Indoor Local Positioning System For Zigbee, Based On Rssi Shashank Tadakamadla

Mid Sweden University
The Department of Information Technology and Media (ITM)
Author: Shashank Tadakamadla

E-mail address: shta0500@student.miun.se
Study programme: Master of Science in Electrical Engineering, 20 points
Examiner: Prof. Bengt Oelmann, Bengt.Oelmann@miun.se
Tutor: Prof. Bengt Oelmann, Bengt.Oelmann@miun.se
Date: 2006-10-09
M.Sc. Thesis report

within Electrical Engineering D, Electronics Design
Programme, 20 points
Indoor Local Positioning System
For ZigBee, Based On RSSI
Shashank Tadakamadla
For ZigBee, Based On RSSI Abstract
Shashank Tadakamadla 10.10.2006
Abstract

This thesis report describes a model for monitoring the presence and
movements of vehicles and humans in an indoor environment. In IEEE
802.15.4 the Received Signal Strength Indicator is used to determine the quality
of the communication from one node to another. By tagging vehicles/humans
with a ZigBee node and deploy a number of nodes at fixed position in the
room, the received signal strength indicator can be used to determine the
position of tagged object. This system operates by recording and processing
signal strength information at multiple base stations positioned to provide
information in the area of interest. It combines Euclidean distance technique
with signal strength matrix obtained during offline measurement to
determine the location of user. The experimental results presented in this
report demonstrate the ability of this system to estimate user’s location with a
high degree of accuracy.
Keywords: ZigBee based user location and tracking, RSSI, Euclidean distance
technique, SENTIO.
ii
For ZigBee, Based On RSSI Acknowledgements
Acknowledgements

This work would not have been possible without the support of my friends
and mentors. Specifically, I would like to thank my advisor, Bengt Oelmann,
who has given me all the support and guidance I needed as a Master student.
I am very grateful to have had trust in my ability, and I have often benefited
from his insight and advice. I would also like to thank Fredrik Linnarsson,
Niklas Lepisto, and Cheng Peng from whom I have had benefit of learning
from. I also owe a great deal of thanks for their time and advice, which is
reflected in this thesis.
Finally, I would like to acknowledge my friends and parents, who have
supported me through these efforts.
iii
For ZigBee, Based On RSSI Table of Contents
Table of Contents
Abstract ....................................................................................................................... ii
Acknowledgements .................................................................................................iii
Table of Contents..................................................................................................... iv
List of Tables............................................................................................................. vi
List of Figures .......................................................................................................... vii
Terminology / Notation ........................................................................................viii
1 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................1
1.1 Introduction to the study ...........................................................................1
1.2 Background ..................................................................................................2
1.3 Objectives .....................................................................................................3
1.4 Research Questions.....................................................................................4
1.5 Scope .............................................................................................................4
1.6 Methodology................................................................................................5
1.7 Outline ..........................................................................................................6
2 LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................8
2.1 Common components of indoor positioning system ............................8
2.2 Classification of Indoor positioning systems ..........................................9
2.3 Indoor local positioning using ZigBee based on RSSI .........................11
2.4 Protocols and Industry standards for WSN ..........................................14
3 RECEIVED SIGNAL STRENGTH (RSS).........................................................26
3.1 Parameters that affect RSS .......................................................................26
3.2 Related work analysis...............................................................................28
3.3 Properties of RSSI......................................................................................29
4 OBJECT TRACKING ...........................................................................................30
4.1 Introduction ...............................................................................................30
4.2 Overview of hardware product ..............................................................30
4.3 Experimental Testbed...............................................................................32
4.4 Obtaining data from the sensor network ..............................................33
4.5 Object tracking application: Testing and Evaluation...........................33
5 RESULTS ................................................................................................................38
5.1 Measurement setup ..................................................................................38
5.2 Number of samples test ...........................................................................39
5.3 0ne dimensional test .................................................................................40
5.4 Two dimensional test ...............................................................................41
5.5 Causes of error in location determination.............................................41
6 DISCUSSIONS......................................................................................................44
6.1 Summary and Conclusion .......................................................................44
6.2 Future work ...............................................................................................44
iv
For ZigBee, Based On RSSI Table of Contents
APPENDIX 1 .............................................................................................................45
APPENDIX 2 .............................................................................................................46
APPENDIX 3 .............................................................................................................47
REFERENCES ...........................................................................................................49

v
For ZigBee, Based On RSSI List of Tables
List of Tables
Table 1 Comparison of Indoor Positioning Systems [7] 3
Table 2 Performance comparison of Indoor Positioning Systems [7] 3
Table 3 Frequency bands and data rates for IEEE 802.15.4 based on the IEEE
802.15.4 standard [18] 16
Table 4 Format based on the IEEE 802.15.4 standard [18] 17
Table 5 General MAC frame format: IEEE 802.15.4 standard [18] 17
Table 6 Beacon frame format [18] 18
Table 7 Data frame format [18] 18
Table 8 Acknowledgement frame format [18] 18
Table 9 Command frame format [18] 18
Table 10 Classification of factors the affect RSS [7] 27
Table 11 Accuracy of positioning system 37
Table 12 One dimensional position estimation results 41
vi
For ZigBee, Based On RSSI List of Figures
List of Figures
Figure 1 Schema of thesis work 5
Figure 2 Block diagram representing hardware module 8
Figure 3 Taxonomy of positioning system [7] 10
Figure 4 Star and peer‐to‐peer topologies in LR‐WPAN [18] 15
Figure 5 WPAN architecture [18] 16
Figure 6 Example of super frame structure [18] 19
Figure 7 Communication from a device to a PAN coordinator in (a) a beacon‐
enabled network, and (b) a non‐beacon enabled network [18] 20
Figure 8 Communication from a PAN coordinator to a device in (a) a beacon‐
enabled network, and (b) a non‐beacon enabled network [18] 21
Figure 9 Overview of the coverage for different wireless communication
standards [17] 21
Figure 10 IEEE 802.15.4/ZigBee stack [20] 22
Figure 11 IEEE 802.15.4/ZigBee stack [17] 23
Figure 12 ZigBee secure frame in MAC layer [17] 24
Figure 13 ZigBee secure frame in network layer [17] 24
Figure 14 ZigBee secure frame in application layer [17] 25
Figure 15 SENTIO Platform [8] 31
Figure 16 Layout of Masterʹs Room 32
Figure 17 Flow chart representing the algorithm of fixed sensors 35
Figure 18 Flow chart representing the algorithm of main sensor 37
Figure 19 Test bed for one dimensional test in Masters Room 38
Figure 20 Histogram plot of RSSI values at 1m and 4m 39
Figure 21 Histogram plot of RSSI values at 6m and 8m 39
Figure 22 Distance vs. RSSI 40
Figure 23 Error Rate vs. Number of samples 42
Figure 24 RSS distribution at 2:14 pm 42
Figure 25 RSS distribution at 1:00pm and 11:00 am 43
vii
For ZigBee, Based On RSSI Terminology / Notation
Terminology / Notation

GPS ‐ Global Positioning System
RSSI ‐ Received Signal Strength Indication
MS ‐ Mobile Station
RF ‐ Radio Frequency
WSN ‐ Wireless Sensor Network
AP ‐ Access Point
RSS ‐ Received Signal Strength
PC ‐ Personal Computer
WLAN ‐ Wireless local Area Network
SNR ‐ Signal to Noise Ratio
RFD ‐ Reduced‐Function Device
WPAN ‐ Wireless Personal Area Network
FFD ‐ Full Functional Device
MAC ‐ Medium Access Control
LR‐WPAN ‐ Low Rate WPAN
PAN ‐ Personal Area Network
OSI ‐ Open Systems Interconnection
LLC ‐ Logical Link Control
SSCS ‐ Service Specific Convergence Sub layer
PHY ‐ Physical Layer
PPDU ‐ PHY Protocol Data Unit
viii
ED ‐ Energy Detection
CCA ‐ Clear Channel Assessment
LQI ‐ Link Quality Indication
ISM ‐ Industrial, Scientific, and Medical
DSSS ‐ Direct‐Sequence Spread Spectrum technique
LSB ‐ Least Significant Bit
SHR ‐ Synchronization Header
SFD ‐ Start of Frame Delimiter
PHR ‐ PHY Header
MPDU ‐ MAC Protocol Data Units
GTS ‐ Guaranteed Time Slot
MHR ‐ MAC Header
MFC ‐ MAC Footer
FCS ‐ Frame Check Sequence
CAP ‐ Contention Access Period
CFP ‐ Contention Free Period
ACL ‐ Access Control List
AES ‐ Advance Encryption Standard
MIC ‐ Message Integrity Code
CBC ‐ Cipher Block Chaining
ZDO ‐ ZigBee Device Objects
OS ‐ Operating System
LOS ‐ Line of Sight
NLOS ‐ Non Line of Sight
ix
FPGA ‐ Field Programmable Gate Array
BS ‐ Base Station
AOA ‐ Angle of Arrival
TDOA ‐ Time difference of arrival
TOA ‐ Time of Arrival
TOF ‐ Time of flight
x
For ZigBee, Based On RSSI 1 INTRODUCTION
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction to the study
Advancement in wireless sensing technologies has encouraged in developing
a model for indoor object‐tracking application using low power IEEE 802.15.4
compliant radios. Stimulus used in this model is RSS. This application is not
only limited to object tracking in an indoor environment. Concierge services
enable users to become aware of nearest supporting facilities. For example,
smart home applications such as multimedia appliances that forward
multimedia stream to the nearest video screen can be achieved with a home
positioning system [3]. In the field of robotics, a robot can navigate by itself
using the assistance of indoor positioning system [2]. Granularity of location
information is most important in location determination applications. For
example, to locate a book in a library requires coarse grained granularity
whereas locating a user requires coarse grained granularity.

Position estimation refers to a process used to obtain location information of
a MS with respect to a set of reference positions within a pre‐defined space. A
system deployed to determine or estimate the location of an entity is called a
position location system or positioning system. A wireless indoor positioning
system refers to a wireless network infrastructure that provides indoor
location information to any requesting end user.

One of the key technical elements allowing the realisation of this vision will
be the knowledge of the accurate position of the person/objects. Already,
today accurate location, mechanisms, such as GPS are commercially available.
Many more will become part of our daily life with the introduction of third
generation mobile phones. But none of these techniques will allow the meter
or sub‐meter level of accuracy within buildings, which is necessary for smart
houses. Hence, this report introduces an object tracking application in an
indoor environment using IEEE 802.15.4 compliant radios, which gives meter
level accuracy.

First, this chapter presents the background of indoor positioning systems,
identifies the challenges of such systems, and briefly describes the scope of
indoor positioning systems based on location fingerprints. Next, the objective
of study, the overview of approaches and the contributions are presented.
Finally, the scope and organization of thesis work is outlined.

1
1.2 Background
The success of outdoor positioning and applications based on the GPS
provides an incentive to the research and development of indoor positioning
systems. It has been developed over several decades and it relies on
constellation of satellites. Ranges to several satellites are used in multi‐
lateration procedure to infer the position of the receiver. This localization
scheme requires hardware that is both expensive and consumes significant
power. As a result, indoor positioning systems require alternative means to
detect the MS location without relying on the direct signal from GPS satellites.
Infrared, RF, and ultra sound signals are major technologies used for indoor
positioning systems. Unlike outdoor areas, the indoor environment imposes
different challenges on location discovery due to the dense multi‐path effect
and building material dependent propagation effect. Thus, an in‐depth
understanding of indoor radio propagation for positioning is crucial for
efficient design and deployment.

The existence of radio connectivity and the attenuation of radio signal with
distance are attractive properties that could potentially be exploited to
estimate the positions of small wireless devices featuring low‐power radios.
RSSI, a standard feature in most radios, has attracted a lot of attention in the
recent literature for obvious reasons. RSSI eliminates the need for additional
hardware in small wireless devices, and exhibits favourable properties with
respect to power consumption, size and cost. As mentioned previously, RF‐
based location tracking has been widely studied [5, 6]. Given a model of radio
signal propagation in a building or other environment, RSSI can be used to
estimate the distance from a transmitter to a receiver, and thereby estimate
the position of a mobile node. However, this approach requires detailed
models of RF propagation and does not account for variations in receiver
sensitivity and orientation.

Table 1 below briefly summarizes performance of existing indoor positioning
system based on location fingerprints and WLAN’s. All the systems
mentioned below in table 1 follow IEEE 802.11 protocol standards. The major
performance metrics studied by all systems are positioning accuracy which is
a form of error measurement. The accuracy of the location information is
usually reported as an error distance between the estimated location and the
actual mobile location. However, the report of accuracy should include the
confidence interval or percentage of successful location detection which is
called the precision. The system parameters of existing systems are
summarized in table 1 and the best reported performance of these systems are
listed in table 2.
2
System Spacing(m) Positions Samples/Pos AP's Orientation Environment

Non
RADAR [6] uniform 70 80 3 4 Hall-way
Saha et al [9] 3 19 1200 3 N/A 1-floor
Roos et al [10] 2 155 40 10 N/A 1-floor
Battiti et at [11] N/A 257 N/A 6 N/A 1-floor
Ladd et al [2] 3 11 1307 5 2 Hall-way
Prasithsangaree 2 to
et al [12] 1.5,3 60 40 7 4 1-floor
Youssef et al[13] 1.5 110 300 4 N/A Hall-way
Xiang et al [14] N/A 100 300 5 4 1-floor
Table 1 Comparison of Indoor Positioning Systems [7]
System Algorithm Type Accuracy and Precision

RADAR [6] Nearest Neighbour within 7 feet, 38%
no specified accuracy,
Saha et al [9] Nearest neighbour & Neural Network 90%
Roos et al [10] Bayesian best within 8.28 feet, 90%
Neural Network & Weighted k-Nearest
Battiti et at [11] Neighbour all within 16-17 feet, 90%
Ladd et al [2] Bayesian within 5 feet, 77%
Prasithsangaree et al 25 feet at 75% & 40 fet at
[12] Weighted k-Nearest Neighbour 95%
within 7 feet, more than
Youssef et al [13] Bayesian 90%
Xiang et al [14] Bayesian with RSS distribution model within 6 feet, 90%
Table 2 Performance comparison of Indoor Positioning Systems [7]
Based on the study of results obtained in various positioning systems as in
table 2, we have developed a model for an indoor positioning system using
SENTIO [8] platform based on RSSI.

1.3 Objectives
In the last two or three years a number of theoretical, practical and/or
simulation studies were done on the topic of object‐tracking. While these
studies are useful, they are too general and provide little guidance for the
actual deployment of sensor networks for real life location‐tracking of an
object.

This thesis focuses on developing an object‐tracking application and
prescribes sensor network configurations that work well with our algorithms.
I implemented my software using SENTIO [8] platform for sensor
networking. The major issue addressed in this project are the accuracy and
precision in tracking an object in a real‐world application and efficient ways
to algorithmically analyze the collected raw data from the specific wireless
sensor product.
3
Although the focus is to develop a real‐world application using WSN, it also
provides great opportunity to explore the new area of wireless
communication overall.
1.4 Research Questions

My primary target is to find a method to determine the position of an object
inside a building using ZigBee protocol standards based on RSSI.
The study addresses the following questions.
What is WSN?
What requirements do WSN need?
What are their main ideas and concepts?
What are the associated technologies?
What are the standards that sensor networks use?
What are the existing hardware implementations that use this
particular technology?
How can we build our new applications using WSN?
What do sensor network systems require for general or specific applications?
Are they applicable? And what is the appropriate design for sensor network
implementations in order to combine them with other existing systems?

At this point we describe and evaluate the specific object‐tracking application
to be built.
1.5 Scope
The study area of the thesis is an overview of the WSN technology, study of
SENTIO platform and implementation of an object tracking application. Thus
the study is divided into two parts. Part one is an overview of WSN; it
includes study of SENTIO platform and IEEE 802.15.4 protocol standards. The
second part describes the implementation of the object tracking algorithm.
The object tracking application receives and uses the raw values returned by
the sensor network system to produce clear and meaningful outputs. Schema
of thesis work is as shown in figure 1.

4
Figure 1 Schema of thesis work
1.6 Methodology
The “Indoor Local Positioning System for ZigBee based on RSSI “is based on
“location fingerprinting” technique. Location fingerprinting refers to a
technique that exploits the relation between any measurable physical stimulus
and a specific location. This approach uses empirical measurements of RSSI to
estimate location. By recording a database of radio “signatures” along with
their known locations, a mobile node can estimate its position by acquiring a
signature and comparing it to the known signatures in the database. All of
these systems require the database of signatures which should be collected
manually prior to the system installation, and rely on central server (or the
user’s mobile node) to perform location calculation. For example, in RADAR
[6] technology, the RSSI is the stimulus. This type of positioning system does
not require specialized hardware other than the common wireless network
interfaces with received signal strength measurement capability; thus, it is
simple to deploy compared to other techniques. Unlike outdoor counterpart
systems which can use AOA and TDOA techniques effectively, indoor
positioning systems encounter the problem of NLOS and the dense multi path
effect that render these two techniques ineffective or complex for practical
implementation. It is also difficult for a MS to always see three or more access
points or base stations in indoor environment, which is essential for
triangulation by AOA and TDOA. Location fingerprinting can also be
implemented as software based positioning system which can reduce
5
complexity and cost. Generally, the deployment of fingerprinting based

positioning systems can be divided into two phases.

First, in the off‐line phase, the locations where the fingerprints are required is
pre‐determined, and then the fingerprints are collected by performing a site‐
survey of the RSS from multiple APs. The distance between two closest
positions is called grid spacing and usually reported in meters or feet.
However, some points may be omitted due to inaccessibility. The RSS is
measured at each predetermined location to create a database of RSS patterns
of the indoor environment. The database of RSS patterns is called a radio
map. The vector of RSS values at a point on the grid is called the location
fingerprint of that point.

Second, in the on‐line phase, a MS will report a sample measured vector of
RSS from different APs to a base station. The base station uses a positioning
algorithm to estimate the location of the MS. The most common algorithm
used to estimate the location is Euclidean algorithm. It computes the
Euclidean distance between the measured RSS vector and each fingerprint in
the database and then the coordinates associated with the fingerprint that
provides the smallest Euclidean distance is returned as the estimate of the
position.

It is clear from the above discussion that the designer should not start out to
do the site survey without proper system design objectives and guideline. If
the performance is not sufficient, collecting more fingerprints in between
previous location fingerprints may help. It is a problem of choice as to how
many access points are required for the system and what the minimum
distance between physical positions on the grid should be in order to provide
a good position resolution and best system performance. The system
parameters and factors that improve the accuracy and the precision
performance are still not clear.
1.7 Outline
Chapter 2 provides literature review of “Indoor Local Positioning System for
ZigBee based on RSSI”; it introduces the basic components required for a
positioning system, general classification of indoor positioning system.
Finally, it explains “Location Fingerprint” technology used in this thesis work
to determine the position of an object in a real‐world application. It briefly
explains the protocols and industry standards for wireless sensor networks.

Chapter 3 describes some properties of RSS which is a stimulus to determine
6
the position of an object. RSS relation with energy and on what parameters is
the RSS value dependent.

Chapter 4 describes the model of an indoor local positioning system and its
probability of returning the correct location. It also explains its performance
evaluation and its error distance distribution.

Chapter 5 describes results obtained from the model of positioning system.

Chapter 6 includes conclusions from the experimental analysis and future
work.
7
For ZigBee, Based On RSSI 2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter reviews the literature on wireless indoor positioning system, as a
means of providing an intellectual background for the thesis work. First in
section 2.1, the common components of indoor positioning system are
described. Then in section 2.2, discusses different means to classify indoor
positioning systems. In section 2.3, reviews of all relevant literature on
location fingerprint technique. Finally in section 2.4, protocols and industry
standards for wireless sensor networks are explained.
2.1 Common components of indoor positioning system

Basically, a wireless local positioning system consists of at least two separate
hardware components: a measurable unit that usually carries the major part
of the system intelligence and a signal transmitter/receiver. The transmitter in
the simplest case is just a beacon. Figure 2 represents basic hardware model of
a positioning system.
Figure 2 Block diagram representing hardware module
First, the location sensing devices detect the signals transmitted by or received
at known reference points using radio sensing technologies. The sensing
technique is based on signal strength level that converts the sensed signal into
RSS. Given a set of reference points, the relative position of the MS can be
derived from the signal characteristics of RSS. The signal characteristics of
RSS are unique for a location. Then, the microcontroller processes the position
algorithm and estimates the position of object and displays it on PC.
8
2.2 Classification of Indoor positioning systems

Indoor positioning system can be categorized based on the stimulus used in
particular application and measurement principle.

2.2.1 Classification based on Stimulus

Based on the stimulus used in an application, WSN inherit certain
characteristics and limitations on sensor’s signal. The propagation delay,
diffraction, reflection and scattering are the basic signal characteristics which
affect all signal types. The effective range, available bandwidth, regulatory
constraints, interference, power constraints, safety and cost of technology
limitations. The wireless signals commonly used for indoor positioning
systems are infrared, radio frequency and ultrasound. Brief descriptions of the
three major technologies are as follows:
Infrared: Infrared signal is an electromagnetic signal of a wavelength

longer than that of visible light, but shorter than that of radio waves. Infrared
is just below the visible spectrum of light in frequency and is radiated
strongly by hot bodies. Many objects such as people, vehicle engines and
aircraft generate and retain heat, and as such, are especially visible in the
infrared wavelengths of light compared to objects in the background. It
cannot pass through walls or obstructions; therefore, it has a rather limited
range of indoor environments. Thus, it requires a more sophisticated circuitry
than ultrasound signals. Indoor lighting interferes with this type of signal and
causes problems in accurate sensing. It generally has a range of around 5 m.
The infrared devices are usually small in size compared to ultrasound
devices.

Radio frequency: The RF signal can penetrate through most of the
building material; therefore, it has an excellent range in indoor environments.
The propagation speed is also high, approximately 3*108 m/s. There are
unlicensed frequencies available freely for use. This type of signal has the
longest range compared to infrared and ultrasound. Since the propagation
waves are of higher frequency (2.4GHz), interference with other frequency
components is less.

Ultrasound: Although ultrasound operates at low frequency bands
(typical 40 kHz) compared to the other two signaling technologies, it
possesses a good precision for location sensing at a slow propagation speed of
sound (343 m/s). The advantages of ultrasound devices are their simplicity
and that they are inexpensive. However, ultrasound does not penetrate walls
9
but reflects off most of the indoor obstructions. It has a short range around 3
m to 10 m but has a 1 cm resolution of distance measurement. The operating
temperature influences the performance of ultrasound.

2.2.2 Classification based on measurement principle

Wireless positioning systems can be categorized by measurement techniques
which are used to derive the position of mobile stations. Mainly, three
different measurement principles are used today: AOA, RSS and propagation‐
time based systems that can further be divided into two different sub‐classes:
TOA and TDOA. Figure 3 shows taxonomy based on the technology and the
technique classifications.

Figure 3 Taxonomy of positioning system [7]
In AOA systems, the position is calculated via goniometry. With the use of
directional antennas or antenna arrays, the angle or bearing relative to points
located at known positions is measured. The intersection of several measured
directions pointers the yields the position value. The accuracy of this
approach is limited by the possible directivity of the measuring aperture, by
shadowing and by multi‐path reflections arriving from misleading directions.

In TOA and TDOA techniques rely on the precision of timing between the
signal transmitter and the receiver in order to use the propagation delay or
TOF to calculate the distance between transmitter and receiver. Therefore, a
precise synchronization is also very important in such systems. By combining
at least three distances from three reference positions, triangulation can be
used to estimate the mobile stationʹs location. This type of technique will
10
require a high accuracy clock in the communication system. TDOA is more
practical [1]. Examples of location‐sensing systems that use time of flight are
GPS, the Active Bats [15], and the Cricket [16]. Besides these time delay‐based
techniques, the distance between transmitter and receiver can also be
determined from signal strength attenuation and direct distance measurement
(such as dead reckoning).

Fingerprinting or Location Pattern Matching, this technique generally
requires only measurement of RSS or other non‐geometric features at several
locations to form a database of location fingerprints. To estimate the mobile
location, the system needs to first measure the received signal strength at
particular locations and then search for the pattern or fingerprint with the
closest match in the database. This technique does not require the mobile
station to see at least three base stations or access points in order to determine
the location. The disadvantage of this technique is that it is very time‐
consuming to perform an exhaustive data collection for a wide area network
such as in outdoor positioning systems.
2.3 Indoor local positioning using ZigBee based on RSSI

This section reviews relevant RF‐based indoor positioning systems which can
be used to locate stationary objects and track mobile users. The impressive
growth of IEEE 802.15.4 wireless PANs (WPAN) in recent years suggests an
interesting future for the location fingerprinting technique. The system is
quite flexible because system designers can select whether to have a
centralized positioning server or let the mobile to determine its own position.
However, the fingerprinting technique requires a training phase (off‐line
phase) to collect location fingerprints for all positions in the operating area,
before the actual deployment (on‐line phase) [7].

The following discussion is divided according to the positioning system
components. First, the common form of location fingerprinting and its
relationship with physical locations are explained. Finally, location estimation
algorithm is reviewed.

2.3.1 Location Fingerprint

A location fingerprint based on RF characteristics such as RSS is the basis for
representing a unique location. It is created under the assumption that each
position or location inside a building has unique RF signature [4]. Generally, a
fingerprint F is labelled with a location information L. The location
fingerprints and their labels (e.g. location information) are maintained in
11
database and used during the on‐line phase to estimate the location. The label
and fingerprint are usually denoted as a tuple of (L, F). Battiti et al [11] point
out that the location information L for indoor location can be recorded in two
forms as either a tuple of coordinates or an indicator variable. The tuple of
real coordinates can vary from one dimension to five dimensions which
include the three dimension space and two orientation variables expressed in
spherical coordinates. For instance, a location information of a two‐dimension
system with an orientation could be expressed as a triplet L = {(x, y, d) | x, y є
R 2, d є {North, East, South, West}}.

The RSS was found to be more location‐dependent than the SNR because the
noise component is rather random in nature. However, the RSS itself
fluctuates over time for each access point and location. Each RSS element can
be considered as a random variable; therefore, it can be captured by recording
its descriptive statistics parameters, approximating its distribution, or
maintaining the whole measurement dataset. These approaches of RSS
representation result in different procedures for location estimation
algorithm. Regardless of the approach, the location fingerprint is usually
denoted as an array or vector of signal strength (random variables) received at
any position in the location‐based service area. The size of the vector is
determined by the number of access points that can be heard.

To create a basis fingerprint such as in a number of samples of vectors of
signal strength are collected over a window of time for each position. This
basis is called a prototype. Then, the average RSS of each access point is
calculated and recorded as an element in the location fingerprint. For an area
that can receive signals from N access points, the location fingerprint can be
expressed as a vector of average RSS elements βi:
F = (β1, β2… βN)T
Besides the basis location fingerprint, the samples of location fingerprint
measured during the on‐line phase are also important for the system that
tracks the mobile object. The number of samples should be selected
appropriately to represent the location fingerprint for the mobile application.
A step in statistical analysis method called pre‐processing is another important
issue needed to be considered because it can impact the estimation of
dependency between location fingerprint and the location information easier.
The pre‐processing refers to a step that cleans the raw data (in this case the
training set) before any further operations or analysis. The cleaning may
consist of encoding, dimensionality reduction (reduce unnecessary elements),
feature extraction/selection, clustering, and outlier elimination. Roos et al [10]
point out that the pre‐processing enables faster location estimation and
12
reduce the noise from the training data. The process that creates the basis of
location fingerprint discussed above could be considered as a part of pre‐
processing.

