machines

Communication
An Improved Super-Twisting Sliding Mode Composite Control
for Quadcopter UAV Formation
Yulong Ye, Song Hu, Xingyu Zhu and Zhenxing Sun *

College of Electrical Engineering and Control Science, Nanjing Tech University, Nanjing 211816, China;
[email protected] (Y.Y.); [email protected] (S.H.); [email protected] (X.Z.)
* Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: Aiming at the nonlinear and multiple disturbances in the multi-quadcopter UAV system,
this paper proposes a leader–follower composite formation control strategy based on an improved
super-twisted sliding mode controller (ISTSMC) and a finite-time extended state observer (FTESO).
For the designed sliding mode control algorithm, the integral term’s switching function is replaced
with a non-smooth term to reduce the vibration in the control, further improving the overall perfor-
mance of the system. For external disturbances, the finite-time extended state observer achieves rapid
and accurate observation of external disturbances. Finally, through formation control experiments,
the reliability and superiority of the proposed composite formation controller (CFC) is validated.

Keywords: quadcopter UAV; formation control; improved super-twisted sliding mode controller;
finite-time extended state observer

1. Introduction
Multi-quadcopter UAV cooperative formation control is a hot topic in the current
research on multi-agent control. Compared to a single quadcopter UAV, multi-quadcopter
formations offer numerous advantages, such as greater field of view, heavier flight loads,
and higher mission tolerance. After years of continuous exploration by researchers, cur-
rent methods for quadcopter UAV formation control include leader–follower [1], virtual
Citation: Ye, Y.; Hu, S.; Zhu, X.; Sun, structure [2], artificial potential field [3] and consistency-based approaches [4]. The leader–
Z. An Improved Super-Twisting follower method is the simplest and most commonly used formation control method. It
Sliding Mode Composite Control for transforms the formation control problem into a position and yaw error tracking prob-
Quadcopter UAV Formation. lem, enabling the followers to track the leader. Finally, this method achieves formation
Machines 2024, 12, 32. https:// maintenance and coordinated flights for multi-quadcopter UAV systems.
doi.org/10.3390/machines12010032 Based on the leader–follower formation control strategy, many methods such as PID
Academic Editor: Dan Zhang and adaptive control were used for multi-agent systems in [5–7]. For the network of het-
erogeneous uncertain agents, reference [8] proposes an output feedback model reference
Received: 16 November 2023 adaptive control (MRAC) to deal with the unknown dynamics of the intelligences. Due
Revised: 21 December 2023
to its strong robustness, sliding mode control is gradually being utilized in multi-agent
Accepted: 22 December 2023
formation control. For instance, multi-agent systems such as multiple spacecraft and un-
Published: 3 January 2024
derwater robots have adopted the sliding mode control method, achieving certain control
effectiveness in [9–11]. Sliding mode control of quadcopter formation flight was used for
the first time in [12]. By improving the sliding mode surface, reference [13] incorporates a
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.
fast nonsingular terminal sliding mode surface to achieve finite-time formation control and
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. improve the convergence speed. However, using traditional formation sliding mode con-
This article is an open access article trol, there was significant vibration in the follower drones. To address the vibration issue in
distributed under the terms and sliding mode control, reference [14] proposed a method using Radial Basis Function (RBF)
conditions of the Creative Commons neural networks to reduce the sliding mode switching gain. Combining neural networks
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// and fast terminal sliding mode control, reference [15] effectively reduces the chattering
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ in sliding mode control and improves the convergence rate and tracking accuracy of the
4.0/). controller. Reference [16] effectively suppresses the vibration effects in sliding mode control

Machines 2024, 12, 32. https://doi.org/10.3390/machines12010032 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/machines

Machines 2024, 12, 32 2 of 13

by improving the super-twisting convergence rate, reducing the vibration in trajectory

tracking for the quadcopter. However, in the aforementioned articles on quadcopter forma-
tion control, there is limited discussion on interference issues in complex environments,
and these control strategies may not effectively suppress external disturbances. In response
to the uncertainty in quadcopter parameters and external disturbances, a control approach
that combines disturbance observer and adaptive control methods was proposed in [17]. A
new robust safety-critical model predictive control framework has been proposed in [18]
for controllers to survive as much as possible under disturbances. Based on nonsingular
terminal sliding mode control, reference [19] further integrates a finite-time extended state
observer, effectively enhancing the disturbance resistance capability of autonomous un-
derwater vehicles. In recent years, with the development of power electronics technology,
neural networks are also gradually used in multi-agent robust tracking control. Aiming at
the distributed tracking problem of networked intelligences under external disturbances,
reference [20] combines neural networks and the disturbance estimator to propose a novel
two-component distributed control scheme. Combining neural network approximator,
sliding mode control and improved extended high-gain observer, reference [21] proposes a
novel robust bipartite tracking consensus control scheme.
To address the issues of sliding mode vibration and external disturbances, in this
paper a composite formation controller is proposed based on the quadrotor UAV dynamic
model with a leader–follower formation control structure that combines an improved
super-twisting sliding model controller (ISTSMC) with a finite-time extended state observer
(FTESO). This controller not only reduces the vibration and errors in the formation control
of multi-quadcopter UAV systems by replacing the switching function with a non-smooth
term but also enhances the disturbance resistance of the controller through the finite-
time extended state observer. Finally, experiments and validation of the quadcopter UAV
formation algorithm were conducted based on a motion capture system.
The full paper is structured as follows: Section 2 expresses the dynamic model and
composite formation controller (CFC) design. Section 3 is the stability analysis of the
controller. Section 4 presents the validation experiments and analysis of the formation
algorithm and finally the conclusions are given.

