IMU calibration

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 11946995
  • Patent Number
    11,946,995
  • Date Filed
    Monday, August 15, 2022
    a year ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, April 2, 2024
    a month ago
Abstract
A method of calibrating an inertial measurement unit, the method comprising: (a) collecting data from the inertial measurement unit while stationary as a first step; (b) collecting data from the inertial measurement unit while repositioning the inertial measurement unit around three orthogonal axes of the inertial measurement unit as a second step; (c) calibrating a plurality of gyroscopes using the data collected during the first step and the second step; (d) calibrating a plurality of magnetometers using the data collected during the first step and the second step; (e) calibrating a plurality of accelerometers using the data collected during the first step and the second step; (f) where calibrating the plurality of magnetometers includes extracting parameters for distortion detection and using the extracted parameters to determine if magnetic distortion is present within a local field of the inertial measurement unit.
Description
INTRODUCTION TO THE INVENTION

The present disclosure is directed to methods and techniques for calibrating inertial measurement units (IMUS) and, more specifically, to methods and techniques that involve calibrating IMUs to account for local environments within which the IMUs operate.


It should be noted that Patent Cooperation Treaty application PCT/US14/69411, filed Dec. 9, 2014 is hereby incorporated by reference and appended hereto as Appendix A.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS


FIG. 1 is a graphical depiction of a ferromagnetic device mounted to an inertial measurement unit and being rotated around an X-axis.



FIG. 2 is a graphical depiction of the ferromagnetic device mounted to the inertial measurement unit of FIG. 1, being rotated around a Y-axis.



FIG. 3 is a graphical depiction of the ferromagnetic device mounted to the inertial measurement unit of FIG. 1, being rotated around a Z-axis.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The exemplary embodiments of the present disclosure are described and illustrated below to encompass inertial measurement units and methods of calibrating the same. Of course, it will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art that the embodiments discussed below are exemplary in nature and may be reconfigured without departing from the scope and spirit of the present invention. However, for clarity and precision, the exemplary embodiments as discussed below may include optional steps, methods, and features that one of ordinary skill should recognize as not being a requisite to fall within the scope of the present invention.


Many current devices make use of integrated sensor components to capture and track information related to the use, location, and status of the device. One such system, the inertial measurement unit (IMU), is used to track object motion. A common packaging of an IMU comprises a single integrated circuit (IC) consisting of multiple inertial sensors, which can be a combination of accelerometers, gyroscopes, and magnetometers. These three sensor types can also be separated into individual ICs populated on the same circuit board. These two cases (single IC and multiple ICs) can be considered the same for purposes of the instant disclosure.


For all such sensors of the IMU, a calibration step may be performed to ensure the proper referencing and operation in the local environment. For example, accelerometers may be calibrated to determine a reference with respect to the direction of gravity and gyroscopes may be calibrated to some known rotational velocity. Magnetometer calibration is more complex, as the process requires knowledge of the local magnetic field strength and direction at a multitude of magnetometer orientations. The local environment calibration can be carried out by hand or by machine. The minimum considerations for local environment calibration should involve maneuvering of the IMU around the three orthogonal axes of the IMU, and a stationary period.


For applications requiring highly reliable and reproducible calibration of an IMU, a calibration machine may be used. A calibration machine may be constructed so that it does not introduce additional magnetic distortion to the IMUs. The calibration machine should produce movement for calibration for all the sensors of the IMU as well as movement in order for an algorithm to inspect the quality of the calibration.


The process for calibrating measurements from uncalibrated accelerometers, gyroscopes, and magnetometers of an IMU is described hereafter. This exemplary process is applicable to a single IMU or multiple IMUs populated on the same circuit board, where all sensors (uncalibrated accelerometers, gyroscopes, and magnetometers) may be calibrated simultaneously.


In exemplary form, the calibration procedure may include the following routines to allow adequate data to calculate and verify the calibration. This exemplary calibration comprises four stages that include, without limitation: (1) calibrating the gyroscopes; (2) calibrating the magnetometers routine; (3) calibrating the accelerometer routine; and, (4) calibrating the checking/validation routine.


Calibrating the gyroscopes of each IMU should provide for the gyroscopes being stationary for a set amount of time. As part of calibrating the gyroscopes, the instant process is determining the bias of the gyroscope by arithmetic mean as set forth in Equation 1 immediately below:












Gyro

mean
i


[

]

=



DATA

gyro
l


_


gyro


calibration



,

i
=
1

,
2
,





Equation


1







Calibrating the magnetometers of each IMU should involve rotating the IMU around all of its orthogonal axes. In this fashion, this magnetometer calibration process first determines the soft and hard iron distortion using multi-dimensional Ellipsoidal Fitting function (EF_fun) set forth in Equation 2 immediately below:










SFe

orig
i


,


HFe

orig
i


=

EF

fun

(


DATA

mag
i


[


Mag


calibration


begin



"\[Rule]"

end

]

)



,

i
=
1

,
2
,





Equation


2








where: SFeorig is the transformation of ellipsoid to sphere, and HFeorig is the sensor and local bias.


The resultant data from Equation 2 are then processed using Equation 3, shown immediately below:












procMAG

orig
i


=


processMag

(



DATA

mag
i


[


Acc


calibration


begin



"\[Rule]"


end


of



checking


routine


]

,

SFe

orig
i


,

HFe

orig
i



)


,

i
=
1

,
2
,


)




Equation


3







Thereafter, the alignment differences among magnetometers are calibrated. In doing so, Equation 4 may be utilized, with the assumption that all magnetometers are aligned to a reference alignment using this equation. Alternatively, the magnetometers may be aligned to a different reference alignment if desired. In Equation 4, TMAGij represents the alignment transformation of magnetometer “i” to reference magnetometer “i”.











