Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (15)
Similar to A Study of Wireless Technology Based Pilgrim Tracking Systems
Similar to A Study of Wireless Technology Based Pilgrim Tracking Systems (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
A Study of Wireless Technology Based Pilgrim Tracking Systems
- 1. A Study of Wireless Technology Based Pilgrim Tracking Systems Seminar Presentation Presented by:- Deepak Kumar IDD-CSI 10211009 Under the guidance of:- Dr. Dhaval Patel
- 2. Overview • Motivation • Wireless Technologies • System Designs • Conclusion
- 3. Motivation Why do track someone?
- 4. Motivation Lost person Trouble for relatives and authorities Language problem Children Identifying and locating among thousands A lost child [1]
- 5. Motivation Stampede Overcrowding Fire Explosion Leaves many dead and injured Sabarimala stampede [2]
- 6. Motivation Medical emergency Medical history Blood group Contact family members Identifying dead JK floods [3]
- 7. Motivation Flood/earthquake Relocating pilgrims How many are there? Direction of movement JK floods [4]
- 8. Wireless Technologies Utilizing radio waves
- 9. Wireless Technologies 1. RFID 2. NFC 3. Wi-Fi 4. Bluetooth 5. GPS
- 10. RFID Radio Frequency Identification
- 11. 1. Radio Frequency Identification • Operates in radio frequency band (3kHz to 300GHz) • Automated identification • RFID tags for each object to identify • Categorising RFID tags based on [6] • Source of power • Passive • Semi-Passive • Active • Power/data transfer • Near-field • Far-field Waterproof RFID Wristband [5]
- 12. Based on Source of Power Passive • Power from RFID reader • No battery • Short range • Low cost • Small in size • Transmit when read by an RFID reader Semi-Passive • Battery powered • Long range • Costly • Larger in size • Transmit when read by an RFID reader • Battery life around 5 year Active • Battery powered • Long range • Costly • Larger size • Transmit automatically and when read by an RFID reader • Battery life around 5 year
- 13. Based on Power/Data Transfer Near-field RFID Power transferred using magnetic induction Data transferred by varying current using load modulation Range is approximately: 푐/2휋푓 Used at frequency < 100 MHz c: speed of light f: frequency of radio wave Figure: Near-field power/communication mechanism [6]
- 14. Based on Power/Data Transfer Far-field RFID Power transferred using electromagnetic wave capture Reflects received signal to transfer data by varying antenna’s impedance Energy received is proportional to 1/푟4 Range is 3 to 6 meters Used at UHF (Ultra High Frequency) Figure: Far-field power/communication mechanism [6]
- 15. Effects of RFID Frequency Factor Lower Frequency Higher Frequency Read range (affected by energy Short (in centimeters) Long (in meters) contained in radio wave) Interference (from Radio reflective materials, like beverages, metals) Less More Data transfer rate Less High Cost High Low
- 16. Effects of RFID Frequency Frequency Passive Active Range Cost Range Cost 125-134.3 kHz Low Frequency (LF) 10 cm – 30 cm $1 13.56 MHz High Frequency (HF) 10 cm – 1.5 m $5 865-867 MHz Ultra High Frequency (UHF) 1 m – 15 m $0.15 50 m $20 2.45 or 5.8 GHz Microwave 3 m 30 m $25 3.1–10 GHz Ultra Wide Band NA up to 200 m $5
- 17. Ultra-Wideband (UWB) RFID • Operates in 3.1 – 10 GHz band • Low power signals on a large range of frequencies instead of a strong signal on a particular frequency • Energy efficient • Battery powered • Long read range • Less interference • Cheaper than Active UHF RFID tags
- 18. 2. Near Field Communication (NFC) • Available on high-end smartphones • Operating frequency: 13.56 MHz • Data transfer rate: 30 to 60 kbps • Compatible with High Frequency RFID tags • Can read/write HF RFID tags • Short range • Theoretical: 20 cm • Practical: 5cm Figure: Two NFC devices [7] • Large amount of data can be transferred by paring up Bluetooth or Wi-Fi • NFC chip can be read even if device is switched off
- 19. Wi-Fi Getting MAC Address
- 20. 3. Wi-Fi • Operates in 2.4GHz and 5GHz bands. • Long range (20m to 300m) • High data transfer rate • Tracking smartphones using Wi-Fi • Periodic transmission of probe messages • Each frame contains MAC address in plain-text • Techniques • Passive • Active