2. Dynamic Modeling and Algorithm Design

2.1. Modeling Design
Choosing the X structure quadcopter as the research subject, based on Newton’s
second law and Euler’s equations, the six-degree-of-freedom dynamic model is derived
as follows:  ..
 x = (cosϕsinθcosψ + sinϕsinψ) T/m + d1
..




 y = (cosϕsinθsinψ − sinϕcosψ) T/m + d2
 z.. = cosϕcosθT/m − g + d3



. .
.. (1)
 ϕ = τ x /J xx + θ ψ( Jzz − Jyy )/Jxx + d4

 .. . .
 θ = τ y /Jyy + ϕψ( Jxx − Jzz )/Jyy + d5



 .. . .


ψ = τ z /Jzz + ϕθ ( Jyy − Jxx )/Jzz + d6 ,
where x, y, z represent the position of the quadcopter relative to the origin of the ground
coordinate system. θ, ϕ, ψ represent the Euler angles of the quadcopter. Jxx , Jyy , Jzz represent
the rotational inertia about the three axes. τ x , τ y , τ z represent the rotational torques about
the three axes. m is the mass of the quadcopter body. d1 to d6 represent the external
disturbances acting on the quadcopter. T is the total lift force generated by the four motors.
 rotational torques about the three axes. m is the mass of the quadcopter body. d1 to d6
rotational
represent torques
the external about the three axes.
disturbances acting m on
is the
the quadcopter.
mass of the quadcopter body.
T is the total d1 togen-
lift force d6
represent
erated bythe
theexternal
four motors. disturbances acting on the quadcopter. T is the total lift force gen-
Machines 2024, 12, 32 eratedConsidering
by the four Figure
motors.1 and assuming that the leader and followers are flying in3 of for-
13
Considering
mation at the same Figure
altitude,1 and theassuming
dynamicthat modelthefor
leader and followers areformation
the multi-quadcopter flying in for-
can
mation at the
be derived as same
follows: altitude, the dynamic model for the multi-quadcopter formation can
be derived as follows:
Considering Figure1 and assuming that the leader and followers are flying in forma-
λxi = (xi - x L )cos(ψL ) + (yi - y L )sin(ψL )
tion at the same altitude, λthe dynamic model for the multi-quadcopter formation can be
xi = (xi - x L )cos(ψL ) + (yi - y L )sin(ψL )
derived as follows:  yi -(x
λ = i - xL )sin(ψL ) + (yi - y L )cos(ψL ) (2)
 λyi = -(xi - xL )sin(ψL ) + (yi - y L )cos(ψL ) (2)
 λ
 xiλψi
== ( xψ
i−i -xψ , (ψ L ) + (yi − y L )sin(ψ L )
L )Lcos
λ = ψ - ψ ,
 ψi= −( xi i − xLL )sin(ψ L ) + (yi − y L )cos(ψ L ) (2)
 yi
λ
where λxi ,λyi ,λψi  represent the
λψi = ψi − ψ L , relative distance and yaw between the i-th follower and
where λxi ,λyi ,λψi represent the relative distance and yaw between the i-th follower and
the leader. x , y ,ψL represent the position and yaw of the leader. xi ,yi ,ψi represent
where λ xi , λyiL, λψiL represent the relative distance and yaw between the i-th follower and
the positionxxLand
theleader.
the leader. L, ,yyL,yaw
,ψLofrepresent the position and yaw of the leader. xi ,yi ,ψi represent
the i-th follower.
L ψ L represent the position and yaw of the leader. xi , yi , ψi represent the
the position
position andandyawyaw of the
of the i-th i-th follower.
follower.

Figure 1. Leader–follower formation control structure schematic diagram.

Figure 1.
Figure Leader-follower formation
1. Leader–follower formation control
control structure
structure schematic
schematic diagram.
diagram.
2.2. Composite Formation Controller Design
2.2. Composite Formation Controller Design
2.2. Composite
The compositeFormation Controller Design
leader–follower control structure designed in this paper is illustrated
The composite leader–follower control structure designed in this paper is illustrated
The composite
in Figure leader–follower
2, which includes control structure
the bottom-level control ofdesigned in this
the following paper is illustrated
quadcopter UAV and
in Figure 2, which includes the bottom-level control of the following quadcopter UAV and
in Figure 2, which includes the bottom-level control of the following quadcopter
the cooperative control to maintain the formation. Figure 2 illustrates the control process UAV and
the cooperative control to maintain the formation. Figure 2 illustrates the control process
the cooperative
between the i-thcontrol
follower to maintain the formation.
and the leader, and thisFigure
sequence 2 illustrates the control process
can be extrapolated succes-
between the i-th follower and the leader, and this sequence can be extrapolated successively
between
sively to the
the i-th
otherfollower andWhile
followers. the leader, and this
maintaining thesequence can be extrapolated
desired formation distance andsucces-
yaw,
to the other followers. While maintaining the desired formation distance and yaw, the
sively
the to the other
cooperative followers.
controller While maintaining
continuously drives theactual
the desired formation
formation distance
distance andand
yawyaw,
to-
cooperative controller continuously drives the actual formation distance and yaw towards
the cooperative
wards the desiredcontroller
formation continuously
distance anddrives
yaw. the actual
This formation
ultimately distance
achieves
the desired formation distance and yaw. This ultimately achieves closed-loop control for the and yaw
closed-loop to-
con-
wards
trol forthe
quadcopter thedesired formation
quadcopter
UAV system. UAV distance
system. In
In addition, and yaw. This
toaddition,
address ultimately
to address
external achieves
external
disturbances closed-loop
disturbances
during con-
during
formation
trol forathe
formation
flight, quadcopter
flight,
finite-time UAVstate
a extended
finite-time system.
extendedIn addition,
observerstate to address
observer
is designed external
is designed
to enhance disturbances
to enhance
the system’s the during
system’s
disturbance
formation
disturbance flight, a finite-time
resistance
resistance capability. extended
capability. state observer is designed to enhance the system’s
disturbance resistance capability.

