The possible applications and benefits of autonomous Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) use in urban areas are gaining considerable attention. Before these possibilities can be realized, it is essential that UAVs be able to navigate reliably and precisely in urban environments. The most common means of determining the location of a UAV is to utilize position measurements from Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS). In urban environments, however, GNSS measurements are significantly degraded due to occlusions and multipath. This research analyzes the use of camera Line-of-Sight (LOS) measurements to self-describing fiducials as a replacement for conventional GNSS measurements. An extended Kalman filter (EKF) is developed and validated for the purpose of combining continuous measurements from an Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) with the discrete LOS measurements to accurately estimate the states of a UAV. The sensitivity of the estimation error covariance to various system parameters is assessed, including IMU grade, fiducial placement, vehicle altitude, and image processing frequency.
StolaroffJK. The need for a life cycle assessment of drone-based commercial package delivery. Technical Report. Livermore, CA: Lawrence Livermore national lab, 2014.
4.
Al-KaffAMorenoFMJoséLJS, et al.VBII-UAV: vision-based infrastructure inspection-UAV. In: World conference on information systems and technologies. Berlin, Germany: Springer international publishing; 2017, pp. 221–231. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-56538-5_24.
5.
MasumMAArrofiMKJatiG, et al.Simulation of intelligent unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) for military surveillance. In: 2013 international conference on advanced computer science and information systems (ICACSIS). Piscataway, NJ: EEE; 2013, pp. 161–166. DOI: 10.1109/ICACSIS.2013.6761569.
6.
RodriguezPAGeckleWJBartonJD, et al.An emergency response UAV surveillance system. AMIA Annu Symp Proc2006; 2006: 1078.
7.
KopardekarPH. Unmanned aerial system (UAS) traffic management (UTM): enabling low-altitude airspace and UAS operations, https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20140013436 (2014, accessed 23 November 2020).
8.
LangleyRB. Dilution of precision. GPS World1999; 10(5): 52–59.
9.
El-RabbanyA. Introduction to GPS: the global positioning system. Norwood, MA: Artech House, 2002.
WingMGEklundAKelloggLD. Consumer-grade global positioning system (GPS) accuracy and reliability. J For2005; 103(4): 169–173.
12.
ModschingMKramerR. Field trial on GPS accuracy in a medium size city: the influence of built-up. In: 3rd workshop on positioning, navigation and communication, Hannover, Germany, 16 March 2006, vol. 2006, pp. 209–218.
13.
KapoorRRamasamySGardiA, et al.UAV navigation using signals of opportunity in urban environments: a review. Energy Proced2017; 110: 377–383.
14.
Al-MoukhlesHAbdel-QaderIAbedAK. Multiple-fingerprints technique for WLAN and compressive sensing based IPS. In: 2018 IEEE 8th annual computing and communication workshop and conference (CCWC). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2018, pp. 707–713. DOI: 10.1109/CCWC.2018.8301665.
15.
HanBZhaoL. An indoor positioning algorithm based on Wi-Fi fingerprint and inertial navigation system. In: 2017 36th Chinese control conference (CCC). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2017, pp. 6067–6072. DOI: 10.23919/ChiCC.2017.8028322.
16.
JungW-SKoY-B. IEEE 802.11 ac based client centered indoor positioning system. In: 2016 IEEE Canadian conference on electrical and computer engineering (CCECE). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2016, pp. 1–4. DOI: 10.1109/CCECE.2016.7726812.
17.
RagothamanSMaarefMKassasZM. Multipath-optimal UAV trajectory planning for urban UAV navigation with cellular signals. In: 2019 IEEE 90th vehicular technology conference (VTC2019-Fall). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2019, pp. 1–6. DOI: 10.1109/VTCFall.2019.8891218.
18.
RabinowitzMSpilkerJJJr. Position location using digital video broadcast television signals. Patent US7372405B2. Alexandria, VA: USPTO, 2006.
19.
TsengCHYenJ-S. Enhanced Gaussian mixture model of RSSI purification for indoor positioning. J Syst Architecture2017; 81: 1–6.
20.
HuangLGanXYuB, et al.An innovative fingerprint location algorithm for indoor positioning based on array pseudolite. Sensors2019; 19(20): 4420.
21.
KochDPWheelerDOBeardRW, et al.Relative multiplicative extended Kalman filter for observable GPS-denied navigation. Int J Robot Res2020; 39(9).
22.
