HAN’s ACTIVE
DISTURBANCE
REJECTION CONTROL
(ADRC)
-AN ANALYSIS
ADRC
INTRODUCTION
PID CONTROL
ADRC
◦ TRANSIENT TRAJECTORY GENERATION
◦ NOISE TOLERANT DIFFERENTIATION
◦ NON LINEAR FEEDBACK
◦ TOTAL DISTURBANCE ESTIMATION AND
REJECTION
STABILITY ANALYSIS
APPLICATIONS OF ADRC
IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES
CONCLUSION
ADRC
PASSIVE DISTURBANCE REJECTION CONTROL
◦ Deals with disturbance (internal and external) as
one of the design issues.
◦
ACTIVE DISTURBANCE REJECTION CONTROL
◦ The disturbances which are mostly external are
estimated by using an observer and thus can
be canceled out thus making the control
design disturbance free.
◦
ADRC
WHY ADRC?
◦ LIKE PID CONTROL, THE CONTROL LAW IS BASED
ON ERROR AND NOT ON MODEL
◦ IT IS BASED ON STATE OBSERVER, AN EFFICIENT
STRATEGY WHICH IS THE OUTCOME OF
MODERN CONTROL APPROACH
◦ IT USES NON-LINEAR FEEDBACK THUS
ENHANCING PERFORMANCE
◦ IT IS WELL SUITED TO DIGITAL COMPUTER
TECHNOLOGY BASED APPLICATIONS AND IS AN
OUTCOME OF EXPERIMENTAL DIGITAL
SIMULATIONS
PID CONTROL
DATES BACK TO 1920s
IT IS DOMINANT IN INDUSTRIAL
APPLICATIONS EVEN TODAY
SIMPLICITY IS A MERIT
NOT ABLE TO MEET DEMANDS OF MODERN
INDUSTRY IN TERMS OF
◦ EFFICIENCY
◦ LACK AND COST OF SKILLED LABOUR
◦ DUE TO SIMPLICITY DOES NOT TAKE FULL
ADVANTAGE OF MODERN DAY POWERFUL
DIGITAL PROCESSORS
DISADVANTAGES OF PID
CONTROLLERS
ERROR COMPUTATION IS A CUMBERSOME
PROCESS FOR INPUT OTHER THAN STEP
SIGNAL.
NOISE GETS AMPLIFIED DUE TO DERIVATIVE
CONTROL.
THE CONTROL LAW IS IN THE FORM OF A
LINEAR WEIGHTED SUM REQUIRING OVER-
SIMPLIFICATION AND THUS LOSS OF
PERFORMANCE.
INTEGRAL CONTROL MAY LEAD TO
COMPLICATIONS OF SATURATION AND
REDUCED STABILITY AMRGIN DUE TO
INTRODUCTION OF PHASE LAG.
ADRC
TO OVERCOME THE DISADVANTAGES OF
PID CONTROLLERS, ADRC IS
PROPOSED WHICH CONSISTS OF FOUR
STEPS
◦ A SIMPLE DIFFERENTIAL EQUATION IS USED
AS A TRANSIENT TRAJECTORY GENERATOR
◦ THE DIFFERENTIATOR IS DESIGNED TO BE
NOISE TOLERANT
◦ NON LINEAR CONTROL LAWS ARE USED
FOR FEEDBACK
◦ TOTAL DISTURBANCE ESTIMATION AND
REJECTION CONCEPT IS USED
HISTORY OF ADRC
FIRST SYSTEMATICALLY INTRODUCED IN
2001 [8]
FURTHER ELABORATED IN [9]
PRACTICAL APPLICATION IN [11,12][13]
EQUIVALENT INPUT DISTURBANCE [14] AND
DISTURBANCE INPUT COUPLING [15] ARE
SPECIAL CASES OF ADRC WHERE ONLY
EXTERNAL DISTURBANCE IS CONSIDERED
TRANSIENT TRAJECTORY GENERATION
FOR A DYNAMICAL SYSTEM, STEP INPUT MAY
NOT BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE OUTPUT TO
TRACK DUE TO ITS SUDDEN JUMP
INPUT WITH TRANSIENT PROFILE REQUIRED
TRANSIENT TRAJECTORY
GENERATION
FOR EXAMPLE, THE DOUBLE INTEGRAL
PLANT
ẋ1 =x2
ẋ2 =u
IF |u|≤ r AND v IS THE DESIRED VALUE OF
x1, THEN THE TIME OPTIMAL SOLUTION IS
u = −r sign(x1 − v + ((x2|x2|)/2r))
TRANSIENT TRAJECTORY
GENERATION
THUS THE DESIRED PROFILE CAN BE
CHOSEN AS
v̇1 =v2
v̇2 = −r sign(v1 − v + ((v2|v2|)/2r))
THE PARAMETER r CAN BE CHANGED TO
SPEED UP OR SLOW THE PROFILE
NOISE TOLERANT
DIFFERENTIATION
IN PID CONTROL, DIFFERENTIATION IS
OBTAINED BY THE LAPLACE OPERATOR AS
IN
NOISE TOLERANT
DIFFERENTIATION
This can be rewritten as
The time domain solution is obtained by
inverse Laplace Transform operation as
This can be approximated as
NOISE TOLERANT
DIFFERENTIATION
Thus, if v(t) contains noise of the form n(t),
y(t) will contain the noise term.
Since τ is small, this term will amount to
amplification of n(t).
The amplification of noise in PID control is
undesirable.
NOISE TOLERANT
DIFFERENTIATION
A different form of Laplace operator for
differentiation is proposed by Han.