Figure 2. Composite formation

Figure 2. formation control
control structure
structure diagram.
diagram.
Figure 2. Composite formation control structure diagram.
2.2.1. Observer Design
To simplify the quadcopter dynamics model in Equation (1), the following second-
order system model can be obtained:
( .
x1i = x2i
. (3)
x2i = f n ( x ) + gn ( x )un + dn ,
Machines 2024, 12, 32 4 of 13

where f n ( x ), gn ( x ) represent the non-linear functions, with the index n ranging from 1 to 6.
i represents the i-th follower. x1i = ( xi , yi , zi , ϕi , θ i , ψi ), represents the position and attitude
for the i-th follower. dn represents the aggregate disturbance on the channel.
Design of the finite-time extended state observer is as follows [22]:
 . 1+ α
 Z = Z2 + β1 sign( x1i − Z1 ) x1i − Z1
 .1


Z2 = Z3 + β2 sign( x1i − Z1 ) x1i − Z1 1+2α + gn ( x )un + f n (4)

 .
 Z = β sign( x − Z ) x − Z
1 1+3α ,

3 3 1i 1 1i

where β1 , β2 , β3 are observer gains, and satisfy the condition β1 = 3ω, β2 = 3ω 2 , β3 = ω 3 .

ω is the bandwidth of the observer. As ω increases, the observer converges faster, but the
filtering becomes less effective, with more noise signals passing through; as ω decreases,
the observer converges slower, but the filtering becomes more effective, and the observation
disturbance error decreases. α is a tunable parameter in the range of −1/3 to 0. Z1 , Z2 , Z3
correspond to the estimated values of x1i , x2i and the aggregate disturbance on the channel.

2.2.2. Controller Design

The controller error is first defined as:

e = λi − λid , (5)

where λi = (λ xi , λyi , λψi ).

Designing the general sliding mode surface as:
.
s = ce + e. (6)

Combining the improved super-twisting convergence law [23], the specific control law
for the followers is as follows:
.. d

−1 .
 un = gi ( x )(λi − ce − tm − f n ( x ) − Z3 )


tm = − p1 |s|1+ε sign(s) + zm (7)
 .


zm = − p2 s 1+2ε sign(s),

where p1 , p2 are the gains of the controller. ε is an adjustable parameter, ranging from −0.5
to 0. tm is the improved convergence rate. zm is the intermediate variable.

3. Stability Analysis

Assumption 1. The disturbance and its various order derivatives in each channel of the quadcopter
are assumed to be bounded.

Definition 1. Given numbers τ i > 0, i = 1, . . . , n and fixed coordinates ( x1 , . . . , xn , ) ∈ Rn .

If there exists a real number p ∈ R, such that for ∀e > 0 and ∀ x ∈ Rn \{0}, one has
g(eτ1 x1 , eτ2 x2 , . . . , eτ n xn ) = e p g( x1 , x2 , . . . , xn ), and function g : Rn → R is called homoge-
neous of degree p, where (τ 1 , τ 2 , . . . , τ n ) are the weights of the coordinates.

Lemma 1. Suppose that the positive-definite function g( x ) : Rn → R and function f ( x ) : Rn → R

have the same homogeneous degree pertaining to the same dilation weight. Then, there exists a
positive constant a, such that f ( x ) ≤ ag( x ). In addition, if f ( x ) is positive-definite, one has
bg( x ) ≤ f ( x ), where b is a positive constant [24].

Lemma 2 [25]. Suppose 0 < a ≤ 1, then for ∀ x, y ∈ R, one has

a
x a sign( x ) − y a sign(y) ≤ 21− a x − y
Machines 2024, 12, 32 5 of 13

Lemma 3 [24]. Define m > 0, n > 0, then for ∀ x, y ∈ R, one has

n+m
m n m
x m y n ≤ h( x, y) x n+m + h( x, y)− n x
m+n m+n

Lemma 4 [26]. Suppose that t ≥ 1, then for ∀ x, y ∈ R, one has

t −1
x t sign( x ) − yt sign(y) ≤ t(2t−2 + 2)( x − y a + x − y y

Lemma 5. Consider the system:

 .

 xi = xi+1 , i = 1, 2, . . . , n + 1

 x = u+σ
n 0
. (8)

 σ j = σ j+1 = 0, 1, m − 2
, j
 .

σm−1 = 0,

for any constant α = − p/q ∈ (−1/(n + m), 0), where p and q are positive even and odd
integers, respectively, and the constant k i satisfies that all roots of the characteristic polynomial:
p(s) = sn+m + k m+n sn+m−1 + · · · + k2 s + k1 fall in the left half-plane of the complex plane, the
observation state of the following observer (9) will converge to the true state of the system (8) in
finite time.
 .

 x̂i = x̂i+1 = k n+m+1−i sign( x1 − x̂1 ) x1 − x̂1 1+(n+m+1−i)α , i = 1, . . . , n − 1


.


 1+(m+1)α
 x̂ n = u + σ̂0 + k m+1 sign( x1 − x̂1 ) x1 − x̂1

. (9)
σ̂ j = σ̂ j+1 + k m+ j sign( x1 − x̂1 ) x1 − x̂1 1+(m− j)α , j = 0, . . . , m − 2





 σ̂.



m−1 = k 1 sign ( x1 − x̂1 ) x1 − x̂1 1+(m− j−1)α .

