Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Experimental evaluation demonstrates improved attitude regulation in fully actuated multirotors under shifting center-of-mass, indicating reduced rotational control demand.
Fully actuated multirotor UAVs (FA-mUAVs) have attracted attention for aerial physical interaction because they generate translational forces without tilting the vehicle, thereby supporting interaction precision and payload-transportation stability. However, this capability relies on an accurate center-of-mass (CoM)-dependent thrust-to-wrench allocation geometry. When the CoM shifts due to payload variation or physical interaction, the nominal allocation geometry produces incorrect moment arms and recurrent unintended torques. Existing robust and robust-adaptive approaches compensate for these effects through the input channel while leaving the allocation geometry unchanged. Conversely, allocation-level CoM correction addresses the geometric source of the mismatch but does not by itself provide transient robustness during estimator convergence or against non-CoM disturbances. This paper proposes a transient-buffered allocation-geometry adaptation framework that addresses these two limitations within a single architecture. The framework combines an input-channel robust layer with allocation-level CoM adaptation: the robust layer buffers instantaneous mismatch and residual disturbances, while the adaptation layer processes the filtered compensation signal generated by the robust layer through the CoM-dependent regression to estimate the CoM and update the allocator, without assuming a unique separation of CoM-induced and non-CoM components. Stability analysis establishes boundedness and phase-dependent convergence of the CoM-estimation error. Real-flight experiments show that adding the CoM-estimation/allocation-update path to a retained disturbance-observer (DOB) robust baseline improves attitude regulation and reduces rotational compensation demand.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Seo et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: