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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Crețu-Sîrcu, Amalia Lelia, Schiøler, Henrik, Cederholm, Jens Peter, Sîrcu, Ion, Schjørring, Allan, Larrad, Ignacio Rodriguez, Berardinelli, Gilberto, Madsen, Ole
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