-
Something wrong with this record ?
Comparison of Four RTK Receivers Operating in the Static and Dynamic Modes Using Measurement Robotic Arm
J. Kadeřábek, V. Shapoval, P. Matějka, M. Kroulík, F. Kumhála
Language English Country Switzerland
Document type Journal Article
NLK
Directory of Open Access Journals
from 2001
PubMed Central
from 2003
Europe PubMed Central
from 2003
ProQuest Central
from 2001-01-01
Open Access Digital Library
from 2001-01-01
Open Access Digital Library
from 2003-01-01
Health & Medicine (ProQuest)
from 2001-01-01
ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources
from 2001
PubMed
34883796
DOI
10.3390/s21237794
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- MeSH
- Motion MeSH
- Movement MeSH
- Robotic Surgical Procedures * MeSH
- Records MeSH
- Acceleration MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
While the existing research provides a wealth of information about the static properties of RTK receivers, less is known about their dynamic properties, although it is clear that the vast majority of field operations take place when the machine is moving. A new method using a MRA for the evaluation of RTK receivers in movement with a precise circular reference trajectory (r = 3 m) was proposed. This reference method was developed with the greatest possible emphasis on the positional, time and repeatable accuracy of ground truth. Four phases of the measurement scenario (static, acceleration, uniform movement and deceleration) were used in order to compare four different types of RTK receiver horizontal operation accuracy over three measurement days. The worst result of one of the receivers was measured at SSR = 13.767% in dynamic movement. Since the same "low-cost" receiver without an INS unit had SSR = 98.14% in previous static measurements, so it can be assumed that the motion had a very significant effect on the dynamic properties of this receiver. On the other hand, the best "high-end" receiver with an INS unit had SSR = 96.938% during the dynamic testing scenarios. The median values of the deviations were always better during uniform movements than during acceleration or braking. In general, the positioning accuracy was worse in the dynamic mode than in the static one for all the receivers. Error indicators (RMSerr and Me) were found several times higher in the dynamic mode than in the static one. These facts should be considered in the future development of modern agricultural machinery and technology.
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc22003174
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20220127150613.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 220113s2021 sz f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.3390/s21237794 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)34883796
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a sz
- 100 1_
- $a Kadeřábek, Jan $u Department of Agricultural Machines, Faculty of Engineering, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, 165 00 Prague, Czech Republic
- 245 10
- $a Comparison of Four RTK Receivers Operating in the Static and Dynamic Modes Using Measurement Robotic Arm / $c J. Kadeřábek, V. Shapoval, P. Matějka, M. Kroulík, F. Kumhála
- 520 9_
- $a While the existing research provides a wealth of information about the static properties of RTK receivers, less is known about their dynamic properties, although it is clear that the vast majority of field operations take place when the machine is moving. A new method using a MRA for the evaluation of RTK receivers in movement with a precise circular reference trajectory (r = 3 m) was proposed. This reference method was developed with the greatest possible emphasis on the positional, time and repeatable accuracy of ground truth. Four phases of the measurement scenario (static, acceleration, uniform movement and deceleration) were used in order to compare four different types of RTK receiver horizontal operation accuracy over three measurement days. The worst result of one of the receivers was measured at SSR = 13.767% in dynamic movement. Since the same "low-cost" receiver without an INS unit had SSR = 98.14% in previous static measurements, so it can be assumed that the motion had a very significant effect on the dynamic properties of this receiver. On the other hand, the best "high-end" receiver with an INS unit had SSR = 96.938% during the dynamic testing scenarios. The median values of the deviations were always better during uniform movements than during acceleration or braking. In general, the positioning accuracy was worse in the dynamic mode than in the static one for all the receivers. Error indicators (RMSerr and Me) were found several times higher in the dynamic mode than in the static one. These facts should be considered in the future development of modern agricultural machinery and technology.
- 650 _2
- $a zrychlení $7 D000054
- 650 _2
- $a pohyb těles $7 D009038
- 650 _2
- $a pohyb $7 D009068
- 650 _2
- $a záznamy jako téma $7 D011996
- 650 12
- $a roboticky asistované výkony $7 D065287
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Shapoval, Vadym $u Department of Agricultural Machines, Faculty of Engineering, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, 165 00 Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Matějka, Pavel $u Department of Technological Equipment of Buildings, Faculty of Engineering, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, 165 00 Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Kroulík, Milan $u Department of Agricultural Machines, Faculty of Engineering, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, 165 00 Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Kumhála, František $u Department of Agricultural Machines, Faculty of Engineering, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, 165 00 Prague, Czech Republic
- 773 0_
- $w MED00008309 $t Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) $x 1424-8220 $g Roč. 21, č. 23 (2021)
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34883796 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20220113 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20220127150610 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1750823 $s 1154323
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2021 $b 21 $c 23 $e 20211123 $i 1424-8220 $m Sensors $n Sensors Basel $x MED00008309
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20220113