Abstract:Active disturbance rejection control (ADRC) can be summarized as follows: it inherits from proportional–integral–derivative (PID) the quality that makes it such a success: the error driven, rather than model-based, control law; it takes from modern control theory its best offering: the state observer; it embraces the power of nonlinear feedback and puts it to full use; it is a useful digital control technology developed out of an experimental platform rooted in computer simulations. ADRC is made possible only when control is taken as an experimental science, instead of a mathematical one. It is motivated by the ever increasing demands from industry that requires the control technology to move beyond PID, which has dominated the practice for over 80 years. Specifically, there are four areas of weakness in PID that we strive to address: 1) the error computation; 2) noise degradation in the derivative control; 3) oversimplification and the loss of performance in the control law in the form of a linear weighted sum; and 4) complications brought by the integral control. Correspondingly, we propose four distinct measures: 1) a simple differential equation as a transient trajectory generator; 2) a noise-tolerant tracking differentiator; 3) the nonlinear control laws; and 4) the concept and method of total disturbance estimation and rejection. Together, they form a new set of tools and a new way of control design. Times and again in experiments and on factory floors, ADRC proves to be a capable replacement of PID with unmistakable advantage in performance and practicality, providing solutions to pressing engineering problems of today. With the new outlook and possibilities that ADRC represents, we further believe that control engineering may very well break the hold of classical PID and enter a new era, an era that brings back the spirit of innovations.

Active Disturbance Rejection Control: Between the Formulation in Time and the Understanding in Frequency

Frequency-Domain Analysis of Nonlinear Active Disturbance Rejection Control Via the Describing Function Method.

Transfer Function Analysis and Implementation of Active Disturbance Rejection Control

Frequency behavior analysis for predictive control with adaptive disturbance model

From PID to Active Disturbance Rejection Control

Development status of active disturbance rejection control

Active Disturbance Rejection Control Design for High-Order Integral Systems

A Simulative Study on Active Disturbance Rejection Control (ADRC) as a Control Tool for Practitioners

From PID to ADRC and back: expressing error-based active disturbance rejection control schemes as standard industrial 1DOF and 2DOF controllers

Tuning Method for Second-Order Active Disturbance Rejection Control

Robust Compensation for Active Disturbance Rejection Control of a Class of High‐order Systems with Large Time Delay: Simulation and Experimental Studies

Quantitative Analysis on the Phase Margin of ADRC

From PID to ADRC and back: Expressing error‐based active disturbance rejection control schemes as standard industrial 1DOF and 2DOF controllers

A Robust Control Methodology Based on Active Disturbance Rejection Control and Input Shaping

Practical Active Disturbance Rejection Control: Bumpless Transfer, Rate Limitation and Incremental Algorithm

Adaptive active disturbance rejection control guaranteeing uniformly ultimate boundedness and simplicity

Comparison of the Phase Margins of Different ADRC Designs

Active Disturbance Rejection Control (ADRC) Toolbox for MATLAB/Simulink

Active Disturbance Rejection Control on a bubbling fluidized bed

Frequency-domain Analysis of A Modified Active Disturbance Rejection Control with Application to Superheated Steam Temperature Control

Active disturbance rejection controller design for distributed parameter systems