2.3.2 Location Estimation Algorithm

Location estimation algorithms or positioning algorithms are procedures that
exploit dependency between location information and location fingerprint
basis in order to determine a position or location from samples of RSS signals.
Position algorithms can be classified into deterministic and probabilistic types
based on the approaches that model the relationship between location
fingerprints and location information. The deterministic type of algorithms
are those that based in the nearest neighbour classifiers and neural network
classifiers. The probabilistic type of algorithms is those that are based on the
Bayesian inference and statistical learning theory such as support vector
machines (SVR). The algorithm used in this project is discussed briefly:

Euclidean distance method: The Euclidean distance method is a
deterministic approach of position estimation because they require only a set
of constant location fingerprints which includes mean vectors. In order to
determine the location, a form of discriminate function is used to classify a
sample of RSS fingerprint into a position. The mean or average RSS vector is a
centre of a mass which represents each class of location fingerprint Suppose, a
set of l location fingerprints is denoted by {F1, F2… Fl} exist and each
fingerprint has a one‐to‐one mapping to a set of positions {L1, L2… Ll}. A
sample of an RSS fingerprint measured during an on‐line phase is denoted as
S which can be another mean or average RSS vector of small window of RSS
samples. Assuming that an indoor positioning system only considers the
average RSS from N access points as a location fingerprint, the sample of RSS
vector is S = (s1, s2, ……, sN)T and each location fingerprint i in the database can
be expressed as Fi = (β1 , β2,…….., βN)T. The simplest closeness metric is a distance
measurement in signal space denoted as the Dist (·) function [6]. Thus, the
simple procedure of nearest neighbour algorithm is expressed as picking the
fingerprint j that has the shortest signal distance:
Dist(S, Fj) ≤ Dist(S, Fk), for all k ≠ j.
A generalized weighted distance Lp summarized by [12] can be used to
calculate different forms of distance in signal space as:
N
Lp = 1/N (∑ 1 / Wi | Si − Pi | p )1 / p
i =1
where N is the number of access points, wi is a weighting factor (wi ≤ 1), and p
is the norm parameter starting from 1. The weighting factor wi is a bias
13
parameter that can demote or promote an important RSS component in the
fingerprint.

2.4 Protocols and Industry standards for WSN

Although many applications for WSN are proposed, the communication
protocols supporting them remain mainly unexplored and diverged. This is
because the area of interest is new, each implementation is application
specific, and the components of WSN’s have a lot of constraints. Wireless
sensor networks use the wireless medium to communicate. However, the
traditional communication protocols that support wireless communications,
especially ad‐hoc mesh networks, may not be well suited for them. WSN
communication is an active research area, and many algorithms and protocols
have already been proposed. This section introduces two proposed standards:
the IEEE 802.15.4 and the ZigBee. The IEEE 802.15.4 covers the physical layer
and the MAC layer of low‐rate WPAN. The ZigBee is “an emerging standard
that is based on the IEEE 802.15.4 and adds network construction (star
networks, peer‐to‐peer/mesh networks, and cluster‐tree networks),
application services, and more”.
2.4.1 IEEE 802.15.4

Holger and Willig (2005) [17] mention home automation, home networking,
and home security as possible applications for IEEE 802.15.4. They add that
“most of these applications require only low‐to‐medium bitrates (up to some
few hundreds of kbps), moderate average delays without too stringent delay
guarantees, and for certain nodes it is highly desirable to reduce the energy
consumption to a minimum.”

The IEEE 802.15.4 standard (2003) defines the device types that can be used in
a LR‐WPAN. A device can be a FFD or a RFD. The RFD can be used in simple
applications in which they do not need to transmit large amounts of data and
they have to communicate only with a specific FFD. The FFD can work as a
PAN coordinator, as a coordinator, or as a simple device. It can communicate
with either another FFD or a RFD.

In keeping with the application requirements, the LR‐WPAN operates in a
star or peer‐to‐peer topology (figure 4). In the star topology the RFD
communicates with a single controller, the PAN coordinator. The PAN
coordinator can perform the same function as the RFD, but it is also
responsible for controlling the PAN; “it initiates, terminates, or routes
communication around the network” [18]. The peer‐to‐peer topology
14
supports ad‐hoc mesh multi‐hop networking. Any device in the peer‐to‐peer
topology can communicate with any other device within its communication
range; however, this topology also has a PAN coordinator. All the devices in a
LR‐WPAN have a unique 64‐bit address. This or a short address, allocated by
the PAN coordinator, can be used inside a PAN. Additionally, each PAN has
a unique identifier. The combination of the PAN identifier and the sort
addresses allows communication across different PANs (IEEE 802.15.4
Standard, 2003).

Figure 4 Star and peer‐to‐peer topologies in LR‐WPAN [18]

The LR‐WPAN based on the OSI seven‐layer model has the layered
architecture presented in figure 5. The application and the network layer are
the upper layers in the LR‐WPAN architecture, but are outside the scope of
the IEEE 802.15.4 standard. Only the physical layer, “which contains the RF
transceiver along with its low‐level control mechanism,” and the MAC layer
“that provides access to the physical channel” are included in the standard
and will be introduced in the following sections. Finally, the Type I 802.2 LLC
and the SSCS are intermediate sub layers supporting communication with the
above layers (IEEE 802.15.4 Standard 2003).
Physical Layer
The 802.15.4 standard specifies two different services that the PHY provides.
The PHY data service controls the radio, and thus, the transmission and
reception of the PPDUs. In addition, the management service performs ED in
the channel. The management service also performs CCA before sending the
messages and provides LQI for the received packets.
15
Figure 5 WPAN architecture [18]
Three different bands are defined by the standard. The 868‐868.6 MHz for
Europe, the 902‐928 MHz for North America, and the 2400‐2483.5 MHz
worldwide. All of them belong in the ISM radio bands and they are using
DSSS. Each of the bands supports different a data rate and it uses a different
modulation technique, chip rate, and number of channels. Moreover, if the
system does not use the 2450 MHz frequency, it operates in both the 802 MHz
and 902 MHz frequencies. Table 3 summarizes the supported bands and data
rates (IEEE 802.15.4 standard, 2003).
PHY Frequency Band Bit

(MHz) (MHz) Modulation Rate Number of Channels
868-868.6 BPSK 20 1
868 / 915 902-928 BPSK 40 10
2450 2400-2483.5 O-QPSK 230 16
Table 3 Frequency bands and data rates for IEEE 802.15.4 based on the IEEE
802.15.4 standard [18]
The physical layer uses PPDU packets to communicate. Table 4 demonstrates
its structure. The LSB is always transmitted and received first. The SHR,
contains the preamble and the SFD fields, which helps receiver
16
synchronization. The 8‐bytes preamble contains only zero and is used for
synchronization. The SFD contains a specific sequence of one and zeros and
specifies the beginning of the frame. The PHR contains the payload length.
Packets with a length of 9 or more bytes are MPDU, as the next section further
explains. Packets with length 5 are used for MPDU acknowledgements. The
payload part of the PPDU encloses the MAC layer packet. Finally, the PPDU
size can be up to 127 bytes [18].
4 bytes 1 byte 1 byte Variable

Frame length Reserved Payload
Preamble SFD (7 bits) (1 bit) (PSU)
SHR PHR PHY Payload
Table 4 Format based on the IEEE 802.15.4 standard [18]
MAC Layer
The MAC layer is the interface between the SSCS and the PHY layer. Similar
to the PHY layer, the MAC layer supports two services. The MAC data service
is responsible for the transmission and reception of the MPDUs through the
PHY data service. The MAC management service, if the device is a
coordinator, manages the network beacons. It is also responsible for PAN
association and disassociation, frame validation, and acknowledgment
providing “a reliable link between two peer MAC entities.” In addition, it
uses the CSMA‐CA for channel access and handles and maintains the GTS
mechanism. Finally, it supports device security [18].

The IEEE 802.15.4 standard defines four different frame types: the beacon,
data, acknowledgment, and MAC command frame. All frame types are based
on the general MAC frame format (table 5). The frame control field describes
and specifies the above different frame types. Every MAC frame comprises a
MHR, which consists of a frame control, sequence number, and the
information field. It also contains the MAC payload; different frame types
have different MAC payload fields. The acknowledgment type does not have
a payload. Finally, each frame includes a MFR, which contains a FCS. The
data in the MPDU follows the same order as the PPDU: the least significant
bits are left in the frame and are transited first.
Octets:2 1 0/2 0/2/8 0/2 0/2/8 Variable 2
Source
Destination Destination PAN Source
Frame Sequence PAN Identifier Address Identifier Address Frame
Control Number Addressing Field Payload FCS
MAC
MHR Payload MFR
Table 5 General MAC frame format: IEEE 802.15.4 standard [18]
17
Table 6, 7, 8 and 9 present the four different MAC frame types. The beacon
frame is transmitted periodically by the PAN coordinator. It provides
information about the network management through the super frame and
GTS fields, which are analyzed later in the section. It also synchronizes the
network devices and indicates the proper communication period for them.
The data frame payload encapsulates data from the higher layers. When a
device receives a packet, it is not obliged to response with an
acknowledgement packet. Finally, the command frame identifier and
command payload fields of the command frame are used for communication
between the network devices. The command identifier specifies actions like
association, disassociation, and data, GTS or beacon request.
Octets:2 1 4/10 2 Variable Variable Variable 2

Pending
Frame Sequence Addressing Super frame GTS Addressing Beacon
Control Number Fields Specification fields Fields Payload FCS
MHR MAC Payload MFR
Table 6 Beacon frame format [18]
Octets :2 1 Variable 2
Frame Sequence Addressing Data
Control Number Field Payload FCS
MAC
MHR Payload MFR
Table 7 Data frame format [18]
Octets :2 1 2
Frame Sequence
Control Number FCS
MHR MFR
Table 8 Acknowledgement frame format [18]
Octets:2 1 1 Variable 2
Frame Sequence Addressing Command Frame Command
Control Number Fields Identifier Payload FCS
MHR MAC Payload MFR
Table 9 Command frame format [18]

