Workshop on Precision Indoor Tracking and Positioning

Transcription

1 Workshop on Precision Indoor Tracking and Positioning The following slides contain informal overall summaries and conclusions from the working sessions.

2 Overall Workshop Conclusions Need Systems approach Need self rescue? yes Most needed/productive research directions? Mixed sensor approaches Cheaper inertial sensors Mixed network some carrying pure ranging systems at optimum operation and a few carrying both ranging and inertial sensors: but what if the mesh gets very sparse like 1 node Integrate RF and inertial methods but not mesh Need to continue to pursue a variety of research directions Preventative aspect improve operational effectiveness, enhance training A capable homing system would be of great value The licensing issue?? Exemption for safety of life use? Congressional Fire Services Institute provides a forum NFPA developing umbrella standard for all electronic equipment (NFPA 1800) (other standards for PASS and thermal imaging

3 RF Panel Sergey Makaroff, moderator August

4 What capabilities have been clearly demonstrated? Dennis McCrady (ITT tests): open-field accuracy 0.5 m indoor (simple) accuracy - 3 m - Single frequency TOA algorithm + Kalman filtering - Very well controlled measurements - Other sets of measurements (Comm + Ranging) - multiple results NIST field tests Other (unsuccessful) tests over last 10 years? WPI: We need to define harsh environment We re certain some building will break any system TimeDomain: In addition to solving the multipath problem we need to move to the deployment problems

5 Necessity for test matrix/standards Nelson Bryner (NIST): Need to determine a test matrix that - Covers different building types - Includes different conditions/scenarios - Possibly has a narrow focus in every case - One reference: NFBE2005 Standards are also necessary for any kind of RF product and field tests (different opinions) We need to measure more than go/no-go results of these tests build a matrix of capabilities

6 Necessity to know exactly the firefighter requirements (1) What accuracy is appropriate for locating firefighters? A: 1 ft, maybe 2 ft What is more important: Tactical or Rescue? A: Rescue is critical Dio: If we don t get to the firefighter in 4-5 minutes it is a recovery mission and not a rescue mission. We need something that will help the firefighter find the exit his/herself. System time response/accuracy is critical for a rescue operation False readings are unacceptable The On switch should work automatically once entering the emergency zone Life cycle/battery operation discussion Dissatisfaction with some past devices

7 Necessity to know exactly the firefighter requirements (2) Firefighter requirements +Technical capabilities A set of common requirements? Firefighter requirements are very clear and specific. Everyone should know them. Better contacts are necessary After all is said, the firefighters decide Concurrence is a part of the job

8 Civilians? Civilians rescue is also important This is a part of firefighter job Existing cell phones may offer a good solution

9 Necessity for more focused groups? At least three different directions in RF positioning exist. Should we separate technologies and requirements? Different tasks: Tactical/Rescue Different technologies Need to subdivide topic between focused groups? Do we really need to subdivide the RF systems? Isn t it the same system after all (with regard to end results)?

10 RF is unable to solve the problem alone Peter Sherman (Draper): - what firefighters really need is a combination of RF + inertial navigation - If RF geolocation within a floor is perfect, is it enough? Discussion on combination of different RF tools (GPS + indoor gelocation) A short note on the combination with acoustic tools

11 Homing and Inertial systems Working session Aug 8th Moderated by W. Michalson

12 Inertial Navigation Who is working on inertial tracking systems? Few people compared to the RF set. Radio navigation attracts more attention. Much inertial work derives from military systems Well-understood. Capable of operation in harsh environments (artillery delivered systems).

13 Navigation v. Location It s good to know where you are, but you need to get that data out. Radio has the advantage of being able to look from the outside in. Inertial systems collect data on the inside which needs to be disseminated.

14 Navigation and Communications The fusion of communications and navigation is key. There needs to be a reach-back communications mechanism. Being able to communicate to a firefighter isn t entirely simple, and getting the location back and forth is non-trivial. How is data best presented to a firefighter?

15 Working in a Maze The firefighting environment is a maze. Homing vs. the RF location overview being a rat in the maze versus being able to see the whole maze from a bird s eye view. If you re on the outside You need to have a data link to get data from the INS. If you re on the inside You need to know your best exit paths (not necessarily shortest distance). However: The maze can change the way you went in is not always the way you can get out.

16 Integrated Solutions RF location, homing and inertial navigation all have a place in the environment An integrated solution will provide the best outcome. Each technology has application in certain situations. Multiple independent systems leads to high cost complex logistics.

17 Accuracy, Availability and Integrity Accuracy is only one metric Not necessarily the most important Availability If the equipment doesn t work, it will be cast aside. Integrity How do you detect when your system is providing tainted information?

18 Performance Metrics What metrics are really important? Given two equally plausible paths: How do you choose? Does the system need better than human performance? FMEA in the environment FMEA is normally an equipment issue. Perhaps it needs to be an environment issue also.