Original Paper

Measurement and Control

2024, Vol. 57(1) 90–100
Research on active disturbance Ó The Author(s) 2023
Article reuse guidelines:
rejection control strategy of electric sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/00202940231192986

power steering system under extreme journals.sagepub.com/home/mac

working conditions

Zhu’An Zheng1 and JinCheng Wei1

Abstract
In response to the influence of motor interference, damping, friction, and other uncertain factors on the operation of
electric power steering systems under extreme working conditions, this study proposes a control strategy for electric
power steering systems based on an active disturbance rejection algorithm. In ADRC, the fastest tracking differentiator
is used to arrange the transition process for the target signal, and the extended state observer compensates for the total
disturbance in the system. Phase compensation has been performed on the monitoring torque by using the torque differ-
entiation method. The Simulink/Carsim simulation results show that ADRC has significantly improved anti-disturbance
performance compared to PID and fuzzy PID. When using ADRC, the tracking accuracy of the assisted current is
enhanced by 45.8%–75.8%, and the current adjustment time is reduced by 35.6%–61.7%. After phase compensation, the
monitoring torque overshoot is reduced by 83.3%. Therefore, the proposed control strategy improves EPS’s robustness
and steering feel.

Keywords
Active disturbance rejection control, electric power steering system, phase compensation, robust control, linear system

Date received: 14 October 2022; accepted: 9 July 2023

Introduction performance. Liu designed power compensation control

Electric Power Steering system (EPS) has been widely
used in passenger cars.1 Compared to hydraulic power
steering systems, EPS has the advantages of good steer-
ing following performance and low energy consumption.2
The EPS control strategy directly determines the effec-
tiveness of assistance. However, many uncertain factors
in the actual driving process of the vehicle, such as road
interference, motor dead zone, system friction, and other
nonlinear factors, significantly increase the difficulty of
control. Traditional PID control algorithm is difficult to
meet the control requirements, so a controller that can
quickly adapt to uncertain interference is needed for
closed-loop control of EPS.
The core part of the EPS control strategy is the con-
trol of the assist motor. Currently, research on EPS con-
trol strategy mainly focuses on improving the control
accuracy of the assist motor. To improve the tracking
effect of assist torque, Murilo et al. Andre proposed an
EPS control strategy based on parameterized model pre-
dictive control (MPC).3 The MPC algorithm provided
lower computational complexity, and the results showed
that the control strategy had good torque tracking
and damping control strategies for the changes in control
methods of heavy-duty vehicle EPS at different driving
speeds, providing a theoretical basis for the development
of heavy-duty vehicle EPS systems.4 Whether using
model predictive control or compensation control, the
purpose is to improve the tracking effect of the assisted
current. However, the target current is the most direct
factor affecting the assisted current’s control effect in
EPS. In the upper control strategy of EPS, the target cur-
rent is jointly determined by the vehicle speed and moni-
toring torque. Considering the influence of damping,
friction, and other factors on the steering column, moni-
toring torque values often exhibit significant fluctuations
1
School of Automotive Engineering, Yancheng Institute of Technology,
Yancheng, Jiangsu, China
Corresponding author:
JinCheng Wei, Yancheng Institute of Technology, No. 1, Hope Avenue
Middle Road, Tinghu District, Yancheng City, Jiangsu Province 224051,
China.
Email: 1453307071@qq.com