In the LR‐WPAN, every PAN has its own coordinator. The PAN coordinator
manages the communication in the local area; it has two options, to use or not
use the super frame structure. The super frame (figure 6) uses network
beacons. If the coordinator does not want to use a super frame structure, it
suspends the beacon transmission. However, the beacon is important for
device association and disassociation. If the coordinator wishes to maintain
close communication control in the PAN, and to support low‐latency devices,
it usually uses the super frame. A super frame determines a specific time
18
period; beacons bound it. The beacon is transmitted in the first of the sixteen
equal time slots that the super frame has. It is used to “synchronize the
attached devices, to identify the PAN, and to describe the structure of the
super frame.” The super frame can have active and inactive periods. All the
communications have to be finished inside the super frame period. In the
inactive periods the devices can switch to the sleep mode, but they have to be
ready for the next beacon. The active period is further divided into a CAP and
a CFP. During the CAP, any device can communicate, competing with the
other devices in the PAN using slotted CSMA‐CA. The CFP contains GTSs
and follows the CAP. A CFP may maintain up to seven GTSs and each GTS
can reserve more than one time slot. However, the CAP should always be
sufficient to allow new devices t join the PAN. The GTSs are allocated to
specific devices. All the transactions must be completed inside the assigned
time period (CAP, GTS, and CFP) (IEEE 802.15.4 standard, 2003).
Figure 6 Example of super frame structure [18]
In accordance with the 802.15.4 standard (2003), three different types of data‐
transfer exist. In addition, the types differ if the coordinator uses or does not
beacons. Data transfer from a device to the PAN coordinator is the first type
(figure 7). For a “non‐beacon‐enable network,” it first senses the medium by
using “un‐slotted CSMA‐CA” and then a simple transmit to the data frame. In
a “beacon‐enabled network,” the sender waits for the beacon; when it finds it,
“the device synchronizes to the super fame structure.” In the specified time
frame, the sender again senses the medium by using “slotted CSMA‐CA” and
transmits the data to the coordinator. In either case, the coordinator has the
option to acknowledge or not acknowledge the data reception; after that, the
transaction is completed.
Data transfer from the coordinator is the next type described in the standard
(figure 8). In a beacon‐enabled network the coordinator indicates a pending
message through the beacon. The message’s target device receives the beacon
and if the message is pending, it responses with a MAC command request
19
message, using slotted CSMA‐CA. the coordinator may or may not
acknowledge the command message and through slotted CSMA‐CA sends
the pending message. The device acknowledges the received message. After
that, the coordinator removes the message from the beacon’s pending list and
completes the transaction. In a non‐beacon enable network the device
periodically sends a MAC command‐request frame to the coordinator. The
coordinator acknowledges the data request. Then, by using un‐slotted CSMA‐
CA, if it has a pending message it transmits it. If it has not it respond with a
data frame with a “zero‐length payload.” To complete the transaction the
device acknowledges the data reception.
Figure 7 Communication from a device to a PAN coordinator in (a) a
beacon‐enabled network, and (b) a non‐beacon enabled network [18]
Peer‐to‐peer is the last type of data transfer. In this situation the devices are
free to communicate with any other device within their communication range.
In a peer‐to‐peer PAN the devices can “either receive constantly or
synchronize with each other.” If they are receiving constantly, to transmit
data they use un‐slotted CSAM‐CA. In the second case, synchronization must
be achieved first (IEEE 802.15.4 standard [IEEE, 2003]).
The IEEE 802.15.4 (2003) standard establishes MAC and PHY standards for
low‐cost, low‐power, and high‐density node deployments. In addition to the
above PHY and MAC characteristics, IEEE 802.15.4 provides a security
baseline, including “the ability to maintain an ACL and use symmetric
cryptography” for data encryption. The algorithm that is used for encryption
is the AES. However, the higher level layers decide when security is need. The
upper layers are in general responsible for device authentication and key
management. The next section introduces the ZigBee standard, which
20
encapsulates the IEEE 802.15.4 and provides additional standardization for

the higher levels.
Figure 8 Communication from a PAN coordinator to a device in (a) a
beacon‐enabled network, and (b) a non‐beacon enabled network [18]

2.4.2 ZigBee
Heily (2004) defines ZigBee as “a rapidly growing, worldwide, non‐profit
industry consortium” whose mission is “to define a reliable, cost‐effective,
low‐power, wirelessly networked, monitoring and control product based on
an open global standard.” Figure 9 illustrates the areas of interest for different
wireless communication standards.
Figure 9 Overview of the coverage for different wireless communication
standards [17]
21
ZigBee, a new standard which became publicly available in June 2005, is
based on the IEEE 802.15.4 standard. It expands the IEEE 802.15.4 by adding
the framework for “the network, security and application” (Craig, 2005).
Figure 10 presents the IEEE 802.15.4/ZigBee stack and the areas of
responsibilities.
Figure 10 IEEE 802.15.4/ZigBee stack [20]
Craig (2005) mentions three networking topologies that the standard covers:
the star, mesh, and cluster tree (figure 11). The ZigBee standard works on top
of the IEEE 802.15.4 addressing schema by using the standard 64‐bit and the
short 16‐bit addressing. Kinney (2005) summarizes the ZigBee network layer
responsibilities: the successful establishment of a new the network, and
successful new device configuration, addressing assignment, network
synchronization, frames security, and message routing.

ZigBee further distinguishes the concept of the physical devices (RFD, FFD)
by using the notion of “logical devices.” “ZigBee Coordinator” is the first type
of logical devices. It is responsible for initializing, maintaining, and managing
the network. Under the coordinator in the network hierarchy is the “ZigBee
router,” which is responsible for controlling the message routing between the
nodes. Finally, the “ZigBee End Device” acts as the end point of the network
22
structure. The tasks that an end device can perform are specified in the
“Application Profiles” (Craig, 2005).
Figure 11 IEEE 802.15.4/ZigBee stack [17]
The ZigBee specifications (2005) summarize the security services provided by
ZigBee: “key establishment, key transport, frame protection, and device
management.” ZigBee builds its security mechanism using symmetric key
cryptography. The security services also depend on the associated layer, thus
as the figure 10 shows, the security mechanism covers the network and the
application layer. In addition, if a MAC frame needs security protection, the
MAC layer is able to secure it. Moreover, the notion of end‐to‐end security is
supported; the source and destination devices have access and use the same
share key.
In the MAC layer the 802.15.4 AES mechanism provides the proper security.
The mechanism protects “the confidentiality, integrity, and authenticity of the
MAC frames” (Kinney, 2005). An auxiliary header field in front of the MAC
payload indicates if the frame is encrypted or not. The MAC frames’ integrity
is supported by calculating and using a MIC at the end of the MAC payload.
In addition to the AES, nonce is used to provide MAC confidentiality and
authenticity. Figure 12 illustrates a MAC frame with security. For different
security aspects the MAC layer uses different mode of the AES: for the
encryption it uses the AES in Counter (CTR) mode, and for the integrity, the
23
CBC‐MAC. Finally, the combination (CCM) of the above two modes is
available, providing both encryption and integrity (Kinney, 2005).
Figure 12 ZigBee secure frame in MAC layer [17]
In the network layer the CCM* (a modified MAC layer CCM mode) is used
for encryption. Because the network layer uses only the CCM* mode, a single
key is used for all different security options. The network layer security
message format is similar to the MAC frame; it is presented in the figure 13.
Finally, although the network layer is responsible for securing its layer
messages, the above layers specify the keys and the CCM* option for each
frame (Kinney, 2005).
Figure 13 ZigBee secure frame in network layer [17]
Security in the application layer works similar to the network and MAC
layers. It uses the “link key” or the “network key” to secure the message and
then encapsulate it inside a set of fields similar to the network format (figure
14). Other security responsibilities that the application layer has are to
provide the ZDO and the applications with device management services, key
establishment, and key transport (ZigBee specifications, 2005).
24
Figure 14 ZigBee secure frame in application layer [17]
The ZigBee application layer contains the manufacturer‐defined application

objects, the ZDO and the application sub‐layer. In addition to the security
responsibilities, the application sub‐layer binds devices based on their duties
and needs, maintains the binding tables, and forwards messages between
them. The application sub‐layer also discovers the neighbour devices for a
given device. The ZDO is responsible for determining the device’s duty in the
network, for communicating using binding requests, and for supporting
security, as was mentioned above. The sub‐layer that implements the actual
application is the manufacturer‐defined application object (Kinney, 2005).
The ZigBee specifications are a great step toward the wireless sensors
networks standardization. They cover all the OSI layers, from the physical to
the application providing guidance to the developers. The specifications are
the product of the ZigBee alliances, a consortium of companies and academic
institutes. Thus they not only produce the specifications, but also are the first
use them. The next section goes beyond the layer architecture and
standardization and introduces the OS field, another crucial element of
WSNs.
25
Indoor Local Positioning System 3 RECEIVED SIGNAL STRENGTH
For ZigBee, Based On RSSI (RSS)
3 RECEIVED SIGNAL STRENGTH (RSS)

Majority of the existing methods leverage the existence of IEEE 802.11 base
stations with powerful radio transmit powers of approximately 100mW per
base station. Such radios are in a different class from the low power IEEE
802.15.4 compliant radios that typically transmit at low power levels ranging
from 52mW to 29mW [19]. The wide availability of larger number of IEEE
802.15.4 radios in the research community has revived the interest for signal
strength based localization in sensor network. Despite of rapidly increasing
popularity of IEEE 802.15.4 radios and signal strength localization, there is a
lack of detailed characterization of the fundamental factors contributing to
large signal strength variation.
This chapter investigates some of the properties of RSS observed during
testing and analysis of research work collected during the period of thesis.
The analysis of RSS values is needed to understand the underlying features of
location dependent RSS patterns and location fingerprints. An understanding
of the properties of the RSS values for location fingerprinting can assist in
improving the design of positioning algorithms and in deployment of indoor
positioning systems.