TMAG
ij

=



procMAG

orig
j


\

procMAG


orig
i

,



i

=
1


,

j
=

2

,
TagBox[",", "NumberComma", Rule[SyntaxForm, "0"]]

3









Equation


4







Calibrating the accelerometers of each IMU should involve rotating the IMU around two axes perpendicular to gravity. In this fashion, the accelerometer calibration is calculated with the multi-dimensional Ellipsoidal Fitting function (EF_fun) set forth immediately below as Equation 5:










AccScale

orig
i


,


AccBias

orig
i


=


EF

fun

(


DATA

Acc
i







Acc


calibration


begin


end




)



,

i
=

1

,
TagBox[",", "NumberComma", Rule[SyntaxForm, "0"]]

2


,





Equation


5







Calibrating the checking routine should involve rotating the IMU around the axis collinear with gravity. The result is best if the motion of the checking routine is performed multiple times at different angles with respect to gravity.


After calibrating the sensors, one may take into account manufacturing and IC assembly placement errors to extract or account for these errors. In this fashion, the instant disclosure includes a calibration sequence taking into account any mal-alignment among sensors, which are calibrated according to Equation 6-10 (applying the calibration parameters) provided immediately below. In doing so, all sensor data collected during the calibration may be subject to these calibration equations/parameters.











procGyro
i

=

processGyro

(


DATA

gyro
i


,

Gyro

bias
i



)


,

i
=

1

,
TagBox[",", "NumberComma", Rule[SyntaxForm, "0"]]

2


,





Equation


6














procAc


c
i


=

p

r

o

c

e

s

s

A

c


c

(


DATA

A

c


c
i



,

Ac


c

b


ias
i





)



,

i
=

1

,
TagBox[",", "NumberComma", Rule[SyntaxForm, "0"]]

2


,





Equation


7














procMAG
i

=


processMag

(


DATA

m

a


g
i



,

SF


e

o

r

i


g
i




,


HF

e


orig
i



)


,

i
=

1

,
TagBox[",", "NumberComma", Rule[SyntaxForm, "0"]]

2


,





Equation


8










Continuing


the


example


as


aligning


all


magnetometer


to


the


first


one

,











alignProcMAG
j

=


procMAG
j



TMAG
ij



,

i
=
1

,

j
=

2

,
TagBox[",", "NumberComma", Rule[SyntaxForm, "0"]]

3









Equation


9













alignProcMA


G
i


=

procMAG
i





Equation


10








With multiple IMUs rigidly fixed together, the aligned and calibrated signals should be roughly equal among each sensor type in the case of no noise or isotropic (to the sensor) noise.


Despite calibration with the local environment, magnetometers are especially prone to transient local disturbance. Specifically, introduction of additional ferromagnetic sources or movement of ferromagnetic sources after initial calibration (described previously) can distort the sensor signal and result in inaccurate readings. Distortion states can be classified as hard iron distortion, which is primary caused by the introduction of ferromagnetic materials such as steel tools that can deflect the field lines and produce an offset on the magnetometer sensors, and soft iron distortion, which is caused by an irregular magnetic field (such as magnets) that can alter the shape of the magnetic field. Given that these devices causing distortions will enter and exit the application field (area of use) of the IMU at unpredictable orientations, positions, and times, it is desirable that these distortions be detected and accounted for. By way of example, one area where distortions are commonplace is an operating room during a surgical procedure. More specifically, surgical instruments within an operating room are frequently repositioned within the operating field at different times and locations depending on the stage of the surgical procedure, which necessarily causes magnetic field distortions. It should be noted, however, that the exemplary disclosure is not limited to calibration of IMUs for surgical navigation or any particular field of use. Rather, the instant disclosure is applicable to calibrating any IMU in any field of use where local distortions may be present.


There are two essential parts to detect transient magnetic distortion. The first part is that the IMU must comprise two or more magnetometers (that may be populated on a common circuit board). The magnetometers are calibrated and aligned based the foregoing calibration teachings. The second part is the detection algorithm, which consists of two processes: (1) extracting parameters for distortion detection, which are calculated from the calibration data; and, (2) use of extracted parameters on captured IMU data to check if distortion is present.


What follows is a detailed explanation for calculating appropriate distortion threshold parameters. In general, one may use an algorithm for this calculation that may make use of the following assumptions: (1) IMU motion (or lack of motion) is detectable by all IMUs (accelerometer, gyroscope and magnetometer); (2) the angle and length of the calibrated magnetometers should have approximately identical values; (3) the calibrated magnetometer vectors should be approximately unity in magnitude; (4) the angle between the calibrated magnetometer vector and calibrated accelerometer vector should not change; (5) the radius of the calibrated magnetometers should be approximately equal to one; and, (6) the quaternions calculated using different magnetometers should be approximately equal.


Sufficient deviation from assumption 1 is deemed a motion anomaly and deviations from assumptions 2-6 are deemed a magnetic anomaly. Parameters for motion detection are calculated for each IMU sensor (accelerometer, gyroscope, and magnetometer) using data collected during local environment calibration. Using stationary and dynamic data, appropriate thresholds of motion are calculated for every IMU sensor, so that the calibrated IMU sensor output above the threshold indicates that the sensor is in motion and below which the sensor can be considered stationary (see Equation 2). A motion anomaly is considered to occur as in Table (2), which is described in more detail hereafter. In short, if a magnetometer has detected motion, but other sensors do not, a motion anomaly is said to exist.


For the magnetic anomaly, a deviation from assumption 2 is used to create a cost function, which is calculated as the magnitude of the vector difference weighted with the angular derivation between the vectors (see Algorithm 1 and Algorithm 4). During local environment calibration, expected values for the deviation from unity and from identical signals are calculated to form a cost function. The threshold is calculated from the value of this cost function during local environment calibration (when no additional distortion is presented). Then, as part of an anomaly detection process, any values of this cost function above the threshold are considered a magnetic anomaly.


For assumption 3, the magnetic strength is calculated as the mean of combined magnitudes (Algorithm (5)), which without noise is expected to be approximately 1. Then, as part of the anomaly detection process, any value outside the calculated magnetic strength (including a preset tolerance) is considered an anomaly.


For assumption 4, the derivation is calculated as the angular derivation between the magnetometer and the accelerometer vectors (Algorithm (6)). Then, as part of the anomaly detection process, any value outside the calculated angle (including a preset tolerance) is considered an anomaly.


For assumption 5, the deviation is calculated by using all of the magnetometer readouts, along with a preset of artificial points, to estimate a radius of the magnetic field using an ellipsoid estimation function as shown in Algorithm (7). The artificial points are used to support the estimation calculation. However, if the IMU contains more than 11 magnetometers, no artificial point is needed to resolve the radius. Then, as part of the anomaly detection process, any value outside the calculated radii (including a preset tolerance) is considered an anomaly.


For assumption 6, the deviation is determined by first calculating the orientation of the IMU using sensor fusion algorithm (e.g. Extended Kalman Filter) using different magnetometers as input, and an angular difference among the output orientation is calculated as shown in Algorithm (8). Then, as part of the anomaly detection process, any values greater than the angular different with a preset tolerance is considered an anomaly.


If motion or magnetic anomaly occurs, some unaccounted for magnetic distortion is present. An alert system for distortion provides feedback indicating the reliability of the orientation reported by the sensors may be inaccurate. What follows is a more detailed discussion of the algorithms utilized to detect motion and magnetic anomalies.


The anomaly detection is based on three categories of detection. The first is sensor fault detection, the second is magnetometer radii verification, and the third is quaternion output discrepancies. Sensor fault detection consists of the following functions: (i) motion and magnetic anomalies; (ii) magnetic strength; and (iii) angle between magnetometer and accelerometer vectors. The following method is used to consistently extract threshold values (TVs) for motion anomalies and cost functions from the calibration. The method utilizes Algorithm (1) as follows:












Algorithm (1)















Iteration: for [beginning of gyro calibration → end of checking routines]


Gyromeani [ . . . ] = |procGyrocurrent−kernelcurrent|, i = 1, 2, . . .


Gyrostdi [ . . . ] = std(procGyro[current − kernel → current]), i = 1, 2, . . .


Accstdi [ . . . ] = std(procAcci[current − kernel → current]), i = 1, 2, . . .


Magstdi [ . . . ] = stdalignProcMAGi[current − kernel → current]),


i = 1, 2, . . .





  
lenDiffi,j[...]=(axis(current-kernelcurrent(alignProcMAGi-alignProcMAGj)2)kernel,






  i ≠ j, i = 1, 2, . . . , j = 1, 2 . . .












angDiff

i
,
j


[


.

.

.


]

=




"\[LeftBracketingBar]"


1
-

(







alignProcMAG
ι

_


current
-
kernel

current

·








alignProcMAG
j

_


current
-
kernel

current




)




"\[RightBracketingBar]"







norm
(



alignProcMAG
ι

_


current
-
kernel

current

)

·






norm
(



alignProcMAG
j

_


current
-
kernel

current

)






,









i ≠ j, i = 1, 2, . . . , j = 1, 2 . . .





metricLenAngi,j[ . . . ] = lenDiffi,j[ . . . ] * angDiffi,j[ . . . ], i ≠ j,


i = 1, 2, . . . , j = 1, 2 . . .











currentMagVal
[


.

.

.


]

=

1


max

(
i
)




(







current
-
kernel

current


(




alignProc


MAG
ι

*






alignProcMAG
j




)




)

_




,









i ≠ j, i = 1, 2, . . . , j = 1, 2 . . .


End









Once the iteration from Algorithm (1) is completed, the mu and sigma of the cost function can be determined using Equations 11 and 12, immediately recited below.















μ = currentMagValmag and acc calibration
Equation 11


δ = SSF1 * std(currentMagVal)mag and acc calibration
Equation 12









Where:
(a) SSF1 is a sensitivity scale factor; and,




(b) δ serves as the detection tolerance based









on standard derivation (i.e., how many standard



deviations away from the mean is considered



acceptable).









Algorithm (2) is utilized to calculate motion and no motion (stationary) states for the sensors.












Algorithm (2)






















Stationary

gyro
std


=



Gyro

std



_




gyro


calibration













Motiongyrostd = Gyrostdacc calibration











Stationary

gyro
mean


=



Gyro

mean



_




gyro


calibration


















Motion

gyro
mean


=



Gyro

mean



_




acc


calibration



















Stationary

Acc
i


=



Acc

ι

std




_


acc


calibration



,

i

=
1

,

2
,


.

.

.

















Motion

Acc
i


=



Acc

ι

std




_


acc


calibration



,

i

=
1

,

2
,


.

.

.

















Stationary

MAG
i


=



MAG

ι

std




_


gyro


calibration



,

i

=
1

,

2
,


.

.

.

















Motion

MAG
i


=



MAG

ι

std




_


Checking


routine



,

i

=
1

,

2
,


.

.

.














A check is performed here to ensure all motion states should have values greater than the corresponding stationary states.


Algorithm (3) is utilized to calculate TVs for motion anomalies.












Algorithm (3)















TVgyrostd = SSF2 * (Motiongyrostd − Stationarygyrostd) + Stationarygyrostd


TVgyromean = SSF3 * (Motiongyromean − Stationarygyrostd) + Stationarygyromean


TVAcci = SSF4 * (MotionAcci − StationaryAcci) + StationaryAcci, i = 1,2, . . .


TVMAGi = SSF5 * (MotionMAGi − StationaryMAGi) + StationaryMAGi, i = 1,2, . . .


SSF2 to SSF5 are the sensitivity scale factor. It is typically set between 0 and 1, and should be


adjusted based on sensors and desired sensitivity of the detection method.









Determination of a magnetic anomaly may be based upon a cost function TV, which is accomplished by calculating the cost function over the period of the calibration period as set forth in Algorithm (4).












Algorithm (4)















Iteration: for [beginning of gyro calibration → beginning of Check 1]





  
pdfVal[...]=12π*δe-0.5*(1-μδ)2-12π*δe-0.5*(currentMagVal[...]δ)2







costFuction[...]=SSF6*"\[LeftBracketingBar]"pdfVal[...]*metricLenAngi,j[...]max(i)"\[RightBracketingBar]",ij,i=1,2...,j=1,2...






end


  TVcostFunction = max(costFunction) + (costFunction) + std(costFunction)


SSF6 is a scale factor that is used to prevent losing the precision of the cost function


from the small number.









In order to consistently extract TVs for discerning the strength of a magnetic anomaly from the calibration data, one can use Algorithm (5).












Algorithm (5)















Iteration: for [beginning of mag calibration → end of mag calibration]






MagStri[...]=axis(alignProcMAGi)i=1,2,...






end


  min_MagStri = min(MagStri) i = 1, 2, . . .


  max_MagStri = max(MagStri) i = 1, 2, . . .









In order to consistently extract TVs for discerning the angle between magnetometer and accelerometer vectors from the calibration data, one can use Algorithm (6).












Algorithm (6)















Iteration: for [beginning of gyro calibration → end of checking routine]


Use Extended Kalman Filter to estimation the orientation during the


calibration


 qi[. . . ] = EKF(procGyro,procAcc,alignProcMAGi), i = 1, 2, . . .


   ei[ . . . ] = [q2i q3i q4i], i = 1, 2, . . .





  
e^i[...]=[0-q4iq3iq4i0-q2i-q3iq2i0],i=1,2,...






  Rpi[ . . . ] = (q1i2 − ei′ei) * I3×3 + 2(eiei′) − 2q1iêi, i = 1, 2, . . .


  MFi[ . . . ] = Rpi * alignProcMAGi, i = 1, 2, . . .


   GFi[ . . . ] = Rpi * procAcc, i = 1, 2, . . .





  
GMi[...]=acos[MFi·GFiMFi*GFi],i=1,2,...






    min∠TV_GMi = ∠GMι − tol1


    max∠TV_GMi = ∠GMι + tol2





Where: to/1 and to/2 are tolerances for the detection threshold.






A magnetometer radii check calculation is performed on the calibrated magnetometer data before alignment. The radii of a normal point set should be equal to one. Algorithm (7) may be used to determine the radii threshold. As part of using Algorithm (7), a set of artificial points on a unit sphere are created or generated, where the set of points should be close to evenly distributed and have a minimum of 18 points. Using an ellipsoid fitting method on the artificial points, one can utilize the processed magnetometer data to determine the radii as set forth below












Algorithm (7)















  Radii = ellipsoidFit([artificial points, procMAGi], i = 1,2 . . .


   minRadii = Radii − tol3


   maxRadii = Radii + tol4


Where: tol3 and tol4 are tolerances for the detection threshold; and,


 minRadii and maxRadii should be within 0.93 and 1.07 for


applications that require high reliability.









Quaternion output discrepancies is a detection method that is based on the orientation output calculated from using different magnetometers. The following algorithm, Algorithm (8), may be used to determine the quaternion output discrepancies threshold, using the quaternions output from Algorithm (6), and calculate the angle between the quaternions.












Algorithm (8)















 qDiffi,j[. . .] = quatAngleDiff(qi[. . .],qj[. . .]) ,


i ≠ j,i = 1,2 . . . , j = 1,2 . . .


TV_qDiffi,j = qDiffi,j[...] + SSF7 * std(qDiffi,j[. . .]),


i ≠ j,i = 1,2 . . . ,j = 1,2 . . .









After extracting the TVs for anomaly detection, the following calculation may be used to determine if the IMU is being affected by a local anomaly. As a prefatory step, all incoming sensor data may be processed using Equations 1-10 discussed previously. In addition, Algorithms (1) and (4) may be utilized to determine relative deviation among magnetometers within a preset kernel size. For the exemplary sensor fault detection system, the motion is detected based on the following rules in Table (1).









TABLE (1)







Motion Detection based on sensors









Activity
Condition
Result





Gyro has
If std(procGyroi) >  custom character   i =
inertial_motion_


detected
1, 2, . . .
detection = 1


motion
OR |procGyroi| >  custom character  i =




1, 2, . . .



