novel approaches to expression and detection of oestrus in dairy cows

novel approaches to expression and detection of oestrus in dairy cows novel approaches to expression and detection of oestrus in dairy cows

etheses.nottingham.ac.uk
from etheses.nottingham.ac.uk More from this publisher
25.12.2013 Views

accuracy, a 360° prism was used attached to a pole, along with a UWB MU and tracked by a surveyor’s total station (TCA2003, Leica Geosystems, Switzerland). The total station is a machine that measures the position of the prism by making angle and distance measurements using reflections of infrared light, to calculate the exact position coordinates of the prism. The position of the prism recorded via the total station, defining a ‘groundtruth’ position, was compared with the position recorded from the MU in reference to the BU network and relayed back to the computer in order to test the horizontal accuracy of static and kinematic positioning. Figure 4.5 shows the static test results and Figure 4.6 demonstrates the kinematic test results. Due to the different sampling rate between the two measurements (total station and UWB), these points cannot match each other one-to-one, but these figures demonstrate that the position calculated by the total station compares well with the UWB position in the horizontal, X and Y axis. The total station provides millimetre level accuracy which is treated as the true position, therefore when comparing the UWB position against the total station position; UWB achieved 2 to 3cm accuracy in the horizontal dimension. Figure 4.3 UWB mobile unit set up, connected to a 12 Volt battery Figure 4.4 Mobile unit and battery set up in backpack monitoring cow movement 86

Therefore this demonstrates that X and Y positioning is precise with few erroneous signals, and is more precise than Z positioning. Z is the most difficult axis to achieve accuracy due to the geometry of the BU transmitters. Therefore vertical positional accuracy of UWB was tested by equipping cows with backpacks and MUs (see Figure 4.4) and monitoring their behaviour, movement and position within a small network of BUs. Three cows were monitored in a controlled environment in a series of short tests lasting approximately 10 minutes with records made of the cows’ behaviour to compare with the UWB results. Legend Total Station UWB MU Test 1 UWB MU Test 2 Stationary Total Station Stationary UWB MU 3cm 3cm 27m Figure 4.5 Static test to compare UWB precision in horizontal axes 29m Figure 4.6 Kinematic tests to compare UWB precision in horizontal axes 87

accuracy, a 360° prism was used attached <strong>to</strong> a pole, along with a UWB MU<br />

<strong>and</strong> tracked by a surveyor’s <strong>to</strong>tal station (TCA2003, Leica Geosystems,<br />

Switzerl<strong>and</strong>). The <strong>to</strong>tal station is a mach<strong>in</strong>e that measures the position <strong>of</strong><br />

the prism by mak<strong>in</strong>g angle <strong>and</strong> distance measurements us<strong>in</strong>g reflections <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>frared light, <strong>to</strong> calculate the exact position coord<strong>in</strong>ates <strong>of</strong> the prism. The<br />

position <strong>of</strong> the prism recorded via the <strong>to</strong>tal station, def<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g a ‘groundtruth’<br />

position, was compared with the position recorded from the MU <strong>in</strong><br />

reference <strong>to</strong> the BU network <strong>and</strong> relayed back <strong>to</strong> the computer <strong>in</strong> order <strong>to</strong><br />

test the horizontal accuracy <strong>of</strong> static <strong>and</strong> k<strong>in</strong>ematic position<strong>in</strong>g. Figure 4.5<br />

shows the static test results <strong>and</strong> Figure 4.6 demonstrates the k<strong>in</strong>ematic<br />

test results. Due <strong>to</strong> the different sampl<strong>in</strong>g rate between the two<br />

measurements (<strong>to</strong>tal station <strong>and</strong> UWB), these po<strong>in</strong>ts cannot match each<br />

other one-<strong>to</strong>-one, but these figures demonstrate that the position<br />

calculated by the <strong>to</strong>tal station compares well with the UWB position <strong>in</strong> the<br />

horizontal, X <strong>and</strong> Y axis. The <strong>to</strong>tal station provides millimetre level<br />

accuracy which is treated as the true position, therefore when compar<strong>in</strong>g<br />

the UWB position aga<strong>in</strong>st the <strong>to</strong>tal station position; UWB achieved 2 <strong>to</strong> 3cm<br />

accuracy <strong>in</strong> the horizontal dimension.<br />

Figure 4.3 UWB mobile unit set up,<br />

connected <strong>to</strong> a 12 Volt battery<br />

Figure 4.4 Mobile unit <strong>and</strong> battery<br />

set up <strong>in</strong> backpack moni<strong>to</strong>r<strong>in</strong>g cow<br />

movement<br />

86

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!