See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/335210748

Implementation of Autonomous Visual Detection, Tracking and Landing for

AR.Drone 2.0 Quadcopter

Conference Paper · August 2019

DOI: 10.1109/DeSE.2019.00093

CITATIONS READS
7 1,193

3 authors:

Victor Massagué Respall Sami Sellami

Innopolis University Innopolis University
9 PUBLICATIONS   16 CITATIONS    5 PUBLICATIONS   9 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Ilya Afanasyev
Innopolis University
101 PUBLICATIONS   742 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Development of methods for identification of interaction models of robot with adaptive compliance with the human and environment View project

Calibration of the Space Solar Patrol apparatus at the synchrotron source View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ilya Afanasyev on 16 August 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Implementation of Autonomous Visual Detection,
Tracking and Landing for AR.Drone 2.0 Quadcopter
Victor Massague Respall, Sami Sellami, Ilya Afanasyev
Innopolis University, Innopolis, 420500, Russia
{v.respall, s.sellami, i.afanasyev}@innopolis.ru
Abstract—This paper presents the design and implementation
of a system where an autonomous aerial vehicle (UAV) has to
detect, track and land in the vicinity of a moving Unmanned
Ground Vehicle (UGV). The quadcopter needs to identify and
track the target using camera-based perception. A color-based
detection algorithm is employed to detect the UGV position and
Kernelized Correlation Filters (KCF) are taken for its tracking,
to double check the UGV presence in an image frame, the ORB
(Oriented FAST and rotated BRIEF) feature detector is used
(suppressing the false positive cases). Then the UGV position
detected in the image frame is used in a PD feedback control loop
in the quadcopter’s controller that enables the actual tracking
of the moving UGV in the horizontal plane, while another PID
controller stabilizes the UAV altitude. The proposed approach was
initially tested in Gazebo simulator, and then in real environment
with Parrot AR.Drone 2.0 and Plato robots (as UAV and UGV
correspondingly). The results demonstrate that the proposed
system can detect and track the UGV in real time mode without
artificial markers and provide robust UAV landing.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Nowadays, plenty of investigations have been carried out in
the field of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), and there has
been considerable interest into multi-rotor drones. Their most
known form is quadcopters, as they are an excellent option
for various applications, such as ground recognition, access
to difficult or dangerous areas, load delivery, data collection,
recreation, etc. [1], [2]. Clearly, one useful application would
be the ability to track and land autonomously on an object in a
dynamically changing environment [3], [4], while landing on
a moving platform is of particular interest for many practical
tasks [5]. This can be valuable for many areas, such as terrain
exploration with ground and aerial vehicles [6], rescue [7] and
military missions [8] or simply for commercial purposes, such
as the delivery of goods [9], [10].
All of these tasks require a detection, tracking and landing
system in different situations and environments where the
target or platform can be in motion. Landing on a moving
target is a challenging task to deal with due to the a priori
unknown motion and the nonlinear quadcopter’s dynamics.
Moreover drones can operate in GPS-denied heterogeneous
areas that require a higher level of UAV autonomy using
computer vision-based tracking and landing. An additional
problem is the UAV flight time limit, since it usually takes
about 20 minutes [11]. However, the problem of UAV tracking
and landing time optimization is beyond the scope of this
article.
This study addresses the problem of building the detection,
tracking and landing system for an autonomous quadcopter
by developing a controller that needs to manage the tasks of
following and landing in the vicinity of a moving UGV using
an the onboard camera and computer vision algorithms. The
task solving was executed in two stages:
• Designing the feedback controller for the UAV
• Implementing the detection, tracking and landing system
using the drone’s onboard camera.
We contribute by this paper with a solution for the online
tracking of a moving platform without any artificial markers
and the landing within the vicinity of this platform using a
low-cost quadcopter. The main limitation of the study is the
low-altitude indoor testing environment due to safety reasons,
that could be overcome in future investigations.
The paper is organized as follows: Section II describes
the papers related to this research; Section III explains our
methodology, Section IV presents the robots used and Section
V provides the results of simulation and experiments. Finally
we conclude in Section VI.