Creative Commons CC BY: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without
further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/
open-access-at-sage).
Zheng and Wei
and phase lag. Therefore, phase lead compensation is
required for the monitoring torque.
In practical engineering, most EPS motor control
still uses PID controllers. PID controllers have simple
control principles and reliable control effects, which are
widely used in engineering.5 Although traditional PID
controllers are easy to adjust, their anti-disturbance
ability is not ideal. To improve the adaptability of PID
controllers, some scholars have combined fuzzy control
theory with PID algorithms to design a fuzzy PID con-
troller that can automatically modify PID control para-
meters, which to some extent, improves the robustness
of the PID controller.6 Although the fuzzy PID control-
ler can adjust the control gain in real time based on
errors and the rate of error change, fuzzy rules are usu-
ally designed based on engineers’ experience, and their
parameter variation range is limited, so their suppres-
sion effect on uncertain disturbances is not outstanding.
When there are uncertain disturbances in the system,
the assisted current is prone to fluctuations due to dis-
turbance, and the tracking performance of the current
will also decrease. Therefore, we have conducted some
research on anti-disturbance control of the system.
Disturbance suppression methods are usually
divided into two categories: one is passive anti-
disturbance control, including robust control, and slid-
ing mode control. Jiang7 takes the EPS of an electric
forklift as the research object and proposes a robust
controller optimized by a genetic algorithm. The
designed controller has an obvious suppression effect
on external disturbance.7 Since EPS is vulnerable to the
road and parameter disturbance, Lu8 proposed an
adaptive fuzzy sliding film control method. The simula-
tion results show that the designed fuzzy sliding film
controller is more stable than the sliding mode control
and effectively reduces the disturbance caused by time-
varying parameters.8 Robust controller design usually
considers the worst case of model uncertainty, and its
dynamic response will not be particularly ideal.
Considering that the response of the assist motor in
EPS should be fast and accurate, robust control is diffi-
cult to meet the control requirements of EPS.9 The slid-
ing mode controller also has a good suppression effect
on disturbances. However, the discontinuous switching
of the sliding mode controller can easily cause system
chattering. For the assist motor, the oscillation of the
output torque will affect the driver’s sense of control.
Another type of method is active anti-disturbance con-
trol. It is mainly achieved through disturbance observer
(DOB), which can estimate and compensate for distur-
bances without affecting the system’s dynamic
response. This type of method has obvious advantages
in suppressing system disturbances. Therefore, active
anti-disturbance control is more suitable to balance the
dynamic response performance and anti-disturbance
performance of EPS.
Compared with the traditional DOB control, the
active disturbance rejection control (ADRC) inherits
the characteristics of error elimination in PID control
91
and arranges a transition process for the target signal.10
Using the fastest tracking differentiator can effectively
filter the noise in the target signal and improve the sys-
tem control accuracy. Moreover, the extended state
observer in ADRC can compensate for the errors and
disturbances in the system modeling process. It can also
estimate the disturbances effectively without relying on
the accurate system model. Na designed a target torque
algorithm based on steering wheel angle and angular
velocity to reduce the impact of low-frequency distur-
bances on steering torque and used an active distur-
bance rejection controller to control motor torque. The
simulation results show that the control method has a
better control effect on torque stability than PI con-
trol.11 To reduce disturbances caused by EPS modeling
errors and nonlinear factors, Leng et al. designed a
steering angle controller based on the active distur-
bance rejection algorithm, which effectively improves
the tracking accuracy of the steering angle by using
feedforward compensation and nonlinear state feed-
back law.12 The above scholars have applied ADRC to
the control strategy of EPS, and their research provides
a theoretical basis for the feasibility of active distur-
bance rejection algorithms in EPS.
In summary, existing research on active anti-
disturbance control of EPS could be better. To simulta-
neously meet the speed, accuracy, and robustness
requirements of EPS, this study combines ADRC with
the control of the assist motor in EPS. It proposes an
assisted current control method based on ADRC. A
second-order ADRC controller is designed, which
includes a discrete fastest-tracking Differentiator, a lin-
ear error feedback control rate, and an extended state
observer. At the same time, to improve the target cur-
rent’s accuracy, this study uses the torque differentia-
tion method for phase compensation of the monitoring
torque. Finally, this article verifies the effectiveness of
the designed control strategy through Simulink/Carsim
joint simulation.
EPS working principle and composition
The EPS consists of an assist motor, a reduction
mechanism, and ECU. The working principle and com-
position are shown in Figure 1. The torque sensor
detects the torque transmitted by the steering wheel and
sends the monitoring torque signal to the ECU. Then,
the target assisted current is calculated from the power
assist characteristic curve. After the ECU controls the
target current, the assist motor outputs the correspond-
ing assisted torque to assist the driver in steering.13
Modeling of electric power steering
system
Steering wheel and steering column
Take the steering wheel and steering column as a whole to
establish the dynamic equation as shown in formula (1):
92 Measurement and Control 57(1)

