| Literature DB >> 26213939 |
Eduardo Munera1, Jose-Luis Poza-Lujan2, Juan-Luis Posadas-Yagüe3, José-Enrique Simó-Ten4, Juan Fco Blanes Noguera5.
Abstract
The inclusion of embedded sensors into a networked system provides useful information for many applications. A Distributed Control System (DCS) is one of the clearest examples where processing and communications are constrained by the client's requirements and the capacity of the system. An embedded sensor with advanced processing and communications capabilities supplies high level information, abstracting from the data acquisition process and objects recognition mechanisms. The implementation of an embedded sensor/actuator as a Smart Resource permits clients to access sensor information through distributed network services. Smart resources can offer sensor services as well as computing, communications and peripheral access by implementing a self-aware based adaptation mechanism which adapts the execution profile to the context. On the other hand, information integrity must be ensured when computing processes are dynamically adapted. Therefore, the processing must be adapted to perform tasks in a certain lapse of time but always ensuring a minimum process quality. In the same way, communications must try to reduce the data traffic without excluding relevant information. The main objective of the paper is to present a dynamic configuration mechanism to adapt the sensor processing and communication to the client's requirements in the DCS. This paper describes an implementation of a smart resource based on a Red, Green, Blue, and Depth (RGBD) sensor in order to test the dynamic configuration mechanism presented.Entities:
Keywords: RGBD sensor; quality of context (QoC); quality of service (QoS); system reconfiguration
Year: 2015 PMID: 26213939 PMCID: PMC4570308 DOI: 10.3390/s150818080
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Topology of a distributed control system based on smart devices.
Figure 2Smart resource: components and relations.
Figure 3TCM description.
Figure 4Task configuration selection mechanism implemented based on the service requirements.
Figure 5Smart resource implementation based on a RGBD camera.
Figure 6Plugins composition.
Figure 7Elements detection.
PgModes for system profiles.
| {null, VGA, QVGA, Q2VGA} | {null, VGA, QVGA, Q2VGA } | {null, VGA, QVGA, Q2VGA } | {null, VGA, QVGA, Q2VGA} | {null, | {null, |
Possible Qmodes for system profiles.
| [20%, 40%] | 15 MB | 50 ms | |
| [40%, 60%] | 15 MB | 50 ms | |
| [60%, 80%] | 15 MB | 50 ms |
Figure 8RGBD smart resource based on XTion and BeagleBoard working.
Figure 9Scalability of the system.
Figure 10Number of clients along experiments and alarms produced.
Figure 11QoS and QoC values along tests performed: deadline (a); CPU load (b); and memory usage (c).
Figure 12Evolution of the plugin image resolution (a); and the penalization factor (b).
Figure 13Data resolution vs. used resources.
Figure 14Accumulated errors.
Evolution of PgModes
| Client 1 | Client 2 | Client 3 | Client 3 | Client 3 | Client 4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VGA | ||||||
| VGA | VGA | |||||
| QVGA | VGA | |||||
| QVGA | QVGA | |||||
| QVGA | QVGA | VGA | ||||
| QVGA | QVGA | QVGA | ||||
| Q2VGA | Q2VGA | QVGA | ||||
| Q2VGA | Q2VGA | QVGA | VGA | |||
| Q2VGA | Q2VGA | Q2VGA | QVGA | |||
| Q2VGA | Q2VGA | Q2VGA | Q2VGA | |||
| Q2VGA | Q2VGA | Q2VGA | ||||
| Q2VGA | Q2VGA | |||||
| QVGA | Q2VGA | |||||
| QVGA | QVGA | |||||
| QVGA | ||||||
| VGA |
Quantitative study of the system evolution.
| N. Clients | Resolution | % Active | Events | Alarms | Deadline | CPU | Memory | Penalization |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VGA | 0.4637 | |||||||
| 1 | QVGA | 0.5631 | 0 | 0 | 0.0142 | 34.34 | 1.048 | 0.24 |
| Q2VGA | 0.0000 | |||||||
| VGA | 0.0321 | |||||||
| 2 | QVGA | 0.6877 | 4 | 0 | 0.0169 | 39.11 | 1.069 | 0.54 |
| Q2VGA | 0.2800 | |||||||
| VGA | 0.0160 | |||||||
| 3 | QVGA | 0.1860 | 4 | 0 | 0.0190 | 43.97 | 1.089 | 0.69 |
| Q2VGA | 0.7980 | |||||||
| VGA | 0.0220 | |||||||
| 4 | QVGA | 0.1090 | 2 | 13 | 0.0221 | 48.27 | 1.130 | 0.76 |
| Q2VGA | 0.8660 |
Variance and standard deviation.
| Active Resolution | QoS (Deadline) | QoC (CPU & Memory) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.0078 | 0.00000025 | 0.007799 | |
| 0.0709 | 0.00047322 | 0.007280 |
Table of accumulated errors.
| Scenarios | Profile 1 | Profile 2 | Profile 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.0060 | 0.0230 | 0.2740 | |
| 0.0000 | 0.1752 | 0.013 | |
| 0.0020 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | |
| 0.0027 | 0.0661 | 0.0957 |