3.1 Parameters that affect RSS

Different factors that affect the indoor RSS are the user’s presence/absence,
his/her orientation, time of the day, building type and material, distance from
transmitter, and type of radio. These factors are by no means exhaustive.
Other possible factors are antenna orientation, directionality and type. Table
10 classify the parameters which affect RSS [7].
26

Effect on Factors Options
1. Proximity of user User’s presence or
absence
Data Collection 2. Orientation of user North, East, South, West
and terminal
3. Make of Radio
4. Time of measurement Time of day & days of
week
5. Period of Second, minute, hour
Statistics measurement
7. Interference Co‐channel/ adjacent co‐
channel
8. Building environment Small offices or large
hall.
Table 10 Classification of factors the affect RSS [7]
Transmitter variability: Different transmitters behave differently even
when they are configured exactly in the same way. In practice, this means that
when a transmitter is configured to send packets at a power level of d dBm
then the transmitter will send these packets at a power level that is very close
to d dBm but not necessarily exactly equal to d dBm. This can alter the
received signal strength indication and thus it can lead to inaccurate distance
estimation.

Receiver variability: The sensitivity of the receivers across different
radio chips is different. In practice, this means that the RSSI value recorded at
different receivers can be different even when all the other parameters that
affect the received signal strength are kept constant.

Antenna orientation: Each antenna has its own radiation pattern that
is not uniform. In practice, this means that the RSSI value recorded at the
receiver for a given pair of communicating nodes and for a given distance
between them varies as the pair wise antenna orientations of the transmitter
and the receiver are changed.

Multi‐path fading and shadowing in the RF channel: In indoor
environments the transmitted signals get reflected after hitting on the walls
and/or on other objects in the room such as furniture. Both the original signal
and the reflected signal reach the receiver almost at the same time since they
both travel at the speed of light. As a result of this, the receiver is not able to
27
distinguish the two signals and it measures the received signal strength for
both of them.
3.2 Related work analysis

A number of indoor location tracking systems have been proposed in the
literature, based on RF signals, ultrasound, infrared and some combinations
of these. As mentioned previously, RF based positioning system are widely
studied as shown in Table 2. Given a model of radio signal propagation in a
building or other environment, RSS can be used to estimate the distance
between the transmitter and receiver. Most of the algorithms (Table 2) have
been evaluated in practice using 802.11b compliant wireless radios and seem
to produce a location error of 15ft to 20ft for an indoor network area of
approximately 225ft x 144ft. According to the results of this study all the
localization techniques produce approximately the same location error over a
range of environments. Ecolocation [22], Mote Track [5] are two of the few
localization algorithms that have been evaluated on a real sensor network that
uses a low power wireless radio. Ecolocation reports a location error of 10ft
for a very small outdoor network deployment area (26ft x 49ft) Mote Track
reports a location error of approximately 13ft for an indoor network
deployment area of 18751ft2.
In general, the RSSI based localization algorithms can be divided into two
broad categories: the map based and the distance (or area) prediction based
algorithms. In the case of the map based algorithms, the deployment area is
divided into a large set of sample points that cover the whole area. Most
techniques collect one or more signal strength measurements from all visible
beacon nodes and for each sample point. Each sample point is then mapped to
either a signal strength vector or a signal strength probability distribution.
This process generates an RSSI fingerprint map which is unique with respect
to the beacon locations and the deployment area. This fingerprint map is
stored to a central base station. A node that is not aware of its location collects
one or more signal strength measurements from all the visible beacon nodes
and creates its own RSSI fingerprint that is sent to the central base station. The
base station computes node’s location as the sample point’s location whose
RSSI fingerprint distance from the unknown node’s RSSI fingerprint is the
minimum among all the sample points. Despite the fact that the map based
RSSI localization methods produce relatively small location errors, they are
not attractive mainly because they require an excessive amount of profiling
data and because they are not fully distributed. The detailed profiling of a
building is a major holdback because it is complex, time consuming and
depends on beacon locations. Therefore, for different buildings or even for the
28
same building and different beacon locations different RSSI maps have to be
obtained.

The second category of RSSI based algorithms are the distance (or area)
prediction algorithms which focus on minimizing the amount of profiling
data. In distance prediction based methods, raw RSSI data are directly
mapped to distances through a signal propagation model. In some cases,
distances are not explicitly measured but they are taken into consideration
through assumptions on the underlying distributions. In the case of outdoor
deployments, where there are no obstacles, a single signal propagation model
is all the profiling data required. In the case of indoor deployments the same
applies but now the signal propagation model might be different across
different buildings with different furniture and wall arrangements. Given an
underlying signal propagation model, raw RSSI data can be mapped to
specific distances. These distances can be either used directly in order to
perform localization or assigned a probability and used in a learning
based/probabilistic localization algorithm. Obviously, the accuracy of the
distance prediction based methods depends heavily on the accuracy of the
signal propagation model used for translating RSSI values to distances.

3.3 Properties of RSSI

Changes in signal due to propagation indoors are difficult to predict because
of dense environment and propagation effects such as reflection, diffraction
and scattering. The multi‐path fading effect, which is the result of either
constructive or destructive combination of multiple signal copies at the
receiver, causes the received signal to fluctuate around a mean value at a
particular location. The received signal is usually modelled by the combined
effects of large‐scale fading and small‐scale fading. The large‐scale fading
component describes the signal attenuation as the signal travels over a
distance and is absorbed by material such as walls and floors along the way to
the receiver. This component predicts the mean of the RSS and usually has a
lognormal distribution. On the other hand, the small scale fading component
explains the dramatic fluctuation of the signal due to multi‐path fading. On
the other hand, the small scale‐fading component explains the dramatic
fluctuation of the signal due to multi‐path fading. If there is no LOS
component, the small‐scale‐fading is often modelled with a Rayleigh
distribution. Such scenarios are commonly called NLOS. If there is a LOS
component; the small‐scale‐fading is typically modelled by a Rician
distribution. Note that when the RSS is measured, the measurement averages
out the small‐scale‐fading effects.
29
For ZigBee, Based On RSSI 4 OBJECT TRACKING
4 OBJECT TRACKING
4.1 Introduction
This chapter presents the object‐tracking application, the main objective of
this thesis work. The application is an algorithmic‐software implementation
written in Embedded C, which is capable of receiving data messages and
generating object position estimation data. The implementation of the object‐
tracking application makes use of the SENTIO platform and uses the
background knowledge introduced in the preceding chapters. The motivation
for the object‐tracking application is to determine the position of an object in
indoor environments (E.g. Home). The application acts as an interface which
collects the raw data that the sensors generate (numerical values). It makes the
proper comparisons and algorithmic processes to identify and track the object
while it is static inside the area covered by the wireless sensor network.
Finally, with the detection and tracking data, it alerts the user or another
system. The following sections provide an overview of the object‐tracking
application.
4.2 Overview of hardware product

Before describing the object tracking application, it is important to know the
characteristics of hardware product. The SENTIO platform (figure 15) is built
in modular fashion and has the following key features [8]:
Flexibility: This platform is very flexible in such a way that it is made
easy to add or change the hardware for each sensor task depending on
the requirement in the WSN. For a specific platform this can be hard or
sometimes even impossible to accomplish.
Sensor resources: Resources in a sensor module includes the ability of
usage of controller’s resources as much as possible, such as ADC‐
channels, interrupts and digital Input‐Output’s. Local voltage
regulation should also be possible since many sensors require higher
supply voltages than digital Integrated Circuits do. Further, support of
a shut‐down mechanism to power down the sensor modules when not
needed.
Computation and memory The processor module based on
microcontroller should support many devices in a microcontroller
family and support different power supply voltages enabling full range
of clock frequencies. All power‐down modes of the devices should be
30
supported. The platform should support different processor modules

including FPGA’s and very simple microcontrollers.
Communication The focus should be on enabling an IEEE 802.15.4
compliant communication interface. With or without ZigBee stack, this
will provide a flexible platform for exploring different network
topologies. Support for power‐down of the entire communication
module should be supported.
Cost and form factor High flexibility is in conflict with low cost and
small size. The primary objective should be flexibility but the size
should be considered in order to enable sensor device integration in
systems where space is limited.
Communication
Module
Processing Module
Antenna
Sensing Module

Figure 15 SENTIO Platform [8]
The communication subsystem of the SENTIO sensor node was designed so
that the correct operation of the radio chip is ensured. The radio chip is
powered by the on‐board voltage regulator and thus fluctuations in the
battery voltage level do not affect the operation of the communication
subsystem.

This platform uses Chipcon CC2420 IEEE 802.15.4 radio transceiver operates
in the 2.4GHz ISM band and includes a digital direct sequence spread
spectrum (DSSS) modem providing a spreading gain of 9dB and an effective
data rate of 250Kbps. It was specifically designed for low power wireless
applications and supports 8 discrete power levels: 0dBm, −1dBm, −3dBm,
−5dBm, −7dBm, −10dBm, −15dBm and −25dBm at which its power consumption
varies from 29mW to 52mW [21]. A built‐in received signal strength indicator
gives an 8‐bit digital value: RSSIVAL. The RSSIVAL is always averaged over 8
symbol periods (128μs) and a status bit indicates when the RSSIVAL is valid
(meaning that the receiver was enabled for at least 8 symbol periods). The
31
power P at the RF pins can be obtained directly from RSSIVAL using the
following
equation:
P = RSSIVAL + RSSIOFFSET [dBm]
where the RSSIOFFSET is found empirically from the front‐end gain and it
is approximately equal to −45dBm. In the next sections when we refer to the
RSSI value we refer to the RSSIVAL and not the power P unless otherwise
stated.
4.3 Experimental Testbed

The experimental test bed for object tracking application is as shown in figure
16. Experiment was conducted in Master’s room at Mid Sweden University. A
DELL laptop is connected to SENTIO platform and software were primarily
used to collect samples of RSS from AP’s. The software monitors IEEE
802.15.4 radio frequency channels which operate in the 2.4GHz band.
AP 3
AP 1
BC - 10/30
BC - 10/30
BC - 10/30
BC - 10/30
BC - 10/30
BC - 10/30
BC - 10/30 BC - 10/30
BC - 10/30
BC - 10/30
BS BC - 10/30 BC - 10/30 BC - 10/30 BC - 10/30

BC - 10/30
AP 2
BC - 10/30 BC - 10/30
BC - 10/30
BC - 10/30
D KAR P AC
TT HE W L E
AP 4
Figure 16 Layout of Masterʹs Room
A three dimensional, scalable testbed is used for indoor sensor network
deployments. The testbed illustrated in figure 16 is a 3‐D structure measuring
16m (L) x 12m (W) x 3m (H) and it is designed to host a large number of static
nodes as shown in figure 16. Arrow marks in the above figure represent the
location where fingerprints were taken. The centrepiece of our infrastructure
32
is the SENTIO sensor node [8], an open‐source general purpose sensing
platform designed with AT Mega 128 microprocessor and the IEEE 802.15.4
compliant CC2420 radio from Chipcon [19].