II. R ELATED W ORKS
The development of an object tracking controller for a
quadcopter with low-cost components of an onboard vision
system was introduced in [12]. The low-frequency monocular
vision methodology was used in a closed-loop control to track
an object of known color, while parallel PID controllers for
UAV bearing, relative height and range were implemented with
feedback from object displacement and size detected in the
image frame. The noise occurred during image measurements
was reduced using Kalman filter. In a similar study an
autopilot for autonomous landing of a helicopter on a rocking
ship was developed, considering the problem as a non-linear
tracking control problem for an underactuated system with a
two time-scale controller [13]. The research [14] provided
the first demonstration of an autonomous landing of a quadro-
copter on a moving platform, using computer vision algorithms
and multi-sensor fusion to localize the UAV, detect and eval-
uate movement of the moving platform, and plan the path for
full autonomous navigation, using only onboard sensing and
computing without relying on any external infrastructure.
An early study and implementation of a real-time vision-
based landing for an autonomous helicopter was presented in
the research [15]. The landing method was integrated with
helicopter visual detection and navigation algorithms from an
arbitrary initial position and orientation. They applied vision acquires the UGV position in the image coordinate frame. In
for accurate target detection and recognition, as well as vision the second phase, the UGV position is used to calculate the
and GPS for navigation, demonstrating successful flight test required command inputs to perform the following. Kalman
results in the field conditions. Another work [16] implements filter is used to reduce the measurement noise. The process
autonomous landing with AR.Drone 2.0, using an image flow is repeated in a control loop until the predefined landing
from drone’s camera that was rectified by camera calibration. signal is sent to the UAV. The block-scheme of the proposed
To calculate the position and orientation relation between the methodology for detection, tracking and landing is shown in
drone and the landing pad, image frames are processed by the Fig. 1.
AR marker recognition package, which is used as the landing
pad. To control the drone’s velocity and stabilize its hovering
on the center of the landing pad, the PID controller is used,
and the landing control is carried out by connecting the drone
with a notebook via WiFi.
Experiments with an external motion capture system were
conducted by [17]. They achieved a maximum deviation of
10 cm from the desired position. Also [18] were using a field
monitored by stationary cameras. They presented an assistant
and training system for controlling RC helicopters during
flight. The idea of using LEDs as landmarks is not completely
new. In [19] is described how a miniature helicopter can be
visually tracked in six degrees of freedom with only three on-
board LEDs and a single on-ground camera. Also the WiFi
remote camera can be found in former projects. [20] presented
an optical tracking system using the camera data of two Wii
remotes. Similar approach using WiFi remotes was used in
[21] and the system provides small errors and allows for safe,
autonomous indoor flights.
Visual methods of tracking and landing are often used for
a multirotor drones using computer vision algorithms and
visual markers like ArUco, AprilTags, Alvar, etc. [3], [22].
The robustness and invariance of these visual markers to
the rotation and occlusion that have made them popular for
robotics applications, is discussed in various studies [23].
Although visual markers have proven to be reliable visual
landmarks for detecting and tracking targets, they are not the
only possible solutions to the problem of UAV following and
landing. In this study, we apply a color-based detection algo-
rithm to detect the position of the UGV and ORB (Oriented
FAST and Rotated BRIEF) feature detector to double check
for the UGV presence in a bounding box within the image
frame (to exclude false positive cases).