:: : Mz : Ts Ta
Mr xr + Br xr + Ff + sgn( xr ) = + ð4Þ
Steering s1 rp rp
Steering
wheel
column
torque Speed
The steering resistance torque is mainly composed of
Torque Monitoring
ECU the self-returning torque and the internal friction
sensor torque
resistance of the steering system.15 The self-returning
Steering torque has two main factors: the caster angle and the
Clutch control
column kingpin inclination angle.
Reducer Motor Current EPS self-returning torque consists of lateral self-
control
returning torque and vertical self-returning torque:
Clutch Feedback current
Steering
Mz = Ml + Mv ð5Þ
gear

The lateral self-returning torque caused by the lateral

Rack force around the kingpin is shown in formula (6):
Wheels

Ml = h1 Fy (eh + et ) cos a cos b ð6Þ

Figure 1. Working principle and composition of EPS.

The vertical self-returning torque caused by the vertical

Td  Ts = Jc €
uc + Bc u_ c ð1Þ force around the kingpin is shown in formula (7):

The monitoring torque can be expressed as the product
of the difference in rotation angle and the stiffness of
the torsion bar, and the monitoring torque equation
can be obtained as shown in formula (2):
Ts = Ks (uc  ue ) ð2Þ
Assuming that the steering shaft and the steering gear
pinion are rigidly connected, the output shaft angle can
also be regarded as the pinion angle:
xr
ue = ð3Þ
rp
Where: Td is the input torque of the steering wheel; Ts is
the monitoring torque; uc is the steering wheel angle; Jc is
the moment of inertia of the steering wheel and steering
shaft; Bc is the damping coefficient of the steering wheel
and steering shaft; Ks is the stiffness of the torsion bar of
the torque sensor; ue is the steering output shaft angle; xr
is rack displacement; rp is the pinion radius.
Rack and pinion steering gear and return torque
The torque acting on the steering wheel by the driver is
transmitted to the rack and pinion steering gear
through the steering column.14 The assist torque
provided by the assist motor also acts on the steering
gear to overcome the steering resistance torque. This
study considers the rack and pinion steering gear and
the tire as a whole. After the force analysis, the balance
equation is obtained as shown in formula (4):
d
Mv = h Fz d1 sin 2b ð7Þ
180 1
Where: Mr is the equivalent mass of rack and tire; Ff is
the friction resistance of the steering system; Mz is the
self-righting moment; s1 is the length of the steering
knuckle arm; Br is the equivalent damping coefficient of
gear and tire; Ml is the lateral self-returning torque; a is
the caster angle of kingpin; b is the kingpin inclination
angle; eh is the pneumatic trail; et is the caster moment
arm; h1 is the reverse transmission efficiency of the
steering system; Mv is the vertical self-returning torque;
d1 is the distance from kingpin center to the wheel; Fz is
the vertical force acting on the wheel; Fy is the lateral
force acting on the wheel; d is the front wheel deflection
angle.
Assist motor
The assist motor adopts a permanent magnet brushless
DC motor. It can be equivalent to a series structure
composed of inductance, resistance, and controlled
source when analyzing its circuit. The equivalent model
is shown in Figure 2.
The equivalent controlled source is the motor back
electromotive force,16 which is proportional to the
motor speed. According to the equivalent model, the
motor loop equation can be obtained in formula (8):
U = RI + LI_ + ke u_ m ð8Þ
The dynamic model can be established by combining
the mechanical part of the assist motor, as shown in
formula (9):
Zheng and Wei 93

Torque Speed Upper level Lower level

control control
phase strategy strategy
compensation

I ADRC
PWM
V0 Target controller
current
Current Voltage
Vmax
Td Assisted
Current sensor
Power assist motor
characteristic curve
Assisted
torque

Figure 2. Equivalent model of the assist motor. Figure 3. EPS control principle.

Ta :: :
Tm = + Jm um + Bm um ð9Þ
G

The electromagnetic torque of the permanent magnet

DC motor is proportional to the current, and formula
(10) can be obtained:

T m = ka I ð10Þ

The assist torque Ta acting on the steering shaft after

being increased by the reducer can be calculated accord-
ing to formula (11):

Ta = Gkm (um  Gue ) ð11Þ

Figure 4. Power assist characteristic curve.

