Nonlinear Disturbance Observer-based Sliding Backstepping Hovering

Control of a Quadrotor
Ning Wang1 , Qi Deng1 , Hong Zhao1 , Jianchuan Yin1 , Zhongjiu Zheng1
1. Center for Intelligent Marine Vehicles, Dalian Maritime University, Dalian, China
E-mail: n.wang.dmu.cn@gmail.com

Abstract: In this paper, the nonlinear observer based hovering control is addressed for a quadrotor with system uncer-
tainties and external disturbances. Main contributions are as follows: 1) A nonlinear observer for complex unknowns
including unmodelled dynamics and external disturbances is designed for a quadrotor, and thereby contributing to more
robustness pertaining to the closed-loop system; 2) The sliding backstepping based technique is then employed to realize
hovering control of a quadrotor, and thereby leading to the proposed controller which achieves satisfactory control per-
formance; 3) Exhaustive analyses ensure that tracking errors of the overall system can converge to a small neighborhood
of the origin. Furthermore, a large number of simulation experiments show the effectiveness of the proposed control law.
Key Words: Sliding Mode Control, Backstepping Control, Nonlinear Disturbance Observer, Quadrotor Hovering Con-
trol

1 INTRODUCTION value. Paper [12] presented a nonlinear dynamic model for

The quadrotor refers to an unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV)
with four propellers. Due to its simple structure, high ma-
neuverability, vertical take-off and landing and other char-
acteristics, the quadrotor has become an indispensable part
of the UAV [1–4]. The quadrotor plays an important role in
both military and civil fields. Such as urban traffic super-
vision, air pollution measurement, monitoring in harsh en-
vironments, search and rescue victims, aerial photography,
power line detection and aerial exploration, target location,
precision strike etc. [5–7]. However, because the quadrotor
has only four inputs and has six outputs, it is an underac-
tuated system, which poses a considerable challenge to the
control problem.
Over the past few decades, a lot of research has been done
on the control of a quadrotor [8, 9]. PID control is a very
effective and practical control method, which is widely
used in industry. Its effectiveness is also demonstrated
on the quadrotor. Paper [10] presented the application of
two different control techniques (PID) and (LQ) to a micro
quadrotor, it can be seen from the experimental plots, the
controller introduced using the modem approach provides
excellent results. Since the quadrotor is a nonlinear system,
the linear method such as PID has many limitations.
In recent years, model-based nonlinear control methods
have been proposed to overcome the limitations of linear
approaches. Backstepping is an efficient method for deal-
ing with underactuated systems [11]. Based on the idea
of recursion, this approach can fast convergence desired
This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of
P. R. China (under Grants 51009017 and 51379002), the Fund for Dalian
Distinguished Young Scholars (under Grant 2016RJ10), the Innovation
Support Plan for Dalian High-level Talents (under Grant 2015R065), and
the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (under Grant
3132016314).
a quadrotor helicopter in a form suited for backstepping
controller design, simulation results show that this control
rate can stabilize the system. In order to solve the strongly
coupled problem of the PVTOL system, the combination
of saturation function and backstepping control is designed
in [13]. By using the saturation function, paper [14] uses
the inner and outer loop control structure to solve the prob-
lem of state and input constraints. The advantage of slid-
ing mode control is that it is insensitivity to the model er-
rors, parametric uncertainties and other disturbances [15].
The system is divided into a full actuated subsystem and
an underactuated subsystem, and the controller is designed
based on sliding mode control technique in [16]. A slid-
ing mode observer based sliding mode control method is
proposed by [17], this technique improves the robustness
of the system in the presence of external disturbances. The
adaptive method is used to solve the uncertainty problem
of the quality in the quadrotor model, and keep the stabil-
ity of the closed loop dynamics of the aircraft in [18]. In
the paper [19], a fuzzy logic control strategy is designed to
approximate the model uncertainty and combined with the
adaptive and backstepping methods, the semiglobally uni-
formly ultimately bounded of all signals in the closed-loop
system is achieved. The paper [20] introduced an adaptive
component into the sliding mode control rate, the system
can avoid the prior knowledge of the upper bound of un-
certainty, this technology used for systems that are in strict
feedback form with matched uncertainties.
The related methods of disturbance observer have been
studied and applied in the past decades [21]. As a very ef-
fective technique for dealing with disturbances, disturbance
observation has received extensive attention, and many new
methods have been extended [22,23]. A new nonlinear dis-
turbance observer is proposed for the first time in [24], it

