Attitude Determination for Underwater Gliders Using Unscented Kalman Filter

Based on Smooth Variable Algorithm

Author(s): Haoqian Huang, Xiyuan Chen, Zhikai Zhou, and Caiping Lv
Source: Journal of Coastal Research, 73(sp1):698-704.
Published By: Coastal Education and Research Foundation
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2112/SI73-120.1
URL: http://www.bioone.org/doi/full/10.2112/SI73-120.1

BioOne (www.bioone.org) is a nonprofit, online aggregation of core research in the biological, ecological, and
environmental sciences. BioOne provides a sustainable online platform for over 170 journals and books published
by nonprofit societies, associations, museums, institutions, and presses.
Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Web site, and all posted and associated content indicates your acceptance of
BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/page/terms_of_use.
Usage of BioOne content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non-commercial use. Commercial inquiries
or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as copyright holder.

BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit publishers, academic institutions, research
libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to critical research.
 Journal of Coastal Research SI 73 698-704 Coconut Creek, Florida Winter 2015

Attitude Determination for Underwater Gliders Using Unscented

Kalman Filter Based on Smooth Variable Algorithm
Haoqian Huang, Xiyuan Chen*, Zhikai Zhou, and Caiping Lv

Key Laboratory of Micro-Inertial Instrument and Advanced

Navigation Technology Ministry of Education
School of Instrument Science and Engineering www.cerf-jcr.org
Southeast University
Nanjing 210096, China

ABSTRACT

Huang, H.; Chen, X.; Zhou, Z., and Lv, C., 2015. Attitude determination for underwater gliders using unscented
Kalman filter based on smooth variable algorithm. In: Mi, W.; Lee, L.H.; Hirasawa, K., and Li, W. (eds.), Recent
Developments on Port and Ocean Engineering. Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue, No. 73, pp. 698-704.
Coconut Creek (Florida), ISSN 0749-0208.
www.JCRonline.org For improving the attitude accuracy using the lower cost and lower power underwater navigation system, this paper
proposes the new underwater navigation system which is composed of the inertial sensors aided with the magnetometer,
and the unscented Kalman filter based on smooth variable algorithm (UKF-SV) is proposed to improve the attitude
accuracy for the underwater glider. The UKF-SV makes use of the advantage of UKF (unscented Kalman filter) in the
nonlinear model to estimate attitudes and then smoothes the variables estimated by UKF. Through this process, the
attitude accuracy can be greatly improved. The convergence of UKF-SV is proven in theory. The static and dynamic
experiments are done to assess the performance of UKF-SV and compare with the traditional UKF. The experiment
results show that the performance of UKF-SV is better than the traditional UKF.

ADDITIONAL INDEX WORDS: Underwater glider navigation, inertial navigation system (INS), unscented
Kalman filter (UKF), smooth variable.
_________________________________________________________________________________________

INTRODUCTION
The underwater glider is a special kind of autonomous
underwater vehicle that glides for a long distance and a long
time by controlling their buoyancy using tanks, pumps and the
pitching angle using the position movable mass (Hussain,
Arshad, and Mohd-Mokhtar, 2011). For keeping gliding steadily
during a long period of time, the navigation and positioning
system with minimum power and high precision should be
designed (Grenon et al., 2001; Houston and Dean, 2013; Sun,
Zhu, and Li, 2012; Sun et al., 2013; Zhu and Zhao, 2011).
For the Faraday cage effect of water to radio-frequency signal,
GPS (Global Positioning System) signal could not be received
in deep water (Li et al., 2011; Morton et al., 1993; Watson,
Coleman, and Handsworth, 2008). The inertial measurement
unit mainly composed of gyroscopes and accelerometers can be
used as the navigation system for an underwater glider (Chen et
al., 2013; Sabatini, 2006).
High accuracy attitude information as the key parameter of
navigation is very important for underwater gliders (Chen, Shen,
and Zhao, 2013). The performance of attitude determination,
including accuracy and speed, not only depends on the
capability of inboard sensors, but also relies on the performance
of attitude determination algorithms (Quan et al., 2013).
The Kalman filter (KF) assumes that the system model is
____________________
DOI: 10.2112/SI73-120.1 received 5 August 2014; accepted in revision
5 November 2014.
*Corresponding author: chxiyuan@seu.edu.cn
© Coastal Education & Research Foundation, Inc. 2015
known and linear, the system and measurement noises are white,
and the states have initial conditions that are modeled as random
variables with known means and variances (Xu, Chen, and Li,
2013). However, these assumptions do not always hold in real
applications. If one of these assumptions is violated, the KF
becomes sub-optimal and could potentially become unstable
(Al-Shabi, Gadsden, and Habibi, 2013).
The extended Kalman filter (EKF) method is widely used in
nonlinear systems. However, it needs to calculate the Jacobian
matrix for the linearization of nonlinear systems, which results
in low accuracy and output frequency. The unscented Kalman
filter (UKF) method was presented by Juliear and Uhlman in
1995 (Crassidis and Markley, 2003; Crassidis, Markley, and
Yang, 2007), in which they used special sample points to fit the
nonlinear state and let the mean and variance of sampling points
equal to those of the states at the sampling moment. Based on
such sampling points in the nonlinear system, the corresponding
transformation sampling points were obtained, during which the
corresponding mean and variance were calculated. For
non-linearized systems, this method can achieve higher
accuracy of filtering than the EKF (Quan et al., 2013).
Although UKF gives better results in attitude estimation than
EKF, it has some flaws because of the theoretical hypothesis
that the distribution of the state parameter is similar to Gaussian.
Consequently, the performance of UKF worsens in the cases of
non-Gaussian distribution. Moreover, even if the initial state
distribution, the process noise, and the measurement noise are
Gaussian, the real distribution of state may not be Gaussian
because of the nonlinearity of the model (Wu et al., 2012).
 Attitude Determination for Underwater Gliders Using Unscented Kalman Filter Based on Smooth Variable Algorithm 699

The smooth variable structure filter (SVSF) (Habibi, 2006;
Habibi and Burton, 2002; Habibi and Burton, 2007) is a
predictor-corrector filter that is based on the sliding mode
control (SMC) concepts, and can be applied to both linear and
nonlinear systems. The SVSF benefits from the stability and
robustness of SMC. Previous attempts were made in combining
the EKF with the SVSF, however the results were poor and the
implementation was overly complex (Habibi, 2007).
This paper designed a new navigation system applied to the
underwater glider, and proposed the unscented Kalman filter
based on smooth variable algorithm (UKF-SV) to improve the
accuracy of attitude calculated by underwater glider navigation
system.
Where VEDR, N ,U are the velocities estimated by DR (Dead
Reckoning); VEINS
, N ,U
are the velocities measured by INS;
ϕ
Gyro , Mag
are the heading angles measured by gyroscopes and
magnetometers, respectively; θ Gyro , Acce are the pitch angles
measured by gyroscopes and accelerometers, respectively;
γ Gyro , Acce are the roll angles measured by gyroscopes and
accelerometers, respectively; H is the observation matrix; V
represents Gaussian measurement noise with zero mean value.
In the practical underwater navigation, the model of data fusion
is not linear. Therefore, the considered nonlinear discrete -time
system is represented (Xiong, Zhang, and Chan, 2006):

THE MODEL OF AN UNDERWATER GLIDER AND X k +1 = f ( X k ) + Wk (3)

UKF-SV
Figure 1 displays the model of the underwater glider. The
continuous-time process model of the system is illustrated as Z k = h( X k ) + Vk (4)
Equation (1):

Where X k and Z k represent the state vector and

measurement at time step k , respectively. f (⋅) is the
ϕ
nonlinear function for state transition and h(⋅) is the nonlinear
γ measurement function. Wk and Vk are zero mean process
θ noise and measurement noise with covariance matrix Qk and
Rk , respectively.
Remark 1. The n-dimensional random variable X k −1 with
mean Xˆ k −1 and covariance Pˆk −1 is approximated by sigma
Figure 1. The model of underwater glider. points selected using the following equations:

X (t ) = F (t ) X (t ) + W (t ) (1) χ i , k −1 = Xˆ k −1 , i=0

X = [δ L δλ δh δ VE δ VN δ VU φE φN φU
χ i , k −1 = Xˆ k −1 + ( a LPˆk −1 ) i , i = 1, , L (5)
∇ bx ∇ by ∇ bz ε bx ε by ε bz δMx δMy δMz]
T

