Formation Control of Multiple UAVs Incorporating Extended State Observer-Based Model Predictive Approach

  • Boyang ZhangEmail author
  • Xiuxia Sun
  • Shuguang Liu
  • Xiongfeng Deng
Original Paper


This paper studies the extended state observer-based state space predictive control approach to deal with the multiple unmanned aerial vehicle formation flight with unknown disturbances. The distributed control problem for a class of multiple unmanned aerial vehicle systems with reference trajectory tracking and disturbance rejection is formulated. Firstly, a local distributed controller is designed by using the state space predictive control approach based on an error model to achieve stable tracking. Then, a feedforward compensation controller is introduced by using the extended state observer to estimate and compensate disturbances and improve the ability of anti-interference. Besides, the bounded stability of the designed extended state observer is analyzed as well. Finally, the simulation examples are provided to illustrate the validity of the proposed control structure.


State space predictive control (SSPC) Extended state observer (ESO) Trajectory tracking Disturbance rejection Multiple unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) 



The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of Aeronautical Science Foundation of China under Grant no. 20155896025.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

Data availability

No data were used to support this study.


  1. 1.
    Oland E (2014) Nonlinear control of fixed-wing unmanned aerial vehicles. In: PhD thesisGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mohamed A, Watkins S, Fisher A et al (2015) A feasibility study of bioinspired wing-surface pressure sensing for attitude control of micro aerial vehicles. J Aircraft 52(3):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zhang JL, Yan JG, Zhang P et al (2018) Collision avoidance in fixed-wing UAV formation flight based on a consensus control algorithm. IEEE Access 6:43672–43682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hafez AT, Marasco AJ, Givigi SN et al (2015) Solving multi-UAV dynamic encirclement via model predictive control. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 23(6):2251–2265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zheng Z, Yi H (2017) Backstepping control design for UAV formation with input saturation constraint and model uncertainty. In: Chinese Control Conference, Dalian, China, pp 6056–6060Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Qu YH, Wu JZ, Xiao B et al (2017) A fault-tolerant cooperative positioning approach for multiple UAVs. IEEE Access 5:15630–15640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhang HM, Wang WN, Xu GY (2017) Optimal control of formation reconfiguration for multiple UAVs based on Legendre Pseudospectral Method. In: Chinese control and decision conference, Chongqing, China, pp. 6230–6235Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Li P, Qin KY, Pu HP (2017) Distributed robust time-varying formation control for multiple unmanned aerial vehicles systems with time-delay. In: Chinese control and decision conference, Chongqing, China, pp. 1539–1544Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen LP, Cui RX, Gao J et al (2016) Cooperative guidance of multiple UAVs for target estimation based on nonlinear model predictive control. In: International conference on advanced robotics and mechatronics. Macau, China, pp 178–183Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cai ZH, Zhao J, Wu K et al (2018) Formation control of multiple unmanned aerial vehicles by event-triggered distributed model predictive control. IEEE Access 6:55614–55627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yao P, Wang HL, Ji HX (2017) Gaussian mixture model and receding horizon control for multiple UAV search in complex environment. Nonlinear Dyn 88(2):903–919CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Afri C, Andrieu V, Bako L et al (2017) State and parameter estimation: a nonlinear luenberger observer approach. IEEE Trans Autom Control 62(2):903–919MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sharma A, Srivastav SC, Chakrabarti S (2017) A cubature kalman filter based power system dynamic state estimator. IEEE Trans Instrum Meas 66(8):2036–2045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ma ZX, Zhang X (2018) FPGA implementation of sensorless sliding mode observer with a novel rotation direction detection for PMSM drives. IEEE Access 6:55528–55536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yan YD, Yang J, Sun ZX et al (2018) Robust speed regulation for PMSM servo system with multiple sources of disturbances via an augmented disturbance observer. IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatron 23(2):769–780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wu ZH, Huang GS, Wu CF et al (2018) On convergence of extended state observer for a class of MIMO uncertain stochastic nonlinear systems. IEEE Access 6:37758–37766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhang J, Liu C, Jiang RH et al (2014) Position control for PMSM servo system using non-smooth feedback and disturbance estimation compensation. In: International conference on electrical machines and systems. Hangzhou, China, pp 2060–2065Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zhang F, Zhang Y, Wu X et al (2017) Control of ultra-supercritical once-through boiler-turbine unit using MPC and ESO approaches. In: IEEE Conference on control technology and applications, Mauna Lani, HI, USA, pp 994–999Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cui RX, Chen LP, Yang CG et al (2017) Extended state observer-based integral sliding mode control for an underwater robot with unknown disturbances and uncertain nonlinearities. IEEE Trans Industr Electron 64(8):6785–6795CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wang JN, Xin M (2013) Integrated optimal formation control of multiple unmanned aerial vehicles. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 21(5):1731–1744CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Menon PK (1989) Short-range nonlinear feedback strategies for aircraft pursuit-evasion. J Guidance Control Dynam 12(1):202–211MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Li XR, Li B, Zhang P (2015) Large-scale unmanned aerial vehicle formation maintenance algorithm based on virtual structure. In: International symposium on computational intelligence and design, Hangzhou, China, pp. 417–421Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Skrjanc I, Klancar G (2016) A comparison of continuous and discrete tracking-error model-based predictive control for mobile robots. Robot Auton Syst 87:177–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ma DL, Xia YQ, Li TY et al (2016) Active disturbance rejection and predictive control strategy for a quadrotor helicopter. IET Control Theory Appl 10(17):2213–2222MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Liu CJ, Negenborn RR, Zheng HR et al (2017) A state-compensation extended state observer for model predictive control. Eur J Control 36:1–9MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gao ZQ (2003) Scaling and bandwidth-parameterization based controller tuning. In: American Control Conference, Denver, CO, USA, pp 4989–4996Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Xu YJ (2009) Nonlinear robust stochastic control for unmanned aerial vehicles. J Guidance Control Dynam 32(4):1308–1319CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Korean Society for Aeronautical & Space Sciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Equipment Management and Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Engineering CollegeAir Force Engineering UniversityXi’anChina

Personalised recommendations