978-1-5386-1243-9/18/$31.00 2018
c IEEE 3274
 ⎧
is used for friction compensation, independent joint con- ⎪
⎪ u1 = b(ω12 + ω22 + ω32 + ω42 )
⎪
⎨u
trol and sensorless torque control of robot manipulators. 2 = b(ω32 − ω12 )
In addition, Chen gave a systematic and comprehensive ⎪ = b(ω42 − ω22 )
⎪
⎪ u 3
overview of the perturbation observer in [25], and a com- ⎩
parative study of how to deal with external disturbances and u4 = d(ω12 − ω22 + ω32 − ω42 )
system uncertainties. Paper [26] develops a sliding-mode with Ix , Iy and Iz as the inertia moments of system and
control approach for systems with mismatched uncertain- Jr is the inertia moments of the propeller blades. l is
ties via a nonlinear disturbance observer. The switching the distance between the center of the quadrotor and the
gain is larger than the bounds of the disturbance, thus, the center of a propeller. b and d are scale factors related to air
chattering problem is solved effectively. density, rotor angle, drag coefficient, etc.
In order to improve the robustness of the system, a control Remark 1: The shape and mass of the quadrotor have
strategy combining backstepping and sliding mode control symmetrical characteristic, and assumed that the drag
is designed in this paper, and the adaptive term is designed coefficient of the quadrotor to be constant under low speed
to deal with the uncertainty of the disturbance. In addition, flight.
a nonlinear disturbance observer is considered to estimate Remark 2: The attitude angles are limited to
the unmodeled dynamics and external disturbances of the (− π2 ≤ φ ≤ π2 ), (− π2 ≤ θ ≤ π2 ) and (−π ≤ ψ ≤ π).
system. The simulation experiments of hovering control is Remark 3: The unknown disturbance term d is bounded,
given in the paper, and the effectiveness of the designed and the bounds are unknown, |d| < δ.
control rate is proved. Conclusions are drawn in the end of
this paper.
2 QUADROTOR MODEL 3 CONTROLLER DESIGN

