TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Ask HN: What is the most accurate 3D indoor positioning method in small spaces?

8 点作者 gerhardi将近 11 年前
I am working on an idea which requires three dimensional location data from somehow &quot;tagged&quot; smallish objects (around the size of a brick) moving within defined spaces of 5-20 cubic meters. What are some standard solutions for this kind of projects? Where to start? Can it be done affordably?<p>The needed frequency of updated positions is around 100hz and accuracy of 1cm or better would be ideal. If you have done something similar to this, I&#x27;d be more than happy to hear! Computer vision and use of cameras is something that I&#x27;d rather avoid.

4 条评论

chrisa将近 11 年前
Other than computer vision, the most accurate positioning method is &quot;ultra wideband&quot; (UWB). It&#x27;s possible to get close to cm accuracy, but it can be expensive. There is also a calibration problem: if the readers get bumped or moved, then you may have to recalibrate the system. UWB uses time distance of arrival instead of RF triangulation, so it&#x27;s extremely accurate, and you can get to 100 Hz.<p>You can check out a few examples: <a href="http://pluslocation.com" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;pluslocation.com</a> <a href="http://www.timedomain.com/" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.timedomain.com&#x2F;</a> or google for: ultra wideband real time location<p>If you have specific questions I&#x27;d be happy to help - contact info is in my profile.
tgflynn将近 11 年前
Why do you want to avoid computer vision ?<p>If the space is unobstructed and the objects are visually distinctive it should be fairly easy to do this with a pair of cameras with known position and orientation.<p>100 Hz is pretty fast but that&#x27;s mostly a question of how much processing power you&#x27;re able to throw at the problem.<p>I&#x27;ve done some work with 3D object tracking. If you&#x27;d like to discuss this further my contact info is in my profile.
beamatronic将近 11 年前
Have you looked into wi-fi triangulation?<p>Here is one example:<p><a href="https://www.navizon.com/product-navizon-indoor-triangulation-system" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.navizon.com&#x2F;product-navizon-indoor-triangulation...</a><p>If you went ultrasonic, this part can provide &quot;0 to 765cm (0 to 25.1ft) with 1cm resolution&quot; at 10 Hz<p><a href="https://www.sparkfun.com/products/9495" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.sparkfun.com&#x2F;products&#x2F;9495</a>
lahirurlt将近 11 年前
If you have line of sight and can use fixed beacons whose position is known apriori, ultrasound is a good bet. However, if you need to track multiple objects within a defined space, things get tricky with ultrasound. Also, if 100hz is a strict requirement, ultrasound is not a great option due to issues such as signal attenuation in the environment.