χ i , k −1 = Xˆ k −1 − ( a LPˆk −1 ) i − L i = L + 1, , 2 L
Where F is the system matrix; W is the system noise,
assumed to be white with zero mean; δ L , δλ , δ h represents
position errors in East-North-Upward (ENU) axes, respectively; Where a ∈ R is a turning parameter denoting the spread of
δ VE , N ,U represents velocity errors; φE , N ,U are the orientation
the sigma points around Xˆ k −1 and is often set to a small
errors; ∇ bx , by , bz represent the biases of accelerometers; ε bx , by , bz positive value. This parameter can affects errors caused by more
represent the gyroscopes drifts; δ M x , y , z are the measured than second-order matrices. ( LPˆk −1 ) i is the ith column of
magnetic field errors. the matrix square root of LPˆk −1 which is real symmetric
The measurement model is described as Equation (2):
positive definite matrix.
The sample points is composed of sigma points set {χ i }
 VEINS − VEDR 
 INS DR  i = 0, , 2 L , and the corresponding weight with these sample
 VN − VN 
1 1
 V − VUDR 
INS
points are described as: ω =1− , ω = , i = 1,  , 2 L . ωi
Z (t ) =  UGyro  = H (t ) X (t ) + V (t ) (2) 0
a
2 i
2 La
2

ϕ − ϕ 
Mag
2n

θ Gyro − θ Acce  is the weight of ith sigma point, and ω =1.

 Gyro 
i
i=0

 γ − γ 
Acce
Remark 2. Each point is instantiated through the process model

Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue No. 73, 2015

700 Chen et al.

to yield a set of transformed samples, Remark 4. The predicted state estimates

χ i , k | k −1 = f ( χ i , k −1 ) (6) Xˆ k = Γ Xˆ k ,Wk
k +1
( ) (16)

The predicted mean and covariance are computed as The corresponding predicted measurements

2L
ˆ ˆ k +1
Zˆ k = hX
Xˆ k | k −1 =  ωi χ i , k | k −1
k +1
(7) k
(17)
i=0

The priori measurement errors

2L

Pˆk | k −1 =  ωi ( χ i , k | k −1 − Xˆ k | k −1 )( χ i , k | k −1 − Xˆ k | k −1 ) + Qk (8)
T

= Z k +1 − Zˆ k
i =0 k +1
eZ k +1 (18)
k

Remark 3. The process of measurement update is as follows:

Measurement The previous time-step’s posteriori measurement errors

Z i , k | k −1 = h ( χ i , k | k −1 ) (9) eZ k = Z k − Zˆ k (19)
k

The predicted measurement The smooth variable gain

(e ) ⋅ sign ( e ) , 0 < λ < 1

2n

Zˆ k =  ωi Z i , k | k −1
−1
(10) G k + 1 = hˆ k +1
Zk
+λ eZ k
Zk
k +1 (20)
k
i =0

The covariance matrix of the innovations The priori state estimate

Xˆ k +1 = Xˆ k + Gk +1
k +1
2n (21)
Pˆk =  ωi ( Z i , k | k −1 − Zˆ k )( Z i , k | k −1 − Zˆ k ) + Rk (11)
zz T

i =0

The posteriori estimated measurement

The cross covariance matrix between the predicted state
estimate errors and innovations ˆˆ
Zˆ k +1 = hX (22)
k +1

2n

Pˆk =  ωi ( χ i , k | k −1 − Xˆ k | k −1 )( Z i , k | k −1 − Zˆ k ) (12) Repeat from Equation (3) to Equation (15) at time step k + 1 ,
xz T

i =0
then Pˆk +1| k and Pˆkzz+1 are derived.

The gain matrix

Update the smooth variable covariance matrix

K k = Pˆk ( Pˆk )
xz zz −1

(13) Pˆk +1 = Pˆk +1| k + Gk +1 Pˆk +1Gk +1

zz T

(23)
The updated state estimates
Theorem. If eZ k ⋅ ( eZ k − eZ k −1 ) < 0 , the estimation process is
k k k −1

stable.
Xˆ k = Xˆ k | k −1 + K k ( Z k − Zˆ k ) (14)
Proof. We must prove the convergence of UKF-SV algorithm
The covariance matrix of error in the updated state estimates proposed in this paper. According to Theorem, because

Pˆk = Pˆk | k −1 + K k Pˆk K k (15)

zz T

Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue No. 73, 2015

 Attitude Determination for Underwater Gliders Using Unscented Kalman Filter Based on Smooth Variable Algorithm 701

eZ k > 0 , then eZ k − eZ k −1 < 0 (24) Then E  eX k  < E  eX k −1  is derived from (30) when
k k k −1
 k   k −1 
Equation (25) is satisfied. So the estimation process is stable
Transform (24), then and the algorithm proposed in this paper is convergent.