Different models have been proposed in recent years. 3.1 Problem Statement
Quadrotor modeling is divided into two forms, Newton- From state equation of the system, the quadrotor is a mul-
Euler form and Euler-Lagrange form [2]. It has been noted tivariable, strongly coupled, nonlinear underactuated sys-
that Newton-Euler form is easy to understand. From [19], tem. Our goal is to design an adaptive controller that en-
the model of the quadrotor can be obtained via Newton- ables the quadrotors to follow a point and hover stably over
Euler approach and a simplified model is given as this point, which mean that all tracking errors asymptoti-
⎧ cally convergence to a small value.
⎪
⎪ x˙1 = x2 In this system, the quadrotor have six state (x, y, z, φ, θ, ψ),
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ x˙2 = (cx7 sx9 cx11 + sx7 sx11 ) um1 + d1 but only have four inputs (u1 , u2 , u3 , u4 ). Therefore, we
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ x˙3 = x4 can not control all of the states at the same time. To
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ solve this problem, we control (x, y, z, ψ) tracking desired
⎪
⎪ x˙4 = (cx7 sx9 sx11 − sx7 cx11 ) um1 + d2
⎪
⎪ signals (xd , yd , zd , ψd ), and enable (φ, θ) stable to zero
⎪
⎪ x˙5 = x6
⎪
⎪ simultaneously. We introduce two virtual control inputs
⎨x˙ = −g + (c c ) u1 + d
6 x7 x9 m 3 (ux , uy ), which represent the relation between pitch and
⎪
⎪ x˙7 = x 8 x motion, roll and y motion respectively.
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ x˙8 = x10 x12 a1 + x10 a2 ω + b1 u2 + d4 
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ux = (cos φ sin θ cos ψ + sin φ sin ψ)
⎪
⎪ x˙9 = x10 (1)
⎪
⎪ uy = (cos φ sin θ sin ψ − sin φ cos ψ)
⎪
⎪ x˙10 = x8 x12 a3 + x8 a4 ω + b2 u3 + d5
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪x˙11 = x12
⎪
⎪ then, transforming the (1) we have
⎩
x˙12 = x8 x10 a5 + b3 u4 + d6 ⎧
⎨φd = arcsin(ux sin ψ − uy cos ψ)
where X = [x, ẋ, y, ẏ, z, ż, φ, φ̇, θ, θ̇, ψ, ψ̇]T is the state  u cos ψ + uy sin ψ  (2)
⎩θd = arcsin x
vector, ω = ω1 − ω2 + ω3 − ω4 , with ωi , i = 1, 2, 3, 4 cos φd
represent the number of revolutions of the ith propeller,
di , i = 1, 2, · · · , 6 are the unknown disturbance that Part of the state space model related to (x, y) can be written
contains system uncertainties and other external factors, as follows:
ai , i = 1, 2, · · · , 5 and bi , i = 1, 2, 3 are the normalized ⎧
⎪
⎪ x˙1 = x2
parameters, u1 , u2 , u3 , u4 are the control input, these ⎪
⎪
parameters are defined as ⎨x˙2 = ux u1 + d1
m (3)
⎪
⎪ x˙3 = x4
⎪
⎪
Iy − Iz Jr Iz − Ix ⎩x˙ = u u1 + d
a1 = , a2 = , a3 = 4 y
m
2
Ix Ix Iy
Jr Ix − Iy l And the state space model can be rearranged as
a 4 = − , a5 = , b1 =
Ix Iz Ix 
l 1 ẋi = xj
b2 = , b3 = (4)
Iy Iz x˙j = fi (x) + gi (x)U

The 30th Chinese Control and Decision Conference (2018 CCDC) 3275
 where i = 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11 and j = 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12. The 3.3 Adaptive Sliding-mode Backstepping Control
control inputs contains virtual control (ux , uy ) in ad- Design
dition to four control inputs of the quadrotor, U = For height subsystem, defining the tracking error as
[ux , uy , u1 , u2 , u3 , u4 ]T . In order to design the controller
conveniently, we have e5 = x5 − x5d (10)
u1
f1 (x) = 0, g1 (x) = Now, let us choose the Lyapunov function:
m
u1
f2 (x) = 0, g2 (x) = 1 2
m V5 = e (11)
cos x7 cos x9 2 5
f3 (x) = −g, g3 (x) =
m and its derivative with time V˙5 is as follows:
f4 (x) = x10 x12 a1 + x10 a2 ω, g4 (x) = b1
f5 (x) = x8 x12 a3 + x8 a4 ω, g5 (x) = b2 V̇5 = e5 ė5 = e5 (x6 − ẋ5d ) (12)
f6 (x) = x8 x10 a5 , g6 (x) = b3
We construct the virtual control law α5 as
3.2 Nonlinear Disturbance Observer Design
α5 = ẋ5d − c5 e5 , c5 > 0 (13)
The goal of control is to design the controller so that the
output of the system can track the given input command in then, the new error between x6 and α5 is
the presence of system uncertainties and external interfer-
ences. The nonlinear disturbance observer is designed as e6 = x6 − α5 (14)
follows [24]:
 last, we define the sliding surface as
z = dˆ − p(x)
(5) s 5 = k 5 e 5 + e 6 , k5 > 0 (15)
ż = −L(x)z + L(x)(−p(x) − g(x)U − f (x))
The control law u1,eq is designed by
with dˆ represents the estimate of disturbance, p(x) is the
nonlinear function to be designed, and L(x) is the gain of 1
the nonlinear observer, they are meeting the conditions: u1,eq = [−k5 (e6 − c5 e5 ) − f3 (x) + α̇5
g3 (x)
ṗ(x) = L(x)ẋj (6) − e5 − h5 s5 − δ̂5 sign(s5 )] (16)