Where: U is the motor terminal voltage; R is the equiva-

lent resistance of the motor; I is motor armature current;
L is the equivalent inductance of motor armature; ke is
the back EMF coefficient; um is the motor angle; G is the
transmission ratio of the reducer; ka is the electromag-
netic torque constant of the motor; Ta is the assisted tor-
que; Tm is the electromagnetic torque; Jm is the rotational
inertia of the motor; Bm is the motor damping.
Electric power steering control strategy
EPS control principle
EPS is a servo system with the basic requirement of
quickly, accurately, and stably tracking the target cur-
rent I0. The basic control principle of EPS is shown in
Figure 3.
After the monitoring torque signal is phase compen-
sated, the corresponding target assisted current is calcu-
lated from the power assist characteristic curve, and the
target current of the motor is tracked and controlled by
the ADRC controller. Then, the analog voltage obtained
by the pulse width modulation (PWM) method is used
as the motor input. The actual assisted current of the
motor is fed back from the current sensor to the
controller for closed-loop control. Finally, the assisted
torque is output by the assist motor.
EPS power assist characteristic curve
EPS power assist characteristic curve can directly reflect
the relationship between steering wheel torque and tar-
get assisted current under different vehicle speeds. The
linear power curve adopted in this paper is shown in
Figure 4.
The curve has the following characteristics:
(1) The curve slope decreases with the increase in
vehicle speed;
(2) When the steering wheel torque is in the range of
[21, 1] Nm, the assisted current is zero;
(3) When the steering wheel torque exceeds 7 N/m,
the assisted current reaches the maximum value
and does not change.
Active disturbance rejection controller
The control principle of the active disturbance rejection
controller designed in this article is shown in Figure 5.
94 Measurement and Control 57(1)

Input
v1 + e1
I1 + + voltage Controlled
TD LESF 1/b0 PWM
v2 - + e2 object
- +
-
z2 trace z3 estimated b0
z1 trace input total
input Disturbance
differential disturbance

Target
current I0
ESO I Output current

Figure 5. Control principle of active disturbance rejection controller.

First, by arranging the transition process, the target variables; r is the speed factor, and its value reflects the
current signal I0 gets the input and differential signals signal tracking speed; h0 is the sampling step size, and
through the discrete fastest tracking differentiator reducing the sampling step size can suppress noise in
(TD). Then, the linear error state feedback control rate the signal.
(LESF) combines the state errors e1 and e2 and forms a The purpose of using the discrete fastest tracking
combined control rate to determine the error feedback differentiator is to arrange the transition process, which
control quantity I1. In the extended state observer can track the signal quickly without overshooting,
(ESO), b0 is the feedback amplification coefficient, z1 expand the selection range of error feedback gain, and
tracks the input signal, z2 tracks the differential signal, improve the robustness of the controller.
and z3 tracks the total disturbance. Finally, ESO pro-
vides feedback compensation for errors and distur- (2) Linear error state feedback control rate (LESF)
bances in EPS based on the input and output signals of 8
the controlled object. The control algorithms for each < e1 (k) = v1 (k)  z1 (k)
>
part of the second-order ADRC controller are as e2 (k) = v2 (k)  z2 (k) ð14Þ
follows: >
:
I1 = b1 e1 (k) + b2 e2 (k)
(1) Discrete fastest tracking differentiator (TD)
Where: b1 is the scaling factor; b2 is the differential
8 amplification factor; e1 is the state error of the input
> e(k) = v1 (k)  I0
>
> signal; e2 is the state error of the differential signal.
< fhan = f(e(k), v2 (k), r, h0 )
ð12Þ The state errors e1 and e2 are combined by the linear
> v1 (k + 1) = v1 (k) + h0 3v2 (k)
> error state feedback rate to improve the feedback effi-
>
:
v2 (k + 1) = v2 (k) + h0 3fhan ciency, which is similar to the PD control, and has good
robustness and adaptability.

