Effect Analysis of GNSS/INS Processing Strategy for Sufficient Utilization of Urban Environment Observations
<p>Tightly coupled data processing strategy. (Note.<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo> </mo> <msubsup> <mi mathvariant="bold-italic">f</mi> <mrow> <mi>i</mi> <mi>b</mi> </mrow> <mi>b</mi> </msubsup> </mrow> </semantics></math> is specific force measured by the accelerometer.<math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo> </mo> <msubsup> <mi mathvariant="bold-italic">ω</mi> <mrow> <mi>i</mi> <mi>b</mi> </mrow> <mi>b</mi> </msubsup> </mrow> </semantics></math> is the angular rate measured by the gyroscope. <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>λ</mi> <mi>i</mi> </msub> <msubsup> <mi>φ</mi> <mrow> <mi>i</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>r</mi> </mrow> <mi>S</mi> </msubsup> </mrow> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msubsup> <mi>P</mi> <mrow> <mi>i</mi> <mo>,</mo> <mi>r</mi> </mrow> <mi>S</mi> </msubsup> </mrow> </semantics></math> are raw carrier phase and pseudorange observations, respectively. <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi mathvariant="bold-italic">r</mi> <mrow> <mi>i</mi> <mi>n</mi> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi mathvariant="bold-italic">v</mi> <mrow> <mi>i</mi> <mi>n</mi> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi mathvariant="bold-italic">ϕ</mi> <mrow> <mi>i</mi> <mi>n</mi> <mi>s</mi> </mrow> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> are position, velocity and attitude estimated by INS, respectively. <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>δ</mi> <mi mathvariant="bold-italic">ϕ</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>δ</mi> <mi mathvariant="bold-italic">v</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mi>δ</mi> <mi mathvariant="bold-italic">r</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math> are the correction of position, velocity and attitude, respectively. <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <msub> <mi>λ</mi> <mi>i</mi> </msub> <mo>∇</mo> <mo>Δ</mo> <mi>φ</mi> </mrow> </semantics></math>, <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>∇</mo> <mo>Δ</mo> <msub> <mi>P</mi> <mi>i</mi> </msub> </mrow> </semantics></math> and <math display="inline"><semantics> <mrow> <mo>∇</mo> <mo>Δ</mo> <mover accent="true"> <mi>ρ</mi> <mo>˙</mo> </mover> </mrow> </semantics></math> are double difference observations. FloatN represent ambiguity float solution and IntN represent inter ambiguity solution. PVA means position, velocity, and attitude.</p> "> Figure 2
<p>Rauch–Tung–Striebel smoothing (RTSS) algorithm diagram.</p> "> Figure 3
<p>SPAN-LCI integrated navigation system.</p> "> Figure 4
<p>Experimental environment for simulating the satellite loss-of-lock experiment. (<b>a</b>) Number of common-view satellites of the base station and the rover station. (<b>b</b>) The position dilution of precision (PDOP) value of the rover station satellite. (<b>c</b>) Sky plot. (<b>d</b>) Experimental trajectory.</p> "> Figure 4 Cont.
<p>Experimental environment for simulating the satellite loss-of-lock experiment. (<b>a</b>) Number of common-view satellites of the base station and the rover station. (<b>b</b>) The position dilution of precision (PDOP) value of the rover station satellite. (<b>c</b>) Sky plot. (<b>d</b>) Experimental trajectory.</p> "> Figure 5
<p>Root mean square error (RMSE) of tightly coupled and loosely coupled systems under different observable satellite numbers for 1 min: (<b>a</b>) 3D position error, (<b>b</b>) roll error, (<b>c</b>) pitch error, and (<b>d</b>) heading error.</p> "> Figure 6
<p>RMSEs under different processing methods. (<b>a</b>) 3D position error, (<b>b</b>) roll error, (<b>c</b>) pitch error, and (<b>d</b>) heading error.</p> "> Figure 7
<p>Plan 4 experimental situation.</p> "> Figure 8
<p>Plan 1 with and without inertial navigation system (INS)-aided pose error. (<b>a</b>) 3D position error, (<b>b</b>) roll error, (<b>c</b>) pitch error, and (<b>d</b>) heading error.</p> "> Figure 9
<p>Plan 2 with and without INS-aided pose error. (<b>a</b>) 3D position error, (<b>b</b>) roll error, (<b>c</b>) pitch error, and (<b>d</b>) heading error.</p> "> Figure 9 Cont.