Generally, there is no prior knowledge of derivative of d, with h5 > 0, δ̂5 is the estimated value of upper bound of
assuming that the change of disturbance relative to the dy- uncertainty item d3 . Define estimation error δ̃5 = δ5 − δ̂5 ,
namic characteristics of the observer is slow, that is d˙ = 0. and parameter adaptive law as follows:
Defining the observation error of nonlinear observer
˙
δ̂ = γ5 |s5 |, γ5 > 0 (17)
d˜ = d − dˆ (7)
Considering the disturbance observer’s input, we conclude
Then, from (7) we have the observer dynamics the control law
˙ ˙
d˜ = d˙ − dˆ u1 =u1,eq + u1,d
˙
= −ż − p̂(x) 1
= [−k5 (e6 − c5 e5 ) − f3 (x) + α̇5
= L(x)z − L(x)(−p(x) − g(x)U − f (x)) − L(x)ẋj g3 (x)
= L(x)z + L(x)p(x) − L(x)(x˙j − g(x)U − f (x)) − e5 − h5 s5 − δ̂5 sign(s5 ) − dˆ3 ] (18)
= L(x)(z + p(x)) − L(x)d
The Lyapunov function in height subsystem is chosen as
= L(x)dˆ − L(x)d
1 2 1 2 1 ˜2 1 ˜2
= −L(x)d˜ (8) V6 = e5 + s5 + δ + d (19)
2 2 2γ5 5 2 3
From the equation (8), we can make the observer’s obser- The time derivative of V6 along (8), (10), (15) and (17) is
vation error converge exponentially by selecting L(x) > 0
properly. Usually, we choose a constant L(x) = a, a > 0 1 ˙ ˙
V˙6 =e5 e˙5 + s5 s˙5 + δ˜5 δ˜5 + d˜3 d˜3
and design p(x) = axj . The disturbance observed by the γ5
=e5 (e6 − c5 e5 ) + s5 (k5 e˙5 + e˙6 ) − δ˜5 |s5 | − L3 (x)d˜23
nonlinear observer is converted into the corresponding con-
trol amount of the input channel. Therefore, design
= − c5 e25 + e5 e6 + s5 [k5 (e6 − c5 e5 ) + f3 (x)
1 ˆ
ud = − d (9) + g (x)u + d − α˙ ] − δ˜ |s | − L (x)d˜2
3 1 3 5 5 5 5 3 (20)
g(x)

3276 The 30th Chinese Control and Decision Conference (2018 CCDC)
Combining with control law (18), we have where
⎧
V˙6 = − c5 e25 + e5 (s5 − k5 e5 ) + s5 (−e5 − h5 s5 ⎪
⎪ e7 = x7 − x7d
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ e 8 = x8 − α 7
− δˆ5 sign(s5 ) − dˆ3 + d3 ) − δ˜5 |s5 | − L5 (x)d˜23 ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ α7 = ẋ7d − c7 e7 , c7 > 0
= − c5 e2 − k5 e2 − h5 s2 − δˆ5 |s5 | + d˜3 s5 − δ˜5 |s5 | ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨e9 = x9 − x9d
5 5 5

− L5 (x)d˜23 e10 = x10 − α9 (27)

⎪
⎪
≤ − c5 e25 − k5 e25 − h5 s25 − δˆ5 |s5 | + δ5 s5 − δ˜5 |s5 | ⎪α9 = ẋ9d − c9 e9 , c9 > 0
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ e11 = x11 − x11d
− L (x)d˜2
5
⎪
⎪
⎪
3 ⎪
⎪e12 = x12 − α11
⎪
=− c5 e25 − k5 e25 − h5 s25 − L5 (x)d˜23 (21) ⎪
⎩
α11 = ẋ11d − c11 e11 , c11 > 0