Accelerometer
If std(procAcci) >TVAcci, i = 1, 2, . . .
inertial_motion_


has detected

detection = 1


motion




Magnetometer
If std(procMAGi) > TVMAGi, i =
Magnetic_motion_


has detected
1, 2, . . .
detection = 1


motion









Within the preset kernel size, the following rules in Table (2) are used to detect a motion anomaly.









TABLE (2)







Motion anomaly detection










Motion Anomaly Flag
Condition







False
If Σinertial_motion_detection > 1




AND




Σmagnetic_motion_detection > 1



False
If Σinertial_motion_detection < 1




AND




Σmagnetic_motion_detection < 1



True
If Σinertial_motion_detection < 1




AND




Σmagnetic_motion_detection > 1



False
If Σinertial_motion_detection > 1




AND




Σmagnetic_motion_detection < 1










The following rules in Table (3) are used to detect a magnetic anomaly.









TABLE (3)







Magnetic Anomaly detection










Magnetic Anomaly Flag
Condition







True
costFunction > TVcostFunction



False
costFunction ≤ TVcostFunction










In accordance with the instant disclosure, one can calculate the magnetic strength using Algorithm (5). Thereafter, using the rules of Table (4), one can discern whether a magnetic anomaly is present.









TABLE (4)







Magnetic strength anomaly detection








Magnetic Strength



Anomaly Flag
Condition





True
MagStri < min_MagStri OR MagStri > max_MagStri


False
MagStri ≥ min_MagStri OR MagStri ≤ max_MagStri









In accordance with the instant disclosure, one can determine the angle between magnetometer and accelerometer vectors using Algorithm (6). This detection is only activated when the IMU/sensors is/are stationary, which is detected from the motion detection algorithm. Using the following table, Table (5), one can discern whether a magnetometer and accelerometer vector anomaly is present.









TABLE (5)







magnetometer and accelerometer vectors anomaly detection








MAG and



ACC vectors



Anomaly Flag
Condition





True
∠GMi < min∠TV_GMi OR ∠GMi > max∠TV_GMi


False
∠GMi ≥ min∠TV_GMi OR ∠GMi ≤ max∠TV_GMi









In accordance with the instant disclosure, one can determine the magnetic radii by processing the raw data from the magnetometers using Algorithm (7). Using the following table, Table (6), one can discern whether a magnetic radii anomaly is present.









TABLE (6)







Magnetic Radii anomaly detection










Magnetic Radii




Anomaly Flag
Condition







True
radii < minRadii OR radii > maxRadii



False
radii ≥ minRadii OR radii ≤ maxRadii










In accordance with the instant disclosure, one can calculate the orientation of the IMUs with Algorithm (6) and calculate the angular difference with Algorithm (8). Using the following table, Table (7), one can discern whether a quaternion output discrepancy is present.









TABLE (7)







Quaternion discrepancies detection










Quaternion Discrepancies




Flag
Condition







True
qDiffi, j > TV_qDiffi, j



False
qDiffi, j ≤ TV_qDiffi, j










Anomaly detection can be weighted using the output from each of these sub-detection systems, and determine the relevant level of disturbance detected by the system. For systems requiring high levels of reliability, it should be considered an anomaly if any of these subsystem flags is detected.


The following discussion describes a process for calibrating an IMU when it is being used with or in proximity to a ferromagnetic object. One example, in the medical device field of use, is during surgical navigation, where the IMU is needed to track the motion of a ferromagnetic object (e.g., tools made from stainless steel, CoCr, etc). Since local environment calibration is performed presumably without these ferromagnetic objects in proximity, there is no way to compensate for their distortions during the local environment calibration stage. A secondary calibration step should be undertaken to correct the distortion when ferromagnetic objects will be used in proximity to the IMUS. The proposed method accounts for the fact that an IMU may be rigidly fixed to the ferromagnetic object when in use.


While it is possible to manually maneuver the IMU attached to the ferromagnetic object to collect a lump sum of data for re-calibration, this method is inefficient and requires a substantial amount of time for the user to repeat the maneuver for each ferromagnetic object needing calibration. Secondly, it is possible that the calibration of the combined effect of the local environment and the ferromagnetic object is not aligned with the calibration of the local environment alone. Though either of the calibrations may be functional for yaw tracking, the latent transformation between calibrations on the reference field can produce errors. By way of example, one may think of it as comparing the reading of two compasses, one being horizontal to the ground, the other being tilted 5 degrees. The horizontal compass is calibrated to the local environment, while the other compass is calibrated with both ferromagnetic objects and local environment. While both calibrations are both functional, the reading from each compass will be different. Accordingly, an exemplary algorithm of the instant disclosure addresses both of these issues.


The instant approach makes use of the distortion characteristic of low field strength ferromagnetic objects, and models the correction based on a limited amount of data input. This enables a much simpler calibration maneuver, while still being able to achieve reasonable calibration.


Referring to FIGS. 1-3, the object 100 attached to the IMU 102 (or the IMU 102 by itself) is moved through a series of orientations—which can be confirmed from the IMU data. From the collected data, an initial estimation of the distortion field can be calculated through standard ellipsoid processing and analysis. A reference dataset (currently using 25000 vectors) is drawn from a von-Mises Fisher density, thereby creating a set of uniformly distributed vectors around the IMU sphere. The magnetic distortion calculated during the local environment calibration, and the initial estimation of magnetic distortion with the ferromagnetic object are applied in reverse to the reference dataset. This creates two datasets: (1) a reference dataset being distorted by the local environment; and, (2) a reference dataset being distorted by both the local environment and the attached ferromagnetic object 100 (or ferromagnetic object in proximity to the IMU 102). Since all the points between these two datasets originate from the same reference dataset, a point-to-point correspondence between local environment distortion, and local environment distortion with the ferromagnetic object is established. The correction for the ferromagnetic object is then extracted from the latter using a recursive optimization algorithm with the prior dataset.