EXPERIMENTS AND RESULTS

eZ k < eZ k −1 (25) In the last Section, we prove that the UKF-SV algorithm is
k −1
k
convergent in theory. To assess the better performance of
UKF-SV than the traditional UKF, the experiments are done in
In order to remove the absolute operator in (25), the this Section. A new underwater inertial navigation system is
following transformation is done using the form of diagonal designed by Southeast University (The model number is
matrices: SUNS-1) and shown in Figure 2. This system is composed of
DSP (Digital Signal Processing) chip and the tri-axial inertial
sensor with the magnetometer. The length, width and height of
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
T T
diag eZ k ⋅ diag eZ k < diag eZ k −1 ⋅ diag eZ k −1 (26) the system is 0.11 m, 0.07 m and 0.05 m, respectively, and its
k k k −1 k −1
volume is 0.385 dm3. This system communicates with a host
computer or other external devices through RS232 and its
Assumption 1. The measurement function is well-defined and power is less than 0.6 w.
constant, and then a posteriori measurement error can be
calculated by using (4) as:

eZ ( ⋅ ) = heX ( ⋅ ) + Vk (27)
(⋅) (⋅)

Then transform (26) using (27):

( ) ( )
 diag he k ⋅ diag he k +   diag he k −1 ⋅ diag he k −1 + 
 Xk Xk   X k −1 X k −1 (
 ) ( )
 diag (V ) ⋅ diag (V ) +   diag (V ) ⋅ diag (V ) + 
 k k   k −1 k −1  (28)
<
 ( Xkk)
 diag he ⋅ diag V +   diag he
( k )   k −1
X k −1
⋅ diag ( V k −1 ) + (

 ) Figure 2. The underwater navigation system and the test turn table.
   
 diag (Vk ) ⋅ diag heX k
 k
(  )
  diag (Vk −1 ) ⋅ diag heX k −1
k −1

 ( ) In addition, the AHRS (Attitude and Heading Reference
System) with higher attitude accuracy is used as the attitude
Assumption 2. If the measurement noise is stationary white reference in the experiments. There are three definitions in this
noise, then: paper as follows:
Definition 1. Absolute standard deviation (ASTD)
For example: calculate the standard deviation (STD) for the
E  diag (he(⋅) ) ⋅ diag (V( ⋅) )  and E  diag (V( ⋅) ) ⋅ diag (he( ⋅) )  attitude reference; calculate the standard deviation for UKF;
calculate the standard deviation for UKF-SV.
in (28) are eliminated. Take the expectation of both sides in (28) Definition 2. Relative standard deviation (RSTD)
then: For example: calculate the standard deviation for UKF
relative to the attitude reference; calculate the standard
deviation for UKF-SV relative to the attitude reference.
E  diag (heX ) ⋅ diag ( heX ) + diag (Vk ) ⋅ diag (Vk ) 
k
k
k
k
Definition 3. Maximum deviation (MAXD)
(29) For example: calculate the maximum deviation between UKF
< E  diag (heX ) ⋅ diag (heX ) + diag (Vk −1 ) ⋅ diag (Vk −1 ) 
k −1
k −1
k −1
k −1
and attitude reference; calculate the maximum deviation
between UKF-SV and attitude reference.

Equation (29) is transformed as Equation (30) because The Static Accuracy Experiment
Equation (29) is positive, diagonal and time-invariant The experiment equipment mainly includes a three-axis
measurement matrix. non-magnetic turn table and a host computer used as data
sampling, as shown in Figure 2. The precision of heading, pitch
and roll of this turn table is 0.05º, 0.1º, and 0.1º, respectively.
E  diag (eX ) ⋅ diag (eX )  < E  diag (eX ) ⋅ diag (eX )  (30)
k
k
k
k
k −1
k −1
k −1
k −1
Adjust the inner frame; the middle frame and the external frame
of the turn table to local level with initialization zero point. The
SUNS-1 is fixed stably to the turn table and is sampled under

Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue No. 73, 2015

702 Chen et al.

Table 1. The attitude ASTD for the attitude reference, UKF and UKF-SV (statically).