Combining Equations (3) and (4), the error dynamics of the finite-time extended state
observer can be obtained as follows:
 . 1+ α


 e1 = e2 − β1 sign(e1 ) e1
 .
1+2α
e2 = e3 − β2 sign(e1 ) e1 (10)

 . .
 e3 = dn − β sign(e1 ) e1 1+3α ,

3

where e1 = z1 − x1i , e2 = z2 − x2i , e3 = z3 − dn . To obtain the finite convergence time T,

.
define Ai (e) = ei−1 + ci ei−1 t sign(ei−1 ) , where i = 2, 3, 0 < t < 1 and ci > 1.
. . .
Design Lyapunov function V = 1/2e12 + 1/2e22 , one has V = e1 e1 + e2 e2 .
.
Combining the proof process in [27] and Lemma 5, it can be proved that V ≤ 0 by
choosing the appropriate observer parameters. Finally, the observer finite convergence
time T is obtained:
1− t
( c3 − 1) × 2 2 1− t 1− t
T≤ |V 2 (0) − V 2 ( T )|.
1−t
In summary, it is proved that the finite time extended state observer is finite time stable.
From Equations (6) and (7), obtain:
( .
s = − p1 s 1+ε sign(s) + zm
. . (11)
zm = − p2 s 1+2ε sign(s) + η (t),
Machines 2024, 12, 32 6 of 13

where η (t) = − Z3 + dn , modifying the above Equation (11) to:

(
z1 = s
Rt (12)
z2 = − p2 0 |s|1+2ε sign(s) + η (t).

z2
Let γ1 = z1 , γ2 = p1 , modifying the above Equation (12) to:
 .  
 γ1 = p1 γ2 − γ11+ε · sign(γ1 )
. (13)
 γ. = − p2 γ1+2ε · sign(γ ) + η (t)
2 p 1 1 1 p1 .

For ease of calculation, obtain:

1+ ε

 η 1 = −γ1 sign(γ1 ) + γ2



 1+2ε
 η 2 = −γ21+ε sign(γ2 )


1+2ε (14)
1+2ε 1+ ε



 η 3 = − γ 1 sign ( γ 1 ) + γ 2 sign(γ2 )


 1
η 4 = −η 1 + γ21+ε sign(γ2 ).


By Lemma 2 and 0 < (1 + 2ε)/(1 + ε) < 1, obtain:

−ε 1+2ε
η 3 ≤ 2 1+ ε | η 1 | 1+ ε . (15)

By Lemma 4, we can obtain:

1 −ε
 
| η 4 | = ξ | η 1 | 1+ ε + | η 1 | × | z 2 | 1+ ε , (16)
 −1−2ε 
1
where ξ = 1+ ε 2
1+ ε + 2 .

Designing the Lyapunov function as follows:


 V (γ1 , γ2 ) = P1 (γ1 , γ2 ) + P2 (γ2 )

  1
2
P1 (γ1 , γ2 ) = 12 γ1 − |γ2 | 1+ε × sign(γ2 ) (17)

 2
P2 (γ2 ) = 1+ 2 | γ2 |
ε 1+ ε .


Derivative for V (γ1 , γ2 ), one has

. . .
V ( γ1 , γ2 ) = P1 ( γ1 , γ2 ) + P2 ( γ2 ) ,
(10) (10) (10)
. ∂P2 (γ2 ) .
P2 ( γ2 ) = ∂γ2 γ2 (10) (18)
(10)
2+ ε 1− ε .
p2 ∂P2 (η 2 ) η (t)
≤ −2|η 2 | 1+2ε − p1 | η 2 |
1+2ε sign ( η ) η
2 3 + ∂η 2 p1 .

By Lemma 3 and (15),

p2 1− ε p2 1− ε −ε 1+2ε
p1 | η 2 |
1+2ε × sign(η 2 )η 3 ≤ p1 | η 2 |
1+2ε 2 1+ε | η | 1+ε
1
2+ ε 2+ ε
(19)
≤ 12 |η 2 | 1+2ε + ε1 |η 1 | 1+ε ,

where ε1 > 0. Combining the above two equations:

.
. 3 2+ ε 2+ ε ∂P2 (η 2 ) η (t)
P2 ( η 2 ) ≤ − |η 2 | 1+2ε + ε1 |η 1 | 1+ε + . (20)
(10) 2 ∂η 2 p1
Machines 2024, 12, 32 7 of 13

Similarly,
.
. 1 2+ ε
 ε
 2+ ε ∂P1 (η 1 , η 2 ) η (t)
P1 ( η 1 , η 2 ) ≤ |η 2 | 1+2ε + ε2 + ε3 − p1 2 1+ε |η 1 | 1+ε + , (21)
(10) 2 ∂η 2 p1

where ε2 > 0, ε3 > 0. Combining the above three equations:

. 2+ ε
  2+ ε ∂V (γ , γ )
≤ −|η 2 | 1+2ε + ε1 + ε2 + ε3 − p1 2 1+ε |η 1 | 1+ε + 1 1 2 .
ε
V ( γ1 , γ2 ) (22)
(10) ∂γ2
−ε
Let p1 ≥ 2 1+ε (ε1 + ε2 + ε3 + 1). Substituting p1 into the above equation:
.
. ∂V (γ , γ ) η (t)
V ( γ1 , γ2 ) ≤ − H ( γ1 , γ2 ) + 1 1 2 . (23)
(10) ∂γ2 p1
2+ ε 2+ ε
Let α is a positive constant, H (γ1 , γ2 ) = |η 1 | 1+ε + |η 2 | 1+2ε , by Assumption 1:

. ∂V1 (γ1 , γ2 ) µ1 + µ2
V ( γ1 , γ2 ) ≤ − H ( γ1 , γ2 ) + . (24)
(10) ∂γ2 p1

Define:
(   12++2εε )
2+ ε 2+ ε α ( µ1 + µ2 )
D1 = ( γ1 , γ2 ) : | η 1 | 1+ ε + |η 2 | 1+2ε ≤ , (25)
p1 (1 − σ )

where σ is a very small constant.