This exemplary calibration process can be used for any number of objects, so that multiple objects which have latent magnetic fields can be used with the magnetometer without compromising sensor accuracy, as well as maintain a consistent reference field.


The following section outlines the algorithm for calibrating a ferromagnetic object with a pre-calibrated IMU. This part assumes that the IMU has been calibrated according to the foregoing discussion. The IMU, as part of this calibration sequence, should be rigidly attached to the tool or otherwise have the tool in a constant position with respect to the MU. The operator rotates the object for at least one revolution along each axis in a standard Cartesian system as depicted in FIGS. 1-3. Once the tool calibration dataset is collected, the following algorithm can calculate and compensate the distortion.


As an initial matter, an initial guess is made as to the center offset of the data set using Equation 13 below.










SFe

i

n

s


t
i



,


HFe

i

n

s


t
i



=

EF

fun

(

DATA

mag
i


)



,

i
=

1

,
TagBox[",", "NumberComma", Rule[SyntaxForm, "0"]]

2


,





Equation


13







Thereafter, a large number (e.g., 25,000) of random 3D unit vectors are generated and application of the inverse of the original and instrument SFe on to them using Algorithm (9) below.












Algorithm (9)



















Iteration: for 1...25000




samples = rand3Dvectors




samplesdistortedi = samples * inv(SFeinsti), i = 1,2, . . .




samplesnormali = samples * inv(SFeorigi), i = 1,2, . . .




End










Using Equation 14, shown below, calculate the point correspondence transformation.











T

i

D

N




=


samples

n

o

r

m

a


l
i





samples

distorted
i




,

i
=

1

,
TagBox[",", "NumberComma", Rule[SyntaxForm, "0"]]

2


,





Equation


14







Using Equation 15, shown below, calculate the point-to-point distortion distance.











Diff

ND
i


=


samples

normal
i


-


samples

distorted
i




,

i
=

1

,
TagBox[",", "NumberComma", Rule[SyntaxForm, "0"]]

2


,





Equation


15







Using Equation 16, shown below, for each axis, locate the maximum negative of DiffND.











l

o


c
i



=

min


max

(

Diff

ND
i


)



,

i
=

1

,
TagBox[",", "NumberComma", Rule[SyntaxForm, "0"]]

2


,





Equation


16







Using Equation 17, shown below, calculate the index location of loc.


The index location of loc is











i

n


d
i


=

index



(

min


max

(

Diff

ND
i


)


)



,

i
=

1

,
TagBox[",", "NumberComma", Rule[SyntaxForm, "0"]]

2


,





Equation


17







Using Equation 18, shown below, calculate the center along the maximum distortion distance axes.











c
i

=


min

(

loc
i

)

+

max

(

loc
i

)



,

i
=

1

,
TagBox[",", "NumberComma", Rule[SyntaxForm, "0"]]

2


,





Equation


18







Using Equation 19, shown below, calculate the maximum correction boundaries.











D

b

o

u

n


d
i


=


samples

distorted
i


(

i

n


d
i


)


,

i
=

1

,
TagBox[",", "NumberComma", Rule[SyntaxForm, "0"]]

2


,





Equation


19







Using Equation 20, shown below, after the distortion compensation parameters are calculated, center the instrument calibration dataset.











centerMAG
i

=


DATA

mag
i


-

HFe

inst
i




,

i
=

1

,
TagBox[",", "NumberComma", Rule[SyntaxForm, "0"]]

2


,





Equation


20







The foregoing calibration correction can be applied in at least two ways. In a first fashion, the calibration correction is applied using a point correspondence transformation, such as Equation 21 shown below.











compensatedMAG
i

=



centerMAG
i

*
i

n


v

(

T

i

D

N



)


i

=

1

,
TagBox[",", "NumberComma", Rule[SyntaxForm, "0"]]

2



,





Equation


21







Alternatively, in a second fashion, the calibration correction is applied using geometric scaling and compensation, such as by using Equations 22 and 23.












SF
i

(

X
,
Y
,
Z

)

=







centerMAG
i

(

X
,
Y
,
Z

)

-







c



(

X
,
Y
,
Z

)

·

Dbound
i




(

X
,
Y
,
Z

)


-

c

(

X
,
Y
,
Z

)









norm



(



centerMAG
i



(

X
,
Y
,
Z

)


-

c


(

X
,
Y
,
Z

)



)

·







norm

(



Dbound
i

(

X
,
Y
,
Z

)

-

c

(

X
,
Y
,
Z

)


)






,

i
=

1

,
TagBox[",", "NumberComma", Rule[SyntaxForm, "0"]]

2


,





Equation


22














ccompensatedMAG
i

=


centerMAG
i

+


loc
i



SF
i




,

i
=

1

,
TagBox[",", "NumberComma", Rule[SyntaxForm, "0"]]

2


,





Equation


23







Using equation 24, the adjusted calibration parameters may be calculated.










