Next Article in Journal
Mining Personal Data Using Smartphones and Wearable Devices: A Survey
Next Article in Special Issue
A New Open-Loop Fiber Optic Gyro Error Compensation Method Based on Angular Velocity Error Modeling
Previous Article in Journal
A High Resolution On-Chip Delay Sensor with Low Supply-Voltage Sensitivity for High-Performance Electronic Systems
Previous Article in Special Issue
Online Estimation of Allan Variance Coefficients Based on a Neural-Extended Kalman Filter
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Correction

Correction: Tang, C. Y. and Chen, X.Y. A Class of Coning Algorithms Based on a Half-Compressed Structure. Sensors 2014, 14, 14289–14301

Key Laboratory of Micro-Inertial Instrument and Advanced Navigation Technology, Ministry of Education, School of Instrument Science and Engineering, Southeast University, Sipailou 2, Nanjing 210096, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sensors 2015, 15(2), 4425-4429; https://doi.org/10.3390/s150204425
Submission received: 23 December 2014 / Revised: 23 December 2014 / Accepted: 11 February 2015 / Published: 13 February 2015
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Optical Gyroscopes and Navigation Systems)

1. Change in Tables/Equations

Due to an oversight by MDPI and the authors, the following numerical corrections were not made in the originally published article [1]. MDPI-Sensors and the authors would like to apologize for any inconvenience brought to the readers.
The authors wish to make the following correction to the article [1]:
The former Table 9 (labelled here as Old Table 9) and Table 10 (labelled here as Old Table 10) should be replaced by the new versions shown below (labelled here as New Table 9 and New Table 10), respectively. The z s in Tables 15 and 16 and the maneuver errors in [1] Table 17 will not be affected by the correction to Tables 9 and 10, because these z s and the maneuver errors were all calculated using the correct coefficients in New Tables 9 and 10. That means, the mistakes in Old Tables 9 and 10 are just writing errors.
Old Table 9. FTSuc algorithm coefficients.
Old Table 9. FTSuc algorithm coefficients.
LNCoefficients
33ς12 = ς23 = 27/40, ς13 = 9/20
44ς12 = ς34 = 232/315, ς23 = 178/315, ς13 = ς24 = 46/105, ς14 = 54/105
55ς12 = 18575/24192, ς13 = 2675/6048, ς14 = 11,225/24,192, ς15 = 125/252, ς23 = 2575/6048, ς24 = 425/672, ς25 = 139,75/24,192, ς34 = 1975/3024, ς35 = 325/1512, ς45 = 21,325/24,192
New Table 9. FTSuc algorithm coefficients.
New Table 9. FTSuc algorithm coefficients.
LNCoefficients
33ς12 = ς23 = 27/40, ς13 = 9/20
44ς12 = ς34 = 232/315, ς23 = 178/315, ς13 = ς24 = 46/105, ς14 = 54/105
55ς12 = 21325/24192, ς13 = 325/1512, ς14 = 13975/24192, ς15 = 125/252, ς23 = 1975/3024, ς24 = 425/672, ς25 =11225/24192, ς34 =2575/6048, ς35 =2675/6048, ς45 = 18575/24192
Old Table 10. LMSuc algorithm coefficients.
Old Table 10. LMSuc algorithm coefficients.
LNCoefficients
33ς12 = 0.681306, ς13 = 0.444312, ς23 = 0.679452
44ς12 = 0.739716, ς13 = 0.432467, ς14 = 516734, ς23 = 0.571812, ς24 = 0.4434453, ς34 = 0.737795
55ς12 = 769,240, ς13 = 0.438591, ς14 = 0.467191, ς15 = 0.495116, ς23 = 0.431753, ς24 = 0.625867, ς25 = 0.579681, ς34 = 0.656805, ς35 = 0.213527, ς45 = 0.881820
New Table 10. LMSuc algorithm coefficients.
New Table 10. LMSuc algorithm coefficients.
LNCoefficients
33ς12 = 0.679452, ς13 = 0.444312, ς23 = 0.681306
44ς12 = 0.737795, ς13 = 0.434453, ς14 = 516734, ς23 = 0.571812, ς24 =0.432467, ς34 = 0.739716
55ς12 = 0.881820, ς13 = 0.213527, ς14 = 0.579681, ς15 = 0.495116, ς23 = 0.656805, ς24 = 0.625867, ς25 =0.467191, ς34 =0.431753, ς35 =0.438591, ς45 = 0.769240
The former Equation (12) of [1]:
G Γ ( t l 1 ) = G ¯ , G ( g i ) M × 1 , G ¯ ( g ¯ j ) M × 1 , Γ ( t l 1 ) ( γ j i ( t l 1 ) ) M × M γ j i ( t l 1 ) = { ( t l 1 ) i j , j = 1 ( t l 1 ) i j ( i 1 ) ! / ( j 1 ) ! , 1 < j i 0 , j > i
Should be replaced by the new Equation (12):
G Γ ( t l 1 ) = G ¯ , G ( g i ) M × 1 , G ¯ ( g ¯ j ) M × 1 , Γ ( t l 1 ) ( γ j i ( t l 1 ) ) M × M γ j i ( t l 1 ) = { ( t l 1 ) i j , j = 1 ( t l 1 ) i j ( i 1 ) ! / ( ( i j ) ! ( j 1 ) ! ) , 1 < j i 0 , j > i
Affected by the correction to Equation (12), the former Table 17 (labelled here as Old Table 17) of [1] should be replaced by the new version (labelled here as New Table 17). The correction to Table 17 will not affect the conclusions of [1].
Old Table 17. Maximum maneuver error over 2 s maneuver.
Old Table 17. Maximum maneuver error over 2 s maneuver.
LNMaximum Maneuver Error, μ Rad

