| Literature DB >> 22163446 |
Zhigao Liu1, Chunwen Li, Danchen Wu, Wenhan Dai, Shaobo Geng, Qingqing Ding.
Abstract
This paper proposes a novel personnel positioning scheme for a tunnel network with blind areas, which compared with most existing schemes offers both low-cost and high-precision. Based on the data models of tunnel networks, measurement networks and mobile miners, the global positioning method is divided into four steps: (1) calculate the real time personnel location in local areas using a location engine, and send it to the upper computer through the gateway; (2) correct any localization errors resulting from the underground tunnel environmental interference; (3) determine the global three-dimensional position by coordinate transformation; (4) estimate the personnel locations in the blind areas. A prototype system constructed to verify the positioning performance shows that the proposed positioning system has good reliability, scalability, and positioning performance. In particular, the static localization error of the positioning system is less than 2.4 m in the underground tunnel environment and the moving estimation error is below 4.5 m in the corridor environment. The system was operated continuously over three months without any failures.Entities:
Keywords: global positioning method; personnel global positioning; tunnel network model; wireless sensor networks
Mesh:
Year: 2010 PMID: 22163446 PMCID: PMC3230985 DOI: 10.3390/s101109891
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1.Architecture of MPPS.
Figure 2.Tunnel network topology and backbone network deployment.
Figure 3.The deployment of reference nodes in each local positioning units.
The level, the intersection point, the travel point and the arc data structure.
| LevelID: int | NodeID: int | TravID: int | ArcID: int |
| LevHorRan: | Location: | Location: | StartNodeID: int |
| LevVerRan: | ArcNum: int | BackTravPID: int | EndNodeID: int |
| NodeNum: int | ArcIDs: | AheadTravPID: int | ArcWide: real |
| NodeIDs: | NabNodNum: int | ArcID: | ArcLength: real |
| NabNodIDs: | ArcAltiAng: real | ||
| ArcHoriAng: real |
Figure 4.The spatial data types.
Gateway, reference node and mobile node data structure.
| GateID: int | RefID: int | MobileID: int |
| GateAddr: long | RefAddr: long | MobileAddr: long |
| CoInterPID: int | CoGateID: int | Name: string |
| BaseLoc: | LocalLoc: | ConfigPara: |
The personnel information data format.
| MobileID: int | MobileID: int | MobileID: int |
| Name: string | CurrentLoc: | GateID: int |
| GroupID: int | CurrentTime: | InTime: |
| WorkPlace: string | CurrentVelo: real | OutTime: |
| WorkTime: | CurrentVeloDir: bool | InArcID: int |
| OutArc: int | ||
| AverVelo: real |
Figure 5.Global positioning method.
Figure 6.The personnel moving angle and range limitation in a mine.
Figure 7.The coordinate translation method.
Figure 8.The locations are on the same arc.
Figure 9.The locations are on the different arcs.
Figure 10.The devices in the positioning unit.
Figure 11.Software structure of the MPPS.
Figure 12.The deployment of positioning system in a underground tunnel.
Figure 13.Static positioning performance, A = 40, n = 3.875.
n parameter lookup table.
| n_index | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| 1.250 | 1.500 | 1.750 | 1.875 | 2.000 | 2.125 | 2.250 | 2.375 | 2.500 | 2.625 | 2.750 | 2.875 | 3.000 | |
| n_index | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 3.125 | 3.250 | 3.375 | 3.500 | 3.625 | 3.750 | 3.875 | 4.000 | 4.125 | 4.250 | 4.375 | 4.500 | 4.625 |
The experiment test results of positioning system (in meters).
| Actual position | (0.0, 0.0) | (0.0, 1.8) | (2.0, 1.0) | (4.0, 1.0) | (5.0, 1.0) | (10.0, 0.0) | (10.0,1.0) |
| Test result | (2.1, 0.0) | (0.4, 2.0) | (1.3, 2.4) | (3.1, 2.7) | (4.8, 1.0) | (9.9, 0.0) | (10.0,1.0) |
| Test error | 2.1 | 1.3 | 1.9 | 1.9 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.0 |
The experiment test results and error (in meters), n = 3.875.
| Actual position | (0.2, 1.0) | (3.0, 1.0) | (5.0, 1.0) | (7.0, 1.0) | (9.0, 1.0) |
| Test result and error ( | (1.8, 5.5), 4.8 | (0.3, 8.8), 8.3 | (5.2, 8.1), 7.1 | (3.1, 8.9), 8.8 | (13.8, 4.6), 6.0 |
| Test result and error ( | (3.4, 0.4), 3.2 | (1.6, 6.6), 5.7 | (5.7, 4.2), 3.3 | (4.3, 6.7), 6.8 | (12.8,3.1), 4.3 |
| Test result and error ( | (2.3, 0.6), 2.1 | (3.7, 2.9), 2.1 | (5.5, 1.1), 0.5 | (5.0, 2.4), 2.4 | (8.4, 0.6), 0.7 |
| Test result and error ( | (2.5, 0.1), 2.4 | (3.5, 0.0), 1.1 | (8.6, 4.3), 4.9 | (5.0, 0.0), 2.2 | (7.6, 0.4), 1.5 |
The experiment test results and error (meter), A = 40.
