Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T10:48:20.928Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Constrained Total Extended Kalman Filter for Integrated Navigation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2018

Vahid Mahboub  and
Dorsa Mohammadi
Vahid Mahboub*
Affiliation:
(Young Researchers and Elite Club, Zanjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan, Iran)
Dorsa Mohammadi
Affiliation:
(Department of RS & GIS, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran)
*
(E-mail: vahid_mahboobk@ut.ac.ir)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this contribution, an improved Extended Kalman Filter (EKF), named the Total Extended Kalman Filter (TEKF) is proposed for integrated navigation. It can consider the neglected random observed quantities which may appear in a dynamic model. In particular, this paper will consider the case of vision-based navigation. This algorithm is equipped with quadratic constraints and makes use of condition equations. The paper will show that the refined data from different sensors including a Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver, an Inertial Navigation System (INS) and remote sensors can be fused into a Constrained Total Extended Kalman Filter (CTEKF) algorithm. The CTEKF algorithm is applied to a case study in the Guilan province in the north of Iran. The results show the efficiency of the proposed algorithm.

Keywords

Total Kalman FilterExtended Kalman FilterIntegrated NavigationDynamic Errors-in-Variables
Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Navigation , Volume 71 , Issue 4 , July 2018 , pp. 971 - 988
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Navigation 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Amiri-Simkooei, A.R. (2017). Weighted Total Least Squares with Singular Covariance Matrices Subject to Weighted and Hard Constraints. Journal of Surveying Engineering, 143(3), 04017018.Google Scholar
Fang, X. (2014). A structured and constrained Total Least-Squares solution with cross-covariances, Studia Geophysica et Geodaetica, 58(1), 1–16.Google Scholar
Fang, X. (2011). Weighted total least squares solutions for applications in geodesy. Ph.D. Thesis. Leibniz University, Hannover.Google Scholar
Gelb, A. (1974). Applied Optimal Estimation. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Grafarend, E. and Awange, J.L. (2012). Applications of linear and nonlinear models: fixed effects, random effects, and total least squares. Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
Jazaeri, S., Schaffrin, B. and Snow, K. (2014). On Weighted Total Least-Squares adjustment with multiple constraints and singular dispersion matrices. Zeitschrift für Vermessungswesen, 139, 229–240.Google Scholar
Jazwinski, A.H. (1970). Stochastic Process and Filtering Theory. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Jekeli, C. (2001). Inertial Navigation Systems with Geodetic Applications. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin.Google Scholar
Julier, S.J. and Uhlmann, J.K. (1997). A new extension of the Kalman filter to nonlinear systems. In International symposium Aerospace/Defense Sensing, Simulation. and Controls (Vol. 3, No. 26, pp. 182–193).Google Scholar
Kalman, R.E. (1960). A New Approach to Linear Filtering and Prediction Problems. Transactions of the ASME, Series D, Journal of Basic Engineering, 82, 34–45.Google Scholar
Mahboub, V. (2012). On weighted total least-squares for geodetic transformations. Journal of Geodesy, 86, 359–367, DOI: 10.1007/s00190-011-0524-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahboub, V. (2014). Variance component estimation in errors-in-variables models and a rigorous total least-squares approach. Studia Geophysica et Geodaetica, 58(1), 17–40.Google Scholar
Mahboub, V. (2016). A weighted least-squares solution to a 3-D symmetrical similarity transformation without linearization. Studia Geophysica et Geodaetica, 60(2), 195.Google Scholar
Mahboub, V., & Sharifi, M.A. (2013a). On weighted total least-squares with linear and quadratic constraints. Journal of Geodesy, 87(3), 279–286.Google Scholar
Mahboub, V. and Sharifi, M.A. (2013b). Erratum to: On weighted total least squares with linear and quadratic constraints. Journal of Geodesy, 87, 607–608.Google Scholar
Mahboub, V., Amiri-Simkooei, A.R. and Sharifi, M.A. (2013). Iteratively reweighted total least squares: a robust estimation in errors-in-variables models. Survey Review, 45(329), 92–99.Google Scholar
Mahboub, V., Ardalan, A.A. and Ebrahimzadeh, S. (2015). Adjustment of non-typical errors-in-variables models. Acta Geodaetica et Geophysica, 50(2), 207–218.Google Scholar
