Gyroscopy and Navigation

, Volume 5, Issue 3, pp 145–152 | Cite as

On magnetometer heading updates for inertial pedestrian navigation system

  • K. Abdulrahim
  • K. Seman
  • M. Othman
  • F. M. Md Shuib
  • T. Moore
  • C. Hide
  • C. Hill


A magnetometer is often used to aid heading estimation of a low-cost Inertial Pedestrian Navigation System (IPNS) without which the latter will not be able to accurately estimate heading for more than a few seconds, even with the help of Zero Velocity Update (ZVU). Heading measurements from the magnetometer are typically integrated with gyro heading in an estimation filter such as Kalman Filter (KF) — to best estimate the true IPNS heading, resulting in a better positioning accuracy. However indoors the reliability of these measurements is often questionable because of the magnetic disturbances that can disrupt the measurements. To solve this problem, a filtering method is often used to select the best measurements. However, the importance of the frequency of these measurement updates has not been highlighted.

In this paper, the impact of frequency of magnetometer updates on the overall accuracy of the navigation system is presented. The paper starts by discussing the use of a magnetometer in a low-cost IPNS. An exemplary filter to extract reliable heading measurements from the magnetometer is then described. From real field trial results, it will be shown that even if reliable heading measurements may be obtained indoors, it is still insufficient to increase the positioning accuracy of the low-cost IPNS unless it is reliable on every epoch.