FTScLMScFTShcLMShcFTSucLMSuc
331.00e–2−1.88e–2−3.34e–33.65e–32.86e–6−2.52e–2
443.24e–23.25e–2−5.51e–3−5.54e–31.48e–129.66e–4
557.32e–27.33e–2−7.50e–3−7.52e–3−7.23e–133.25e–5
New Table 17. Maximum maneuver error over 2 s maneuver.
New Table 17. Maximum maneuver error over 2 s maneuver.
LNMaximum Maneuver Error, μ rad

FTScLMScFTShcLMShcFTSucLMSuc
33−1.09e–2−7.29e–33.63e–37.48e–31.39e–63.66e–3
44−3.52e–2−3.54e–25.98e–35.89e–31.67e–12−1.40e–4
55−7.97e–2−7.97e–28.15e–38.17e–3−3.09e–13−4.73e–6

2. Change in Main Body Paragraphs

Due to an obscurity on how Equations (13) and (14) of [1] were built, the authors wish to insert some additional sentences to explain how Equations (13) and (14) of [1] can be converted from Equations (59) and (13) of Song (reference [9] of [1]).
Below we respectively denote the Song ςij and the [1] ςij using (ςij)S and (ςij)T.
After setting p = N + 1− i and q = N + 1− j, we can rewrite Equation (5) of Song [9] as:
δ ϕ ^ unc ( t ) = p = 1 N 1 q = p + 1 N ( ς N + 1 p , N + 1 q ) S Δ α p × Δ α q
If δϕ̂unc(t) and (ςN+1−p,N+1−q)S are respectively denoted by δϕ̂l and ξpq, Equation (a1) can be rewritten as:
δ ϕ ^ l = p = 1 N 1 q = p + 1 N ξ p q Δ α p × Δ α q
Comparing Equation (a2) with the [1] Equation (3), we will find that both equations are the same expression under ξpq = (ςij)T with p = i and q = j.
Thus, to make Song [9] Equation (5) of and [1] Equation (3) equivalent will achieve (ςij)T = (ςN+1−i,N+1−j)S. Using this relationship, we have respectively converted ςij s in Tables 1 and 2 of Song [9] to ςij s in New Tables 9 and 10, also we can convert Song [9] Equation (13) to [1] Equation (14), when Song [9] n is replaced by L.
Now we rewrite Song [9] Equation (59) as:
δ ϕ ^ unc δ ϕ c = z 3 ω ( t m 1 ) × ω ˙ ( t m 1 ) ( t t m 1 ) 3 + z 4 ω ( t m 1 ) × ω ¨ ( t m 1 ) ( t t m 1 ) 4 + ( z 51 ω ( t m 1 ) × ω ( t m 1 ) + z 52 ω ˙ ( t m 1 ) × ω ¨ ( t m 1 ) ) ( t t m 1 ) 5 + ( z 61 ω ( t m 1 ) × ω ˙ ( t m 1 ) + z 62 ' ω ˙ ( t m 1 ) × ω ( t m 1 ) ) ( t t m 1 ) 6 + ( z 71 ' ω ( t m 1 ) × ω ¨ ( t m 1 ) + z 72 ' ω ˙ ( t m 1 ) × ω ˙ ( t m 1 ) + z 73 ' ω ¨ ( t m 1 ) × ω ( t m 1 ) ) ( t t m 1 ) 7 + o ( ( t t m 1 ) 9 ) z 3 = 1 6 ( f 3 1 2 ) , z 4 = 1 24 ( f 4 1 ) , z 51 = 1 120 ( f 51 3 2 ) , z 52 = 1 120 ( f 52 1 ) , z 61 = 1 720 ( f 61 2 ) z 62 = 1 720 ( f 62 5 2 ) , z 71 = 1 5040 ( f 71 5 2 ) , z 72 = 1 5040 ( f 72 9 2 ) , z 73 = 1 5040 ( f 73 5 2 )
where f s are of Song [9], rather than of [1].
Set:
g i = d i 1 d t i 1 ( ω ( t ) | t = t m 1 ) / ( i 1 ) ! , i = 1 , 2 ,
where i is a positive integer, and d 0 d t 0 ( ω ( t ) | t = t m 1 ) denotes ω(tm−1).
Then Equation (a3) can be converted into [1] Equation (13), when δϕ̂unc(t) − δϕc(t), tm−1 and n are respectively replaced by δϕ̂l − δϕl, tl−1 and L.