Mahboub, V., Saadatseresht, M. and Ardalan, A.A., (2017a). A general weighted total Kalman filter algorithm with numerical evaluation. Studia Geophysica et Geodaetica, 61(1), 19–34.Google Scholar
Mahboub, V., Saadatseresht, M. and Ardalan, A.A., (2017b). A solution to dynamic errors-in-variables within system equations. Acta Geodaetica et Geophysica, 53, 1–14. DOI 10.1007/s40328-017-0201-0.Google Scholar
Neitzel, F. (2010). Generalization of total least-squares 1 on example of unweighted and weighted similarity transformation. Journal of Geodesy, 84, 751–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paláncz, B. and Awange, L. (2012). Application of Pareto optimality to linear models with errors-in-all-variables. Journal of Geodesy, 86(6), 531–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanso, F. (1986). Statistical methods in physical geodesy. In: Sunkel, H (ed) Mathematical and numerical techniques in physical geodesy. Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences, 7, 49–155. Springer, Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaffrin, B. (2016). Adjusting the Errors-In-Variables Model: Linearized Least-Squares vs. Nonlinear Total Least-Squares. VIII Hotine-Marussi Symposium on Mathematical Geodesy Volume 142 of the series International Association of Geodesy Symposia, 301–307.Google Scholar
Schaffrin, B. and Felus, Y. (2008). On the multivariate total least-squares approach to empirical coordinate transformations: Three algorithms. Journal of Geodesy, 82, 353–383.Google Scholar
Schaffrin, B. and Uzun, S. (2011). Errors-In-Variables for Mobile Mapping Algorithms in the Presence of Outliers. Archives of Photogrammetry, Cartography and Remote Sensing, 22, 377–387.Google Scholar
Schaffrin, B., & Iz, H. B. (2008). Towards total Kalman filtering for mobile mapping. In 5th International Symposium on Mobile Mapping Technology.Google Scholar
Schaffrin, B., Neitzel, F., Uzun, S. and Mahboub, V. (2012). Modifying Cadzow's algorithm to generate the optimal TLS-solution for the structured EIV-Model of a similarity transformation. Journal of Geodetic Science, 2(2), 98–106.Google Scholar
Shen, Y.Z., Li, B.F. and Chen, Y. (2011). An iterative solution of weighted total least squares adjustment. Journal of Geodesy, 85, 229–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheta, B. (2012). Vision based Navigation (VBN) of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV). Doctoral dissertation, University of Calgary.Google Scholar
Skaloud, J. (1999). Problems in direct-georeferencing by INS/DGPS in the airborne environment. In ISPRS, Workshop on “Direct versus indirect methods of sensor orientation”, Commission III, WG III/1, Barcelona, Spain (No. TOPO-CONF-1999-015).Google Scholar
Skoglund, M.A., Hendeby, G. and Axehill, D. (2015). Extended Kalman filter modifications based on an optimization view point. In Information Fusion (Fusion), 2015 18th International Conference on, 1856–1861.Google Scholar
Snow, K. (2012). Topics in total least-squares adjustment within the errors-in-variables model: singular cofactor matrices and prior information. The Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Teunissen, P. (1989). First and second moments of non-linear least-squares estimators. Journal of Geodesy, 63(3), 253–262.Google Scholar
Teunissen, P.J.G. (1990). Nonlinear least squares. Manuscripta Geodaetica, 15, 137–150.Google Scholar
Teunissen, P.J.G. (1991). On the local convergence of the iterated Extended Kalman Filter. Proceedings of the XX General Assembly of the IUGG, IAG Section IV. Vienna: IAG, Aug 1991, 177–184.Google Scholar
Teunissen, P.J.G. and Khodabandeh, A. (2013). BLUE, BLUP and the Kalman filter: some new results. Journal of Geodesy, 87(4), 461–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Volpe, J.A. (2001). Vulnerability assessment of the transport infrastructure relying on the global positioning system. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy, U.S. Department of Transportation, Report, Aug.Google Scholar
Welch, G. and Bishop, G. (2001) An Introduction to the Kalman Filter. SIGGRAPH 2001, Los Angeles, CA, August 12–17.Google Scholar
Zeng, W., Liu, J. and Yao, Y. (2015). On partial errors-in-variables models with inequality constraints of parameters and variables. Journal of Geodesy, 89(2), 111–119.Google Scholar
Zhang, S., Tong, X. and Zhang, K. (2013). A solution to EIV model with inequality constraints and its geodetic applications. Journal of Geodesy, 87(1), 23–28.Google Scholar