Where: e is the input signal error; I0 is the target cur- (3) Extended state observer (ESO)
rent; fhan is the optimal control synthesis function; v1 is
the input signal; v2 is the differential signal. 8
> e3 (k)=z1 (k)I(k)
The function in fhan is shown in formula (13): >
>
< z (k+1)=h ½z (k)b (z (k)y(k))+z (k)
1 0 2 01 1 1
8
>
> d = r3h0 3h0 >
> z2 (k+1)=h ½b
0 0 u(k)+z 3 (k)b 02 fal (e
00 3 (k),a1 ,d1 )+z2 (k)
> >
:
>
> a0 = h0 3v2 (k) z3 (k+1)=h0 b03 fal01 (e3 (k),a2 ,d2 )+z3 (k)
>
>
>
>
>
> y = e(k) + a0 ð15Þ
>
> pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
>
>
>
> a1 = d3(d + 83jyj) 
>
< sgn(e3 (k))je3 (k) ja1 je3 (k)j . d1
a2 = a0 + sgn(y)3(a1  d)30:5 fal00 (e3 (k), a1 , d1 ) =
>
> e3 (k)d1 a1 je3 (k)j4d1
>
> a = (a0 + y)3(sgn(y + d)  sgn(y  d))30:5
>
> ð16Þ
>
> + a2 3(1  (sgn(y + d)  sgn(y  d))30:5)
>
>
>
> a (
>
> fhan =  r3 3(sgn(a + d)  sgn(a  d))30:5 e3 (k)
>
> d2 a2 1 je3 (k)j4d2
>
> d fal01 (e3 (k), a2 , d2 ) =
: a2
 r3sgn(a)3(1  (sgn(a + d)  sgn(a  d))30:5 je3 (k)j sgn(e3 (k)) je3 (k)j . d2
ð13Þ ð17Þ