We can guarantee V˙6 ≤ 0 by selecting the appropriate pa- and

rameters. ⎧
Similar to the height subsystem, we define the error ⎪
⎨ s 7 = k 7 e 7 + e 8 , k7 > 0
⎧ s9 = k9 e9 + e10 , k9 > 0 (28)
⎪
⎩
⎪
⎪ e1 = x1 − x1d s11 = k11 e11 + e12 , k11 > 0
⎪
⎨e
2 = x2 − α1
(22) The stability of the whole system can be proved by con-
⎪
⎪ e 3 = x3 − x3d
⎪
⎩ structing Lyapunov function for each subsystem similar to
e4 = x4 − α3
the height subsystem, detailed simulation experiments will
be given in the next section.
where virtual control input signal α1 and α3 are designed
as follows: 4 SIMULATIONS
 To evaluate the efficiency of the proposed control strat-
α1 = ẋ1d − c1 e1 , c1 > 0
(23) egy, simulations are made to check the performances of the
α3 = ẋ3d − c3 e3 , c3 > 0 quadrotor. The nominal parameters of the quadrotor are
chosen by Table 1.
and the sliding manifold for horizontal position subsystem
is chosen as follows: Table 1: Parameters of model
 m 2kg Ix 6.114 × 10−3 kg · m2
s 1 = k 1 e 1 + e 2 , k1 > 0 l 0.5m Iy 6.114 × 10−3 kg · m2
(24)
s 3 = k 3 e 3 + e 4 , k3 > 0 b 3.16 × 10−5 Iz 1.223 × 10−2 kg · m2
d 7.32 × 10−7 Jr 1.55 × 10−5 kg · m2
The virtual control input can be determined as
The initial conditions and desired values for
⎧ =
⎪ 1 quadrotor are used in simulations by X(0)
⎪
⎪ ux = [−k1 (e2 − c1 e1 ) − f1 (x) + α̇1 [0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0]T , {xd , yd , zd , ψd } =
⎪
⎪ g1 (x)
⎪
⎨ {5, 5, 10, 0.1}. The external disturbances and parameter
−e1 − h1 s1 − δ̂1 sign(s1 ) − dˆ1 ]
1 (25) uncertainties are added to each quadrotor state, and the dis-
⎪
⎪ uy = [−k3 (e4 − c3 e3 ) − f2 (x) + α̇3
⎪
⎪ turbance is time-varying: di =cos(0.5t), i=1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.
⎪
⎪ g2 (x)
⎩
−e3 − h3 s3 − δ̂3 sign(s3 ) − dˆ2 ] Where the controller parameters are chosen as
ci = 1, i = 1, 3, 7, 9, 11, c5 = 3, ki = 1, hi =
2, i = 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11. The gains of adaptive laws
Substituting (25) into (2), we can calculate φd and θd as
are chosen as γi = 15, i = 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, and
desired roll angle and pitch angle respectively. Further-
the disturbance observer parameters are designed as
more, control input (u2 , u3 , u4 ) for attitude subsystem can
Li (x) = ai = 10, i = 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11.
designed by
Simulation results presented in Figures 1−7 show the
⎧ 1 hovering control of the quadrotor. Figure 1 shows tracking
⎪
⎪ u2 = [−k7 (e8 − c7 e7 ) − f4 (x) + α̇7
⎪
⎪ g4 (x)
results in x, y, z position, where roll, pitch and yaw angle
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ −e7 − h7 s7 − δ̂7 sign(s7 ) − dˆ4 ]
are presented in Figure 2. We can see that the system
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 1 has stabilized after a period of regulation, roll angle and
⎨u = [−k9 (e10 − c9 e9 ) − f5 (x) + α̇9 pitch angle adjustment time longer than the yaw angle. It
3
g5 (x) (26)
⎪ can be seen that control inputs (u1 , u2 , u3 , u4 ) response
⎪
⎪
⎪ −e9 − h9 s9 − δ̂9 sign(s9 ) − dˆ5 ]
⎪
⎪ 1
curve from Figures 3−4. Control input u1 stabilised at
⎪
⎪ u4 = [−k11 (e12 − c11 e11 )−f6 (x)+ α̇11 19.6N which equal to the weight of the aircraft. Due to
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ g6 (x)
⎩ disturbances is time-varying, u2 , u3 are always changing.
−e11 − h11 s11 − δ̂11 sign(s11 ) − dˆ6 ] Figure 5 shows the three-dimensional trajectory of the