III. M ETHODOLOGY
Fig. 1. The block-scheme of the proposed methodology for UGV detection
In this section we describe every steps of the detection and and tracking
tracking methodology. Because we need to calculate the UGV
exact positions relative to a quadcopter using image processing
from the UAV camera, and suppress possible distortions, the A. Detection and Tracking
AR.Drone 2.0 bottom camera is calibrated. This procedure is To obtain the UGV current position, considering it is within
repeated every time the drone is powered up. In the next step, the on-board camera’s field of view, one of the approaches
the drone is ready to take off and start the process of UGV would be to detect the UGV in every frame. However this
detection in every current frame of the video streaming. technique is not computationally efficient since it searches the
The algorithm is performed in two phases, the first one is object in the whole image frame, without using the previous
UGV detection and tracking, and the second one deals with information of its last position. Instead, we would like to
the drone’s motion control. The detection process is executed detect the object once and then use the object tracker to handle
for each frame until the UGV is detected. If the UGV is every subsequent frame, leading to faster and more efficient
successfully localized in the image, then the tracking algorithm object tracking pipeline. This is exactly what many trackers
do, they optimize such process using different information
acquired over time. A good tracking algorithm will use all
information about the object position while a detection algo-
rithm always starts a search from the beginning. The examples
of successful trackers are Boosting (based on AdaBoost [24]),
Multiple Instance Learning (MIL, [25]), Tracking, Learning
and Detection (TLD, [26]).
For our project, a fast and precise tracker is required that
can work in real-time mode in order to keep the ground
vehicle position in the current frame. It should also be robust
to tracking failures which means the ability to recover from
a lost position while tracking. All these characteristics are
included in Kernelized Correlation Filters (KCF) tracker [27].
The basic idea of the correlation filter tracking is the estimation
of an optimal image filter in a way that the filtration with the
input image produces a desired response. The desired response
typically has the Gaussian shape centered at the target location,
therefore the estimation decreases with the distance.
The filter is trained from translated (shifted) instances of the
target patch. When testing, the filter’s response is evaluated
and the maximum value gives the new target position. The
filter is trained online and updated sequentially with every
frame in order to adapt the tracker to moderate target position
changes. The major advantage of the correlation filter tracker
performed efficiently in the Fourier domain is the computa-
tional cost [27]. Therefore the tracker runs successfully in real
time even with several hundreds frames per second (FPS).
The UGV and UAV used for this task are shown in the Fig.
2.
Fig. 2. The differential drive robot called Plato (left) used as a moving target
platform, and AR.Drone 2.0 quadcopter (right)
For the detection part, Gaussian filtering is applied for
smoothing and removing possible image noise caused by
the image’s low quality coming from the constantly moving
camera. Then we take advantage of the UGV color to detect
the platform using the yellow tint. We used HSV color space
to extract the yellow color considering possible illumination
changes. This step will determine if the robot is in the frame
of the drone’s camera. After the detection phase, the algorithm
builds a bounding box around the UGV that the tracker will
use in future frames. As an extra solution, the ORB feature
detector will further be used to double check that the bounding
box found with the color detection actually contain the UGV
(suppression of the false positive cases). It should be noted
that the quality of the images from the drone’s bottom camera
during flight is not good enough to rely only on the ORB
features as the main detector. Therefore, we used it as the
additional one.
B. PID Controller
As the name suggests the PID controller consist solely of
three elements, Proportional, Integral and Derivative and can
be represented by this formula:
Z
de
u(t) = Kp e(t) + Ki e(t)d(t) + Kd (1)
dt
wheres Kp , Ki , Kd are the proportional, integral and deriva-
tive gains and e(t) is the error signal i.e., the difference
between desired and measured values.
The basic operation principle of PID control is that it
takes measured value from output sensor, compares it with
the desired value and then accordingly sends commands to a
plant (i.e. a system) on which the desired actions are being
performed to optimize it’s behaviour. The block diagram is
shown in Fig. 3.
Fig. 3. The schematic diagram of PID controller
The PID controller coefficients make a different contribution
to the damping of transient process, stability and a response
rate of the system. The proportional gain simply multiplies the
constant value by the error, aggressively trying to match the
output and input. The higher the proportional gain, the shorter
the rise time. But increasing the proportional gain results in
more oscillations around a steady state value. The increase
of the derivative coefficient results in damping the system
oscillation that is valuable for developing stable systems.
But additional increase can lead to the system over-damping,
driving up the system’s rise time and reaching the steady
state value. The integral coefficient is responsible for the
accumulation of input and output errors over time, trying to
improve the steady state error of the system [28].
For the UAV control, we applied two controllers: PD to
control the quadcopter in the horizontal plane, and PID to
control the altitude. This choice is primarily motivated by the
continuous change of the trajectory in the x-y plane, whereas
the altitude should remain constant over time.