4.4 Obtaining data from the sensor network

The next important step in the development of the object tracking application
is to obtain the data from the sensor network and send it to the base station.
From there the data is transmitted through a serial port to the computer that
runs the object tracking application. When the data arrives at the serial port,
the application must capture it.

This paragraph gives a brief explanation of how and what kind data is
transmitted by the static object, fixed sensors and how this data is being used
to estimate the position of the object. First, the static object transmits Beacon
packet continuously which is received by all the fixed AP’s. The beacon
packet format is as shown in table 6. Then, the fixed AP’s calculates the 8‐bit
value of RSSI from the transmitted beacon packet and then sends the resultant
RSSI value as a form of data packet (table 7) to the BS which calculates the
position and sends back to the object.

4.5 Object tracking application: Testing and Evaluation

The purpose of this section is to discuss and evaluate the object tracking
application. Finally, we are ready with the experimental testbed as shown in
figure 16.

As shown in figure 16, AP1, AP2, AP3 and AP4 are the fixed sensors placed at
the corners of the master’s room. BS is placed at the centre of the room
connected to a PC. All the nodes are power connected before an actual
measurement takes place. At first, the object is placed at random position
inside the room and transmits beacon packets continuously. Then, these
packets are received by the fixed AP’s which calculate the RSSI from the
packet and then averages it, until it receives 50 beacon packets and then
transmits the data to the BS (figure 17). Then the BS waits until it receives the
data from all the AP’s. Once it receives from all the AP’s it calculates the
position of the object (figure 18).

The application was developed to demonstrate a real world use of a WSN in
object tracking. In evaluating the final position obtained with respect to the
actual position, we conclude that the object‐tracking was successful. Although
33
it is a research prototype, object tracking application is a simple, stable, stand‐
alone system capable of demonstrating an important application of WSN. It
takes raw data from the WSN, aggregates it, evaluates it, and based on the
evaluation, tracks the object. The accuracy of estimating the position is less
than 5m. Table 11 below shows a log of readings taken during test
Start
Intialize micro‐controller and
transeciever in receieve mode
No
If
B received_packet=
Beacon?
Yes
Average RSSI values
Increase the counter
No
If counter
B
>10,000/50
Yes
A
34
Reset counter
Set transceiever in transmit mode
Transmit averaged RSSI to Main sensor and
set it back to receive mode
10,000 samples ‐ Offline
50 samples ‐ Online
Figure 17 Flow chart representing the algorithm of fixed sensors
35
Start
Intialize micro‐controller and
transeciever in receieve mode
No
Received
RSSI values
from all fixed
Sensors?
Yes
Open radio map
Calculate Euclidean distance between obtained
RSSI values from fixed sensors and fingerprints
in radio map
Bubble sort for least error in signal strength values
36
Get the location of the object from the radio
using the least error value
Display location of object on PC
End
Figure 18 Flow chart representing the algorithm of main sensor

Table 11 Accuracy of positioning system
37
For ZigBee, Based On RSSI 5 RESULTS
5 RESULTS
This chapter presents how the system parameters such as number of samples,
mean or median etc…are finalized? All the tests are performed in master’s
room at Mid Sweden University. This chapter is divided into three
subsections. First in Section 5.1 it reviews results obtained from samples test.
Section 5.2 discusses one dimensional test results and finally section 5.3
discusses results of two dimensional tests.
5.1 Measurement setup

A Dell laptop was connected to a SENTIO platform and is loaded with
software (Appendix 2). This setup was used to determine number of samples
required during object tracking, mean or median, position estimation
algorithm and one dimensional test. The setup is as follows:

BC - 10/30
BC - 10/30
BC - 10/30
BC - 10/30
BC - 10/30
BC - 10/30
BC - 10/30 BC - 10/30
AP 2
AP 1
BC - 10/30
BC - 10/30
BS BC - 10/30 BC - 10/30 BC - 10/30 BC - 10/30

BC - 10/30
BC - 10/30 BC - 10/30
BC - 10/30
BC - 10/30
D KAR PAC
TT LE HEW
Figure 19 Test bed for one dimensional test in Masters Room

Two SENTIO nodes (AP1 and AP2, as shown above) were separated by a
distance of 10 meters and these sensors are known as fixed sensors which are
fixed to the ceiling such that there antenna is faced towards the ground. They
are linear is position. A BS was connected to Dell laptop and it was placed in
such a way that its antenna was faced towards the ceiling. Another SENTIO
38
node was used as an object and its orientation was same as BS. Figure 19
represents the complete setup for object tracking application. Mobile node
was moved between these fixed ones at regular intervals of one meter and
RSSI values were logged at each interval.

5.2 Number of samples test

This test was performed to determine number of samples required for
accurate positioning and either mean of the obtained RSSI values or median
of them. Figure 19 represents the setup for number of samples test. Once the
setup is ready the measurements are taken as follows:
1. An object was tagged with SENTIO node and was placed stationary
linear to the fixed sensors.
2. 10,000 samples (RSSI) were taken at regular intervals of 1 meter up to
10 meters.
3. The sample values were logged at every interval.
4. Using these logged samples, I have plotted graphs such as distribution
of RSS values (figure 20, 21), mean/median at intervals of 1 meter using
MATLAB.
5. The mean and median for various numbers of samples is as shown in
figure 22.

Figure 20 Histogram plot of RSSI values at 1m and 4m

Figure 21 Histogram plot of RSSI values at 6m and 8m
39
Figure 22 Distance vs. RSSI
From the above graphs, following conclusions were made.
1. From the histogram plots we can observe that the distribution of RSSI
values follow Gaussians distribution law.
2. As we can see from figure 22, that median curve has drastic changes
when compared to mean curve. Hence mean is considered, while
estimating the position.
3. From the observations we conclude that the number of samples does
not matter since mean curve tends to be same for various numbers of
samples.
4. Hence, 10,000 samples are considered in order to get a proper location
fingerprint during off‐line phase and during online phase 50 samples
are enough to estimate the position of object.
5.3 0ne dimensional test

Measurement setup for one dimensional test is as shown in figure 19. This test
was conducted to check the performance of algorithm and how accurate it
was. At first, i.e. during offline phase fingerprints at each interval averaging
10,000 samples were taken. During online phase, Euclidean algorithm was
used estimate the position averaging 50 samples of RSSI. From the results, we
40
can realize that the error was less than 2 meters. Table 12 shows the result of
location estimation in one dimensional case.

Table 12 One dimensional position estimation results
5.4 Two dimensional test

This test is the final stage of my thesis work. Experimental testbed for this
stage is as shown in figure 16. AP1, AP2, AP3 and AP4 are the fixed sensors
fixed at the corners of the room and a BS at the centre of the room. There are
18 pre‐determined locations where the fingerprints (RSSI) were taken. The
fingerprints are as shown in Appendix 1. All the readings were taken in
presence of user’s. The algorithm for position estimation is shown in Appendix
2. Position estimation test is performed as follows:
Tagged object is placed at random inside the master’s room.
All the sensors including the base station and object are switched on.
Using the algorithm (Appendix 2) the BS estimates the position of the
object and displays it on the PC.
This test was performed using various numbers of samples to test which has a
better accuracy. Figure 23, represents the error rate using various numbers of
samples. From figure 23, we can conclude that 50 numbers of samples is
enough to estimate the position of object with an accuracy of 3m.

5.5 Causes of error in location determination

The randomness of RSS is the major cause of error in any indoor
positioning system that uses the RSS for location inference. If there is
no randomness in the RSS and its location fingerprint, every indoor
positioning systems of this type will have no location detection error.
For example, I have recorded RSS at one particular location during
different times of the day. From figures 24 and 25, you can observe that
RSS values are different at different times of day.
The performance of indoor positioning systems depends greatly on the
separation of location fingerprints. A location fingerprint
41
corresponding to a location can be identified correctly if it is difficult

to classify it as another fingerprint by a pattern classifier.
Path loss is one of the basic signal propagation properties of the RSS
that best describes attenuation of transmit signal power over a
distance between an access point and a mobile device.
Presence of User’s or user’s orientation affects RSS.
Figure 23 Error Rate vs. Number of samples
Figure 24 RSS distribution at 2:14 pm
42
Figure 25 RSS distribution at 1:00pm and 11:00 am
43
For ZigBee, Based On RSSI 6 DISCUSSIONS
6 DISCUSSIONS
6.1 Summary and Conclusion
While empirical results and performance studies of positioning systems based
on location fingerprint have been presented in this report, analytical model
that can be used as a framework for efficiently designing the positioning
systems are not available. This thesis design work uses general principles of
position estimation such as position estimation of sensors, grid spacing etc...
This design work focuses on accuracy and precision.