To confirm the correctness of [1] Equations (13) and (14), the z s in [1] Equation (13) are calculated for LMSuc using the [1] f s (see [1] Equation (14)) and ς s in New Table 10. Also the z s in Equation (a3) are calculated for UncExp using the Song [9] f s (see Song [9] Equations (13)) and ς s in Song [9] Table 1. The z s for LMSuc and the z s for UncExp are listed in Tables a1 (the copy of [1] Table 16) and a2, respectively.
Table a1. The z s for [1] LMSuc.
Table a1. The z s for [1] LMSuc.
LNz3z4z51z52z61z62z71z72z73
33−2.29e–50−9.12e–4−2.56e–4−1.83e–3−8.46e–4−2.57e–3−1.48e–3−5.53e–4
444.95e–7−1.30e–8−2.00e–8−1.04e–61.32e–7−1.02e–8−6.17e–5−7.30e–5−2.84e–5
551.07e–81.07e–92.24e–92.21e–83.03e–91.55e–9−3.49e–52.08e–93.45e–6
Table a2. The z s for Song [9] UncExp.
Table a2. The z s for Song [9] UncExp.
nNz3z4z51z52z61z62z71z72z73
33−2.29e–50−1.52e–4−1.28e–4−7.63e–5−1.41e–4−2.15e–5−6.18e–5−4.61e–5
444.95e–7−6.51e–9−3.34e–9−5.21e–75.49e–9−1.70e–9−5.14e–7−3.04e–6−2.37e–6
551.07e–85.33e–103.73e–101.10e–81.26e–102.58e–10−2.91e–78.67e–112.87e–7
Comparing the z3,z4, z51 and z52 in Table a2 with those in Equations (65)–(67) of Song [9], we can find that the former is consistent with the later except for z4 and z51. (The z4 and z51 in Equations (66) and (67) of Song [9] are zero, while the z4 and z51 in Table a2 for UncExp4 and UncExp5 are near zero. The difference between z4 and z51 of Table a2 and those of Song [9] is due to round-off (to six places) in the Song [9] ς s used in [1].) This has been confirmed independently by a Reviewer of [1] that found identical results when using Song [9] equations and Song rounded ς s.
The authors wish to express their appreciation to a reviewer of [1] for his insightful comments and constructive suggestions used in the original article, also for his valuable suggestions used in this correction.

References

  1. Tang, C.Y. A Class of Coning Algorithms Based on a Half-Compressed Structure. Sensors 2014, 14, 14289–14301. [Google Scholar]

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Tang, C.; Chen, X. Correction: Tang, C. Y. and Chen, X.Y. A Class of Coning Algorithms Based on a Half-Compressed Structure. Sensors 2014, 14, 14289–14301. Sensors 2015, 15, 4425-4429. https://doi.org/10.3390/s150204425

AMA Style

Tang C, Chen X. Correction: Tang, C. Y. and Chen, X.Y. A Class of Coning Algorithms Based on a Half-Compressed Structure. Sensors 2014, 14, 14289–14301. Sensors. 2015; 15(2):4425-4429. https://doi.org/10.3390/s150204425

Chicago/Turabian Style

Tang, Chuanye, and Xiyuan Chen. 2015. "Correction: Tang, C. Y. and Chen, X.Y. A Class of Coning Algorithms Based on a Half-Compressed Structure. Sensors 2014, 14, 14289–14301" Sensors 15, no. 2: 4425-4429. https://doi.org/10.3390/s150204425

APA Style

Tang, C., & Chen, X. (2015). Correction: Tang, C. Y. and Chen, X.Y. A Class of Coning Algorithms Based on a Half-Compressed Structure. Sensors 2014, 14, 14289–14301. Sensors, 15(2), 4425-4429. https://doi.org/10.3390/s150204425

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop