FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2396543455> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2396543455 abstract "The inertial positioning is becoming a technique gradually more and more used both in geomatics and in professional world, thanks to the improvement of the Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) platforms performances combined to the reduction of the electronical element size and cost. A mass-market IMU platform has today costs of about few euros: this kind of instruments are installed in a widely instruments, typically used for integrated positioning such as smartphones, Mobile Mapping System (MMS) or Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV), where the requested accuracy is lower. These kind of devices are traditionally called as mass market, considering the level of distribution and the cost, but the quality and performance of the internal sensors could be completely different. In the case of low cost IMU is also possible to obtain completely different performance, even considering similar devices. In this work the performance of two IMU mass-market platforms have been analyzed, used in different positioning modes (static and kinematic), integrated also with GNSS single frequency receivers, analyzing the positioning accuracies obtainable in the presence or absence of obstacles that obstruct the satellite visibility. The comparison of these results will be carried out using a tactical grade platform, defined as a reference. Firstly some bias analyses are made, focusing the attention on errors estimation: the achievable accuracies in static mode will analyzed, estimating the noise through the classical tests available in the literature. These test were carried out in laboratory, with purpose to work in free magnetic field condition, considering that several IMUs contains an internal magnetometer which is disturbed by eventual artificial magnetic field. The Allan Variance of each sensors were estimated in order to identify eventually the flicker noise, white noise and random noise in the single devices. Each dataset (acceleration, angular velocity, magnetic field) has been also analyzed with wavelet filter, with purpose to remote the noise, using the filtered data for estimating the navigation solution. After that, the precision and accuracies obtainable in real conditions was investigated; these performance have been evaluated analyzing some kinematic trajectories and considering a low-cost Mobile Mapping system (MMS), which belongs to the Geomatics Group of the Politecnico di Torino. Accuracies of positions and attitude will be evaluated considering different methods of data processing in post processing approaches. Both the loosely coupled (LC) and tightly coupled (TC) approaches are followed and the results obtained with all two methods are shown and described. To do this, the Inertial Explorer 8.60 post processing software was used to determine positions and attitudes. In this study, an interesting comparison about two different mass-market IMU generations is realized, in particular for mobile mapping applications." @default.
• W2396543455 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2396543455 creator A5017075999 @default.
• W2396543455 creator A5035769326 @default.
• W2396543455 date "2016-04-01" @default.
• W2396543455 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W2396543455 title "Comparison of two different mass-market IMU generations: Bias analyses and real time applications" @default.
• W2396543455 cites W1564768010 @default.
• W2396543455 cites W2018815059 @default.
• W2396543455 cites W2039944338 @default.
• W2396543455 cites W2047842548 @default.
• W2396543455 cites W2062520712 @default.
• W2396543455 cites W2099387486 @default.
• W2396543455 cites W2146345195 @default.
• W2396543455 cites W2152067647 @default.
• W2396543455 cites W2152716595 @default.
• W2396543455 cites W2156877688 @default.
• W2396543455 cites W2159012223 @default.
• W2396543455 cites W2164203636 @default.
• W2396543455 cites W2179059024 @default.
• W2396543455 cites W2276427944 @default.
• W2396543455 cites W231713690 @default.
• W2396543455 doi "https://doi.org/10.1109/plans.2016.7479680" @default.
• W2396543455 hasPublicationYear "2016" @default.
• W2396543455 type Work @default.
• W2396543455 sameAs 2396543455 @default.
• W2396543455 citedByCount "5" @default.
• W2396543455 countsByYear W23965434552017 @default.
• W2396543455 countsByYear W23965434552018 @default.
• W2396543455 countsByYear W23965434552020 @default.
• W2396543455 countsByYear W23965434552022 @default.
• W2396543455 crossrefType "proceedings-article" @default.
• W2396543455 hasAuthorship W2396543455A5017075999 @default.
• W2396543455 hasAuthorship W2396543455A5035769326 @default.
• W2396543455 hasConcept C154945302 @default.
• W2396543455 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2396543455 hasConcept C79061980 @default.
• W2396543455 hasConceptScore W2396543455C154945302 @default.
• W2396543455 hasConceptScore W2396543455C41008148 @default.
• W2396543455 hasConceptScore W2396543455C79061980 @default.
• W2396543455 hasLocation W23965434551 @default.
• W2396543455 hasOpenAccess W2396543455 @default.
• W2396543455 hasPrimaryLocation W23965434551 @default.
• W2396543455 hasRelatedWork W2040913503 @default.
• W2396543455 hasRelatedWork W2091018038 @default.
• W2396543455 hasRelatedWork W2225378543 @default.
• W2396543455 hasRelatedWork W2725046151 @default.
• W2396543455 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W2396543455 hasRelatedWork W2899084033 @default.
• W2396543455 hasRelatedWork W3110613631 @default.
• W2396543455 hasRelatedWork W3166845860 @default.
• W2396543455 hasRelatedWork W3202472720 @default.
• W2396543455 hasRelatedWork W4287122200 @default.
• W2396543455 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2396543455 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2396543455 magId "2396543455" @default.
• W2396543455 workType "article" @default.