Where: The final output is the optimal control synthesis Where: b0 is the feedback amplification coefficient; e3 is
function fhan; d, a, y, a0, a1, a2 are intermediate the estimation error; b01, b02, and b03 are the control
Zheng and Wei
feedback quantities z1, z2, and z3 respectively corre-
sponding to the gain parameters of the extended state
observer; a1, a2 is the nonlinear factor in the fal func-
tion; d1,d2 is the interval length of the linear section
As the core part of ADRC, ESO does not rely on the
model that generates disturbances to obtain disturbance
estimates and can expand the uncertain parts and dis-
turbances in the EPS model into new state variables,
which has good robustness.
The parameter selection of ADRC directly affects
the control effect of the system. According to the
research conclusion of researcher Fang H in active
disturbance rejection control technology, this study
used a fixed sampling step method to determine the
control parameters in TD.17 The relationship between
the speed factor and the sampling step size is shown in
formula (18):
0:000001
r= ð18Þ
h20
To select the control parameters of the extended state
observer more conveniently, some scholars proposed a
parameter tuning method based on the controller band-
width.18 The characteristic equation of the extended
state observer of the second-order system is shown in
formula (19):
r(s) = s3 + b01 s2 + b02 s + b03 ð19Þ
Usually, when the form of the characteristic equation
is (s + v)3, the stability is good and can provide a
good transition process. To make the state estimation
of the controlled object more ideal, this article
configures the control parameters b01, b02, b03 to the
form of 3v, 3v2, v3.
Where: s is the Laplace operator; v is the control-
ler’s bandwidth, it can be determined according to sys-
tem requirements.
EPS phase compensation
In controlling the motor’s assisted current, it is neces-
sary to output the analog motor voltage through the
PWM module. The PWM module can be equivalent to
the delay module, and its transfer function is shown in
formula (20):
1
GPWM = ð20Þ
Ts  1
Where: T is the switching cycle, usually 1/20,000 s.
The presence of torque sensor signal acquisition,
current loop, and PWM module will cause EPS torque
output to fluctuate and delay to a certain extent, which
is shown as slight shaking and abnormal noise of the
steering wheel during steering. Therefore, it is necessary
to improve system stability and response speed through
95
certain phase compensation. To improve the phase
margin of the system, the torque differential method is
used to compensate for the monitored torque.
The actual differential transfer function used is
shown in formula (21):
1 + kd Te s
Gc (s) = , kd . 1 ð21Þ
1 + Te s
Where: Te is the differential time constant; kd is the dif-
ferential gain.
Simulink/CarSim joint simulation
Simulink/CarSim software is used for joint simulation
according to the mathematical model to verify the
above EPS control strategy. The input signals of the
EPS simulation model are the steering wheel torque sig-
nal and the vehicle speed signal. The CarSim vehicle
model feeds back the left and right wheel state signals
to estimate the resistance torque in real-time.
Control effect of ADRC controller
From Figure 6, it can be seen that TD has a good
tracking effect on the input signal under step input and
sinusoidal input, without overshoot, and is synchro-
nized with the input signal. The estimation effect of
ESO on the feedback value is in line with expectations.
The parameters of the controller in the simulation are
shown in Table 1.
Set the vehicle speed to 10 km/h, and the motor con-
trol effect is shown in Figure 7:
The performance index of the current step response
in Figure 7(a) is shown in Table 2.
After combining Figure 7(a) and (b), it can be seen
from Table 2 that the motor current has the minimum
rising time and overshoot when using the ADRC con-
troller. Compared to PID and fuzzy PID controllers,
the ADRC controller reduces the adjustment time by
35.6%–61.7%, improving the response speed of assisted
current and assisted torque.
This article defines the tracking effect coefficient of
the signal as Kt, which can be calculated according to
formula (22):
emax
Kt = ð22Þ
I0
Where: emax represents the maximum error of current;
I0 is the target current.
The tracking effect coefficients in Figure 7(c) are
shown in Table 3.
Figure 7(c) shows that when using a PID controller,
the motor current tracking effect is poor and does not
completely coincide with the target signal at the dead
zone position. Under the sinusoidal input of steering
wheel torque, the tracking accuracy of current using
the ADRC controller is improved by 45.8%–75.8%
96
Figure 6. The signal tracking effect of TD and ESO without disturbance: (a) the tracking effect of TD on input signal under step
input, (b) the tracking effect of TD on input signal under sinusoidal input, (c) estimation effect of feedback value z1 under sinusoidal
input, and (d) estimation effect of feedback value z2 under sinusoidal input.
Table 1. Parameters of the controller.
Control methods Parameters
ADRC r = 0.01, h0 = 0.1, b1 = 200, b2 = 10
b01 = 30, b02 = 300, b03 = 1000
PID kp = 40, ki = 20, kd = 0.5
compared to the PID controller and fuzzy PID control-
ler. In Figure 7(d), when using a fuzzy PID controller,
the motor torque fluctuates significantly in the assist
dead zone. Compared to the fuzzy PID controller, the
control effect of ADRC on the assisted torque is
significantly improved.
Phase compensation effect
Set the steering wheel torque as step input and sinusoi-
dal input respectively, and the phase compensation
effect of the monitoring torque is shown in Figure 8.
The performance index of step response in Figure
8(a) is shown in Table 4.
Based on Figure 8 and Table 4, it can be seen that
there is low-frequency jitter in the monitoring torque
before phase compensation. After phase compensation,
the adjustment time for monitoring torque is reduced
by 60.3%, tracking accuracy is improved by 25%, and
Measurement and Control 57(1)
overshoot is reduced by 83.3%. Phase compensation
significantly reduces the oscillations during the response
process, improving the system’s robustness.
It can be seen from Figure 9 that in the case of no
interference, although the closed loop of the system is
stable before compensation, the phase margin is too
small. After phase compensation, the cut-off frequency
of the system increases, and the phase margin is greater
than 40°. The rapid response ability and stability of the
system are improved.
Anti-disturbance effect
When white noise and sinusoidal disturbance signals are
added to the motor voltage, the anti-disturbance effect
of the ADRC controller, fuzzy PID controller, and PID
controller are shown in Figure 10. It can be seen from
Figure 10 that the PID controller is very sensitive to dis-
turbance signals, and whether it is sinusoidal disturbance
or white noise will cause large fluctuations in the assisted
current, which will seriously affect the control accuracy
of the assisted current. The fuzzy PID controller has a
certain inhibitory effect on disturbance signals, but the
control effect still needs to be improved. When using the
ADRC controller, the system output is minimally
affected by disturbances, and the assisted current can
effectively track the target signal, significantly enhancing
the system’s anti-disturbance performance.
Zheng and Wei 97

Figure 7. Control effect of the motor: (a) step response of assisted current, (b) step response of assisted torque, (c) sinusoidal
response of assisted current, and (d) sinusoidal response of assisted torque.

