Statistical Turbulence and High-Fidelity Disturbance Fields for Quadrotor Flight Control
Organizations: State Key Laboratory of Turbulence and Complex Systems, Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Peking University, Beijing, 100871, People’s Republic of China
Abstract
Reinforcement-learning quadrotor controllers are usually trained under simplified wind models, yet the impact of wind-field fidelity, as opposed to magnitude, on policy robustness remains unquantified. This paper compares five disturbance-fidelity levels, from wind-free flight and discrete 1-cosine gusts through statistical turbulence and synthetic coherent structures to large-eddy-simulation fields of the atmospheric boundary layer, in a full cross-fidelity train test evaluation of proximal policy optimization (PPO) agents, with cascaded PID and geometric SE(3) controllers as training-free references, over a 0-12 m/s wind sweep. Before any controller comparison is made, all disturbance data are validated: every synthetic generator is checked quantitatively against its analytical or certification-standard reference, and the large-eddy-simulation fields against the imposed log law. On a racing-class quadrotor in hover, the train test matrix is remarkably flat, and the cheapest structured training wind, which is discrete-gust domain randomization, ranks first in every test column, a ranking replicated on a wind-sensitive 27 g platform; a once-tuned geometric controller brackets the learned PPO policies at zero crash rate. Mechanism diagnostics show that control authority, not wind realism, bounds robustness, so wind-fidelity investment should scale with platform wind sensitivity.
Figures & tables
| [m] | [m/s] | log law [m/s] | dev. [%] | / [m/s] |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.17 | 5.09 | 4.92 | 1.15 / 0.24 | |
| 2.73 | 6.19 | 6.06 | 1.03 / 0.40 | |
| 5.08 | 6.97 | 6.89 | 0.91 / 0.48 | |
| 9.77 | 7.78 | 7.77 | 0.79 / 0.48 | |
| 19.92 | 8.79 | 8.73 | 0.64 / 0.40 |
| Training level | test L0 | test L1 | test L2 | test L3 | test L4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PPO (L0) | (6%) | (6%) | (8%) | (6%) | (10%) |
| PPO (L1) | (0%) | (2%) | (2%) | (2%) | (2%) |
| PPO (L2) | (8%) | (6%) | (8%) | (8%) | (14%) |
| PPO (L3) | (2%) | (2%) | (0%) | (0%) | (0%) |
| PPO (L4) | (4%) | (4%) | (2%) | (0%) | (0%) |
| PID (baseline) | (0%) | (100%) | (100%) | (100%) | (100%) |
Quadrotor Control
Quadrotor control studies how to stabilize, guide, and adapt aerial robots under demanding flight conditions and physical constraints.
See all 117 papers