The concept of location fingerprint technique based on RSS us explained in
detail in chapter 2. It is found that RSS is random. It is possible to
approximate the RSS as being normally distributed. While the RSS random
process is non‐stationary, the mean is more or less constant and could be used
as the fingerprint of the location.

Model designed for position estimation is as shown in chapter 4. Accuracy
and precision are the two major performance matrices in this study. Uniform
grid spacing has been used. From the experimental analysis, I have obtained
an accuracy of 3 meters and 35% precision.

The sensitivity analysis among the system parameters and the performance
matrices were done using the model as shown in chapter 4. For instance, our
study found that the minimum distance between two adjacent positions also
affects the positioning performance. This is due to the randomness of RSS
patterns induced by the ever changing indoor environment.

6.2 Future work
The research in this thesis provides a ground work for the future study of
efficient design of indoor positioning system. The RSSI based position
estimation still has limitations. First, the RSSI value is time dependent. Thus,
the future study should address this issue. Second, the movement of object is
not considered. Third, orientations of sensors affect the performance which
should be taken care off. Fourth, to improve the performance of the system
we need to find a solution to deal with those incomplete or missing data
during the off‐line and the on‐line phase. Fifth, position estimation on multi‐
floor and three‐dimensional coordinates is not available.
44
For ZigBee, Based On RSSI APPENDIX 1
APPENDIX 1
Location Fingerprints of Master's Room

Time : 13:15 Observation Time: 20 minutes Number of Samples: 10,000
People Presence
S.No Co-ordinates AP1 (0x0001) AP2 (0x0002) AP3 (0x0004) AP4 (0x0008)
1 1,1 -24 -16 -27 -33
2 1,3 -26 -8 -34 -31
3 1,5 -43 -9 -39 -25
4 3,2 -21 -11 -27 -33
5 6,1 -6 -23 -32 -28
6 6,4 -20 -31 -25 -34
7 3,5 -23 -35 -29 -38
8 3,7 -29 -35 -22 -27
9 3,9 -38 -29 -21 -27
10 6,7 -27 -23 -20 -23
11 6,11 -26 -29 -23 -30
12 6,13 -35 -32 -2 -31
13 5,13 -34 -31 -20 -26
14 1,1 -39 -22 -29 -17
15 2,12 -37 -42 -28 -31
16 -2,12 -38 -33 -29 -6
17 -2,1 -42 -29 -33 -19
18 -3,8 -40 -23 -35 -22
45
APPENDIX 2
A
Begin
Open radio map and raw data

files for write Check if data
is No
Received from
all
Intialize radio map in memory sensors?
Yes
Check whether
Estimate the position of static
the
Packet is data or No
Beacon packet,
If data packet ? Display the position on PC
Yes End
Save the data to register
Flow chart representing the main algorithm for position estimation
46
APPENDIX 3
47
Distribution of RSSI
48
For ZigBee, Based On RSSI REFERENCES
REFERENCES
[1] T. S. Rappaport, J. H. Reed, and B. D. Woerner, “Position location using
wireless communications on highways of the future,ʺ IEEE Commun. Mag.,
vol. 34, no. 10, pp.33‐41, Oct. 1996.
[2] A. M. Ladd, K. E. Bekris, G. Marceau, A. Rudys, L. E. Kavraki, and D. S.
Wallach, ”Robotics‐based location sensing using wireless ethernet,ʺ in Proc.
ACM International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking
(MOBICOMʹ02), 2002, pp. 227‐238.
[3] I. Ramani, R. Bharadwaja, and P. V. Rangan, “Location tracking for media
appliances in wireless home networks,ʺ in Proc. International Conference on
Multimedia and Expo (ICMEʹ03), July 2003, pp. 769‐772.
[4] K. Pahlavan, X. Li, and J. P. Makela, “Indoor geolocation science and
technology,ʺ IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 112‐118, Feb. 2002.
[5] Konard Lorincz and Matt Welsh, “Mote Track: A Robust, Decentralized
Approach to RF‐Based Location Tracking”.
[6] Paramvir Bahl and Venkata N. Padmanabham, “RADAR: An In‐Building
RF‐based User Location and Tracking System”.
[7] Kamol Kaemarungsi, “Design of Indoor positioning system based on
location fingerprint techinique”. University of Pittsburgh, 2005.
[8] Fredrik Linnarsson, Cheng Peng and Bengt Oelmann, “SENTIO: A
Hardware Platform for Rapid Prototyping of Wireless Sensor Networks”.
[9] S. Saha, K. Chaudhuri, D. Sanghi, and P. Bhagwat, “Location
determination of a mobile device using IEEE 802.11b access point signals,ʺ in
Proc. IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNCʹ03),
New Orleans, LA, Mar. 2003, pp. 1987‐1992.
[10] T. Roos, P. Myllymaki, H. Tirri, P. Misikangas, and J. Sievanen, “A
probabilistic approach to WLAN user location estimation,ʺ International
Journal of Wireless Information Networks, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 155‐164, July 2002.
[11] R. Battiti, M. Brunato, and A. Villani, “Statistical learning theory for
location fingerprinting in wireless LAN’s,ʺ Technical Report, Oct. 2002.
[Online]. Available: http://rtm.science.unitn.it/»battiti/archive/86.pdf
[12] P. Prasithsangaree, P. Krishnamurthy, and P. K. Chrysanthis, “An indoor
position location with wireless LANs,ʺ in Proc. IEEE International Symposium
on Personal, Indoor, and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRCʹ02), Lisbon,
Portugal, Sept. 2002.
[13] M. A. Youssef, A. Agrawala, and A. U. Shankar, “WLAN location
determination via clustering and probability distributions,ʺ in Proc. IEEE
49
For ZigBee, Based On RSSI REFERENCES
International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications

(PerComʹ03), Dallas‐Fort Worth, TX, Mar. 23‐26, 2003, pp. 23‐26.
[14] Z. Xiang, S. Song, J. Chen, H. Wang, J. Huang, and X. Gao, “A wireless
LAN‐based indoor positioning technology,ʺ IBM Journal of Research and
Development, vol. 48, no. 5/6, pp. 617‐626, Sept./Nov. 2004.
[15] R. Want, A. Hopper, V. Falcao, and J. Gibbons, “The active badge location
system,ʺACM Transactions on Information Systems, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 91‐102,
Jan. 1992.
[16] N. B. Priyantha, A. Chakraborty, and H. Balakrishnan, “The cricket
location‐support system,ʺ in Proc. ACM International Conference on Mobile
Computing and Networking (MOBICOMʹ00), Boston, MA, Aug. 2000, pp. 32‐43.
[17] Holger, K., Willig A. (2005). Protocols and Architectures for Wireless
Sensor Networks. London.
[18] IEEE. (2003). Part 15.4: Wireless Medium Access Control (MAC) and
Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications for Low‐Rate Wireless Personal Area
Networks (LR‐WPANs). New York
[19] Chipcon: CC2420 802.15.4 compliant radio. http://www.chipcon.com.
[20] ZigBee Specification v1.0, ZigBee Alliance.
[21] Dimitrios Lymberopoulos, Quentin Lindsey and Andreas Savvides, “An
Empirical Analysis of Radio Signal Strength Variability in IEEE 802.15.4
Networks using Monopole Antennas”.
[22] Kiran Yedavalli, Bhaskar Krishnamachari, Sharmila Ravula and Bhaskar
Srinivasan, “Ecolocation: A sequence based technique for RF localization in
wireless sensor networks”. Robert Bosch Research and Technology Centre,
Palo Alto, CA.
50

Indoor Local Positioning System For Zigbee, Based On Rssi Shashank Tadakamadla

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Indoor Local Positioning System For Zigbee, Based On Rssi Shashank Tadakamadla

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Mid Sweden University

The Department of Information Technology and Media (ITM)

Author: Shashank Tadakamadla

M.Sc. Thesis report

System Spacing(m) Positions Samples/Pos AP's Orientation Environment

System Algorithm Type Accuracy and Precision

1.4 Research Questions

complexity and cost. Generally, the deployment of fingerprinting based

2.1 Common components of indoor positioning system

2.2 Classification of Indoor positioning systems

2.2.1 Classification based on Stimulus

Infrared: Infrared signal is an electromagnetic signal of a wavelength

2.2.2 Classification based on measurement principle

2.3 Indoor local positioning using ZigBee based on RSSI

2.3.1 Location Fingerprint

2.3.2 Location Estimation Algorithm

2.4 Protocols and Industry standards for WSN

2.4.1 IEEE 802.15.4

PHY Frequency Band Bit

4 bytes 1 byte 1 byte Variable

Octets:2 1 4/10 2 Variable Variable Variable 2

encapsulates the IEEE 802.15.4 and provides additional standardization for

The ZigBee application layer contains the manufacturer‐defined application

3 RECEIVED SIGNAL STRENGTH (RSS)

3.1 Parameters that affect RSS

3.2 Related work analysis

3.3 Properties of RSSI

4.2 Overview of hardware product

supported. The platform should support different processor modules

4.3 Experimental Testbed

BS BC - 10/30 BC - 10/30 BC - 10/30 BC - 10/30

4.4 Obtaining data from the sensor network

4.5 Object tracking application: Testing and Evaluation

5.1 Measurement setup

BS BC - 10/30 BC - 10/30 BC - 10/30 BC - 10/30

5.2 Number of samples test

5.3 0ne dimensional test

5.4 Two dimensional test

5.5 Causes of error in location determination

corresponding to a location can be identified correctly if it is difficult

Location Fingerprints of Master's Room

Open radio map and raw data

Save the data to register

International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications

S-ar putea să vă placă și