| Literature DB >> 35808188 |
Fubin Zhang1, Xiaohua Gao1, Wenbo Song1.
Abstract
The failure of the traditional initial alignment algorithm for the strapdown inertial navigation system (SINS) in high latitude is a significant challenge due to the rapid convergence of polar longitude. This paper presents a novel vision aided initial alignment method for the SINS of autonomous underwater vehicles (AUV) in polar regions. In this paper, we redesign the initial alignment model by combining inertial navigation mechanization equations in a transverse coordinate system (TCS) and visual measurement information obtained from a camera fixed on the vehicle. The observability of the proposed method is analyzed under different swing models, while the extended Kalman filter is chosen as an information fusion algorithm. Simulation results show that: the proposed method can improve the accuracy of the initial alignment for SINS in polar regions, and the deviation angle has a similar estimation accuracy in the case of uniaxial, biaxial, and triaxial swing modes, which is consistent with the results of the observable analysis.Entities:
Keywords: AUV; SINS; polar region; vision
Year: 2022 PMID: 35808188 PMCID: PMC9268847 DOI: 10.3390/s22134691
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.847
Figure 1Transversal coordinate system.
Figure 2Schematic diagram of the alignment platform of the visual aided INS.
Figure 3The difference between the true value and the estimated value of the misalignment angle.
Figure 4The difference between the true value and the estimated value of the velocity error.
Figure 5The difference between the true value and the estimated value of the position error.
Figure 6Residual mounting misalignment angle between camera and IMU after calibration.
Figure 7Residual bar arm error between camera and IMU after calibration.
Estimates under triaxial sway.
| Rotation Axis |
|
|
| Still | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.11 | 0.26 | 0.61 | 0.41 | 0.50 | 0.40 | 0.36 | 0.51 |
|
| −0.17 | −0.12 | 0.31 | 0.70 | −0.11 | −0.21 | 0.37 | −0.18 |
|
| −0.30 | −0.75 | 0.90 | 0.76 | 0.86 | −3.20 | 9.21 | 6.38 |
|
| 6.98 | −1.20 | −3.0 | −1.20 | 1.4 | −1.2 | −6.64 | −8.67 |
|
| 8.71 | 1.1 | −2.10 | −1.24 | 5.4 | 1.0 | −5.57 | −9.41 |
|
| 3.13 | 1.1 | −2.0 | −1.80 | 1.3 | 1.6 | −1.0 | 2.68 |
|
| −0.007 | 0.022 | 0.035 | −0.0025 | −0.017 | 0.351 | 0.001 | 0.333 |
|
| −0.013 | 0.028 | 0.023 | 0.034 | 0.304 | −0.012 | 0.001 | 0.323 |
|
| 0.017 | 0.015 | 0.021 | 0.023 | −0.002 | 0.013 | 0.317 | 0.315 |
|
| −0.069 | 0.064 | 0.054 | 0.049 | 0.058 | 0.073 | 0.071 | 0.062 |
|
| 0.042 | 0.035 | 0.050 | 0.058 | 0.043 | 0.078 | 0.021 | 0.043 |
|
| 0.023 | 0.021 | 0.032 | 0.012 | 0.034 | 0.018 | −0.029 | 0.005 |
|
| x | x | x | x | x | x | x | x |
|
| x | x | x | x | x | x | x | x |
|
| x | x | x | x | x | x | x | x |
|
| 29.40 | 29.20 | 29.01 | 28.75 | 28.82 | 29.43 | 31.04 | 29.23 |
|
| 31.20 | 31.21 | 31.20 | 30.60 | 31.01 | 31.60 | 28.29 | 29.02 |
|
| 29.50 | 31.19 | 31.80 | 29.53 | 31.40 | 33.40 | 31.30 | 24.12 |
|
| 0.0113 | 0.0109 | 0.0107 | 0.0113 | −0.202 | 0.011 | 0.103 | −0.213 |
|
| 0.0124 | 0.0115 | 0.0123 | 0.0121 | 0.0120 | −0.247 | 0.108 | −0.230 |
|
| 0.0106 | 0.0115 | 0.0114 | 0.0114 | 0.0107 | 0.096 | −0.227 | −0.227 |
Figure 8Overall connection diagram of the experiment.
The difference between the yaw angle obtained by the visual aid initial alignment algorithm and the corresponding turntable.
| The Experimental Group Number | 1 | 2 | 3 | Average Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Difference in yaw | 0.4438 | 0.5890 | 0.6106 | 0.5478 |