Cooperative Localization of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles Using GNSS, MEMS Inertial, and UWB Sensors

Goel, Subhash C.; Kealy, Allison; Gikas, Vassilis; Retscher, Guenther; Toth, Charles K.; Brzezinska, Dorota-Grejner; Lohani, Bharat

doi:10.1061/(asce)su.1943-5428.0000230

Cited by 20 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Systematic error has been previously modelled as a constant time lag (e.g. due to device synchronization) (Hol, 2011) and as a polynomial term, as a function of distance , Dierenbach et al, 2015, Goel et al, 2017. Actually, according to our experiments, systematic errors of the considered low cost Pozyx devices are significantly anisotropic, i.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 81%

Comparison of Low Cost Photogrammetric Survey With TLS And Leica Pegasus Backpack 3d Modelss

Masiero

Fissore

Guarnieri

et al. 2017

Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:This paper considers Leica backpack and photogrammetric surveys of a mediaeval bastion in Padua, Italy. Furhtermore, terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) survey is considered in order to provide a state of the art reconstruction of the bastion. Despite control points are typically used to avoid deformations in photogrammetric surveys and ensure correct scaling of the reconstruction, in this paper a different approach is considered: this work is part of a project aiming at the development of a system exploiting ultra-wide band (UWB) devices to provide correct scaling of the reconstruction. In particular, low cost Pozyx UWB devices are used to estimate camera positions during image acquisitions. Then, in order to obtain a metric reconstruction, scale factor in the photogrammetric survey is estimated by comparing camera positions obtained from UWB measurements with those obtained from photogrammetric reconstruction. Compared with the TLS survey, the considered photogrammetric model of the bastion results in a RMSE of 21.9cm, average error 13.4cm, and standard deviation 13.5cm. Excluding the final part of the bastion left wing, where the presence of several poles make reconstruction more difficult, (RMSE) fitting error is 17.3cm, average error 11.5cm, and standard deviation 9.5cm. Instead, comparison of Leica backpack and TLS surveys leads to an average error of 4.7cm and standard deviation 0.6cm (4.2cm and 0.3cm, respectively, by excluding the final part of the left wing).

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 81%

Comparison of Low Cost Photogrammetric Survey With TLS And Leica Pegasus Backpack 3d Modelss

Masiero

Fissore

Guarnieri

et al. 2017

Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cooperative Localization (CL) provides an alternative framework for localization, using information sharing within a connected network where nodes with GNSS measurements share this information with the other nodes that do not have access to GNSS signals. This information sharing strategy has been demonstrated to be effective in localization of all nodes, irrespective of the availability of GNSS signals to some of the nodes in the network [8]. Additionally, CL is tremendously useful in development and deployment of swarm networks that are robust and significantly more efficient as compared to a single node in applications such as search and rescue, mapping, surveillance, etc.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, CL is tremendously useful in development and deployment of swarm networks that are robust and significantly more efficient as compared to a single node in applications such as search and rescue, mapping, surveillance, etc. [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The shared information in such an inter-connected network is used for localization of all dynamic (or even static) nodes, even in GNSS denied environments. Based on the strategy adopted for processing, a CL framework can be divided into two broad categories: centralized [8][9][10][11] and distributed [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24]. Centralized networks employ a central processor that is responsible for collecting, computing and communicating the states of all nodes in a network.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Development and Experimental Evaluation of a Low-Cost Cooperative UAV Localization Network Prototype

Goel

Kealy

Lohani

2018

JSAN

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Precise localization is one of the key requirements in the deployment of UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles) for any application including precision mapping, surveillance, assisted navigation, search and rescue. The need for precise positioning is even more relevant with the increasing automation in UAVs and growing interest in commercial UAV applications such as transport and delivery. In the near future, the airspace is expected to be occupied with a large number of unmanned as well as manned aircraft, a majority of which are expected to be operating autonomously. This paper develops a new cooperative localization prototype that utilizes information sharing among UAVs and static anchor nodes for precise positioning of the UAVs. The UAVs are retrofitted with low-cost sensors including a camera, GPS receiver, UWB (Ultra Wide Band) radio and low-cost inertial sensors. The performance of the low-cost prototype is evaluated in real-world conditions in partially and obscured GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite Systems) environments. The performance is analyzed for both centralized and distributed cooperative network designs. It is demonstrated that the developed system is capable of achieving navigation grade (2-4 m) accuracy in partially GNSS denied environments, provided a consistent communication in the cooperative network is available. Furthermore, this paper provides experimental validation that information sharing is beneficial to improve positioning performance even in ideal GNSS environments. The experiments demonstrate that the major challenges for low-cost cooperative networks are consistent connectivity among UAV platforms and sensor synchronization.

show abstract

“…Calibration of the UWB systematic error has been previously considered in several works [40][41][42][43][44][45]; however, according to our experiments, systematic errors of low-cost Pozyx devices are significantly anisotropic and difficult to properly model [8], i.e., the dependence on the relative orientation between rover and anchors is typically not negligible. Motivated by this consideration, the Pozyx system is used without any ad hoc calibration procedure.…”

Section: Photogrammetric Reconstruction With the Uwb Positioning Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance Evaluation of Two Indoor Mapping Systems: Low-Cost UWB-Aided Photogrammetry and Backpack Laser Scanning

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the past dozen years, several mobile mapping systems based on the use of imaging and positioning sensors mounted on terrestrial (and aerial) vehicles have been developed. Recently, systems characterized by an increased portability have been proposed in order to enable mobile mapping in environments that are difficult to access for vehicles, in particular for indoor environments. In this work the performance of a low-cost mobile mapping system is compared with that of: (i) a state-of-the-art terrestrial laser scanning (TLS), considered as the control; (ii) a mobile mapping backpack system (Leica Pegasus), which can be considered as the state-of-the-art of commercial mobile mapping backpack systems. The aim of this paper is two-fold: first, assessing the reconstruction accuracy of the proposed low-cost mobile mapping system, based on photogrammetry and ultra-wide band (UWB) for relative positioning (and a GNSS receiver if georeferencing is needed), with respect to a TLS survey in an indoor environment, where the global navigation satellite system (GNSS) signal is not available; second, comparing such performance with that obtained with the Leica backpack. Both mobile mapping systems are designed to work without any control point, to enable an easy and quick survey (e.g., few minutes) and to be easily portable (relatively low weight and small size). The case study deals with the 3D reconstruction of a medieval bastion in Padua, Italy. Reconstruction using the Leica Pegasus backpack allowed obtaining a smaller absolute error with respect to the UWB-based photogrammetric system. In georeferenced coordinates, the root mean square (RMS) error was respectively 16.1 cm and 50.3 cm; relative error in local coordinates was more similar, respectively 8.2 cm and 6.1 cm. Given the much lower cost (approximately $6k), the proposed photogrammetric-based system can be an interesting alternative when decimetric reconstruction accuracy in georeferenced coordinates is sufficient.

show abstract

Cooperative Localization of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles Using GNSS, MEMS Inertial, and UWB Sensors

Cited by 20 publications

References 28 publications

Comparison of Low Cost Photogrammetric Survey With TLS And Leica Pegasus Backpack 3d Modelss

Comparison of Low Cost Photogrammetric Survey With TLS And Leica Pegasus Backpack 3d Modelss

Development and Experimental Evaluation of a Low-Cost Cooperative UAV Localization Network Prototype

Performance Evaluation of Two Indoor Mapping Systems: Low-Cost UWB-Aided Photogrammetry and Backpack Laser Scanning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About