<p>Plan 2 with and without INS-aided pose error. (<b>a</b>) 3D position error, (<b>b</b>) roll error, (<b>c</b>) pitch error, and (<b>d</b>) heading error.</p> "> Figure 10
<p>Plan 3 with and without INS-aided pose error. (<b>a</b>) 3D position error, (<b>b</b>) roll error, (<b>c</b>) pitch error, and (<b>d</b>) heading error.</p> "> Figure 11
<p>Comparison of Plan 4 with and without INS-aided pose error. (<b>a</b>) 3D position error, (<b>b</b>) roll error, (<b>c</b>) pitch error, and (<b>d</b>) heading error.</p> "> Figure 12
<p>Experimental environment. (<b>a</b>) Number of common-view satellites of the base station and the rover station and PDOP of the rover station satellite. (<b>b</b>) Sky plot.</p> "> Figure 13
<p>Experimental track of test vehicle. (<b>a</b>) Track at jumping point A. (<b>b</b>) Track at jumping point B. (<b>c</b>) Track at jumping point C.</p> "> Figure 14
<p>Comparison of 3D position RMSE obtained using three different methods.</p> "> Figure 15
<p>Comparison of attitude RMSE obtained using three different methods.</p> ">
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Differential Tightly Coupled GNSS/INS
2.1.1. System Model.
2.1.2. Measurement Model
2.2. INS-Aided IAR
2.3. RTSS Algorithm Based on Extended Kalman Filter
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Simulation Experiment
3.1.1. Test 1
3.1.2. Test 2
3.1.3. Test 3
3.2. Field Experiment in Urban Environment
4. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
Appendix A.1. Attitude Error Equation
Appendix A.2. Velocity Error Equation
Appendix A.3. Position Error Equation
References
- Sairam, N.; Nagarajan, S.; Ornitz, S. Development of Mobile Mapping System for 3D Road Asset Inventory. Sensors 2016, 16, 367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Wan, G.; Yang, X.; Cai, R.; Li, H.; Zhou, Y.; Wang, H.; Song, S. Robust and Precise Vehicle Localization Based on Multi-Sensor Fusion in Diverse City Scenes. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Brisbane, Australia, 21–25 May 2018; pp. 4670–4677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Deren, L. From Geomatics to Geospatial Intelligent Service Science. Acta Geod. Cartogr. Sin. 2017, 46, 1207–1212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chiang, K.-W.; Duong, T.T.; Liao, J.-K. The Performance Analysis of a Real-Time Integrated INS/GPS Vehicle Navigation System with Abnormal GPS Measurement Elimination. Sensors 2013, 13, 10599–10622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Falco, G.; Einicke, G.A.; Malos, J.T.; Dovis, F. Performance Analysis of Constrained Loosely Coupled GPS/INS Integration Solutions. Sensors 2012, 12, 15983–16007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Gao, Z.; Ge, M.; Li, Y.; Chen, Q.; Zhang, Q.; Niu, X.; Zhang, H.; Shen, W.; Schuh, H. Odometer, low-cost inertial sensors, and four-GNSS data to enhance PPP and attitude determination. GPS Solut. 2018, 22, 57–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, Y.; Liu, S.; Atia, M.M.; Noureldin, A.M. INS/GPS/LiDAR Integrated Navigation System for Urban and Indoor Environments Using Hybrid Scan Matching Algorithm. Sensors 2015, 15, 23286–23302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chang, L.; Niu, X.; Liu, T.; Tang, J.; Qian, C. GNSS/INS/LiDAR-SLAM Integrated Navigation System Based on Graph Optimization. Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 1009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Godha, S.; Cannon, M.E. GPS/MEMS INS integrated system for navigation in urban areas. GPS Solut. 2007, 11, 193–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Niu, X.; Li, Y.; Zhang, Q.; Cheng, Y.; Shi, C. Observability Analysis of Non-Holonomic Constraints for Land-Vehicle Navigation Systems. J. Glob. Position. Syst. 2012, 11, 80–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, C.; Li, X.; Gao, S.; Lin, T.; Wang, L. Performance Analysis of Global Navigation Satellite System Signal Acquisition Aided by Different Grade Inertial Navigation System under Highly Dynamic Conditions. Sensors 2017, 17, 980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Chen, Z.; Lai, J.; Liu, J.; Li, R.; Ji, G. A Parameter Self-Calibration Method for GNSS/INS Deeply