Error’s compensation in the x-y quadcopter trajectory (Fig.
4) with PD controller is performed because of the proportional
and derivative actions which causes the error to converge to
zero. Adding the Integral term causes offset’s accumulation
over time which and a deviation in the final response, so we
decided to exclude it, considering that the drone has already
demonstrated a robust behavior. Thus, the control equations for
UAV stabilization in the horizontal plane will be the following:

d computer Jetson TX1, bumpers, sonars, Troyka IMU module,
ux (t) = Kp ex (t) + Kd ex (t)
dt
d
uy (t) = Kp ey (t) + Kd ey (t) (3)
dt
The control of the drone’s flight altitude is executed with a
PID controller, where there is also an integral term responsible
for bringing the error to zero. The UAV command scheme
allows to control linear velocities in each direction, therefore
the input signal will be proportional to the above-mentioned
velocities [29]:
Z t
d RAM
uz (t) = Kpz ez (t) + Kiz ez (t)dt + Kdz ez (t)
0 dt
where ez (t) = z ∗ − z is the difference between the
actual and the desired altitude (which is given by the sensors
measurements).
Fig. 4. Local frame representation of the UAV
We use different PID coefficient for the altitude and x-y
positions control, the altitude being a sensor measurement, it
is quite different in scale from the desired x-y position which
is obtained from the computer vision based algorithm used
to track the UGV position. These coefficients are tuned in
realtime while controlling the UAV; by analyzing rigorously
the stability of the copter and the data obtained from the
IMU, we made changes in the coefficients scale each time
the quadcopter was exhibiting a weak or strong behavior in
the response. All coefficients are adapted for indoor flight.
IV. S YSTEM S ETUP
For the execution of the tracking algorithm and the feedback
control loop together with the communication with the hard-
ware we used the following system configuration, containing
AR.Drone 2.0 quadcopter, the differential drive mobile robot
called Plato and a laptop with Ubuntu 16.04 (Xenial Xerus)
as an operating system. The Ar.Drone 2.0 quadcopter is
equipped with the onboard 720p 30fps HD front-camera,
ARM Cortex A8 32-bit 1 GHz processor with DSP video
800 MHz TMS320DMC64x, a gyroscope, an accelerometer, a
magnetometer, a pressure sensor, an altitude ultrasound sensor
and the vertical camera QVGA 60 FPS to measure the ground
speed.
The Plato mobile platform is equipped with the onboard
(2)
and wheel encoders that allow to calculate the wheel odometry.
The robots onboard computer uses Ubuntu 16.04 installed with
Robot Operating System - ROS Kinetic Kame [30]. The
hardware and software system configuration is presented in
the Table I.
TABLE I
T HE S PECIFICATION OF C OMPUTATIONAL S YSTEM
System Configuration
Laptop MacBook Pro (15-inch, 2017)
Operating System macOS Mojave
16 GB
(4)
CPU 2.8 GHz Intel Core i7
The processing of the frame images captured by the quad-
copter bottom’s camera is performed using a laptop with
ROS Kinetic Kame packages. Moreover the Ardrone Autonomy
package [31] from ROS library is used for communicating
between the quadcopter and the laptop, computing the UGV
position, reading sensors data from AR.Drone and sending
the corresponding commands (calculated by a pilot controller)
in order to track it. In addition, the OpenCV (Open Source
Computer Vision) Library [32] is applied for detecting and
tracking the UGV using Kernelized Correlation Filters (KCF)
algorithm [27]. The main advantage of this algorithm is that
it uses very few easy-to-set parameter.
V. S IMULATION AND E XPERIMENTS
A. Simulation of UGV detection and tracking by a quadcopter
The first phase of experiments was performed using Gazebo
simulator that allowed studying the quadcopter behaviour
while detecting and tracking the UGV . The Fig. 5 shows
a screenshot of the simulation performed. The task was to de-
velop a robust and accurate algorithm for detection and track-
ing , using the proposed methodology and a modified version
of the Turtlebot as the UGV prototype. The experiments with
the Turtlebot in the Gazebo simulation show the robustness in
the ground platform detection and tracking by a quadcopter’s
camera in the different conditions and environments. After
developing a robust system in the simulation, we transferred
the developed algorithm implementation to the real hardware
experiment.
