| Literature DB >> 29473912 |
Wei Wang1, Xiyuan Chen2.
Abstract
In view of the fact the accuracy of the third-degree Cubature Kalman Filter (CKF) used for initial alignment under large misalignment angle conditions is insufficient, an improved fifth-degree CKF algorithm is proposed in this paper. In order to make full use of the innovation on filtering, the innovation covariance matrix is calculated recursively by an innovative sequence with an exponent fading factor. Then a new adaptive error covariance matrix scaling algorithm is proposed. The Singular Value Decomposition (SVD) method is used for improving the numerical stability of the fifth-degree CKF in this paper. In order to avoid the overshoot caused by excessive scaling of error covariance matrix during the convergence stage, the scaling scheme is terminated when the gradient of azimuth reaches the maximum. The experimental results show that the improved algorithm has better alignment accuracy with large misalignment angles than the traditional algorithm.Entities:
Keywords: fading memory index weighting; fifth-degree cubature Kalman filter; initial alignment; large misalignment angle
Year: 2018 PMID: 29473912 PMCID: PMC5855102 DOI: 10.3390/s18020659
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1The distribution of weights of innovations under different .
Figure 2The flow chart of IICKF5.
Figure 3The estimated misalignment angles (): (a) Pitching misalignment angle; (b) rolling misalignment angle; (c) azimuth misalignment angle.
Figure 4The gradient values of azimuth angle error.
Figure 5The estimated azimuth misalignment angles of CKF5, ICKF5 and IICKF5.
Comparison of alignment errors (°).
| EKF | UKF | CKF3 | CKF5 | ICKF5 | IICKF5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| error of pitch (°) | −7.0205 | 0.0899 | 0.1270 | 0.1590 | 0.0829 | 0.0291 |
| error of roll (°) | 7.8234 | −0.1464 | −0.1634 | −0.2078 | −0.2949 | −0.2738 |
| error of heading (°) | 62.7783 | 157.7361 | 61.2902 | 13.6403 | −1.2458 | −0.0878 |
Figure 6The field test setup.
Figure 7The alignment errors of large azimuth misalignment angle of dynamic vehicle experiment: (a) Pitch errors; (b) roll errors; (c) heading errors.
Figure 8The gradient values of azimuth angle error (dynamic vehicle experiment).
Figure 9The alignment errors of different algorithms: (a) Pitch errors; (b) roll errors; (c) heading errors.
Comparison of alignment errors with in-motion base (°).
| EKF | UKF | CKF3 | CKF5 | ICKF5 | IICKF5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| error of pitch (°) | −3.2814 | −1.2868 | −2.6771 | −3.7189 | 3.0270 | 5.9149 |
| error of roll (°) | −1.2960 | −0.2867 | 3.3751 | 5.4245 | −2.9030 | 1.8357 |
| error of heading (°) | −139.5622 | −266.3212 | −204.3457 | 7.9986 | 42.5004 | −1.9540 |
Mean and Standard Deviation (SD) of azimuth misalignment errors (°).
| EKF | UKF | CKF3 | CKF5 | ICKF5 | IICKF5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean (°) | −155.2618 | −264.1352 | −201.1962 | 1.6920 | −6.1625 | −0.6852 |
| SD (°) | 38.8935 | 3.8062 | 11.5359 | 10.2307 | 41.2056 | 4.6229 |