NisterDNaroditskyOBergenJ. Visual odometry. In: Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE computer society conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, vol. 1. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2004, pp. I–II. DOI: 10.1109/CVPR.2004.1315094. CVPR.
23.
WangCWangTLiangJ, et al.Monocular vision and IMU based navigation for a small unmanned helicopter. In : 2012 7th IEEE conference on industrial electronics and applications (ICIEA), Singapore, Singapore, 18 July 2012. Singapore: IEEE, 2012, pp. 1694–1699. DOI: 10.1109/ICIEA.2012.6360998.
24.
ChowdharyGJohnsonENMagreeD, et al.GPS-denied indoor and outdoor monocular vision aided navigation and control of unmanned aircraft. J Field Robotics2013; 30(3): 415–438.
25.
WeissSScaramuzzaDSiegwartR. Monocular-SLAM-based navigation for autonomous micro helicopters in GPS-denied environments. J Field Robotics2011; 28(6): 854–874.
26.
BlöschMWeissSScaramuzzaD, et al.Vision based MAV navigation in unknown and unstructured environments. In: 2010 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2010, pp. 21–28. DOI: 10.1109/ROBOT.2010.5509920.
27.
CiveraJDavisonAJMontielJ. Inverse depth parametrization for monocular SLAM. IEEE Trans Robot2008; 24(5): 932–945.
28.
Jonghyuk KimJSukkariehS. Autonomous airborne navigation in unknown terrain environments. IEEE Trans Aerosp Electron Syst2004; 40(3): 1031–1045.
WheelerDOKochDPJacksonJS, et al.Relative navigation: a keyframe-based approach for observable GPS-degraded navigation. IEEE Control Syst2018; 38(4): 30–48.
31.
HemannGSinghSKaessM. Long-range GPS-denied aerial inertial navigation with LIDAR localization. In: 2016 IEEE/RSJ International conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2016, pp. 1659–1666. DOI: 10.1109/IROS.2016.7759267.
NguyenPHKimKWLeeYW, et al.Remote marker-based tracking for UAV landing using visible-light camera sensor. Sensors2017; 17(9): 1987.
35.
YuCCaiJChenQ. Multi-resolution visual fiducial and assistant navigation system for unmanned aerial vehicle landing. Aerosp Sci Technol2017; 67: 249–256.
36.
ClausDFitzgibbonAW. Reliable fiducial detection in natural scenes. In: PajdlaTMatasJ (eds) European conference on computer vision. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2004, pp. 469–480. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-24673-2_38.
37.
CesarDBdSGaudigCFritscheM, et al.An evaluation of artificial fiducial markers in underwater environments. In: OCEANS 2015-Genova. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2015, pp. 1–6.
38.
OlsonE. AprilTag: a robust and flexible visual fiducial system. In: 2011 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2011, pp. 3400–3407. DOI: 10.1109/ICRA.2011.5979561.
39.
WangJOlsonE. AprilTag 2: efficient and robust fiducial detection. In: 2016 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2016, pp. 4193–4198. DOI: 10.1109/IROS.2016.7759617.
40.
KrogiusMHaggenmillerAOlsonE. Flexible layouts for fiducial tags. In: IROS 2019. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2019, pp. 1898–1903. DOI: 10.1109/IROS40897.2019.8967787.
41.
FialaM. ARTag, a fiducial marker system using digital techniques. In: 2005 IEEE computer society conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (CVPR’05), vol. 2. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2005, pp. 590–596. DOI: 10.1109/CVPR.2005.74.
ShabalinaKSagitovALiH, et al.Comparing fiducial marker systems occlusion resilience through a robot eye. In: 2017 10th international conference on developments in eSystems engineering (DeSE). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2017, pp. 273–278. DOI: 10.1109/DeSE.2017.39.
44.
CensiAStrubelJBrandliC, et al.Low-latency localization by active LED markers tracking using a dynamic vision sensor. In: 2013 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2013, pp. 891–898. DOI: 10.1109/IROS.2013.6696456.
45.
FaesslerMMuegglerESchwabeK, et al.A monocular pose estimation system based on infrared LEDs. In: 2014 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2014, pp. 907–913. DOI: 10.1109/ICRA.2014.6906962.
46.
CavaniniLCiminiGFerracutiF, et al.A QR-code localization system for mobile robots: application to smart wheelchairs. In: 2017 European conference on mobile robots (ECMR). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2017, pp. 1–6. DOI: 10.1109/ECMR.2017.8098667.