S

F


e

adjInst
i



,


HFe

adjIinst
i


=

magCal

(

compensatedMAG
i

)


,

i
=

1

,
TagBox[",", "NumberComma", Rule[SyntaxForm, "0"]]

2


,





Equation


24







Post conclusion of the foregoing calibration computations, the calibration computations may be applied to the magnetometers of each IMU that is attached to the ferromagnetic object or will be in a fixed positional relationship thereto. In order to apply the calibration computations to the magnetometers of each IMU, the magnetometer data is centered using Equation 20. By way of example, on may apply the correction to account for the distortion cause by the tool via a point correspondence transformation using Equation 21, or apply the geometric scaling and compensation using Equations 22 and 23. Thereafter, the magnetometers of the IMU can be processed by applying the adjusted soft and hard iron compensation parameters via Equation 25, shown below.











procMAG
i

=


processMag

(


compensatedMAG
i

,

SFe

adjInst
i


,

HFe

adjIinst
i



)


,

i
=

1

,
TagBox[",", "NumberComma", Rule[SyntaxForm, "0"]]

2


,





Equation


25








Once the magnetometers have been processed, the magnetometers are aligned using Equations 9 and 10


Following from the above description, it should be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art that, while the methods and apparatuses herein described constitute exemplary embodiments of the present invention, the invention described herein is not limited to any precise embodiment and that changes may be made to such embodiments without departing from the scope of the invention as defined by the claims. Additionally, it is to be understood that the invention is defined by the claims and it is not intended that any limitations or elements describing the exemplary embodiments set forth herein are to be incorporated into the interpretation of any claim element unless such limitation or element is explicitly stated. Likewise, it is to be understood that it is not necessary to meet any or all of the identified advantages or objects of the invention disclosed herein in order to fall within the scope of any claims, since the invention is defined by the claims and since inherent and/or unforeseen advantages of the present invention may exist even though they may not have been explicitly discussed herein.

Claims
  • 1. A method of accounting for magnetic disturbances within range of two or more magnetometers of an inertial measurement unit, the method comprising: calibrating the two or more magnetometers of the inertial measurement unit to account for local magnetic field distortions and reference misalignments so all magnetometers are aligned to a reference alignment, wherein calibrating the two or more magnetometers of the inertial measurement unit includes performing a first calibration of the inertial measurement unit not mounted to a ferromagnetic object and performing a second calibration of the inertial measurement unit mounted to the ferromagnetic object to produce a reference dataset;extracting parameters for distortion detection that are established from the calibrating; andapplying the extracted parameters to captured data from the inertial measurement unit to identify transient magnetic distortion.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the extracting parameters assumes two or more of the following: (a) motion or lack of motion of the inertial measurement unit is detectable; (b) an angle and a length of the two or more magnetometers have identical values; (c) calibrated magnetometer vectors should be unity in magnitude; (d) an angle between a calibrated magnetometer vector and a calibrated accelerometer vector should not change; (e) a radius of the two or more magnetometers should be one; and, (f) quatemions calculated using different magnetometers should be equal.
  • 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the extracting parameters assumes motion or lack of motion of the inertial measurement unit is detectable and, using data output from the inertial measurement unit during calibration, calculating a threshold of magnetic anomaly for the inertial measurement unit, where values below the threshold of magnetic anomaly are representative of the inertial measurement unit not being influenced by a magnetic anomaly, and where values above the threshold of magnetic anomaly are representative of the inertial measurement unit being influenced by a magnetic anomaly.
  • 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the extracting parameters assumes an angle and a length of the two or more magnetometers have identical values and, using data output from the inertial measurement unit during calibration, a threshold of magnetic anomaly is calculated for the inertial measurement unit, where values below the threshold of magnetic anomaly are representative of the inertial measurement unit not being influenced by a magnetic anomaly, and where values above the threshold of magnetic anomaly are representative of the inertial measurement unit being influenced by a magnetic anomaly.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the extracting parameters assumes calibrated magnetometer vectors should be unity in magnitude and, using data output from the inertial measurement unit during calibration, calculating a tolerance range of magnetic anomaly for the inertial measurement unit, where values within the tolerance range of magnetic anomaly are representative of the inertial measurement unit not being influenced by a magnetic anomaly, and where values above the tolerance range of magnetic anomaly are representative of the inertial measurement unit being influenced by a magnetic anomaly.
  • 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the extracting parameters assumes an angle between a calibrated magnetometer vector and a calibrated accelerometer vector should not change within an angle tolerance and, using data output from the inertial measurement unit during calibration, calculating a tolerance angle range of magnetic anomaly for the inertial measurement unit, where values within the tolerance angle range of magnetic anomaly are representative of the inertial measurement unit not being influenced by a magnetic anomaly, and where values outside the tolerance angle range of magnetic anomaly are representative of the inertial measurement unit being influenced by a magnetic anomaly.
  • 7. The method of claim 1, wherein the extracting parameters assumes a radius of the two or more magnetometers should be the same and, using data output from the inertial measurement unit during calibration, calculating a tolerance radius for the two or more magnetometers, where values within the tolerance radius are representative of the two or more magnetometers not being influenced by a magnetic anomaly, and where values outside the tolerance radius are representative of at least one of the two or more magnetometers being influenced by a magnetic anomaly.
  • 8. The method of claim 1, wherein the extracting parameters act assumes quaternions calculated using different magnetometers should be equal and, using data output from the inertial measurement unit during calibration, calculating a tolerance orientation range for the two or more magnetometers, where values within the tolerance orientation range are representative of the two or more magnetometers not being influenced by a magnetic anomaly, and where values outside the tolerance orientation range are representative of at least one of the two or more magnetometers being influenced by a magnetic anomaly.
  • 9. An inertial measurement unit calibrated according to the method of claim 1.
  • 10. An inertial measurement unit incorporated as part of a surgical navigation system calibrated according to the method of claim 1.
  • 11. An inertial measurement unit configured for use in surgical navigation and calibrated according to the method of claim 1.
  • 12. The method of claim 1, wherein: performing the first calibration includes calculating a magnetic distortion representative of a local environment; and, performing the second calibration includes calculating an estimated distortion representative of the ferromagnetic object.
  • 13. The method of claim 12, wherein calibrating the two or more magnetometers of the inertial measurement unit includes: applying the calculated magnetic distortion to the reference dataset to generate a first distorted dataset; and, applying the calculated estimated distortion to the reference dataset to generate a second distorted dataset.
  • 14. The method of claim 13, wherein calibrating the two or more magnetometers of the inertial measurement unit further includes: establishing a point-to-point correspondence between the first and second distorted datasets; and, extracting a ferromagnetic distortion correction from the second distorted dataset using a recursive optimization algorithm after establishing point-to-point correspondence between the first and second distorted datasets.
  • 15. The method of claim 14, wherein performing the second calibration of the inertial measurement unit mounted to the ferromagnetic object to produce the reference dataset includes rotating the ferromagnetic object for at least one revolution along each axis in a standard Cartesian system.
  • 16. The method of claim 15, wherein performing the second calibration of the inertial measurement unit mounted to the ferromagnetic object to produce the reference dataset includes establishing an initial guess as to the center offset of the reference dataset.
  • 17. The method of claim 16, wherein performing the second calibration of the inertial measurement unit mounted to the ferromagnetic object to produce the reference dataset includes using a multi-dimensional ellipsoidal fitting function to determine soft and hard iron distortion.
  • 18. The method of claim 17, wherein performing the second calibration of the inertial measurement unit mounted to the ferromagnetic object to produce the reference dataset includes applying a calibration correction using a point correspondence transformation to the reference dataset.
  • 19. The method of claim 17, wherein performing the second calibration of the inertial measurement unit mounted to the ferromagnetic object to produce the reference dataset includes applying a calibration correction using geometric scaling and compensation to the reference dataset.
  • 20. The method of claim 1, further comprising applying a calibration correction to the two or more magnetometers to align the two or more magnetometers and account for magnetic distortions present in the detected data.
CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