B. Experiments with Plato mobile robot detection and tracking
by AR.Drone 2.0 quadcopter
We hereby discuss the results of experiments with the
teleoperated Plato mobile robot that was detected and tracked
with the proposed algorithm implemented on AR.Drone 2.0
quadcopter as demonstrated in the Fig. 8 and the video
available at [33]. The system is able to recover from a tracking
failure (Figure 6) and renew the UGV detection if the platform
appears in the camera’s field of view again (Fig. 7).
Performing the experiments, we faced some problems due
to unpredictable and uncontrollable factors such as noise in

Fig. 5. Gazebo-based simulation of UGV detection and tracking by a
quadcopter. The figure shows the initial copter position after taking off and
live streaming from the quadcopter’s bottom camera
Fig. 6. Video streaming acquired from the AR.Drone 2.0 bottom camera
reporting a tracking failure due to the absence of the UGV in the frame
Fig. 7. Video streaming acquired from the AR.Drone 2.0 bottom camera
showing the UGV detection (shown in the red rectangle, where the blue point
represents the position sent to the controller)
the camera images and hardware failures. In addition, because
of the AR.Drone’s feature of ”auto-hovering”, which uses the
bottom camera for auto-stabilization, the quadcopter was not
available for full control, this is why we disabled this feature
for further tests.
The test results for feedback controller lead to quite different
behavior comparing to the Gazebo simulation. Actually, the
UAV was not able to accurately follow the desired trajectories
and altitude. To solve this problem we tuned the PID
controller parameters for various control schemes (altitude and
translation control), and finally obtained a robust behavior in
adequacy with our specifications.
Fig. 8. The photo of AR.Drone 2.0 following the Plato mobile robot, and the
live video streaming from the copter (in the bottom-right part) with the red
bounding box around the object of interest [33]
Finally, the landing system (Fig. 9), which is realized by
a simple decrease in the drone’s altitude while tracking the
UGV platform, was developed for landing on the moving
mobile robot. Using the altitude sensor makes it completely
autonomous for landing. The problem comes at a certain
altitude, where the system is not able to detect the UGV
landing platform anymore because of to the shrinking of the
camera’s field of view. Moreover, the UGV platform being
quite small, it was impossible to perform a safe landing, thus
we decided to land in the vicinity of the vehicle. We defined a
a circular area of radius 1.2 meters around the ground vehicle
where the quadcopter should perform a safe landing, and after
numerous test we managed to create a robust and desired
behaviour in the landing process.
Fig. 9. AR.Drone 2.0 landed in the vicinity of the UGV after tracking it for
a short period of time
VI. C ONCLUSIONS
This paper presents the design and implementation of a
system where a moving Unmanned Ground Vehicle (UGV)
has to be detected and tracked by an autonomous aerial vehicle
(UAV) using a camera-based perception and without special
artificial markers, the UAV then has to land in the UGV
vicinity when a predefined signal is sent to the quadcopter.
We proposed and developed a two-step methodology. At the
first, the detection and tracking system of the ground vehicle
is executed using a color-based algorithm and Kernelized
Correlation Filters (KCF) tracker respectively. At the second
step a PID controller for robust tracking is employed using
the UGV position detected from the first step. The process
is repeated until a specified landing command is sent to the
quadcopter. The UGV position detected in the image frame
is used in the feedback control loop of the quadcopter’s PD
controller enabling the actual tracking of the moving UGV in
the horizontal plane, while another PID controller is employed
to stabilize the UAV altitude. To double check the UGV
presence in an camera frame, an ORB feature detector is used
(to suppress the false positive cases).
The proposed approach was initially tested in Gazebo simu-
lator, and then in real environment with Parrot AR.Drone 2.0
and Plato robots (as UAV and UGV correspondingly). The
quadcopter was operating quite well in the tracking procedure
and the experimental results demonstrate that the proposed
system can detect and track the UGV in real time mode
without artificial markers and provide robust UAV landing in
the UGV vicinity.
