Accuracy and Validation of Geotab GPS Fleet Tracking Devices
- Delivery
- Provide download link
- Format
- Price
- Non-members (tax incl.)：￥6,600 Members (tax incl.)：￥5,280
- Paper/Info type
- SAE Paper
No.2021-01-0908
- Pages
- 1-37(Total 37 p)
- Date of publication
- Apr 2021
- Publisher
- SAE International
- Language
- English
- Event
- SAE WCX Digital Summit 2021
Detailed Information
| Author(E) | 1) Roberto C. Morales, 2) Jason Gamboa, 3) Benjamin Nguyen, 4) Omair Siddiqui, 5) Jeffrey Bonsall |
|---|---|
| Affiliation(E) | 1) Momentum Engineering Corp., 2) Momentum Engineering Corp., 3) Momentum Engineering Corp., 4) Momentum Engineering Corp., 5) Momentum Engineering Corp. |
| Abstract(E) | Fleet management companies have implemented tracking devices in their vehicles that employ Global Positioning Systems (GPS) in near real time for optimizing fuel consumption, smart routes, and for monitoring driving behavior. For this purpose, Geotab Inc. has developed the OBD-II connected Geotab GO device. These devices are capable of recording vehicle position and speed data using GPS. The present study seeks to validate and compare Geotab recorded data to data collected from a VBOX 3i RTK DGPS; this instrumentation will provide a reliable reference for vehicle position and speed. Additional data logging characteristics such as LTE connectivity, Geotab’s proprietary curve logging algorithm, near-real-time vehicle data, and speed interpolation were analyzed. This study considered two Geotab models, the GO8 and GO9. Both devices were connected in parallel using two sets of two-way splitters connected to the test vehicle’s OBD-II port. The GO8, GO9, and VBOX 3i RTK, logged data simultaneously and independently. The present study was performed to provide insight for accident reconstructionists investigating crashes involving vehicles equipped with Geotab GO devices. Four different test scenarios were utilized. Scenario 1, Run 1 consisted of a vehicle traveling in a straight line at 45 mph, slowing to a stop, and then performing a left turn maneuver. Scenario 1, Run 2 was conducted in the same manner as Scenario 1, Run 1 except at 65 mph. Scenario 2 consisted of a Stop-Go-Stop-Go-Stop routine in a straight line. Scenario 3 consisted of accelerating in a straight line, then stopping for 3 minutes, and subsequently accelerating. Scenario 4 consisted of four left turn maneuvers around a block. Calculated results for all scenarios showed 11.86 ft in average positional error and ±3.40% in average speed error for speeds greater than 10 mph for the GO8. For the GO9, the results were 8.35 ft in average positional error and ±3.45% in average speed error for speeds greater than 10 mph. Recorded speed was more accurate when the vehicle was traveling faster than 10 mph. |
