Position tracking and attitude control for quadrotors via active disturbance rejection control method

  • Yuan YuanEmail author
  • Lei Cheng
  • Zidong Wang
  • Chong Sun
Research Paper


In this paper, a trigonometric-saturation-function-based position controller is designed for the quadrotor system with internal and external disturbances. Furthermore, in the attitude control problem, a dual closed-loop structure is put forward. Specifically, a nonlinear extended-state-observer (ESO) is employed to provide an estimate for the so-called total disturbance. Then, based on the estimate provided by the ESO, a nonlinear composite control strategy is designed for the purpose of angular tracking. Some sufficient conditions are established to guarantee that the position and attitude subsystems are stable. The contributions are mainly as follows. (1) A trigonometric-saturation-function is used in the position control which could guarantee that the studied system is fully-actuated. (2) The nonlinear ESO is implemented in the attitude control-loop which could enhance the anti-disturbance property. Finally, some numerical simulations and practical experiments are provided to verify the applicability of the proposed methodology.


position control quadrotor system extended-state-observer attitude control 



This work was supported in part by Royal Society of the U.K., in part by Research Fund for the Taishan Scholar Project of Shandong Province of China, in part by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 61503001), and in part by Alexander von Humboldt Foundation of Germany.


  1. 1.
    Tousi M M, Khorasani K. Optimal hybrid fault recovery in a team of unmanned aerial vehicles. Automatica, 2012, 48: 410–418MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gandolfo D C, Salinas L R, Brandao A, et al. Stable path-following control for a quadrotor helicopter considering energy consumption. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol, 2017, 25: 1423–1430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cabecinhas D, Naldi R, Silvestre C, et al. Robust landing and sliding maneuver hybrid controller for a quadrotor vehicle. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol, 2016, 24: 400–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Loianno G, Brunner C, McGrath G, et al. Estimation, control, and planning for aggressive flight with a small quadrotor with a single camera and IMU. IEEE Robot Autom Lett, 2017, 2: 404–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dong X W. Formation and Containment Control for High-Order Linear Swarm Systems. Berlin: Springer, 2015Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liang X, Fang Y C, Sun N, et al. Nonlinear hierarchical control for unmanned quadrotor transportation systems. IEEE Trans Ind Electron, 2018, 65: 3395–3405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Aguiar A P, Hespanha J P. Trajectory-tracking and path-following of underactuated autonomous vehicles with parametric modeling uncertainty. IEEE Trans Autom Control, 2007, 52: 1362–1379MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cao N, Lynch A F. Inner-outer loop control for quadrotor UAVs with input and state constraints. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol, 2016, 24: 1797–1804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang X H, Shirinzadeh B, Ang M H. Nonlinear double-integral observer and application to quadrotor aircraft. IEEE Trans Ind Electron, 2015, 62: 1189–1200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yuan Y, Yuan H H, Wang Z D, et al. Optimal control for networked control systems with disturbances: a delta operator approach. LET Control Theory Appl, 2017, 11: 1325–1332MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yuan Y, Wang Z D, Guo L. Event-triggered strategy design for discrete-time nonlinear quadratic games with disturbance compensations: the noncooperative case. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst, 2018, 48: 1885–1896CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Leena N, Saju K K. Modelling and trajectory tracking of wheeled mobile robots. Procedia Tech, 2016, 24: 538–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sun W C, Tang S Y, Gao H J, et al. Two time-scale tracking control of nonholonomic wheeled mobile robots. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol, 2016, 24: 2059–2069CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Xu B. Disturbance observer-based dynamic surface control of transport aircraft with continuous heavy cargo airdrop. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst, 2017, 47: 161–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kim W, Shin D, Won D, et al. Disturbance-observer-based position tracking controller in the presence of biased sinusoidal disturbance for electrohydraulic actuators. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol, 2013, 21: 2290–2298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pereira P O, Cunha R, Cabecinhas D, et al. Leader following trajectory planning: a trailer-like approach. Automatica, 2017, 75: 77–87MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tayebi A, McGilvray S. Attitude stabilization of a VTOL quadrotor aircraft. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol, 2006, 14: 562–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Meng Z Y, Ren W, You Z. Distributed finite-time attitude containment control for multiple rigid bodies. Automatica, 2010, 46: 2092–2099MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tian B L, Liu L H, Lu H C, et al. Multivariable finite time attitude control for quadrotor UAV: theory and experimentation. IEEE Trans Ind Electron, 2018, 65: 2567–2577CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shi X N, Zhang Y A, Zhou D. A geometric approach for quadrotor trajectory tracking control. Int J Control, 2015, 88: 2217–2227MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Liu H, Xi J X, Zhong Y S. Robust attitude stabilization for nonlinear quadrotor systems with uncertainties and delays. IEEE Trans Ind Electron, 2017, 64: 5585–5594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Xia Y Q, Liu B, Fu M Y. Active disturbance rejection control for power plant with a single loop. Asian J Control, 2012, 14: 239–250MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Han J Q. From PID to active disturbance rejection control. IEEE Trans Ind Electron, 2009, 56: 900–906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wu D, Chen K. Frequency-domain analysis of nonlinear active disturbance rejection control via the describing function method. IEEE Trans Ind Electron, 2013, 60: 3906–3914CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Guo B Z, Zhao Z L. On convergence of the nonlinear active disturbance rejection control for MIMO systems. SIAM J Control Optim, 2013, 51: 1727–1757MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chen S, Xue W, Zhong S, et al. On comparison of modified ADRCs for nonlinear uncertain systems with time delay. Sci China Inf Sci, 2018, 61: 070223MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bai W Y, Xue W C, Huang Y, et al. On extended state based Kalman filter design for a class of nonlinear time-varying uncertain systems. Sci China Inf Sci, 2018, 61: 042201MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Liu G P, Shi P, Han J, et al. Active disturbance rejection control for uncertain multivariable systems with time-delay. IET Control Theory Appl, 2007, 1: 75–81MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Cabecinhas D, Cunha R, Silvestre C. Experimental validation of a globally stabilizing feedback controller for a quadrotor aircraft with wind disturbance rejection. In: Proceedings of American Control Conference, Washington, 2013. 1024–1029Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yang H J, Cheng L, Xia Y Q, et al. Active disturbance rejection attitude control for a dual closed-loop quadrotor under gust wind. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol, 2018, 26: 1400–1405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yuan Y, Wang Z D, Zhang P, et al. Nonfragile near-optimal control of stochastic time-varying multiagent systems with control-and state-dependent noises. IEEE Trans Cybern, 2018. doi: 10.1109/TCYB.2018.2829713Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Yuan Y, Wang Z D, Zhang P, et al. Near-optimal resilient control strategy design for state-saturated networked systems under stochastic communication protocol. IEEE Trans Cybern, 2018. doi: 10.1109/TCYB.2018.2840430Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Liu J L, Liu Q H, Cao J, et al. Adaptive event-triggered H filtering for T-S fuzzy system with time delay. Neurocomputing, 2016, 189: 86–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Liu J L, Cao J, Wu Z A, et al. State estimation for complex systems with randomly occurring nonlinearities and randomly missing measurements. Int J Syst Sci, 2014, 45: 1364–1374MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Science China Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceBrunel University LondonUxbridgeUK
  2. 2.School of AstronauticsNorthwestern Polytechnical UniversityXi’anChina

Personalised recommendations