If (η 1 , η 2 ) ∈
/ D1 , one has:
  12++2εε
2+ ε 2+ ε α ( µ1 + µ2
|η 1 | 1+ε + |η 2 | 1+2ε ≥ . (26)
p1 (1 − σ )

∂V1 (γ1 ,γ2 ) 1− ε

By Definition 1, we get ∂γ2 and H 2+ε (γ1 , γ2 ) are homogeneous of degree 1 − ε
pertaining to the dilation weight (1, 1 + ε).
By Lemma 1, one has:

∂V1 (η 1 , η 2 ) 1− ε
≤ αH 2+ε (η 1 , η 2 ). (27)
∂η 2

Substituting the above Equation (27) into (24), we get:

.
V ( γ1 , γ2 ) < −ηH (γ1 , γ2 ) < 0. (28)
(10)

To ensure that the system can exist at any initial time with (η 1 (0), η 2 (0)) ∈ D2 after
time T, such that

(η 1 (t), η 2 (t)) ∈ D2 , ∀t ≥ T

2
  2 
α(µ1 +µ2 ) 1+2ε
D2 = (γ1 , γ2 ) : V (γ1 , γ2 ) ≤ K, K = β 2 + ε
p (1− σ )
⊃ D1 .
1

2+ ε
By Definition 1, we get V ε (γ1 , γ2 ) and H (γ1 , γ2 ) are homogeneous of degree 2 + ε
pertaining to the dilation weight (1, 1 + ε).
By Lemma 1, one has
2+ ε
  1+22ε ! 2
2+ ε 2 α ( µ1 + µ2 ) 2+ ε
V 2 (γ1 , γ2 ) ≤ βH (γ1 , γ2 ) ≤ β 2+ ε =K 2 . (29)
p1 (1 − σ )
Machines 2024, 12, 32 8 of 13

From the above, it is known that there exists a time T, such that ∀t ≥ T, V (γ1 , γ2 ) ≥ K.
If t ≥ T,one has
 1
2
1
P1 (γ1 , γ2 ) = 2 γ1 − |γ2 | 1+ε × sign(γ2 ) ≤ V (γ1 , γ2 ) ≤ K,
2
(30)
1+ ε
P2 (γ2 ) = 2 | γ2 |
1+ ε ≤ V (γ1 , γ2 ) ≤ K.
z2
By γ1 = z1 , γ2 = p1 , one has

1 1
|z1 | ≤ |γ2 | 1+ε + γ1 − |γ2 | 1+ε sign(γ2 )
1 1 1
1 α(µ1 +µ2 ) 1+2ε 1 1 α(µ1 +µ2 ) 1+2ε
2 2
≤ β 2+ ε ( 1+ ε) ( p1 (1− σ )
) + 2 2 β 2+ ε ( p1 (1− σ )
) , (31)
1+ ε 1+ ε
1 12+ ε
+ε ( 2 ) 2 α ( µ1 + µ2 ) 1+2ε
| z2 | ≤ p1 β 1+ ε ( p1 (1− σ )
) .

From the above two equations, it can be concluded that, within a finite time, z1 and z2
will converge to an infinitesimally small range.

4. Experimental Analysis
This paper utilized the MC4000 motion capture camera and system provided by
Chingmu Technology, and established a quadcopter formation experimental platform, as
shown in Figure 3, to validate the designed composite formation controller. The overall
length of the quadcopter formation platform is 5 m, width is 4 m and height is 2.3 m.
The experimental quadcopter is a small-scale drone with the K210 chip as the main con-
troller, autonomously developed by the laboratory, as illustrated in Figure 4. Two sets of
experiments were conducted. The first set involved anti-disturbance experiments with
wind disturbances for the followers. The composite controller was compared with the
ISTSMC. The second set involved a triangular formation with one leader and two followers,
Machines 2024, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 15
conducting formation flight experiments along straight lines and circles. The composite
controller was compared with the traditional sliding mode formation controller.

Figure3.3. Formation
Figure Formationexperiment
experimentplatform.
platform.
Machines 2024, 12, 32 9 of 13
Figure 3. Formation experiment platform.

Figure 4. The quadcopter with the K210 chip as the main controller.
controller.