The present application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 17/022,488 filed Sep. 16, 2020, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/664,342 filed Jul. 31, 2017, now U.S. Pat. No. 10,852,383 issued Dec. 1, 2020, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/382,546 filed Dec. 16, 2016, now abandoned and claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application Serial No. 62/268,175, titled “IMU CALIBRATION,” filed Dec. 16, 2015, the disclosures of which are incorporated herein in their entireties by reference.

US Referenced Citations (25)
Number Name Date Kind
7640106 Stokar et al. Dec 2009 B1
9141194 Keyes et al. Sep 2015 B1
20060184336 Kolen Aug 2006 A1
20070001920 Webb et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070032748 McNeil et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070085528 Govari et al. Apr 2007 A1
20100063763 Rozelle Mar 2010 A1
20100310141 Wilson Dec 2010 A1
20110063167 Gum et al. Mar 2011 A1
20110066392 Judd Mar 2011 A1
20110106477 Brunner May 2011 A1
20110199274 Dalmazzo Aug 2011 A1
20110208473 Bassompiere et al. Aug 2011 A1
20110248704 Chowdhary et al. Oct 2011 A1
20110320153 Lightcap Dec 2011 A1
20120209117 Mozes et al. Aug 2012 A1
20130046489 Keal Feb 2013 A1
20130185018 Sheng Jul 2013 A1
20130217998 Mahfouz et al. Aug 2013 A1
20140275987 Bzostek et al. Sep 2014 A1
20140278183 Zheng et al. Sep 2014 A1
20150019159 Elgersma et al. Jan 2015 A1
20170066464 Carter et al. Mar 2017 A1
20180188284 Douglas et al. Jul 2018 A1
20200233053 Vissiere et al. Jul 2020 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (16)
Number Date Country
2016369607 Dec 2015 AU
201636907 Feb 2019 AU
H0996534 Apr 1997 JP
2007040762 Feb 2007 JP
2011220825 Nov 2011 JP
2013510318 Mar 2013 JP
2015203641 Nov 2015 JP
2015031072 Mar 2015 WO
PCTUS2014051173 Mar 2015 WO
2015089118 Jun 2015 WO
PCTUS2014069411 Jun 2015 WO
PCTUS2014051173 Jan 2016 WO
PCTUS2014069411 Jun 2016 WO
2017106794 Jun 2017 WO
PCTUS2016067387 Jun 2017 WO
PCTUS2016067387 Jun 2018 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (2)
Entry
Fong et al., “Methods for In-Field User Calibration of an Inertial Measurement Unit Without External Equipment.,” Measurement Science and Technology, vol. 19, No. 8, Jul. 10, 2008, pp See Priority U.S. Appl. No. 17/022,488, filed Sep. 16, 2020.
Skog et al., “Calibration of a MEMS inertial measurement unit”, XVII IMEDO World Congress, 2006, pp. 1-6.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20220413081 A1 Dec 2022 US
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
62268175 Dec 2015 US
Continuations (3)
Number Date Country
Parent 17022488 Sep 2020 US
Child 17887990 US
Parent 15664342 Jul 2017 US
Child 17022488 US
Parent 15382546 Dec 2016 US
Child 15664342 US