The approximation
is used.
NOISE TOLERANT
DIFFERENTIATION
A particular second approximation of a
differentiator is given by
Or
Defining r=1/τ, and carrying out inverse
Laplace Transform on above equation gives
Where y(t) tracks v(t), tracks , and r
determines the speed.
NOISE TOLERANT
DIFFERENTIATION
Consider that v(t) is the input signal to be
differentiated. Then the previous equation
can be expressed as
This gives the fastest tracking of v(t) and its
derivative subject to an acceleration limit
in the form of r. The above equation is
denoted as “tracking differentiator”.
NON LINEAR FEEDBACK
The PID controller employs a linear feedback
which is a combination of present, past
and future samples of the tracking error, e.
However with this form, the tracking error
approaches zero or converges to origin
with infinite time.
NON LINEAR FEEDBACK
A non-linear feedback of the form
is proposed by Han which has the following
advantages:-
NON LINEAR FEEDBACK
The tracking error can approach zero in finite
time and much more quickly by the choice of
α<1.
Another advantage of this selection of α is that
the steady state error reduces significantly
without having to resort to integral feedback.
Thus the disadvantages of integral control can
be avoided.
An extreme case is when α=0, which is
equivalent to bang-bang control that ensures
zero steady state error without requirement of
integral control term in PID.
TOTAL DISTURBANCE
ESTIMATION AND REJECTION
Consider the single-input-single-output
(SISO) second order plant represented by
the state equation
TOTAL DISTURBANCE
ESTIMATION AND REJECTION
To ensure that y tracks the input, the
control, u, is chosen such that it
overcomes the multivariable function f(x1,
x2, w(t), t) in feedback control
architecture.
Hence the above function can be denoted as
F(t) is called the “total disturbance”.
TOTAL DISTURBANCE
ESTIMATION AND REJECTION
F(t) can be treated as an additional state
variable, x3. Thus denoting G(t)=Ḟ(t), the
second order plant can be represented by
a new set of state equations given by
TOTAL DISTURBANCE
ESTIMATION AND REJECTION
The above plant is observable and hence an
extended state observer (ESO) can be
constructed by defining the tracking error
to be of the form e=z1-y as follows:-
The gains β01 , β02 and β03 are selected such
that the tracking error, e, approaches zero
in finite time.
TOTAL DISTURBANCE
ESTIMATION AND REJECTION
It can be shown that by choosing the control law as
The second order plant reduces to the following set
of equations:-
This cascaded integral form can be easily controlled
by making u0 as function of the tracking error and
its derivative i.e., a PD controller. Thus the control
problem is converted to a simple problem of
estimation and rejection of the total disturbance.
FORMULATION OF ADRC
TO BE CONTINUED
APPLICATIONS OF ADRC
IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
[1] J. Han, “Control theory: Model approach or control approach,” Syst. Sci.
Math., vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 328–335, 1989, (in Chinese).
[2] J. Han andW.Wang, “Nonlinear tracking-differentiator,” Syst. Sci. Math.,
vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 177–183, 1994, (in Chinese).
[3] J. Han, “Nonlinear PID controller,” J. Autom., vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 487–
490,
1994, (in Chinese).
[4] J. Han, “Extended state observer for a class of uncertain plants,”
Control
Decis., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 85–88, 1995, (in Chinese).
[5] J. Han, “Auto disturbances rejection controller and its applications,”
Control Decis., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 19–23, 1998, (in Chinese).
[6] J. Han, “From PID to auto disturbances rejection control,” Control Eng.,
vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 13–18, 2002, (in Chinese).
[7] J. Han, “Active disturbances rejection control technique,” Frontier Sci.,
vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 24–31, 2007, (in Chinese).
REFERENCES (CTD..)
[8] Z. Gao, Y. Huang, and J. Han, “An alternative paradigm for control system
design,” in Proc. 40th IEEE Conf. Decis. Control, 2001, vol. 5, pp. 4578–4585.
[9] Z. Gao, “Active disturbance rejection control: A paradigm shift in feedback
control system design,” in Proc. Amer. Control Conf., 2006, pp. 2399–2405.
[10] B. Sun and Z. Gao, “A DSP-based active disturbance rejection control
design for a 1-kW H-bridge DC–DC power converter,” IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 52, no. 5, pp. 1271–1277, Oct. 2005.
[11] Y. Su, B. Y. Duan, C. H. Zheng, Y. F. Zhang, G. D. Chen, and J. W. Mi,
“Disturbance-rejection high-precision motion control of a Stewart platform,”
IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 364–374, May 2004.
[12] Y. Su, C. Zheng, and B. Duan, “Automatic disturbances rejection controller
for precise motion control of permanent-magnet synchronous motors,” IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 814–823, Jun. 2005.
[13] D. Sun, “Comments on active disturbance rejection control,” IEEE Trans.
Ind. Electron., vol. 54, no. 6, pp. 3428–3429, Dec. 2007.
[14] J.-H. She, F. Mingxing, Y. Ohyama, H. Hashimoto, and M. Wu, “Improving
disturbance-rejection performance based on an equivalentinput-disturbance
approach,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 380–389, Jan. 2008.
[15] M. Valenzuela, J. M. Bentley, P. C. Aguilera, and R. D. Lorenz, “Improved
coordinated response and disturbance rejection in the critical sections of
paper machines,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 857–869, May/Jun.
2007.
[16]Jingqing Han, ”From PID to Active Disturbance Rejection Control,” IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Electronics, Vol. 56, No. 3, March 2009.