Table 2. Performance index of the current step response. the motor voltage. The steering wheel angle increases
correspondingly with the torque input. When using
Name PID Fuzzy PID ADRC PID control, torque fluctuations are reflected on the
Rising time (s) 0.472 0.231 0.215 steering gear, causing significant shaking of the steering
Peak time (s) 1.467 0.864 1.051 wheel angle. After adopting ADRC control, there is a
Adjustment time (s) 0.619 0.368 0.237 significant suppression of steering wheel shaking, mak-
Overshoot 3.7% 2.3% 1.3% ing the steering process more stable and improving the
Steady value 10.96 10.96 10.96 EPS steering feel.

Table 3. Tracking effect coefficients. Conclusion

Name PID Fuzzy PID
Kt 0.244 0.109
Steering feel simulation
To further verify the superiority of ADRC control, the
double twisted wire simulation of the electric power
steering system in this paper is carried out according to
GB/T 6323-2014 test method for vehicle handling and
stability.
The double-twisted wire simulation is shown in
Figure 11. The steering wheel torque is sinusoidal input
when the vehicle speed is 10 km/h. To simulate the sys-
tem disturbance, this study adds white noise with a
maximum amplitude of 5 and sampling time of 0.1 s to
ADRC To improve the anti-disturbance performance of the
electric power steering system, this paper proposes an
0.059 EPS assisted current controller based on an active dis-
turbance rejection algorithm. The designed ADRC con-
troller includes a discrete fastest tracking differentiator,
linear error state feedback control rate, and extended
state observer. Considering that the monitoring torque
in EPS is affected by steering column damping and fric-
tion, which can cause jitter, this article conducts phase
compensation for the monitoring torque. The tracking
performance and anti-disturbance effect of PID, fuzzy
PID, and ADRC were compared through Simulink/
Carsim joint simulation.
The simulation results show that in the absence of
disturbances, the dynamic response characteristics and
tracking accuracy of ADRC are superior to PID and
fuzzy PID controllers. When using an ADRC
98 Measurement and Control 57(1)

Figure 8. Phase compensation effect of monitoring torque: (a) step response of monitoring torque and (b) sinusoidal response of
monitoring torque.

Table 4. Performance index of monitoring torque step

response.

Name Before After

compensation compensation

Rising time (s) 0.015 0.044

Peak time (s) 0.047 0.071
Adjustment time (s) 0.116 0.046
Overshoot 6% 1%
Steady value 3 3

Figure 9. Bode diagram before and after phase compensation.

