Lists
Lists
Kaveripakam, Sathish, Chinthaginjala, Ravikumar, Anbazhagan, Rajesh, Alibakhshikenari, Mohammad, Virdee, Bal Singh, Khan, Salahuddin, Pau, Giovanni, See, Chan Hwang, Dayoub, Iyad, Livreri, Patrizia and Abd-Alhameed, Raed (2023) Enhancement of precise underwater object localization. Radio Science, 58 (9). pp. 1-29. ISSN 1944-799X
Underwater communication applications extensively use localization services for object identification. Because of their significant impact on ocean exploration and monitoring, underwater wireless sensor networks (UWSN) are becoming increasingly popular, and acoustic communications have largely overtaken radio frequency (RF) broadcasts as the dominant means of communication. The two localization methods that are most frequently employed are those that estimate the angle of arrival (AOA) and the time difference of arrival (TDoA). The military and civilian sectors rely heavily on UWSN for object identification in the underwater environment. As a result, there is a need in UWSN for an accurate localization technique that accounts for dynamic nature of the underwater environment. Time and position data are the two key parameters to accurately define the position of an object. Moreover, due to climate change there is now a need to constrain energy consumption by UWSN to limit carbon emission to meet net-zero target by 2050. To meet these challenges, we have developed an efficient localization algorithm for determining an object position based on the angle and distance of arrival of beacon signals. We have considered the factors like sensor nodes not being in time sync with each other and the fact that the speed of sound varies in water. Our simulation results show that the proposed approach can achieve great localization accuracy while accounting for temporal synchronization inaccuracies. When compared to existing localization approaches, the mean estimation error (MEE) and energy consumption figures, the proposed approach outperforms them. The MEEs is shown to vary between 84.2154m and 93.8275m for four trials, 61.2256m and 92.7956m for eight trials, and 42.6584m and 119.5228m for twelve trials. Comparatively, the distance-based measurements show higher accuracy than the angle-based measurements.
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.
Download (2MB) | Preview
 |
View Item |