## 6 Simulation and Test Results  
### Parameter Measurement Tests  
To determine each model parameter and refine the FPTLIR energy consumption, a test platform was independently designed and built as shown in Figure 11. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Flight On-Line**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Flight Off-Line**} \\ \hline
**Velocity** & **Shortest** & **Post-** & **Velocity** & **Shortest** & **Post-** \\
**Command** & **Flight Time** & **Optimized** & **Command** & **Flight Time** & **Optimized** \\ \hline \(a_{\text{vn1}}\) & 6.00 m/s\({}^{2}\) & 2.17 m/s\({}^{2}\) & \(a_{\text{hf1}}\) & 10.00 m/s\({}^{2}\) & 0.84 m/s\({}^{2}\) \\ \(t_{\text{vn1}}\) & 1.67 s & 3.03 s & \(h_{\text{hf1}}\) & 0.77 s & 1.41 s \\ \(t_{\text{vn2}}\) & 3.33 s & 4.84 s & \(h_{\text{hf2}}\) & 0 & 3.99 s \\ \(a_{\text{vn2}}\) & 6.00 m/s\({}^{2}\) & 2.68 m/s\({}^{2}\) & \(a_{\text{hf2}}\) & 10.00 m/s\({}^{2}\) & 1.80 m/s\({}^{2}\) \\ \(a_{\text{hn1}}\) & 10.00 m/s\({}^{2}\) & 0.35 m/s\({}^{2}\) & \(a_{\text{vf1}}\) & 6.00 m/s\({}^{2}\) & 0.26 m/s\({}^{2}\) \\ \(t_{\text{hn1}}\) & 0.78 s & 2.99 s & \(t_{\text{vf1}}\) & 1.17 s & 11.56 s \\ \(t_{\text{hn2}}\) & 0 & 4.01 s & \(t_{\text{vf2}}\) & 5.96 s & 9.88 s \\ \(a_{\text{hn2}}\) & 10.00 m/s\({}^{2}\) & 2.29 m/s\({}^{2}\) & \(a_{\text{vf2}}\) & 6.00 m/s\({}^{2}\) & 2.40 m/s\({}^{2}\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: The flight state commands. Figure 10: Comparison of velocity curves before and after optimization. (**a**) Flight on-line mission interval; (**b**) flight off-line mission interval. The test platform uses an STM32 development board to control both the rotor motor and the blade speed using the PWM signal output from the electronic speed controller. The test platform follows the actual FPTLIR installation method with the rotor motor and blade mounted vertically downwards. A single horizontally mounted parallel beam force sensor is used to measure the thrust generated by the rotor motor and blade rotation, while torque is measured and calculated using two vertically mounted force sensors symmetrically positioned on either side of the rotor motor. A non-contact tachometer is used to measure the speed of both the rotor motor and the blades. Dedicated voltage and current detectors are used for voltage and current measurements, respectively. The power supply for the rotor motor and the electronic speed controller can be either a constant voltage DC power supply or a battery power supply, depending on the actual requirements, with all test data collected and recorded by the upper computer. Detailed design parameters of each sensor in the test platform are listed in Table 3.  
To simplify the analysis, we assume that the test platform bracket is stationary and neglect the small deformation caused by the rotation of the rotor motor and paddle. This means that we assume that both the rotor motor and the paddle are in a hovering rotational state. Under this test condition, we can consider \(v=v_{x}=v_{z}=0\) as the airspeed of the FPTLIR and obtain data under different PWM signals as shown in Figure 12a. Based on these measured data under specified conditions (including load conditions) and combining  
Figure 11: Test platform for parameter determination of flight system energy consumption model: (1) motor, rotor blade, and internal electronic governor 80A-FOC; (2) parallel beam force sensor; (3) non-contact tachometer; (4) force transmission module; (5) RS485 communication protocol to USB module; (6) STM32 control board; (7) voltage and current detector; (8) voltage and current detector bluetooth transmitter; (9) transformer module; (10) 6S battery (11) 12S battery; (12) direct current (DC) regulated power supply; (13) upper computer. these with Equation (15), we calculate and fit average values for \(k\) to be 5.081 rad\({}^{-1}\) and \(c_{d}\) to be 0.005. In the case where the rotor motor operates without propeller blades and rotates under normal conditions, a series of data was measured, as shown in Figure 12b.