Figure 10. The anti-disturbance effect of ADRC, PID, and fuzzy PID: (a) step response of assist current when adding sinusoidal
disturbance, (b) step response of assist current when adding white noise, (c) sinusoidal response of assist current when adding
sinusoidal disturbance, and (d) sinusoidal response of assist current when adding white noise.
Zheng and Wei
Figure 11. Double-twisted wire simulation.
controller, EPS has good current tracking characteris-
tics and slight torque jitter. Even under white noise or
sinusoidal signal disturbance, the ADRC controller can
still effectively track the target signal with good robust-
ness. The monitoring torque has a minor overshoot and
faster stabilization time after phase compensation, and
the accuracy of the target current is improved.
Therefore, it can be concluded that the proposed con-
trol scheme has good control accuracy and anti-
disturbance ability, which can effectively enhance the
EPS steering feel.
The electric power steering system designed in this
study based on active disturbance rejection control
meets the basic design requirements. In the next stage,
compensation control will be applied to the front wheel
angle of the vehicle for handling stability, and the
control strategy will be further validated through
hardware in the loop testing using Control Base.
Author contributions
Methodology, Z.Z.; software, J.W.; formal analysis, J.W.;
resources, Z.Z.; data curation, J.W.; writing-original draft
preparation, J.W.; writing-review and editing, Z.Z.; project
administration, J.W.; funding acquisition, Z.Z. All authors
have read and agreed to the published version of the
manuscript
Declaration of conflicting interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial
support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of
99
this article: This work was supported by the National Natural
Science Foundation of China (51875494); the Natural Science
Research Program of Jiangsu Province Colleges and
Universities (19KJB580019); the Ministry of Education’s
Industry School Cooperation Collaborative Education
Project (202102427007); the Graduate innovation program of
Yancheng institute of technology (SJCX22_XZ030)
ORCID iD
JinCheng Wei https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3239-9285
Data availability and code availability statement
The data and code that support the findings of this study are
available from the corresponding author upon reasonable
request.
References
1. Guo Z, Wu H, Zhao W, et al. Coordinated control strat-
egy for vehicle electro-hydraulic compound steering sys-
tem. Proc IMechE, Part D: J Automobile Engineering
2021; 235: 732–743.
2. BongChoon J. A study on modeling of rack type electric
power steering and development of control algorithm
⧯䌖㧛㦮(36⳾◎Ⱇὒ㩲㠊㞢ἶⰂ㯮Ṳ⹲㠦ὖ䞲㡆ῂG.
Asia Pac J Multimed Serv Converg Art Humanit Sociol
2019; 9: 411–420.
3. Murilo A, Rodrigues R, Teixeira ELS, et al. Design of a
parameterized model predictive control for electric power
assisted steering. Control Eng Pract 2019; 90: 331–341.
4. Liu H, Yuan F, Xie J, et al. Research on EPS control
strategy of heavy vehicle based on Simulink. Wirel Pers
Commun 2018; 103: 417–425.
5. Zhou H, Chen R, Zhou S, et al. Design and analysis of a
drive system for a series manipulator based on
orthogonal-fuzzy PID control. Electronics 2019; 8: 1051.
6. Cao Z and Zheng S. MR-SAS and electric power steering
variable universe fuzzy PID integrated control. Neural
Comput Appl 2019; 31: 1249–1258.
7. Jiang Z and Xiao B. Electric power steering system con-
trol strategy based on robust HN control for electric
forklift. Math Probl Eng 2018; 2018: 1–12.
8. Lu S, Lian M, Liu M, et al. Adaptive fuzzy sliding mode
control for electric power steering system. J Mech Sci
Technol 2017; 31: 2643–2650.
9. Lee D, Jang B, Han M, et al. A new controller design
method for an electric power steering system based on a
target steering torque feedback controller. Control Eng
Pract 2021; 106: 104658.
10. Ma X, Guo Y and Chen L. Active disturbance rejection
control for electric power steering system with assist
motor variable mode. J Frankl Inst-Eng Appl Math 2018;
355: 1139–1155.
11. Na S, Li Z, Qiu F, et al. Torque control of electric power
steering systems based on improved active disturbance
rejection control. Math Probl Eng 2020; 2020: 1–13.
12. Leng B, Jiang Y, Yu Y, et al. Distributed drive electric
autonomous vehicle steering angle control based on
100
active disturbance rejection control. Proc IMechE, Part
D: J Automobile Engineering 2021; 235: 128–142.
13. Lee MH, Ki Ha S, Choi JY, et al. Improvement of the
steering feel of an electric power steering system by
torque map modification. J Mech Sci Technol 2005; 19:
792–801.
14. Zhao W, Lin Y, Wei J, et al. Control strategy of a novel
electric power steering system integrated with active front
steering function. Sci China Technol Sci 2011; 54: 1515–
1520.
15. Liu YH and Ji XW. Matching strategy of electric power
steering assistant characters based on the vehicle inherent
road feel. Proc IMechE, Part D: J Automobile Engineer-
ing 2011; 225: 1481–1491.
Measurement and Control 57(1)
16. Kurishige M, Nishihara O and Kumamoto H. A new
control strategy to reduce steering torque without percep-
tible vibration for vehicles equipped with electric power
steering. J Vib Acoust-Trans ASME 2010; 132(5): 054504.
DOI: 10.1115/1.4001838
17. Fang H, Yuan X and Liu P. Active–disturbance–
rejection–control and fractional–order–proportional–
integral–derivative hybrid control for hydroturbine speed
governor system. Meas Control 2018; 51: 192–201.
18. Chen G, Xue R, Song C, et al. An active disturbance
rejection synchronous control strategy based on cross
compensation for stepper motor XY platform. Meas
Control 2023; 56: 694–703.