Coupled Navigation Systems in Highly Dynamic Environments. Sensors 2018, 18, 2341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Xu, R.; Ding, M.; Qi, Y.; Yue, S.; Liu, J. Performance Analysis of GNSS/INS Loosely Coupled Integration Systems under Spoofing Attacks. Sensors 2018, 18, 4108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Kim, Y.; Song, J.; Kee, C.; Park, B. GPS Cycle Slip Detection Considering Satellite Geometry Based on TDCP/INS Integrated Navigation. Sensors 2015, 15, 25336–25365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Zhang, X.; Zhu, F.; Zhang, Y.; Mohamed, F.; Zhou, W. The improvement in integer ambiguity resolution with INS aiding for kinematic precise point positioning. J. Geod. 2019, 93, 993–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Falco, G.; Pini, M.; Marucco, G. Loose and Tight GNSS/INS Integrations: Comparison of Performance Assessed in Real Urban Scenarios. Sensors 2017, 17, 255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.; Liu, F.; Gao, Y.; Zhao, L. Implementation and Analysis of Tightly Coupled Global Navigation Satellite System Precise Point Positioning/Inertial Navigation System (GNSS PPP/INS) with Insufficient Satellites for Land Vehicle Navigation. Sensors 2018, 18, 4305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Li, T.; Zhang, H.P.; Niu, X.J.; Zhang, Q. Performance analysis of BDS+GPS RTK+INS tightly coupled algorithm in urban environment. Bull. Surv. Mapp. 2016, 9–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, H.; Wang, J.; Wang, J.; Tan, X. Performance Analysis on Carrier Phase-Based Tightly-Coupled GPS/BDS/INS Integration in GNSS Degraded and Denied Environments. Sensors 2015, 15, 8685–8711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Li, T.; Zhang, H.P.; Niu, X.J.; Zhang, Q. Performance Analysis of Tightly Coupled RTK/INS Algorithm in Case of Insufficient Number of Satellites. Geomat. Inf. Sci. Wuhan Univ. 2018, 43, 478–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dorn, M.; Filwarny, J.O.; Wieser, M. Inertially-aided RTK based on tightly-coupled integration using low-cost GNSS receivers. In Proceedings of the 2017 European Navigation Conference (ENC), Lausanne, Switzerland, 9–12 May 2017; pp. 186–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hao, W.L.; Sun, F.P.; Liu, S. Fixed-Interval Smoothing Post-Processing A lgorithms Based on Tightly Coupled Carrier Phase DGNSS/INS Method. J. Geod. Geodyn. 2015, 35, 1031–1035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dong, Y.; Wang, D.; Zhang, L.; Li, Q.; Wu, J. Tightly Coupled GNSS/INS Integration with Robust Sequential Kalman Filter for Accurate Vehicular Navigation. Sensors 2020, 20, 561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Gong, X.; Qin, T. Airborne Earth Observation Positioning and Orientation by SINS/GPS Integration Using CD R-T-S Smoothing. J. Navig. 2013, 67, 211–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, X.; Zhu, F.; Tao, X.; Duan, R. New optimal smoothing scheme for improving relative and absolute accuracy of tightly coupled GNSS/SINS integration. GPS Solut. 2017, 21, 861–872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hide, C.; Moore, T. GPS and Low Cost INS Integration for Positioning in the Urban Environment. In Proceedings of the 18th International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation (ION GNSS 2005), Long Beach, CA, USA, 13–16 September 2005; pp. 1007–1015. [Google Scholar]
- Weinred, A.; Bar-Itzhack, I. The Psi-Angle Error Equation in Strapdown Inertial Navigation Systems. IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst. 1978, 14, 539–542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Groves, P.D. Principles of GNSS, Inertial, and Multisensor Integrated Navigation Systems, 2nd ed.; National Defense Industry Press: Beijing, China, 2015; pp. 59–60, 527–528. [Google Scholar]
- Qin, Y.Y.; Zhang, H.Y.; Wang, S.H. Kalman Filter and Integrated Navigation Principle, 3nd ed.; Northwestern Polytechnical University Press: Xi’an, China, 2015; pp. 33–57. [Google Scholar]
- NOVATEL.SPAN on OEM6 User Manual [EB/OL] (2017-02-22). Available online: https://novatel.com/support/support-materials/manual (accessed on 12 July 2020).
