Cargando…
Evaluation and Comparison of Ultrasonic and UWB Technology for Indoor Localization in an Industrial Environment
Evaluations of different technologies and solutions for indoor localization exist but only a few are aimed at the industrial context. In this paper, we compare and analyze two prominent solutions based on Ultra Wide Band Radio (Pozyx) and Ultrasound (GoT), both installed in an industrial manufacturi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9026763/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35458908 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s22082927 |
_version_ | 1784691191790436352 |
---|---|
author | Crețu-Sîrcu, Amalia Lelia Schiøler, Henrik Cederholm, Jens Peter Sîrcu, Ion Schjørring, Allan Larrad, Ignacio Rodriguez Berardinelli, Gilberto Madsen, Ole |
author_facet | Crețu-Sîrcu, Amalia Lelia Schiøler, Henrik Cederholm, Jens Peter Sîrcu, Ion Schjørring, Allan Larrad, Ignacio Rodriguez Berardinelli, Gilberto Madsen, Ole |
author_sort | Crețu-Sîrcu, Amalia Lelia |
collection | PubMed |
description | Evaluations of different technologies and solutions for indoor localization exist but only a few are aimed at the industrial context. In this paper, we compare and analyze two prominent solutions based on Ultra Wide Band Radio (Pozyx) and Ultrasound (GoT), both installed in an industrial manufacturing laboratory. The comparison comprises a static and a dynamic case. The static case evaluates average localization errors over 90 s intervals for 100 ground-truth points at three different heights, corresponding to different relevant objects in an industrial environment: mobile robots, pallets, forklifts and worker helmets. The average error obtained across the laboratory is similar for both systems and is between 0.3 m and 0.6 m, with higher errors for low altitudes. The dynamic case is performed with a mobile robot travelling with an average speed of 0.5 m/s at a height of 0.3 m. In this case, low frequency error components are filtered out to focus the comparison on dynamic errors. Average dynamic errors are within 0.3–0.4 m for Pozyx and within 0.1–0.2 m for GoT. Results show an acceptable accuracy required for tracking people or objects and could serve as a guideline for the least achievable accuracy when applied for mobile robotics in conjunction with other elements of a robotic navigation stack. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9026763 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-90267632022-04-23 Evaluation and Comparison of Ultrasonic and UWB Technology for Indoor Localization in an Industrial Environment Crețu-Sîrcu, Amalia Lelia Schiøler, Henrik Cederholm, Jens Peter Sîrcu, Ion Schjørring, Allan Larrad, Ignacio Rodriguez Berardinelli, Gilberto Madsen, Ole Sensors (Basel) Article Evaluations of different technologies and solutions for indoor localization exist but only a few are aimed at the industrial context. In this paper, we compare and analyze two prominent solutions based on Ultra Wide Band Radio (Pozyx) and Ultrasound (GoT), both installed in an industrial manufacturing laboratory. The comparison comprises a static and a dynamic case. The static case evaluates average localization errors over 90 s intervals for 100 ground-truth points at three different heights, corresponding to different relevant objects in an industrial environment: mobile robots, pallets, forklifts and worker helmets. The average error obtained across the laboratory is similar for both systems and is between 0.3 m and 0.6 m, with higher errors for low altitudes. The dynamic case is performed with a mobile robot travelling with an average speed of 0.5 m/s at a height of 0.3 m. In this case, low frequency error components are filtered out to focus the comparison on dynamic errors. Average dynamic errors are within 0.3–0.4 m for Pozyx and within 0.1–0.2 m for GoT. Results show an acceptable accuracy required for tracking people or objects and could serve as a guideline for the least achievable accuracy when applied for mobile robotics in conjunction with other elements of a robotic navigation stack. MDPI 2022-04-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9026763/ /pubmed/35458908 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s22082927 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Crețu-Sîrcu, Amalia Lelia Schiøler, Henrik Cederholm, Jens Peter Sîrcu, Ion Schjørring, Allan Larrad, Ignacio Rodriguez Berardinelli, Gilberto Madsen, Ole Evaluation and Comparison of Ultrasonic and UWB Technology for Indoor Localization in an Industrial Environment |
title | Evaluation and Comparison of Ultrasonic and UWB Technology for Indoor Localization in an Industrial Environment |
title_full | Evaluation and Comparison of Ultrasonic and UWB Technology for Indoor Localization in an Industrial Environment |
title_fullStr | Evaluation and Comparison of Ultrasonic and UWB Technology for Indoor Localization in an Industrial Environment |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation and Comparison of Ultrasonic and UWB Technology for Indoor Localization in an Industrial Environment |
title_short | Evaluation and Comparison of Ultrasonic and UWB Technology for Indoor Localization in an Industrial Environment |
title_sort | evaluation and comparison of ultrasonic and uwb technology for indoor localization in an industrial environment |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9026763/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35458908 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s22082927 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT cretusircuamalialelia evaluationandcomparisonofultrasonicanduwbtechnologyforindoorlocalizationinanindustrialenvironment AT schiølerhenrik evaluationandcomparisonofultrasonicanduwbtechnologyforindoorlocalizationinanindustrialenvironment AT cederholmjenspeter evaluationandcomparisonofultrasonicanduwbtechnologyforindoorlocalizationinanindustrialenvironment AT sircuion evaluationandcomparisonofultrasonicanduwbtechnologyforindoorlocalizationinanindustrialenvironment AT schjørringallan evaluationandcomparisonofultrasonicanduwbtechnologyforindoorlocalizationinanindustrialenvironment AT larradignaciorodriguez evaluationandcomparisonofultrasonicanduwbtechnologyforindoorlocalizationinanindustrialenvironment AT berardinelligilberto evaluationandcomparisonofultrasonicanduwbtechnologyforindoorlocalizationinanindustrialenvironment AT madsenole evaluationandcomparisonofultrasonicanduwbtechnologyforindoorlocalizationinanindustrialenvironment |