| Actual position | (3.0, 1.0) | (5.0, 1.0) | (7.0, 1.0) | (9.0, 1.0) |
| Test result and error ( | (0.3, 4.8), 4.4 | (7.4, 4.9), 4.6 | (4.4, 6.2), 5.8 | (11.0, 3.7), 3.4 |
| Test result and error ( | (0.0, 4.4), 4.5 | (6.8, 5.8), 5.1 | (4.4, 3.1), 3.3 | (9.3, 4.0), 3.0 |
| Test result and error ( | (3.7, 2.9), 2.1 | (5.5, 1.1), 0.5 | (5.0, 2.4), 2.4 | (8.4, 0.6), 0.7 |
| Test result and error ( | (2.7, 0.0), 1.1 | (6.0, 1.3), 1.0 | (5.0, 0.4), 2.1 | (7.3, 2.5), 2.3 |
| Test result and error ( | (3.0, 0.0), 1.0 | (6.0, 1.0), 1.0 | (5.0, 0.0), 2.2 | Overrun |
| Test result and error ( | (3.0, 0.1), 0.9 | (6.8, 1.6), 1.9 | (5.0, 0.0), 2.2 | Overrun |
Figure 14.The deployment of positioning system in a corridor.
The configuration parameters of the reference nodes in the third level.
| LevelID | BaseLoc | Refenode 1 | Refenode 2 | Refenode 3 | Refenode 4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | (4.0, 6.0) | (0.0, 0.0) | (4.0, 0.4) | (4.2, 2.0) | (0.2, 1.9) | |
| 3 | (49.3, 9.0) | (0.0, 0.0) | (3.2, 0.6) | (3.0, 1.9) | (0.5, 2.0) | |
| 3 | (47.2, 51.7) | (0.0, 0.0) | (3.8, 0.3) | (3.6, 1.8) | (0.3, 2.2) | |
| 3 | (78.1, 54.7) | (0.0, 0.0) | (3.6, 0.2) | (3.8, 2.0) | (0.2, 2.0) |
The configuration parameters of the mobile nodes.
| A | Operation mode | Collection time | Cycle time | Min. Ref. Nodes | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 39 | 3.875 | 0 | 10 | 2 | 3 |
Figure 15.A snapshot of the tunnel network, the message log and parameter configuration.
The comparison between KJ280, KJ272 and MPPS positioning system.
| KJ280 | KJ272 | MPPS | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fieldbus architecture | Clustering structure | Clustering-Fieldbus hybrid hierarchical architecture with blind areas | |
| Location registration, Location query | Location registration, Location query | Location registration, Integrated information query, Location prediction | |
| Radio Frequency | Received signal strength indication–based location method | Four-step global positioning method: the local positioning, the simple filtering, the three-dimensional algorithm and the estimation algorithm in blind area | |
| Regional Location | ≤ ±15 meters | ≤ ±3.0 meters (positioning areas); | |
| High | High | Low | |
| Medium | Low | High | |
| Mains supply | Batteries | Mains supply and batteries | |
| Senior RFID reader is complex and expensive, complex maintenance | Arrange a large number of routing nodes to maintain the wireless connectivity, complex maintenance | Measuring nodes decreased greatly due to the blind areas, easy maintenance |
SimpleCorrection( )
| 1. work out | |
| 2. for each | |
| 3. θ = ∠( | |
| 4. | |
| 5. if | |
| 6. | {if |
| 7. | Δ |
| 8. | else if |
| 9. | Δ |
| 10. | end if |
| 11. | |
| 12. | } |
| 13. if | |
| 14. | {if
|
| 15. | |
| 16. | goto (line7.) |
| 17. | else |
| 18. | goto (line7.) |
| 19. | } |
| 20. for each | |
| 21. θ = ∠( | |
| 22. | |
| 23. goto (line5.) | |
PositionEstimation( )
| 1. for each update log
| |
| 2. if ∃ | |
| 3. output | |
| 4. else if ∃ | |
| 5. | {if |
| 6. | Output |
| 7. | else // |
| 8. | {determine the |
| 9. | determine the state ( |
| 10. | put the state in step (9) into the |
| 11. | } |
| 12. | } |
| 13. else // | |
| 14. | {
|
| 15. | Predict the |
| 16. | Predict the state ( |
| 17. | put the state in step (16) into the linear interpolation |
| 18 | } |
| 19. end | |