second link w.r.t world frame. Total system diagram is depicted in Fig. 7.

IV-B Experimental Evaluation

IV-B1 Aerial transformation experiment

A aerial transformation experiment as shown in Fig. 8 was conducted. The robot took off from the ground and hover in the air. After reaching target altitude, joints are actuated in mid-air. Plots in Fig. 9 show the tracking errors of positions, tracking errors of orientations, joint angles, and input command to each thrusters after reaching target altitude.

RMS of those errors were $\begin{bmatrix}0.021&0.022&0.016\end{bmatrix}\mathrm{m}$ and $\begin{bmatrix}0.018&0.028&0.035\end{bmatrix}\mathrm{rad}$ . The maximum absolute values of these errors were $\begin{bmatrix}0.065&0.085&0.045\end{bmatrix}\mathrm{m}$ and $\begin{bmatrix}0.053&0.089&0.099\end{bmatrix}\mathrm{rad}$ . Power consumption in flight was approximately $1150\text{\,}\mathrm{W}$ . When the links are opened as shown in Fig. 8(3), the control of pitch angle was vibratory. Actualy, RMS of pitch angle tracking error from $20\text{\,}\mathrm{s}$ to $31\text{\,}\mathrm{s}$ was $0.024\text{\,}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{d}$ and from $35\text{\,}\mathrm{s}$ to $43\text{\,}\mathrm{s}$ was $0.041\text{\,}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{d}$ . This is because the inertia around $y$ axis increased much larger compared to other axis, and resposiveness of pitch angle was decreased. The inertia of in the state shown in Fig. 8(2) was $\mathrm{diag}\quantity(0.132,0.151,0.271)$ and in the state shown in Fig. 8(3) was $\mathrm{diag}\quantity(0.155,0.245,0.389)$ .

IV-B2 Standing up experiment

A standing experiment as shown in Fig. 10 was conducted. By sending target roll angle of cog as $\pi/2$ $\mathrm{r}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{d}$ , the robot rose from a horizontal state on the ground to a vertical state by thrust force. $\phi_{\alpha}$ for transition to rolling mode introduced in Sec. III-C3 was set $0.2\text{\,}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{d}$ . Plots in Fig. 11 show the input command to each thrusters and tracking error of roll angle of the cog frame. After exerting about the same amount of thrust as in flight during the first few seconds, the robot could balance in a vertical state with small amount of thrust. After standing up, from $6\text{\,}\mathrm{s}$ to $10\text{\,}\mathrm{s}$ in Fig. 11, the tracking error of the roll angle was less than $0.05\text{\,}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{d}$ . Besides, the power consumption during this period was less than $100\text{\,}\mathrm{W}$ .

IV-B3 Stability against disturbance

The stability against external disturbances in the standing state was verified as shown in Fig. 12. We added disturbance manually around roll and pitch axis. Plots in Fig. 12 show the tracking errors of roll and pitch angle, and the input command to each thrusters. Although there is a steady error of about $0.1\text{\,}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{d}$ due to modeling error, rotors were actuated to return to its original orientation in responce to the disturbance.

IV-B4 Rolling experiment

Rolling experiment as shown in Fig. 14 was conducted. While standing and balancing on the ground, the robot was sent a target angle around the rotational axis of rolling. Plots in Fig. 15 show the position of the cog in the world frame, input command to each thrusters, tracking errors of roll and yaw angle, and the pitch angle of the baselink (second link). Note that the pitch angle of the baselink is clamped to be in the interval $\quantity[-\pi,\pi]$ . Rolling locomotion over than $0.3\text{\,}\mathrm{m}\mathrm{/}\mathrm{s}$ could be achieved. The maximum tracking error of the roll angle was about $0.1\text{\,}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{d}$ , which is larger than that of only standing state. The yaw angle tracking error increased to about $0.1\text{\,}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{d}$ , then it was decreased. This is because the tracking error bacame larger enough and the exerted torque became larger than the rotational friction. As shown in Fig. 15, the exerted force of the rotors was firstly larger for link1 and then for link3. This is because the more the rotor’s rotational axis vector is oriented in the direction of move, the more it can contribute to rolling motion. The power consumption during rolling was about $200\text{\,}\mathrm{W}$ and this was lower than that of flight.

V Conclusions and Future Works

In this work, we proposed a multilinked multirotor platform which can move on the ground by rolling. The design of the link module with a thrust vectoring mechanism and a frame for contact with the ground, and the optimal configuration method of the rotors are presented. A control framework including flight control and rolling control that consider the contact force with the environment was proposed. Then, we implemented prototype and achieved aerial transformation and ground locomotion.