The specific
specific model
modelparameters
parametersofofthe
thequadrotor
quadrotorininFigure 4 are
Figure shown
4 are in in
shown Table 1 below.
Table 1 be-
low.
Table 1. Model parameters of the quadrotor.
Table 1. Model parameters of the quadrotor.
Parameters Meaning Parameters
ParametersQuadrotor
Meaningmass Parameters
0.04 kg
Gravitational
Quadrotor massacceleration 0.04 Kg9.8 m/s2
x-axis moment of inertia 1.532 × 10−4 kg · m2
Gravitational
y-axisacceleration
moment of inertia 9.81.532
m /× s2 10−4 kg · m2
−4 2 · m2
z-axis moment
x-axis moment of inertiaof inertia
104 ×kg10 mkg
1.532  3.472
Quadcopter wheelbase 0.12 m
y-axis moment of inertia 1.532  10 kg  m 2
4

In this
z-axis paper,of
moment the experiments set the yaw 3.472
inertia of the leader
 104and
kgthe
 mfollowers
2 to be the
same, so there is no need to carry out the yaw angle control during the formation flight, and
Quadcopter
at the same time,wheelbase 0.12 m and observer parameters
the two channels x, y have the same controller
due to the structure of the quadrotor, as shown in Table 2 below.
In this paper, the experiments set the yaw of the leader and the followers to be the
Table 2.soController
same, there is no
andneed to carry
observer out the yaw angle control during the formation flight,
parameters.
and at the same time, the two channels x, y have the same controller and observer param-
Controller/Observer
eters due to the structure of the quadrotor, as shown in Table Parameters
2 below.
SMC c = 1, k = 5
ISTSMC c = 1, p1 = 8, p2 = 0.1, ε = −0.49
β1 = 3ω, β2 = 3ω 2 , β3 = ω 3
FTESO ω = 70, α = −2/9

In SMC and ISTSMC parameters, c determines the speed of convergence of the sliding
mode. The larger c is, the faster the convergence is, but if c is too large, it can lead to system
instability. In SMC, k is the switching function gain, which affects the vibration amplitude
of the system. In ISTSMC, the larger p1 is, the smaller the overshoot of the system is; p2
reduces the steady state error of the system; ε affects the vibration and steady state error of
the system. In FTESO, the larger ω is, the better the response performance of the observer,
but if ω is too large, it increases the observation error; α affects the convergence speed of
the observer.
To validate the effectiveness of the observer, we positioned the follower to hover
directly above the origin at a height of 0.3 m. Additionally, we placed a fan along the x-axis,
0.5 m away from the origin, and allowed it to oscillate left and right within the range of
(−80◦ , 80◦ ), simulating gusty wind disturbance with a period of 4 s. The experimental
results are shown in Figure 5 below.
 performance of the observer, but if ω is too large, it increases the observation error; α
affects the convergence speed of the observer.
To validate the effectiveness of the observer, we positioned the follower to hover di-
rectly above the origin at a height of 0.3 m. Additionally, we placed a fan along the x-axis,
0.5 m away from the origin, and allowed it to oscillate left and right within the range of
Machines 2024, 12, 32 10 of 13
(−80°, 80°), simulating gusty wind disturbance with a period of 4 s. The experimental re-
sults are shown in Figure 5 below.

Figure 5.
Figure 5. Results
Resultsofof
thethe
wind disturbance
wind resistance
disturbance experiment.
resistance a(1) Position
experiment. coordinate
a(1) Position x; a(2) x;
coordinate
Position coordinate y; a(3) X channel control output; a(4) Y channel control output;
a(2) Position coordinate y; a(3) X channel control output; a(4) Y channel control output;a(5) X channel
a(5) X
observation disturbance; a(6) Y channel observation disturbance.
channel observation disturbance; a(6) Y channel observation disturbance.

In Figure 5a(1), the follower without the observer, under gusty wind disturbance,
exhibited an average maximum deviation of approximately 0.3 m in the x-axis direction. In
contrast, the follower with the observer experienced an average maximum deviation of
only 0.08 m and its convergence to a steady state was faster by about 2 s. In Figure 5a(2),
since the y-axis was not subjected to significant wind disturbances and the focus was
mainly on the x-axis, upon comparison, it was observed that the follower with the observer
reduced tracking error by approximately 0.02 m. Figure 5a(3) is the x-axis controller
output comparison plot, at the fourth, eighth and twelfth seconds, we obviously found
that the composite controller compensates the gust disturbance, which effectively reduces
the position offset in the x-direction in Figure 5a(1), and improves the controller’s anti-
disturbance performance. Figure 5a(4) is the y-axis controller output comparison plot.
Figure 5a(5),a(6) show the estimated disturbances for the x, y channels, respectively, and it
can be found that the observer accurately observes the external gust disturbance.
To validate the effectiveness of the composite formation controller, we set λdψ1 , λdψ2 ,
ψ L = 0, λdx1 = −0.4 m, λdy1 = −0.4 m, λdx2 = −0.4 m, λdy2 = 0.4 m. The formation flight was
maintained at a height of 0.3 m, and the leader used a cascade double-loop PID control.
Two desired trajectories were given: a 1 m straight-line trajectory in the positive x-axis
direction starting from the origin and a circular trajectory with a radius of 0.3 m centered at
the origin.
The root cause of chattering in conventional sliding mode control is the presence of
discontinuous switching function. To smooth the switching term, the improved super-
twisted sliding mode control proposed in this paper replaced the discontinuous switching
function with homogeneous function and integral function. The homogeneous function
ensures the continuity of the control signal as the switching term approaches zero. The
integral function effectively reduces the chattering of the control quantity by integrating
 discontinuous switching function. To smooth the switching term, the improved
twisted sliding mode control proposed in this paper replaced the discontinuous sw
function with homogeneous function and integral function. The homogeneous fu
ensures the continuity of the control signal as the switching term approaches ze
Machines 2024, 12, 32 11 of 13
integral function effectively reduces the chattering of the control quantity by inte
the control signal. In addition, ISTSMC replaced the integral function’s discont
switching
the control function
signal. In with a non-smooth
addition, ISTSMC replacedtermthe
to integral
reduce function’s
the vibration in the control,
discontinuous
improving the overall
switching function with a performance
non-smooth term oftothe system.
reduce The CFC
the vibration was
in the compared
control, furtherwith th
improving the overall performance of the system. The CFC was
and the experimental results are shown in Figures 6 and 7 below. compared with the SMC,
and the experimental results are shown in Figures 6 and 7 below.