Kalman Filter Inertial Measurement Unit Significant Position Error Indoor Navigation Earth Magnetic Field 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Foxlin, E., Pedestrian tracking with shoe-mounted inertial sensors, IEEE Computer Graphics & Applications, 2005, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 38–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Skog, I., Nilsson, J.-O., and Händel, P., Evaluation of zero-velocity detectors for foot-mounted inertial navigation systems, Proceedings of International Conference on Indoor Positioning and Indoor Navigation (IPIN 2010), Zurich, Switzerland, 15–17 September 2010.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Abdulrahim, K., Hide, C., Moore, T., and Hill, C., Aiding low cost inertial navigation with building heading for pedestrian navigation, Journal of Navigation, 2011, vol. 64, no. 6, pp. 219–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Xsens, 2013. [Online] Available at: 〈〉 [Accessed on 2 October 2013].
  5. 5.
    Microstrain, 2013. [Online] Available at: 〈〉 [Accessed on 2 October 2013].
  6. 6.
    Intersense, 2013. [Online] Available at: 〈〉 [Accessed on 2 October 2011].
  7. 7.
    Haverinen, J. and Kemppainen, A., Global indoor selflocalization based on the ambient magnetic field, Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 2009, vol. 57, pp. 1028–1035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Huang, C., Liao, Z., and Zhao, L., Synergism of INS and PDR in self-contained pedestrian tracking with a miniature sensor module, IEEE Sensors Journal, 2010, vol. 10, no. 8, pp. 1349–1359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Glanzer, G. and Walder, U., Self-contained indoor pedestrian navigation by means of human motion analysis and magnetic field mapping, Proceedings of the 7th Workshop on Positioning, Navigation and Communication (WPNS 2010), Dresden, Germany, 11–12 March 2010.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Storms, W. F., Raquet, J. F., and Shockley, J. A., 2010. Magnetic Field Navigation in an Indoor Environment. In Proceedings of Ubiquitous Positioning, Indoor Navigation and Location Based Services (UPIN LBS 2010). Helsinki, Finland, 14–15 October 2010.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bird, J. and Arden, D., Indoor navigation with footmounted strapdown inertial navigation and magnetic sensors, IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, 2011, no. 18, pp. 28–35.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Faulkner, W.T., Alwood, R., Taylor, D.W.A., and Bohlin, J., GPS-denied pedestrian tracking in indoor environments using an IMU and magnetic compass, Proceedings of the 2010 International Technical Meeting of the Institute of Navigation, California, USA, 25–27 January 2010.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shin, S.H., Park, C.G., and Choi, S., New mapmatching algorithm using virtual track for pedestrian dead reckoning, ETRI Journal, 2010, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 891–900.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sabatini, A.M., Adaptive filtering algorithms enhance the accuray of low-cost inertial/magnetic sensing in pedestrian navigation systems, International Journal of Computational Intelligence and Applications, 2008, no. 7, pp. 351–361.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stirling, R., Fyfe, K., and Lachapelle, G., Evaluation of a new method of heading estimation for pedestrian dead reckoning using shoe mounted sensors, The Journal of Navigation, 2005, vol. 58, pp. 31–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mather, C.J., Groves, P.D., and Carter, M.R., A man motion navigation system using high sensitivity GPS, MEMS IMU and auxiliary sensors, Proceedings of the 19th International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of the Institute of Navigation (ION GNSS 2006), Texas, USA, 26–29 September 2006.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kemppi, P., Pajunen, J., and Rautiainen, T., Use of artificial magnetic anomalies in indoor pedestrian navigation, Proceedings of IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference, Ottawa, Canada, 6–9 September 2010.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Renaudin, V., Afzal, M., and Lachapelle, G., New method for magnetometers based orientation estimation, Proceedings of ION/IEEE PLANS 2010, California, USA, 4–6 May 2010.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Afzal, M.H., Renaudin, V., and Lachapelle, G., Multimagnetometer based perturbation mitigation for indoor orientation estimation, Navigation, 2011, vol. 58, pp. 279–292.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Caruso, M., Applications of magnetic sensors for low cost compass systems, Proceedings of Position, Location and Navigation Symposium (PLANS 2000), California, USA, 13–16 March 2000.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bachmann, E.R., Yun, X., and Brumfield, A., Limitations of attitude estimation algorithms for inertial/magnetic sensor modules, IEEE, Robotics & Automation Magazine, 2007, vol. 14, pp. 76–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chung, J., Donahoe, M., Schmandt, C., Kim, I. J., Razavai, P., and Wiseman, M., Indoor location sensing using geo-magnetism, Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services, Washington, USA, 28 June–1 July 2011.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Storms, W. F. and Raquet, J.F., Magnetic field aided indoor navigation, Proceedings of European Navigation Conference (ENC-GNSS 09), Naples, Italy, 3–6 May 2009.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Afzal, M.H., Renaudin, V., and Lachapelle, G., Assessment of indoor magnetic field anomalies using multiple magnetometers, Proccedings of ION GNSS 2010, Oregon, USA, 21–24 September 2010.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Finlay, C., Maus, S., Beggan, C., Bondar, T., Chambodut, A., Chernova, T., Chulliat, A., Golovkov, V., Hamilton, B., and Hamoudi, M., International Geomagnetic Reference Field: the eleventh generation, Geophysical Journal International, 2010, vol. 183, pp. 1216–1230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kaniewski, P. and Kazubek, J., Integrated system for heading determination, Acta Physica Polonica A, 2010, vol. 116, no. 3, pp. 325–330.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Aponte, J., Meng, X., Hill, C., Moore, T., Burbidge, M., and Dodson, A., Quality assessment of a network-based RTK GPS service in the UK, Journal of Applied Geodesy, 2010, no. 3, pp. 25–34.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Dmitriev, S.P., Stepanov, O.A., Rivkin, B.S., Koshaev, D.A., and Chung, D., Synthesis and analysis of map-matching algorithm for car navigation systems, 55th Annual Meeting on Navigational Technology for the 21st Century, Cambridge, June, 1999.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bergman, N., Recursive Bayesian estimation. Navigation and tracking applications. Linkoping studies in science and technology, Dissertations No. 579. Department of Electrical Engineering Linkoping University, SE-581-83 Linkoping, Sweden, 1999.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Stepanov, O.A., and Toropov, A.B., Comparison of point mass and particle filters in map-aided navigation, 17 St. Petersburg International Conference on Integrated Navigation Systems, 2010, pp. 381–384.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. Abdulrahim
    • 1
  • K. Seman
    • 1
  • M. Othman
    • 1
  • F. M. Md Shuib
    • 1
  • T. Moore
    • 2
  • C. Hide
    • 2
  • C. Hill
    • 2
  1. 1.University Sains Islam Malaysia (USIM)NilaiMalaysia
  2. 2.Nottingham Geospatial Institute (NGI)University of NottinghamNottinghamUK

Personalised recommendations