To improve the proposed approach and compare the perfor-
mance with other methods, more tests with different detection
algorithms and controllers should be provided. Regarding the
shrinking of the UAV field of view (FoV) while landing, one of
the possible solutions would be to modify the camera lens to
obtain a fish-eye structure to increase the FOV in all directions,
however it would introduce image distortions and needs for
relevant corrections.
R EFERENCES
[1] S. A. Wich, “Drones and conservation,” Drones and Aerial Observation:
New Technologies for Property Rights, Human Rights, and Global
Development, 2015.
[2] A. Sabirova, M. Rassabin, R. Fedorenko, and I. Afanasyev, “Ground pro-
file recovery from aerial 3d lidar-based maps,” in 2019 24th Conference
of Open Innovations Association (FRUCT), April 2019, pp. 367–374.
[3] P. H. Nguyen, K. W. Kim, Y. W. Lee, and K. R. Park, “Remote
marker-based tracking for uav landing using visible-light camera sensor,”
Sensors, vol. 17, no. 9, p. 1987, 2017.
[4] D. Borreguero, O. Velasco, and J. Valente, “Experimental design of a
mobile landing platform to assist aerial surveys in fluvial environments,”
Applied Sciences, vol. 9, no. 1, p. 38, 2019.
[5] T. Yang, Q. Ren, F. Zhang, B. Xie, H. Ren, J. Li, and Y. Zhang,
“Hybrid camera array-based uav auto-landing on moving ugv in gps-
denied environment,” Remote Sensing, vol. 10, no. 11, p. 1829, 2018.
[6] P. Tokekar, J. Vander Hook, D. Mulla, and V. Isler, “Sensor planning
for a symbiotic uav and ugv system for precision agriculture,” IEEE
Transactions on Robotics, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 1498–1511, 2016.
[7] T. Tomic, K. Schmid, P. Lutz, A. Domel, M. Kassecker, E. Mair,
I. L. Grixa, F. Ruess, M. Suppa, and D. Burschka, “Toward a fully
autonomous uav: Research platform for indoor and outdoor urban search
and rescue,” IEEE robotics & automation magazine, vol. 19, no. 3, pp.
46–56, 2012.
[8] T. Samad, J. S. Bay, and D. Godbole, “Network-centric systems for
military operations in urban terrain: The role of uavs,” Proceedings of
the IEEE, vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 92–107, 2007.
[9] E. T. Bokeno, T. M. Bort, S. S. Burns, M. Rucidlo, W. Wei, D. L.
Wires et al., “Package delivery by means of an automated multi-copter
uas/uav dispatched from a conventional delivery vehicle,” Jul. 14 2016,
uS Patent App. 14/989,870.
[10] K. L. Koster, “Delivery platform for unmanned aerial vehicles,” Jun. 25
2015, uS Patent App. 14/560,821.
[11] B. Saha, E. Koshimoto, C. C. Quach, E. F. Hogge, T. H. Strom, B. L.
Hill, S. L. Vazquez, and K. Goebel, “Battery health management system
for electric uavs,” in 2011 Aerospace Conference. IEEE, 2011, pp. 1–9.
[12] A. Kendall, N. N. Salvapantula, and K. Stol, “On-board object tracking
control of a quadcopter with monocular vision,” 05 2014, pp. 404–411.
View publication stats
[13] S.-R. Oh, K. Pathak, S. K. Agrawal, H. R. Pota, and M. Garrett,
“Autonomous helicopter landing on a moving platform using a tether,”
in Robotics and Automation, 2005. ICRA 2005. Proceedings of the 2005
IEEE International Conference on. IEEE, 2005, pp. 3960–3965.
[14] D. Falanga, A. Zanchettin, A. Simovic, J. Delmerico, and D. Scara-
muzza, “Vision-based autonomous quadrotor landing on a moving
platform,” in 2017 IEEE International Symposium on Safety, Security
and Rescue Robotics (SSRR), Oct 2017, pp. 200–207.
