Cargando…
Buried RF Sensors for Smart Road Infrastructure: Empirical Communication Range Testing, Propagation by Line of Sight, Diffraction and Reflection Model and Technology Comparison for 868 MHz–2.4 GHz
Updating the road infrastructure requires the potential mass adoption of the road studs currently used in car detection, speed monitoring, and path marking. Road studs commonly include RF transceivers connecting the buried sensors to an offsite base station for centralized data management. Since tra...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9919453/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36772709 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s23031669 |
_version_ | 1784886828759777280 |
---|---|
author | Marsic, Vlad Faramehr, Soroush Fleming, Joe Ball, Peter Ou, Shumao Igic, Petar |
author_facet | Marsic, Vlad Faramehr, Soroush Fleming, Joe Ball, Peter Ou, Shumao Igic, Petar |
author_sort | Marsic, Vlad |
collection | PubMed |
description | Updating the road infrastructure requires the potential mass adoption of the road studs currently used in car detection, speed monitoring, and path marking. Road studs commonly include RF transceivers connecting the buried sensors to an offsite base station for centralized data management. Since traffic monitoring experiments through buried sensors are resource expensive and difficult, the literature detailing it is insufficient and inaccessible due to various strategic reasons. Moreover, as the main RF frequencies adopted for stud communication are either 868/915 MHz or 2.4 GHz, the radio coverage differs, and it is not readily predictable due to the low-power communication in the near proximity of the ground. This work delivers a reference study on low-power RF communication ranging for the two above frequencies up to 60 m. The experimental setup employs successive measurements and repositioning of a base station at three different heights of 0.5, 1 and 1.5 m, and is accompanied by an extensive theoretical analysis of propagation, including line of sight, diffraction, and wall reflection. Enhancing the tutorial value of this work, a correlation analysis using Pearson’s coefficient and root mean square error is performed between the field test and simulation results. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9919453 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-99194532023-02-12 Buried RF Sensors for Smart Road Infrastructure: Empirical Communication Range Testing, Propagation by Line of Sight, Diffraction and Reflection Model and Technology Comparison for 868 MHz–2.4 GHz Marsic, Vlad Faramehr, Soroush Fleming, Joe Ball, Peter Ou, Shumao Igic, Petar Sensors (Basel) Article Updating the road infrastructure requires the potential mass adoption of the road studs currently used in car detection, speed monitoring, and path marking. Road studs commonly include RF transceivers connecting the buried sensors to an offsite base station for centralized data management. Since traffic monitoring experiments through buried sensors are resource expensive and difficult, the literature detailing it is insufficient and inaccessible due to various strategic reasons. Moreover, as the main RF frequencies adopted for stud communication are either 868/915 MHz or 2.4 GHz, the radio coverage differs, and it is not readily predictable due to the low-power communication in the near proximity of the ground. This work delivers a reference study on low-power RF communication ranging for the two above frequencies up to 60 m. The experimental setup employs successive measurements and repositioning of a base station at three different heights of 0.5, 1 and 1.5 m, and is accompanied by an extensive theoretical analysis of propagation, including line of sight, diffraction, and wall reflection. Enhancing the tutorial value of this work, a correlation analysis using Pearson’s coefficient and root mean square error is performed between the field test and simulation results. MDPI 2023-02-02 /pmc/articles/PMC9919453/ /pubmed/36772709 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s23031669 Text en © 2023 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 Marsic, Vlad Faramehr, Soroush Fleming, Joe Ball, Peter Ou, Shumao Igic, Petar Buried RF Sensors for Smart Road Infrastructure: Empirical Communication Range Testing, Propagation by Line of Sight, Diffraction and Reflection Model and Technology Comparison for 868 MHz–2.4 GHz |
title | Buried RF Sensors for Smart Road Infrastructure: Empirical Communication Range Testing, Propagation by Line of Sight, Diffraction and Reflection Model and Technology Comparison for 868 MHz–2.4 GHz |
title_full | Buried RF Sensors for Smart Road Infrastructure: Empirical Communication Range Testing, Propagation by Line of Sight, Diffraction and Reflection Model and Technology Comparison for 868 MHz–2.4 GHz |
title_fullStr | Buried RF Sensors for Smart Road Infrastructure: Empirical Communication Range Testing, Propagation by Line of Sight, Diffraction and Reflection Model and Technology Comparison for 868 MHz–2.4 GHz |
title_full_unstemmed | Buried RF Sensors for Smart Road Infrastructure: Empirical Communication Range Testing, Propagation by Line of Sight, Diffraction and Reflection Model and Technology Comparison for 868 MHz–2.4 GHz |
title_short | Buried RF Sensors for Smart Road Infrastructure: Empirical Communication Range Testing, Propagation by Line of Sight, Diffraction and Reflection Model and Technology Comparison for 868 MHz–2.4 GHz |
title_sort | buried rf sensors for smart road infrastructure: empirical communication range testing, propagation by line of sight, diffraction and reflection model and technology comparison for 868 mhz–2.4 ghz |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9919453/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36772709 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s23031669 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT marsicvlad buriedrfsensorsforsmartroadinfrastructureempiricalcommunicationrangetestingpropagationbylineofsightdiffractionandreflectionmodelandtechnologycomparisonfor868mhz24ghz AT faramehrsoroush buriedrfsensorsforsmartroadinfrastructureempiricalcommunicationrangetestingpropagationbylineofsightdiffractionandreflectionmodelandtechnologycomparisonfor868mhz24ghz AT flemingjoe buriedrfsensorsforsmartroadinfrastructureempiricalcommunicationrangetestingpropagationbylineofsightdiffractionandreflectionmodelandtechnologycomparisonfor868mhz24ghz AT ballpeter buriedrfsensorsforsmartroadinfrastructureempiricalcommunicationrangetestingpropagationbylineofsightdiffractionandreflectionmodelandtechnologycomparisonfor868mhz24ghz AT oushumao buriedrfsensorsforsmartroadinfrastructureempiricalcommunicationrangetestingpropagationbylineofsightdiffractionandreflectionmodelandtechnologycomparisonfor868mhz24ghz AT igicpetar buriedrfsensorsforsmartroadinfrastructureempiricalcommunicationrangetestingpropagationbylineofsightdiffractionandreflectionmodelandtechnologycomparisonfor868mhz24ghz |