Reference UKF UKF-SV

Heading (Deg) 0.1917 0.4572 0.2913
Pitch (Deg) 0.0621 0.1357 0.0939
Roll (Deg) 0.0629 0.1226 0.0786

Table 2. The attitude RSTD and MAXD for UKF and UKF-SV (statically).

UKF UKF-SV
RSTD MAXD RSTD MAXD
Heading (Deg) 0.4409 1.8169 0.2718 0.8721
Pitch (Deg) 0.0987 0.6905 0.0571 0.3179
Roll (Deg) 0.1199 0.6373 0.0753 0.3315

comparison results are given in Tables 1-2.

-5
Heading Comparison
In Table 1, the ASTD of heading for the proposed UKF-SV is
Reference
UKF-SV
0.2913º while the ASTD of heading for UKF is 0.4572º. The
-6 UKF
ASTD for the proposed UKF-SV is reduced by about 36.29%
-7
compared with UKF. Similar to the heading, the similar results
are got for pitch and roll in Table 1.
Heading (deg)

-8

Roll Comparison
-9 2.8
Reference
-10 2.6 UKF-SV
UKF
-11 2.4
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Time (sec) 4
x 10
2.2

Figure 3. The heading angle comparison (statically).

2
Roll (deg)

1.8
Pitch Comparison
-1 1.6
Reference
-1.2 UKF-SV
1.4
UKF
-1.4
1.2
-1.6
1
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
Pitch (deg)

-1.8
Time (sec) 4
x 10
-2

-2.2 Figure 5. The roll angle comparison (statically).

-2.4
-2.6
0 0.5
Figure 4. The pitch angle comparison (statically).
the static condition. The sample frequency is 1 Hz and the
sample time is about 11 hours. The attitude angles (heading,
pitch, and roll) calculated by the attitude reference, UKF and the
proposed UKF-SV are shown in Figures 3-5.
It is clearly seen from Figure 3 to Figure 5 that the
performance of the proposed UKF-SV algorithm is much better
than UKF. To further analyze the accuracy of attitude estimated
by UKF-SV and compare UKF-SV with UKF, more detailed
RSTD of attitudes are presented to evaluate the performance
of different algorithms. In Table 2, we can see that, the RSTD of
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
heading for UKF-SV is 0.2718º while the RSTD of heading for
Time (sec) 4
x 10
UKF is 0.4409 º . The RSTD of heading for the proposed
UKF-SV is reduced by about 38.35% compared with UKF.
Moreover, by employing the proposed UKF-SV, the MAXD of
heading is reduced from 1.8169º to 0.8721º. Similar to the
heading, the similar results are given for pitch and the roll in
Table 2. Therefore, it can be concluded that the proposed
UKF-SV algorithm can lead to a better performance in terms of
attitude determination accuracy than conventional UKF under
the static condition.
The Dynamic Accuracy Experiment
In order to further evaluate the dynamic performance of the

Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue No. 73, 2015

 Attitude Determination for Underwater Gliders Using Unscented Kalman Filter Based on Smooth Variable Algorithm 703

Table 3. The attitude ASTD for the attitude reference, UKF and UKF-SV (dynamically).

Reference UKF UKF-SV

Heading (Deg) --- --- ---
Pitch (Deg) 0.4070 1.0151 0.6168
Roll (Deg) 0.4226 1.1397 0.6282

Table 4. The attitude RSTD and MAXD for UKF and UKF-SV (dynamically).

