Crazyflie 2.0 quadrotor as a platform for research and education in robotics and control engineering
Abstract
In this paper a Crazyflie 2.0 nano quadrotor helicopter (quadcopter) as an open source experimental platform for research and education in robotics and control engineering has been presented. This low cost, easily expandable and upgradeable flying robot is here characterized in terms of hardware and software. Three aspects, which demonstrate the potential of broad use of this unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) by researchers and students, are discussed in the paper. The first one is an acquisition of measurement data from test flights by the proposed, freely available “black-box” software. The second is the use of a new, advanced 4FLY Simulator in order to utilize the MATLAB®/Simulink environment to easily implement a mathematical model of Crazyflie 2.0 dynamics, as well as for a synthesis of various types of controllers with support of OpenGL cross-language in the visualization of simulations results. The 4FLYSimulator allows to test autonomous flights (and landings) with obstacles avoidance and to conduct learning and teaching the basics of Crazyflie 2.0 piloting. In the third aspect the authors outlined promising, preliminary results obtained in control of flying robot by pointing device (positioner) and with the support of a vision system, which basis only on a single Kinect sensor.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Current approaches to microrobots and nanorobots are not exploiting conventional hardware but are rather made of active colloidal particles, soft-bodied (biological) robots, bacteria-powered nanomachines, and even controllable genetically engineered organisms.
“Current approaches to microrobots and nanorobots are not exploiting conventional hardware but are rather made of active colloidal particles [77], soft-bodied (biological) robots [78], bacteria-powered nanomachines [79], [80], and even controllable genetically engineered organisms [81].”
From Swarm Robotics: Past, Present, and Future [Point of View] (2021) · cites this paper as [77]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Swarm Robotics: Past, Present, and Future [Point of View]
Dorigo, M., Theraulaz, G., & Trianni, V. (2021) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/jproc.2021.3072740 · Cited by 401 · see citing works
- Authors
- Giernacki, W., Skwierczynski, M., Witwicki, W., Wronski, P., & Kozierski, P.
- Affiliations
- Poznań University of Technology (PL)
- Venue
- 2017 22nd International Conference on Methods and Models in Automation and Robotics (MMAR)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2017-08
- Pages
- 37-42
- OpenAlex
- W2758653969
- Cited by
- 235
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 23 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 6
- FWCI
- 15.80
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Conference on Methods and Models in Automation and Robotics (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Aerospace Engineering and Control Systems
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Educational Robotics and Engineering
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Aerospace and Aviation Technology
- Keywords
- quadrotor, unmanned aerial vehicles, open-source hardware, robotics education, control engineering education, flight dynamics modeling, autonomous flight, obstacle avoidance, piloting
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review