The 30th Chinese Control and Decision Conference (2018 CCDC) 3277
 400 0.05 φ
φd

φ(rad)
0
200

u1(N)
-0.05
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
0
time(s)
θ
0.05
-200 θd

θ (rad)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
0
time(s)

0.02 -0.05
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
0.01 time(s)
20
ψ
u2(N)

0 ψd

ψ(rad)
10
-0.01
0
-0.02 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
time(s)
time(s)

Figure 3: Control input for u1 , u2 Figure 2: Tracking results for φ(t), θ(t), ψ(t)

0.02 5 CONCLUSION
0 In this paper, an adaptive sliding-mode backstepping con-
u3(N)

trol technique has been developed for quadrotor hovering

-0.02
control problem. The main purpose of the combination of
-0.04 sliding mode control and backstepping control is to over-
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
time(s)
come the lack of robustness of backstepping control. Dis-
1
turbance observer is used to estimate system uncertainties

0.5
u4(N)

0
12 3D Trajectory
Target
-0.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 10
time(s)
8
Figure 4: Control input for u3 , u4
z(m)

4
aircraft, and reaching the target point finally. It also can be
2
seen that disturbance observers quickly estimate the actual
disturbance by Figures 6−7. 0
6
4 6
2 4
10
x 0
2
0
xd y(m) x(m)
x(m)

0 Figure 5: 3D-Position
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
time(s)
10 y
yd 1
disturbance
y(m)

5
0 d1
0 dˆ1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 -1
time(s) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
20 z time(s)
zd 1
disturbance
z(m)

10
0 d2
0 dˆ2
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 -1
time(s) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
time(s)
1
disturbance

Figure 1: Tracking results for x(t), y(t), z(t) 0 d3

dˆ3
-1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
time(s)

Figure 6: Observation of disturbance for d1 , d2 , d3

3278 The 30th Chinese Control and Decision Conference (2018 CCDC)
 International Conference on Intell Robots and Systems,
1

disturbance
2451-2456, 2004.
d4
0
dˆ4
[11] Y. Yu, G. Lu, C. Sun , et al. Robust backstepping decen-
-1 tralized tracking control for a 3-DOF helicopter, Nonlinear
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Dynamics, Vol.82, No.1-2, 1-14, 2015.
time(s)
[12] T. Madani, A. Benallegue, Backstepping Control for a
1
disturbance

Quadrotor Helicopter, IEEE/RSJ International Conference

d5
0
dˆ5
on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 3255-3260, 2006.
-1 [13] C. Aguilar-Ibez, J. H. Sossa-Azuela, M. S. Suarez-
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Castanon, A backstepping-based procedure with satura-
time(s)
1
tion functions to control the PVTOL, Nonlinear Dynamics,
disturbance