UKF UKF-SV
RSTD MAXD RSTD MAXD
Heading (Deg) 1.2802 7.1349 0.8434 5.0838
Pitch (Deg) 1.0084 3.3230 0.6377 1.7748
Roll (Deg) 1.0267 3.5618 0.6202 1.5685

Roll Comparison
7
Reference
6 UKF-SV
5 UKF

SUNS-1 4

Roll (deg)
2

-1
AHRS
-2

-3
Figure 6. The vehicle experiment platform.
-4
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Time (sec)
Heading Comparison
200
Reference

150
UKF-SV Figure 9. The roll angle comparison (dynamically).
UKF

100
UKF-SV, vehicle experiments were done. The experiment was
performed with the non-magnetic trolley on the playground.
Heading (deg)

50

0
AHRS and SUNS-1 are all fixed to the trolley. The attitudes
measured by SUNS-1 and AHRS are sampled at the same time
-50
with a frequency of 1 Hz. The attitude angles measured by
-100 AHRS are as the reference to evaluate the attitude accuracy for
-150
SUNS-1. Figure 6 shows the experiment trolley and the setup of
0 20 40 60 80 100
Time (sec)
120 140 160 180
these navigation systems in detail.
The trolley runs with the velocity of 0.5 m/s along with the
Figure 7. The heading angle comparison (dynamically). presupposition rectangular trajectory (Length: 40 m, Width: 16
m). The attitude angles estimated by the attitude reference, UKF
3
Pitch Comparison and the proposed UKF-SV are shown in Figures 7-9.
Reference It is seen from Figure 7 to Figure 9 that the proposed
2 UKF-SV
UKF UKF-SV performs better than UKF. To further analyze the
1
attitude accuracy for UKF-SV and compare UKF-SV with UKF,
0 more detailed comparison results are given in Tables 3-4.
In Table 3, the ASTD of heading is not calculated because the
Pitch (deg)

-1

-2 heading angle changes in a large range during the trolley

-3
running. The ASTD of pitch for the proposed UKF-SV is
0.6168º while the ASTD of pitch for UKF is 1.0151º. The
-4
ASTD for the proposed UKF-SV is reduced by about 39.24%
-5
compared with UKF. Similar to the pitch, the similar results are
-6
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 got for the roll in Table 3.
Time (sec)
In Table 4, it is seen that, the RSTD of heading for UKF-SV
is 0.8434º while the RSTD of heading for UKF is 1.2802º. The
Figure 8. The pitch angle comparison (dynamically).
RSTD of heading for the proposed UKF-SV is reduced by about

Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue No. 73, 2015

704
34.12%. Moreover, by employing UKF-SV, the MAXD of
heading is reduced from 7.1349º to 5.0838º. The similar results
are also analyzed for the pitch and the roll. Therefore, it can be
concluded that the proposed UKF-SV algorithm can perform
better in terms of attitude determination accuracy than
conventional UKF under the dynamic condition.
CONCLUSION
This paper designed a new underwater navigation system and
proposed the UKF-SV algorithm to improve the attitude
determination accuracy for an underwater glider. The UKF-SV
algorithm makes use of the advantage of UKF in the nonlinear
model to estimate attitudes and then smoothes the variables
estimated by UKF. Through this process, the attitude accuracy
can be greatly improved. The static experiment can show that
the attitude accuracy for UKF-SV is much higher than UKF. In
the dynamic experiment, the advantage of UKF-SV is more
obvious than UKF and the attitude accuracy for UKF-SV is
higher than UKF.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work is supported by Public Science and Technology
Research Funds Projects of Ocean (No. 201205035),
Specialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher
Education (No. 20110092110039), National Natural Science
Foundation of China (No. 51375087), 973 Program (No.
2009CB724002) and Research Innovation Program for College
Graduates of Jiangsu Province (No. CXLX12_0082)
REFERENCES
Al-Shabi, M.; Gadsden, S.A., and Habibi, S.R., 2013. Kalman
filtering strategies utilizing the chattering effects of the smooth
variable structure filter. Signal Processing, 93(2) 420-431.
Chen, X.Y.; Shen, C.; Zhang, W.B.; Tomizuka, M.; Xu, Y., and
Chiu, K.L., 2013. Novel hybrid of strong tracking Kalman
filter and wavelet neural network for GPS/INS during GPS
outages. Measurement, 46(10), 3847-3854.
Chen, X.Y.; Shen, C., and Zhao, Y.F., 2013. Study on GPS/INS
system using novel filtering methods for vessel attitude
determination. Mathematical Problems in Engineering,
Article ID 678943, 8p, DOI: 10.1155/2013/678943.
Crassidis, J.L. and Markley, F.L., 2003. Unscented filtering for
spacecraft attitude estimation. Journal of Guidance, Control,
and Dynamics, 26(4), 536-542.
Crassidis, J.L.; Markley, F.L., and Yang, C., 2007. Survey of
nonlinear attitude estimation methods. Journal of Guidance,
Control, and Dynamics, 30(1), 12-28.
Grenon, G.; An, P.E.; Smith, S.M., and Healey, J., 2001.
Enhancement of the inertial navigation system for the
morpheus autonomous underwater vehicles. IEEE Journal of
Oceanic Engineering, 26(4), 548-560.
Habibi, S., 2006. The extended variable structure filter. Journal
of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control, 128(2),
341-351.
Habibi, S., 2007. The smooth variable structure filter.
Proceedings of the IEEE, 95(5), 1026-1059.
Habibi, S.R. and Burton, R., 2002. The variable structure filter.
Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue No. 73, 2015
Chen et al.
ASME 2002 International Mechanical Engineering Congress
and Exposition (New Orleans, Louisiana, USA), pp. 157-165.
Habibi, S.R. and Burton, R., 2007. Parameter identification for a
high performance hydrostatic actuation system using the
variable structure filter concept. ASME Journal of Dynamic
Systems, Measurement, and Control, 129(2), 229-235.
Houston, J.R., and Dean, R.G., 2013. Effects of sea-level decadal
variability on acceleration and trend difference. Journal of
Coastal Research, 29(5), 1062-1072.
Hussain, N.N.A.; Arshad, M.R., and Mohd-Mokhtar, R., 2011.
Underwater glider modelling and analysis for net buoyancy,
depth and pitch angle control. Ocean Engineering, 38(16),
1782-1791.
Li, Y.; Pang, Y.J.; Jiang, Y.Q., and Chen, P.Y., 2011. Application
of strong tracking kalman filter in dead reckoning of
underwater vehicle. Electrical Engineering and Control,
Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, 98, 909-915.
Morton, R.A.; Leach, M.P.; Paine, J.G., and Cardoza, M.A.,
1993. Monitoring beach changes using GPS surveying
techniques. Journal of Coastal Research, 9(3), 702-720.
Quan, W.; Xu, L.; Zhang, H.J., and Fang, J.C., 2013. Interlaced
optimal-REQUEST and unscented Kalman filtering for
attitude determination. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 26(2),
449-455.
Sabatini, A.M., 2006. Quaternion-based extended kalman filter
for determining orientation by inertial and magnetic sensing.
IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, 53(7),
1346-1356.
Sun, B.; Zhu, D.Q.; Ding, F., and Yang, S.X., 2013. A novel
tracking control approach for unmanned underwater vehicles
based on bio-inspired neurodynamics. Journal of Marine
Science and Technology (Japan), 18(1), 63-74.
Sun, B.; Zhu, D.Q., and Li, W.C., 2012. An integrated
backstepping and sliding mode tracking control algorithm for
unmanned underwater vehicles. Proceedings of the 2012
UKACC International Conference on Control (Cardiff, Wales,
UK), pp. 644-649.
Watson, C.; Coleman, R., and Handsworth R., 2008. Coastal tide
gauge calibration: a case study at macquarie island using gps
buoy techniques . Journal of Coastal Research, 24(4),
1071-1079.
Wu, J.J.; Liu, K.; Wei, J.B.; Han, D.P., and Xiang, J.H., 2012.
Particle filter using a new resampling approach applied to
LEO satellite autonomous orbit determination with a
magnetometer. Acta Astronautica, 81(2), 512-522.
Xiong, K.; Zhang, H.Y., and Chan, C.W., 2006. Performance
evaluation of UKF-based nonlinear filtering. Automatica,
42(2), 261-270.
Xu, Y.; Chen, X.Y., and Li, Q.H., 2013. Autonomous integrated
navigation for indoor robots utilizing on-line iterated extended
rauch-tung-striebel smoothing. Sensors, 13(12), 15937-15953.
Zhu, D.Q. and Zhao, Y., 2011. A bio-inspired dynamic
path-following control of autonomous underwater vehicle.
Proceedings of the 16th IASTED International Conference on
Robotics and Applications (Vancouver, BC, Canada), pp.
22-29.