In the future, manipulation in air and ground domains will be investigated to demonstrate the versatility of this robot. The ground locomotion experiment in this work was conducted on the flat plane. We aim to realize adaptations to diverse environment by motion planning based on environmental recognition and running over uneven terrain by utilizing deformations and multi-point contact.

References

[1] Kevin G Gim, et al. Ringbot: Monocycle robot with legs. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 2024.
[2] Hamzeh Alzu’bi, et al. Loon copter: Implementation of a hybrid unmanned aquatic-aerial quadcopter with active buoyancy control. Journal of Field Robotics, Vol. 35, pp. 764–778, 8 2018.
[3] G. Clark Haynes, et al. Developing a robust disaster response robot. Journal of Field Robotics, Vol. 34, pp. 281–304, 3 2017.
[4] Kyunam Kim, et al. Rolling locomotion of cable-driven soft spherical tensegrity robots. Soft Robotics, Vol. 7, p. 346, 6 2020.
[5] Suseong Kim, et al. Aerial manipulation using a quadrotor with a two dof robotic arm. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 4990–4995, 2013.
[6] Daniel Mellinger, et al. Design, modeling, estimation and control for aerial grasping and manipulation. In 2011 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 2668–2673, 2011.
[7] Hyunsoo Yang, et al. Lasdra: Large-size aerial skeleton system with distributed rotor actuation. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 7017–7023, 2018.
[8] Moju Zhao, et al. Forceful valve manipulation with arbitrary direction by articulated aerial robot equipped with thrust vectoring apparatus. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 4893–4900, 2022.
[9] Kyunam Kim, et al. A bipedal walking robot that can fly, slackline, and skateboard. Science Robotics, Vol. 6, No. 59, p. eabf8136, 2021.
[10] Tomoki Anzai, et al. Design and development of a flying humanoid robot platform with bi-copter flight unit. In 2020 IEEE-RAS 20th International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids), pp. 69–75. IEEE, 2021.
[11] Kazuki Sugihara, et al. Design and control of a small humanoid equipped with flight unit and wheels for multimodal locomotion. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, Vol. 8, No. 9, pp. 5608–5615, 2023.
[12] Moju Zhao, et al. Design, modeling, and control of a quadruped robot spidar: Spherically vectorable and distributed rotors assisted air-ground quadruped robot. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, Vol. 8, No. 7, pp. 3923–3930, 2023.
[13] Muqing Cao, et al. Doublebee: A hybrid aerial-ground robot with two active wheels. In 2023 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pp. 6962–6969, 2023.
[14] Eric Sihite, et al. Multi-modal mobility morphobot (m4) with appendage repurposing for locomotion plasticity enhancement. Nature communications, Vol. 14, No. 1, p. 3323, 2023.
[15] Arash Kalantari, et al. Design and experimental validation of hytaq, a hybrid terrestrial and aerial quadrotor. In 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 4445–4450, 2013.
[16] Zhi Zheng, et al. Roller-quadrotor: A novel hybrid terrestrial/aerial quadrotor with unicycle-driven and rotor-assisted turning. In Proceedings of The 2023 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 6927–6934. IEEE, 2023.
[17] Koji Kawasaki, et al. MUWA: Multi-field universal wheel for air-land vehicle with quad variable-pitch propellers. In Proceedings of The 2013 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 1880–1885, 2013.
[18] Zhifeng Huang, et al. Jet-hr1: Two-dimensional bipedal robot step over large obstacle based on a ducted-fan propulsion system. In 2017 IEEE-RAS 17th International Conference on Humanoid Robotics (Humanoids), pp. 406–411. IEEE, 2017.
[19] Arash Kalantari, et al. Drivocopter: A concept hybrid aerial/ground vehicle for long-endurance mobility. In 2020 IEEE Aerospace Conference, pp. 1–10, 2020.
[20] Jared R. Page, et al. The Quadroller: Modeling of a UAV/UGV hybrid quadrotor. In Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 4834–4841, 2014.
[21] Toshiya Maki, et al. Elastic Vibration Suppression Control for Multilinked Aerial Robot Using Redundant Degrees-of-Freedom of Thrust Force. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 2859–2866, 2022.
[22] Sangyul Park, et al. ODAR: Aerial Manipulation Platform Enabling Omnidirectional Wrench Generation. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 1907–1918, 2018.
[23] T. P. Runarsson, et al. Search biases in constrained evolutionary optimization. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews), Vol. 35, pp. 233–243, 2005.
[24] Taeyoung Lee, et al. Geometric tracking control of a quadrotor uav on se(3). In 49th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), pp. 5420–5425, 2010.
[25] Tomoki Anzai, et al. Multilinked multirotor with internal communication system for multiple objects transportation based on form optimization method. In 2017 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pp. 5977–5984. IEEE, 2017.