Figure 6. Results of the formation flight along a straight trajectory. a(1) Position coordinate x of
followers; a(2) Position coordinate y of followers; b(1) Position coordinate x of followers; b(2) Position
coordinate y of followers; c(1) Position coordinate x of leader; c(2) Position coordinate y of leader.
Figure 6a(1),a(2) and Figure 7a(1),a(2) show the flight trajectories of the two followers
using SMC; Figure 6b(1),b(2) and Figure 7b(1),b(2) are the flight trajectories of the two
followers using CFC; Figure 6c(1),c(2) and Figure 7c(1),c(2) are flight trajectories of the
leader. In the formation flight along a straight trajectory, the average vibration amplitude
of the two followers using SMC is around 0.07 m, while the average vibration amplitude of
the two followers using CFC is around 0.02 m, which is reduced by 71.4%. In the formation
flight along a circular trajectory, the average vibration amplitude of the two followers using
SMC is around 0.06 m, while the average vibration amplitude of the two followers using
CFC is around 0.025 m, which is reduced by 58.3%. In addition, the trajectories of the two
followers using CFC are smoother and more accurate, which improves the stability and
accuracy of the formation flight. Observing the experimental results in Figures 6 and 7, it
can be seen that whether in a straight-line or circular trajectory, the composite formation
controller proposed in this paper effectively reduces the sliding mode chattering.
Machines 2024, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 15

Figure 6. Results of the formation flight along a straight trajectory. a(1) Position coordinate x of
followers; a(2) Position coordinate y of followers; b(1) Position coordinate x of followers; b(2) Posi-
Machines 2024, 12, 32 12 of 13
tion coordinate y of followers; c(1) Position coordinate x of leader; c(2) Position coordinate y of
leader.

Resultsofof
Figure7.7.Results
Figure the
the formation
formation flight
flight along
along a circular
a circular trajectory.
trajectory. a(1) a(1) Position
Position coordinate
coordinate x of x of
followers;a(2)
followers; Position coordinate
a(2)Position coordinate yy of
of followers; b(1)Position
followers;b(1) Positioncoordinate
coordinatex xofoffollowers; b(2)
followers; b(2)Position
Posi-
coordinate
tion y ofyfollowers;
coordinate of followers; Position
c(1) c(1) coordinate
Position x of xleader;
coordinate Position
c(2) c(2)
of leader; coordinate
Position y of yleader.
coordinate of
leader.
5. Conclusions
This paper
Figures proposes
6a(1),a(2) anda7a(1),a(2)
leader–follower
show the composite formationofcontrol
flight trajectories the twostrategy
followersforusing
quad-
copterFigures
SMC; UAV systems.
6b(1),b(2)Theandcontroller
7b(1),b(2)integrates an improved
are the flight trajectoriessuper-twisted sliding using
of the two followers mode
controller
CFC; (ISTSMC)
Figures and
6c(1),c(2) a finite-time
and 7c(1),c(2) extended
are flight state observer
trajectories of (FTESO),
the leader.effectively reducing
In the formation
vibration in sliding mode control and enhancing the controller’s disturbance
flight along a straight trajectory, the average vibration amplitude of the two followers us- resistance.
Experimental
ing SMC is around results validate
0.07 m, whilethe the
effectiveness of the composite
average vibration amplitudeformation
of the two controller
followers in
using CFC is around 0.02 m, which is reduced by 71.4%. In the formation flight along of
reducing chattering and resisting disturbances and improve the stability and accuracy a
formation
circular flight. the average vibration amplitude of the two followers using SMC is
trajectory,
around 0.06 m, while the average vibration amplitude of the two followers using CFC is
Author Contributions: X.Z., resources, conceptualization, methodology, project administration; S.H.,
around 0.025 m, which is reduced by 58.3%. In addition, the trajectories of the two follow-
methodology, data curation, writing—review and editing, supervision; Y.Y., methodology, validation,
ers using CFC are smoother and more accurate, which improves the stability and accuracy
writing—original draft preparation, visualization, software; Z.S., supervision, project administration,
of the formation
funding acquisition,flight. Observingand
writing—review theediting.
experimental results
All authors have in Figures
read 6 and
and agreed 7, itpublished
to the can be
seen that whether in a
version of the manuscript. straight-line or circular trajectory, the composite formation control-
ler proposed in this paper effectively reduces the sliding mode chattering.
Funding: This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No.
61903186) and the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province, China (Grant No. BK20190665).
5. Conclusions
DataThis
Availability proposes aData
paper Statement: are contained within
leader–follower the article.
composite formation control strategy for
quadcopter UAV systems.
Conflicts of Interest: Thedeclare
The authors controller integrates
no conflicts an improved super-twisted sliding
of interest.
mode controller (ISTSMC) and a finite-time extended state observer (FTESO), effectively
References
1. Mehmood, Y.; Aslam, J.; Ullah, N.; Chowdhury, M.S.; Techato, K.; Alzaed, A.N. Adaptive robust trajectory tracking control of
multiple quad-rotor UAVs with parametric uncertainties and disturbances. Sensors 2021, 21, 2401. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. Askari, A.; Mortazavi, M.; Talebi, H.A. UAV formation control via the virtual structure approach. J. Aerosp. Eng. 2015,
28, 04014047. [CrossRef]
Machines 2024, 12, 32 13 of 13