- Leick, A.; Rapoport, L.; Tatarnikov, D. GPS Satellite Surveying, 4th ed.; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2015; pp. 257–275. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Y.P.; Shi, B.; Wang, S.L.; Liu, M.K.; Zhang, Q.; Gao, Y. Analysis of BDS/GPS Integrated Kinematic Difference Positioning Algorithm in Multi- Occlusion Environment. J. Geod. Geodyn. 2018, 38, 276–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teunissen, P.J.G. The least-squares ambiguity decorrelation adjustment: A method for fast GPS integer ambiguity estimation. J. Geod. 1995, 70, 65–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Titterton, D.; Weston, J. Strapdown Inertial Navigation Technology, 2nd ed.; Institution of Engineering and Technology: London, UK, 2004; pp. 214–215. [Google Scholar]
Gyroscope | Accelerometer | |
---|---|---|
Bias stability | ||
Random walk | ||
Scale factor | ||
Sampling rate |
Tightly Coupled (TC) | Loosely Coupled (LC) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Number of Satellites | >4 | 3 | 2 | >4 | 3 | |
Position Error (m) | 3D | 0.028 | 0.033 | 0.115 | 0.036 | 0.714 |
Attitude Error (°) | Roll | 0.0058 | 0.0058 | 0.0058 | 0.0066 | 0.0076 |
Pitch | 0.0114 | 0.0114 | 0.0114 | 0.0126 | 0.0128 | |
Heading | 0.0238 | 0.0239 | 0.0250 | 0.0235 | 0.0289 |
Satellite Number ≥ 4 | Satellite Number = 3 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
LC-EKF | LC-RTS | LC-EKF | LC-RTS | ||
Position Error (m) | 3d | 0.036 | 0.032 | 0.714 | 0.035 |
Attitude Error (°) | Roll | 0.0066 | 0.0063 | 0.0076 | 0.0066 |
Pitch | 0.0126 | 0.0119 | 0.0128 | 0.0118 | |
Heading | 0.0235 | 0.0121 | 0.0289 | 0.0143 |
RMSE (m) | MAX (m) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
INS-Aided | Not INS-Aided | INS-Aided | Not INS-Aided | |||||
EKF | RTS | EKF | RTS | EKF | RTS | EKF | RTS | |
Plan 1 | 0.036 | 0.027 | 0.085 | 0.057 | 0.070 | 0.032 | 0.218 | 0.088 |
Plan 2 | 0.062 | 0.029 | 0.203 | 0.032 | 0.146 | 0.044 | 0.373 | 0.043 |
Plan 3 | 0.117 | 0.030 | 0.250 | 0.057 | 0.242 | 0.044 | 0.443 | 0.095 |
Plan 4 | 0.037 | 0.028 | 0.098 | 0.029 | 0.090 | 0.040 | 0.202 | 0.044 |
INS-Aided | Not INS-Aided | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
EKF | RTS | EKF | RTS | ||
Roll (°) | Plan 1 | 0.0059 | 0.0056 | 0.0059 | 0.0056 |
Plan 2 | 0.0062 | 0.0058 | 0.0062 | 0.0059 | |
Plan 3 | 0.0061 | 0.0057 | 0.0061 | 0.0057 | |
Plan 4 | 0.0058 | 0.0049 | 0.0058 | 0.0050 | |
Pitch (°) | Plan 1 | 0.0070 | 0.0067 | 0.0070 | 0.0068 |
Plan 2 | 0.0082 | 0.0079 | 0.0082 | 0.0079 | |
Plan 3 | 0.0087 | 0.0082 | 0.0087 | 0.0082 | |
Plan 4 | 0.0114 | 0.0110 | 0.0114 | 0.0110 | |
Heading (°) | Plan 1 | 0.0247 | 0.0099 | 0.0246 | 0.0096 |
Plan 2 | 0.0247 | 0.0100 | 0.0249 | 0.0099 | |
Plan 3 | 0.0267 | 0.0111 | 0.0271 | 0.0114 | |
Plan 4 | 0.0238 | 0.0089 | 0.0242 | 0.0090 |
RMSE(m) | MAX(m) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Not INS-Aided | INS-Aided | INS-Aided RTS | Not INS-Aided | INS-Aided | INS-Aided RTS | |
Position | 0.063 | 0.054 | 0.049 | 1.159 | 0.347 | 0.253 |
Roll | 0.0085 | 0.0085 | 0.0072 | 0.0546 | 0.0543 | 0.0539 |
Pitch | 0.0115 | 0.0115 | 0.0113 | 0.0883 | 0.0886 | 0.0897 |
Heading | 0.0510 | 0.0490 | 0.0425 | 0.1684 | 0.1541 | 0.1679 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. 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 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Shi, B.; Wang, M.; Wang, Y.; Bai, Y.; Lin, K.; Yang, F. Effect Analysis of GNSS/INS Processing Strategy for Sufficient Utilization of Urban Environment Observations. Sensors 2021, 21, 620. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21020620
Shi B, Wang M, Wang Y, Bai Y, Lin K, Yang F. Effect Analysis of GNSS/INS Processing Strategy for Sufficient Utilization of Urban Environment Observations. Sensors. 2021; 21(2):620. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21020620
Chicago/Turabian StyleShi, Bo, Mengke Wang, Yunpeng Wang, Yuntian Bai, Kang Lin, and Fanlin Yang. 2021. "Effect Analysis of GNSS/INS Processing Strategy for Sufficient Utilization of Urban Environment Observations" Sensors 21, no. 2: 620. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21020620