## 5 Result and Discussion
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Motion** & **Controller** & **Rise Time** & **Settling Time** & **Overshoot** & **Steady-State Error** & **RMSE** \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{Roll} & PD & \(-96.0911\) & \(-96.4446\) & \(-\) & \(\mathbf{2.38\times 10^{5}}\) & \(-44.9991\) \\ \cline{2-7}  & PID & \(-92.4543\) & \(-92.8493\) & \(-98.6043\) & \(-71.0674\) & \(-41.9429\) \\ \cline{2-7}  & LQR & \(-98.5063\) & \(-98.5081\) & \(-98.5642\) & \(-76.2831\) & \(-51.7968\) \\ \cline{2-7}  & P\(-\)LQR & \(-95.5406\) & \(-96.2304\) & \(-\) & \(-67.7181\) & \(-43.0985\) \\ \cline{2-7}  & PD\(-\)LQR & \(-95.2626\) & \(-95.2549\) & \(-\) & \(-67.6491\) & \(-41.8819\) \\ \cline{2-7}  & PD2\(-\)LQR & \(-95.8027\) & \(-95.8197\) & \(-98.3135\) & \(-38.8650\) & \(-41.5298\) \\ \cline{2-7}  & GWO PD2 LQR & \(-13.5046\) & \(-16.3954\) & \(-\) & \(-19.5313\) & \(\mathbf{1.7487}\) \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{Pitch} & PD & \(-96.0246\) & \(-96.3925\) & \(-\) & \(\mathbf{2.40\times 10^{5}}\) & \(-44.4740\) \\ \cline{2-7}  & PID & \(-92.4090\) & \(-93.0263\) & \(-98.5899\) & \(-69.9172\) & \(-41.6645\) \\ \cline{2-7}  & LQR & \(-98.4826\) & \(-98.4885\) & \(-98.4921\) & \(-75.2416\) & \(-51.4610\) \\ \cline{2-7}  & P\(-\)LQR & \(-95.4426\) & \(-96.0992\) & \(-\) & \(-67.0264\) & \(-42.8584\) \\ \cline{2-7}  & PD\(-\)LQR & \(-95.1770\) & \(-95.1591\) & \(-\) & \(-67.7696\) & \(-41.6426\) \\ \cline{2-7}  & PD2\(-\)LQR & \(-95.7131\) & \(-95.7103\) & \(-98.2828\) & \(-65.8460\) & \(-41.3285\) \\ \cline{2-7}  & GWO PD2 LQR & \(-13.5868\) & \(-16.6083\) & \(-\) & \(-17.8541\) & \(\mathbf{1.7764}\) \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{Yaw} & PD & \(-97.7647\) & \(-97.8964\) & \(-\) & \(\mathbf{5.47\times 10^{4}}\) & \(-52.6835\) \\ \cline{2-7}  & PID & \(-95.4107\) & \(-95.6372\) & \(-99.6335\) & \(-71.5243\) & \(-49.2793\) \\ \cline{2-7}  & LQR & \(-99.1297\) & \(-99.1103\) & \(-99.6867\) & \(-78.7864\) & \(-56.4742\) \\ \cline{2-7}  & P\(-\)LQR & \(-97.4038\) & \(-97.5356\) & \(-\) & \(-72.7710\) & \(-45.7161\) \\ \cline{2-7}  & PD\(-\)LQR & \(-97.7309\) & \(-97.7916\) & \(-99.5685\) & \(-61.4476\) & \(-45.8574\) \\ \cline{2-7}  & PD2\(-\)LQR & \(-97.5933\) & \(-97.6424\) & \(-\) & \(-39.5690\) & \(-45.7575\) \\ \cline{2-7}  & GWO PD2 LQR & \(-20.3889\) & \(-22.1660\) & \(-\) & \(-17.7509\) & \(\mathbf{1.7519}\) \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{Altitude} & PD & \(-82.4165\) & \(-83.8590\) & \(-\) & \(\mathbf{1.22\times 10^{2}}\) & \(\mathbf{16.6380}\) \\ \cline{2-7}  & PID & \(-80.0311\) & \(-79.9060\) & \(-\) & \(-62.6273\) & \(\mathbf{15.3320}\) \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-7}  & LQR & \(-95.0667\) & \(-95.0044\) & \(-\) & \(\mathbf{1387.5152}\) & \(\mathbf{1.4674}\) \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-7}  & P\(-\)LQR & \(-88.7388\) & \(-94.0784\) & \(-100.0000\) & \(-51.7419\) & \(\mathbf{15.8266}\) \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-7}  & PD\(-\)LQR & \(-80.8053\) & \(-82.4873\) & \(-\) & \(\mathbf{1.6224}\) & \(\mathbf{15.2307}\) \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-7}  & PD2\(-\)LQR & \(-82.9823\) & \(-82.2273\) & \(-\) & \(-34.3908\) & \(\mathbf{16.3365}\) \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{2-7}  & GWO PD2 LQR & \(\mathbf{1.9638}\) & \(\mathbf{2.2561}\) & \(-\) & \(\mathbf{37.4687}\) & \(-0.1553\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Performance comparison of the controller (in percentage). used. Although the slowest response is about 2 s, other controllers show rise time ranging between 0.4 s to 0.8 s.  
The same result can be seen for the settling time where the IGWO PD2-LQR controller shows the shortest time (0.0526 s, 0.0533 s, 0.0308 s, and 0.2245 s) to settle the desired reference angle and altitude. The longest time taken to settle is produced by the LQR controller with 3.4910 s, 3.4923 s, 3.4511 s, and 4.4146 s compared with the IGWO PD2-LQR controller in roll, pitch, yaw, and altitude motion, respectively. For the other controllers, the settling time is ranging from 0.7 s to 3.9 s.  
The evaluation of the percentage overshoot reveals that two controllers have the lowest overshoot.