d6
0
dˆ6
-1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
time(s)
Figure 7: Observation of disturbance for d4 , d5 , d6
and external disturbances. The superiority of the algorithm
is proved by simulation experiments. For future work, we
can improve the algorithm to solve the problem of quadro-
tor path tracking, and consider the use of other observers to
achieve better control effect.
REFERENCES
[1] F. Kendoul, Survey of advances in guidance, navigation, and
control of unmanned rotorcraft systems, Journal of Field
Robotics, Vol.29, No.2, 315-378, 2012.
[2] X. Zhang, X. Li, K. Wang, et al. A Survey of Modelling
and Identification of Quadrotor Robot, Abstract and Applied
Analysis,Vol.10, No.23, 2014.
[3] L. Li, L. Sun, J. Jin, Survey of advances in control algo-
rithms of quadrotor unmanned aerial vehicle, IEEE Interna-
tional Conference on Communication Technology, 107-111,
2016.
[4] R. U. Amin, A. Li, S, Shamshirband, A Review of Quadrotor
UAV: Control Methodologies and Performance Evaluation,
International Journal of Automation and Control, Vol.10,
No.2, 2015.
[5] M. J. Reinoso, L. I. Minchala, P. Ortiz, et al. Trajectory track-
ing of a quadrotor using sliding mode control, IEEE Latin
America Trans. Vol.14, No.5, 2157-2166, 2016.
[6] T. Zhang, Y. Kang, M. Achtelik, et al, Autonomous hovering
of a vision/IMU guided quadrotor, IEEE, International Con-
ference on Mechatronics and Automation, 2870-2875, 2010.
[7] B. Xu, Composite Learning Finite-Time Control With Appli-
cation to Quadrotors, IEEE Trans. Systems Man and Cyber-
netics Systems, No.99, 1-10, 2017.
[8] H. Du, H. Shen, W. Zhu, Control of a hovering quadrotor
aircraft based finite-time attitude control algorithm, IEEE In-
ternational Conference on Control and Automation 192-197,
2016.
[9] Y. Qu, Z. Xing, Y. Zhang, Wind estimation using the posi-
tion information from a hovering quadrotor, IEEE, Guidance,
Navigation and Control Conference, 1345-1350, 2017.
[10] S. Bouabdallah, A. Noth, R. Siegwart, PID vs LQ control
techniques applied to an indoor micro quadrotor, IEEE/RSJ
Vol.83, No.3, 1247-1257, 2016.
[14] N. Cao, A. F. Lynch, InnerOuter Loop Control for Quadrotor
UAVs With Input and State Constraints, IEEE Trans. Control
Syst. Technol., Vol.24, No.5, 1797-1804, 2016.
[15] R. Xu, U. Ozguner, Sliding Mode Control of a Quadrotor
Helicopter, IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, 4957-
4962, 2006.
[16] L. Besnard, Y. B. Shtessel, B. Landrum, Quadrotor ve-
hicle control via sliding mode controller driven by sliding
mode disturbance observer, Journal of the Franklin Institute,
Vol.349, No.2, 658-684, 2012.
[17] M. Huang, B. Xian, C. Diao, et al. Adaptive tracking con-
trol of underactuated quadrotor unmanned aerial vehicles via
backstepping, American Control Conference, IEEE, 2076-
2081, 2010.
[18] J. J. Xiong, G. B. Zhang, Global fast dynamic terminal slid-
ing mode control for a quadrotor UA, ISA Trans., Vol.66,
233, 2016.
[19] F. Yacef, O. Bouhali, M. Hamerlain, Adaptive fuzzy back-
stepping control for trajectory tracking of unmanned aerial
quadrotor, International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft
Systems, IEEE, 920-927, 2014.
[20] T. Chingozha, O. Nyandoro, Adaptive sliding backstepping
control of quadrotor UAV attitude, IFAC Proceedings Vol-
umes, Vol.47, No.3, 11043-11048, 2014.
[21] M. Chen, W. H. Chen, Sliding mode control for a class of
uncertain nonlinear system based on disturbance observer,
International Journal of Adaptive Control and Signal Pro-
cessing, Vol.24, No.1, 51-64, 2010.
[22] L. Wang, J. Su, Robust Disturbance Rejection Control for
Attitude Tracking of an Aircraft, IEEE Trans. Control Syst.
Technol., Vol.23, No.6, 2361-2368, 2015.
[23] F. Chen, W. Lei, K. Zhang, et al. A novel nonlinear resilient
control for a quadrotor UAV via backstepping control and
nonlinear disturbance observer, Nonlinear Dynamics, Vol.85,
No.2, 1281-1295, 2016.
[24] W. H. Chen, D. J. Ballance, P. J. Gawthrop, et al. A non-
linear disturbance observer for robotic manipulators, IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron., Vol.47, No.4, 932-938, 2000.
[25] W. H. Chen, J. Yang, L. Guo, Disturbance-Observer-Based
Control and Related MethodsAn Overview, IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., Vol.63, No.2, 1083-1095, 2016.
[26] J. Yang, S. Li, X. Yu, Sliding-Mode Control for Systems
With Mismatched Uncertainties via a Disturbance Observer,
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., Vol.60, No.1, 160-169, 2013.

The 30th Chinese Control and Decision Conference (2018 CCDC) 3279