[15] S. Saripalli, J. F. Montgomery, and G. S. Sukhatme, “Visually guided
landing of an unmanned aerial vehicle,” IEEE transactions on robotics
and automation, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 371–380, 2003.
[16] T. Zhao and H. Jiang, “Landing system for ar. drone 2.0 using onboard
camera and ros,” in Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference
(CGNCC), 2016 IEEE Chinese. IEEE, 2016, pp. 1098–1102.
[17] D. Gurdan, J. Stumpf, M. Achtelik, K.-M. Doth, G. Hirzinger, and
D. Rus, “Energy-efficient autonomous four-rotor flying robot controlled
at 1 khz,” in IEEE ICRA, 2007, pp. 361–366.
[18] K. Watanabe, Y. Iwatani, K. Nonaka, and K. Hashimoto, “A visual-
servo-based assistant system for unmanned helicopter control,” in Intel-
ligent Robots and Systems, 2008. IROS 2008. IEEE/RSJ International
Conference on. IEEE, 2008, pp. 822–827.
[19] L. C. Mak and T. Furukawa, “A 6 dof visual tracking system for
a miniature helicopter,” in 2nd International Conference on Sensing
Technology (ICST). Citeseer, 2007, pp. 32–37.
[20] S. Hay, J. Newman, and R. Harle, “Optical tracking using commodity
hardware,” in Proc. 7th IEEE/ACM international Symposium on Mixed
and Augmented Reality. IEEE Computer Society, 2008, pp. 159–160.
[21] K. E. Wenzel, A. Masselli, and A. Zell, “Automatic take off, tracking
and landing of a miniature uav on a moving carrier vehicle,” Journal of
intelligent & robotic systems, vol. 61, no. 1-4, pp. 221–238, 2011.
[22] M. Gavrilenkov, I. Danilov, and I. Afanasyev, “Ros-based visual au-
tonomous landing method for a multirotor drone,” MDPI Robotics, 2019.
[23] K. Shabalina, A. Sagitov, L. Sabirova, H. Li, and E. Magid, “Artag,
apriltag and caltag fiducial systems comparison in a presence of partial
rotation: Manual and automated approaches,” in ICINCO. Springer,
2017, pp. 536–558.
[24] H. Grabner, M. Grabner, and H. Bischof, “Real-time tracking via on-line
boosting.” in Bmvc, vol. 1, no. 5, 2006, p. 6.
[25] B. Babenko, M.-H. Yang, and S. Belongie, “Visual tracking with online
multiple instance learning,” in 2009 IEEE Conference on Computer
Vision and Pattern Recognition. IEEE, 2009, pp. 983–990.
[26] Z. Kalal, K. Mikolajczyk, and J. Matas, “Tracking-learning-detection,”
IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, vol. 34,
no. 7, pp. 1409–1422, 2012.
[27] J. F. Henriques, R. Caseiro, P. Martins, and J. Batista, “High-speed track-
ing with kernelized correlation filters,” IEEE transactions on pattern
analysis and machine intelligence, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 583–596, 2015.
[28] K. J. Åström and T. Hägglund, PID controllers: theory, design, and
tuning. Instrument society of America Research Triangle Park, NC,
1995, vol. 2.
[29] R. C. G. Szafranski, Different Approaches of PID Control UAV Type
Quadrotor. Silesian University of Technology, Akademicka St 16,
Gliwice, Poland, 2011.
[30] M. Quigley, K. Conley, B. Gerkey, J. Faust, T. Foote, J. Leibs,
R. Wheeler, and A. Y. Ng, “Ros: an open-source robot operating system,”
in ICRA workshop on open source software, vol. 3, no. 3.2. Kobe, Japan,
2009, p. 5.
[31] M. Monajjemi et al., “ardrone autonomy: A ros driver for ardrone 1.0
& 2.0,” 2012.
[32] G. Bradski, “The OpenCV Library,” Dr. Dobb’s Journal of Software
Tools, 2000.
[33] “Experiments with plato mobile robot detection and tracking by ar.drone
2.0 quadcopter,” https://youtu.be/9nc1TGTTwhY, accessed: 2019-06-15.