3. Bennet, D.J.; MacInnes, C.R.; Suzuki, M.; Uchiyama, K. Autonomous three-dimensional formation flight for a swarm of unmanned
aerial vehicles. J. Guid. Control. Dyn. 2011, 34, 1899–1908. [CrossRef]
4. Zheng, D.; Zhang, H.; Andrew Zhang, J.; Li, Y. Consensus of the second-order multi-agent systems under asynchronous switching
with a controller fault. Int. J. Control. Autom. Syst. 2019, 17, 136–144. [CrossRef]
5. Ali, Z.A.; Israr, A.; Alkhammash, E.H.; Hadjouni, M. A leader-follower formation control of multi-UAVs via an adaptive hybrid
controller. Complexity 2021, 2021, 9231636. [CrossRef]
6. Cao, L.; Liu, G.P.; Zhang, D.W. A leader-follower formation strategy for networked multi-agent systems based on the PI predictive
control method. In Proceedings of the 2021 40th Chinese Control Conference (CCC), Shanghai, China, 26–28 July 2021; pp. 4763–4768.
7. Jasim, W.; Gu, D. Leader-follower formation suboptimal control for quadrotors. Int. J. Syst. Control. Commun. 2020, 11, 25–51.
[CrossRef]
8. Rosa, M.R. Adaptive synchronization for heterogeneous multi-agent systems with switching topologies. Machines 2018, 6, 7.
[CrossRef]
9. Zhang, N.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, R. Attitude control of spacecraft formation flying based on nonsingular fast terminal sliding mode
control with adaptive fuzzy tuning technique. In Proceedings of the 2021 40th Chinese Control Conference (CCC), Shanghai,
China, 26–28 July 2021; pp. 112–117.
10. Tian, L.; Li, Q.; Hua, Y.; Dong, X.; Li, Q.; Ren, Z. Finite-time time-varying group formation tracking for second-order multiagent
systems by continuous integral sliding mode. In Proceedings of the 2020 Chinese Control and Decision Conference (CCDC),
Hefei, China, 22–24 August 2020; pp. 3790–3795.
11. Gao, Z.; Guo, G. Fixed-time sliding mode formation control of AUVs based on a disturbance observer. IEEE/CAA J. Autom. Sin.
2020, 7, 539–545. [CrossRef]
12. Mercado, D.A.; Castro, R.; Lozano, R. Quadrotors flight formation control using a leader-follower approach. In Proceedings of
the 2013 European Control Conference (ECC), Zurich, Switzerland, 17–19 July 2013; pp. 3858–3863.
13. Nguyen, N.P.; Park, D.; Ngoc, D.N.; Xuan-Mung, N.; Huynh, T.T.; Nguyen, T.N.; Hong, S.K. Quadrotor formation control via
terminal sliding mode approach: Theory and experiment results. Drones 2022, 6, 172. [CrossRef]
14. Zhang, H.; Du, M.; Bu, W. Sliding mode controller with RBF neural network for manipulator trajectory tracking. IAENG-Ternational
J. Appl. Math. 2015, 45, 334–342.
15. Truong, T.N.; Vo, A.T.; Kang, H.J. A model-free terminal sliding mode control for robots: Achieving fixed-time prescribed
performance and convergence. ISA Trans. 2023. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
16. Wu, W.; Xin, J.; Tang, Y. Vision-based trajectory tracking control of quadrotors using super twisting sliding mode control.
Cyber-Phys. Syst. 2020, 6, 207–230. [CrossRef]
17. Yang, Z.J. Adaptive robust output feedback control for attitude tracking of quadrotor unmanned aerial vehicles. Int. J. Adapt.
Control. Signal Process. 2021, 35, 2075–2093. [CrossRef]
18. Yan, Y.; Wang, X.F.; Marshall, B.J.; Liu, C.; Yang, J.; Chen, W.H. Surviving disturbances: A predictive control framework with
guaranteed safety. Automatica 2023, 158, 111238. [CrossRef]
19. Ali, N.; Tawiah, I.; Zhang, W. Finite-time extended state observer based nonsingular fast terminal sliding mode control of
au-tonomous underwater vehicles. Ocean. Eng. 2020, 218, 108179. [CrossRef]
20. Li, W.; Qin, K.; Chen, B.; Lin, B.; Shi, M. Passivity-based distributed tracking control of uncertain agents via a neural network
combined with UDE. Neurocomputing 2021, 449, 342–356. [CrossRef]
21. Li, W.; Qin, K.; Li, G.; Shi, M.; Zhang, X. Robust bipartite tracking consensus of multi-agent systems via neural network combined
with extended high-gain observer. ISA Trans. 2023, 136, 31–45. [CrossRef]
22. Shen, Y.; Xiao, X. Semi-global finite-time observers for nonlinear systems. Automatica 2008, 44, 3152–3156. [CrossRef]
23. Hou, Q.; Ding, S.; Yu, X.; Mei, K. A super-twisting-like fractional controller for SPMSM drive system. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.
2021, 69, 9376–9384. [CrossRef]
24. Qian, C.; Li, J. Global output feedback stabilization of upper-triangular nonlinear systems using a homogeneous domination
approach. Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control. IFAC-Affil. J. 2006, 16, 441–463. [CrossRef]
25. Ding, S.; Park, J.H.; Chen, C.C. Second-order sliding mode controller design with output constraint. Automatica 2020, 112, 108704.
[CrossRef]
26. Mei, K.; Ding, S. HOSM controller design with asymmetric output constraints. Sci. China Inf. Sci. 2022, 65, 189202. [CrossRef]
27. Razmjooei, H.; Shafiei, M.H. A new approach to design a finite-time extended state observer: Uncertain robotic manipulators
application. Int. J. Robust Nonlinear Control. 2021, 31, 1288–1302. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.