- 21. Passive Wi-Fi Tracking • No transmission of frames by Wi-Fi monitor • Silently listen to all the frames transmitted by others • Problems • No control over the transmission time of frames • No guarantee of frame transmission • A corrupted frame might be dropped • More number of frames can provide better accuracy
- 22. Active Wi-Fi Tracking • Transmission of frames by Wi-Fi monitor to trick smartphone • Goal is to increase the • Number of devices detected • Number of frames transmitted • Techniques • Advertising popular access point’s SSID • Opportunistic access point emulation • Sending RTS packets
- 23. Advertising Popular Access Point’s SSID • Smartphones automatically try to connect to known AP • Broadcast beacons containing SSID of popular AP • E.g. “attwifi”, “tmobile” • No need of fully functional AP • Get more frames • Emulate fully functional AP • Null frames for notifying power state
- 24. Opportunistic Access Point Emulation • Directed probe request for known networks • Contains SSID of the access point, along with other parameters • Emulate access point with that SSID • Security protocol must match for secured networks • Security protocol information is not available in probe request Search •Probe request for SSID “A” Emulate •Emulate AP with SSID “A” Associate •Association request for SSID “A” Wait •Null frames transmission
- 25. Opportunistic Access Point Emulation • Emulate multiple security protocols • 4-way handshake required for secure protocols • Requires credentials • No need to complete handshake • Null frames transmitted until we complete handshake for around 10 seconds • After that the process is repeated
- 26. Emulating Access Point [8]
- 27. Sending RTS Frames to Known Devices • No emulation of access points • Transmit RTS (request to send) frame to a device • In response we get CTS (clear to send) frame • CTS doesn’t have transmitter address (TA), only receiver address (RA) • Set TA to a unique address (UA) in each RTS RTS (UA, RA) CTS (UA)
- 28. Bluetooth Getting MAC Address
- 29. 4. Bluetooth • Operates in 2.4 GHz band • Energy efficient (2.5 mW for class 2 devices) • Long range (10m to 30m) • Decent data transfer speed • Tracking methods • Inquiry based • Inquiry free
- 30. Inquiry Based Tracking • Transmit discovery packet on predefined 32 channels • Discoverable devices respond to this packet • Response follows a random delay to minimize collisions • Takes around 10 seconds for all devices to respond • Problems • Requires a device to be discoverable • Privacy risk • Disrupts normal communication whilst scanning a channel
- 31. Inquiry Free Tracking • Connection based approach • Requires paring up with Bluetooth monitor • Send inquiry targeted for a particular device • Requires multiple inquiry messages • Faster targeted discovery • Maximum 7 simultaneous connections to other devices
- 32. 5. Global Positioning System (GPS) • Provides position, velocity and time • Position accuracy (outdoor): 2 to 10 meters • Position accuracy (indoor): > 100m • Global Navigation Satellite System (GLONASS) • GPS + GLONASS • Better accuracy • Faster fix • Assisted GPS (A-GPS) • Gets the almanac and ephemeris data from the Internet • Send the location to the central server
- 33. System Designs Putting all of the pieces together
- 34. System Designs • Scalable • Should handle real-time location updates of millions of people • Reliable • Inter-operable and compatible with other systems • Components • Position data collection techniques • Location Based Services (LBS) • Finding nearby ATM • Traffic information • Geographic Information System (GIS)
- 35. 1. Smartphone + RFID • Developed for Hajj • RFID tag for each pilgrim • App for smartphones with GPS • Locating family members or friends • Requesting urgent help • Map of important locations • Control center • Visualizing location of all pilgrims on a map • Searching for pilgrims based on region, age etc. • Maintains database of hospitals, location history, personal information
- 36. Smartphone + RFID Figure: System architecture [10]
- 37. Smartphone + RFID • Problems • Read range of RFID reader was low • Affected by environmental factors • Interference from human body • Collocated tags • Taking back wristband tags • Conclusion • Not to use wristband RFID tags
- 38. 2. Smartphone GPS [HajjLocator] • Get location from GPS • Send location using • Wi-Fi • 3G • SMS (emergency) • Update location after certain • Time period • Distance travelled • Geo-fencing • Searching for someone • Push notifications
- 39. Smartphone GPS Figure: System architecture [12]
- 40. 3. Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) • Developed for Hajj • Need for tracking in addition to identification • A sensor unit for each pilgrim • Mobile sensor unit consists of • GPS • Microcontroller • Antenna • Battery • ZigBee radio • Fixed master units • Get position data from mobile sensor units • Send this data to central server by routing through other fixed units
- 41. Wireless Sensor Network • Node configurations • End nodes • Routers • Gateways • Information packet • UID number • Latitude • Longitude • Time • Searching for someone • Routing multiple queries in parallel • Based on previous known location • Very high cost • Comparable with smartphone Figure: Node configurations [9]
- 42. 4. Bluetooth • Networked host machines with Bluetooth class 2 devices • Current position of all devices stored on central system • Ask a host which is probably near to a device • Frequent connection and disconnection • Clock synchronization for faster connection time • Distribute clock information to other hosts • Can tolerate an error up to 10.24 seconds • Average connection time after utilizing clock information: 0.64 seconds
- 43. 5. Wi-Fi Monitors • Designed for tracking smartphones on a street for traffic flow and congestion monitoring • Wi-Fi monitor: standard AP with custom firmware • MAC address + signal strength • Monitors were 400 meters apart • Mean error: 70m • Problems • A phone may pass a monitor without transmitting any frame and remain undetected. • Techniques for increasing frame transmission • Stationary devices • Maintain blacklist
- 44. Wi-Fi + Bluetooth Figure: Meshlium Scanner [11]
- 45. Summary Technology Distance Power consumed Cost Remarks RFID (Passive) < 3 m No battery Very Low Best suited for identification RFID (Active) ~ 100 m Very Low Low Interference from human body NFC ~ 4 cm No battery High Can read/write RFID tags Bluetooth 10 m – 30 m Low High High availability in phones Wi-Fi 20 m – 200 m High High Drains battery of smartphone GPS + Networking Anywhere on earth surface High Very High Requires an app to be installed in smartphone
- 46. Conclusion • Passive UHF RFID tags are cost effective but their range is limited to 3 meters. • UWB tags can provide long range but are more expensive. • Using smartphone GPS is best for real-time tracking but require active Internet connection. • Bluetooth and Wi-Fi based methods are independent of OS of smartphone and don’t require Internet connection. • None of the system discussed address the issue of scalability. • None of the methods are without drawbacks.
- 47. References 1. http://www.thewonderoflight.com/fiap-awards-2/b1-lost-child/ 2. http://news.oneindia.in/feature/2011/sabarimala-stampede-deadly-accident-for-hindu-pilgrims.html 3. http://www.swadeshnews.com/latest/unprecedented-rains-unplanned-urbanisation-behind-jk-floods 4. http://indiatoday.intoday.in/technology/story/kashmir-floods-live-jammu-and-kashmir-rescue-motor-boats-vaishno-devi/1/381531.html 5. http://en.asiadcp.com/company/productinfo.php?pid=60658&upcid=10482&id=128214 6. R. Want, “An Introduction to RFID technology,” Pervasive Computing, IEEE, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 25-33, 2006. 7. http://www.nokia.com/mea-en/support/product/c7-00/userguidance/?action=singleTopic&topic=GUID-0D70FE24-64A1-4DB9-A6D2- 2355C10847D9 8. A. Musa and J. Eriksson, “Tracking Unmodified Smartphones Using Wi-Fi Monitors,” in ACM Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys), 2012. 9. M. Mohandes, M. A. Haleem, A. Abul-Hussain and K. Balakrishnan, “Pilgrims Tracking Using Wireless Sensor Network,” in International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications (WAINA), Biopolis, 2011. 10. R. O. Mitchell, H. Rashid, F. Dawood and A. AlKhalidi, “Hajj Crowd Management and Navigation System,” in International Conference on Computer Applications in Technology (ICCAT), 2013. 11. http://www.libelium.com/meshlium-scanner-smartphone-detection-improved-iphone-android-devices-mobiles-cellulars-bluetooth-wifi/ 12. T. Mantoro, A. D. Jaafar, M. F. M. Aris and M. A. Ayu, “HajjLocator: A Hajj Pilgrimage Tracking Framework in Crowded Ubiquitous Environment,” in International Conference on Multimedia Computing and Systems (ICMCS), 2011.