Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T05:17:02.014Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A review of mechanical model, structure, and prospect for long-distance pipeline pig and robot

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 July 2022

Jianguo Zhao ,
Ju Wang Open the ORCID record for Ju Wang [Opens in a new window] ,
Qingyou Liu ,
Xu Luo  and
Xuecheng Dong
Jianguo Zhao*
Affiliation:
School of Mechatronic Engineering, Southwest Petroleum University, Chengdu, 610500, China State Key Laboratory of Oil and Gas Reservoir Geology and Exploitation, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu, 610059, China
Ju Wang
Affiliation:
School of Mechatronic Engineering, Southwest Petroleum University, Chengdu, 610500, China
Qingyou Liu
Affiliation:
School of Mechatronic Engineering, Southwest Petroleum University, Chengdu, 610500, China State Key Laboratory of Oil and Gas Reservoir Geology and Exploitation, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu, 610059, China
Xu Luo
Affiliation:
School of Mechatronic Engineering, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu, 610059, China
Xuecheng Dong
Affiliation:
State Key Laboratory of Oil and Gas Reservoir Geology and Exploitation, Chengdu University of Technology, Chengdu, 610059, China
*
*Corresponding author: E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The safety and reliability of robots are very important for the inspection in a long-distance pipeline used for the oil and gas transportation. In this paper, the long-distance pipeline pig and robots (LDPPRs) are classified into two categories, which are velocity-uncontrollable type and velocity-controllable type. Among them, the velocity control of velocity-controllable LDPPR has three ways, which are friction resistance, driving force, and self-running. Meanwhile, the mechanical models of the motion of the LDPPRs are classified into the dynamic model of the velocity-uncontrollable LDPPRs, velocity-controllable LDPPRs, and vibration, and the contact mechanics model between the rubber barrel and the pipe wall. In addition, the anti-stuck technologies, the inspection technologies, and the location technologies are investigated and analyzed. Thus, the purpose of this review is to provide a concise reference for the development and research directions, as well as the design of the LDPPRs.

Keywords

pipeline robotlong-distance pipelinemechanical modelvelocity controllablebypassbrake
Type
Review Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 40 , Issue 12 , December 2022 , pp. 4271 - 4307
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Karydis, K., A Data-Driven Hierarchical Framework for Planning, Navigation, and Control of Uncertain Systems: Applications to Miniature Legged Robots (University of Delaware, 2015).Google Scholar
Hong, X., Zhuxin, L., Yi, S., Zhang, Z. and Yuanyuan, L., “Research status and prospect of pipeline inspection robot localization technology,” Mach. Tool Hydraul. 41(9), 172–175 (2013).Google Scholar
PPSA Directory of Members, http://ppsa-online.com/directory-of-members.php.Google Scholar
Abney, L., Pipeline Pig and Method for Irradiation of Bacteria in a Pipeline, US: 11/947660, 2007-11-29.Google Scholar
Comello, C., Laursen, P. and Maki, J., Device for Passing Through Pipes, US: 6339993, 2002-1-22.Google Scholar
PII Pipeline Solutions, https://www.geoilandgas.com/sites/geog.dev.local/files/pii-pipeline-solutions-product-matrix.pdf.Google Scholar
Comello, C., Laursen, P. and Maki, J., Device for Inspection of Pipes, US: 6196075, 2001-3-6.Google Scholar
Bjorn, S. and Ewan, R. A., Method and Apparatus for Inspecting the Integrity of Pipeline Walls, EP: 2085155A1, 2009-5-8.Google Scholar
The HAPP™ Technology, http://www.happ-tech.com/Our%20Technology/Technology.htm.Google Scholar
Stoltze, B., A new pipeline cleaning technology: hydraulically activated power pigging (HAAP TM). http://www.ppsa-online.com/papers/2007-8-Stoltze.pdf.Google Scholar
Thomas, B., Stephan, B. and Hubert, L., “Overcoming the Specific Issues Associated with the In-Line Inspection of Gas Pipelines,” In: PPSA Seminar on 17th, Germany (November 2010).Google Scholar
Aue, H., Steffen Paeper, R. and Bryce Brown, R., “High-quality Geometry Module Data for Pipeline Strain Analyses,” In: Pigging Products and Services Association 2007 (ROSEN Technology & Research Center, Hamburg, Germany, 2007).Google Scholar
Schaller, D., Pig Segment and Pig, US: 14/899778, 2014-6-4.Google Scholar
Inspection Solutions Accurate Inspection Data is the Key to Integrity, http://www.rosen-group.com/global/solutions/services/inspection.html.Google Scholar
Braithwaite, J. C. and Smith, I., Braking System for Pipeline Inspection Vehicle – Which Controls Vehicles Speed to that of Average Flow Velocity of Fluid in Pipeline, AU: 511001B2, 1978-8-8.Google Scholar
Ghorbel, F. H. and Dabney, J. B., Autonomous Robotic Crawler for In-pipe Inspection, US: 7182025, 2007-2-27.Google Scholar
Lavine, G. T. L., Gómez, A. R. A. and Perez, R. B., Electrorecovery of Gold and Silver from Leaching Solutions by Simultaneous Cathodic and Anodic Deposits, US: 13/993247, 2011-12-9.Google Scholar
Pruett, R. D., Strong, R. F., Freeman, E. N., Cooper, C. C. G., Nelson, S. D. and Henault, M. R., Speed Regulated Pipeline Pig, US: 8650694B2, 2014-2-18.Google Scholar
Campbell, D. C. and Varney, B., Apparatus for Use in a Pipeline, US: 6190090, 2001-2-20.Google Scholar
Smith, I., Couchman, P. A. and Jones, B. K. C., Pipeline Pigs, US: 6098231, 2001-8-8.Google Scholar
Torres, C. R. Jr, Manzak, P. T. and Miller, J. E., Variable Speed Pig for Pipeline Applications, US: 6370721, 2002-4-16.Google Scholar
Chaitanya, Y., Design of Regulated Velocity Flow Assurance Device for the Petroleum Industry (Texas A & M University, 2004).Google Scholar
Bin, T. G., Min, Z. S. and Xiao, Z. X., “Design of the speed regulating PIG with butterfly bypass-valve,” Adv. Mater. Res. 15(8), 1165–1173 (2011).Google Scholar
Hu, Z. and Appleton, E., “Dynamic characteristics of a novel self-drive pipeline pig,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 21(5), 781–789 (2005).Google Scholar
Appleton, E. and Stutchbury, N. W., Dynamic Characteristics of a Novel Self-drive Pipeline Pig, US: 6769321, 2004-8-3.Google Scholar
Tharmalingam, T., Mohamed, E.-S., Pradip, S. K., Ashraf, S., Ali, A.-A. H. and Amr, N., “Keyless Pigging,” In: Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition & Conference, Abu Dhabi, UAE (2007). doi:10.2118/188570-MS.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alvis, M. E. and Ovid, B., “A Method of Calculating Multiphase Flow in Pipe Lines Using Rubber Spheres to Control Liquid Holdup,” In: Drilling and Production Practice (Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE), USA, 1964).Google Scholar
Kazuioshi, M. and Ovadia, S., “Pigging dynamics in two-phase flow pipelines: experiment and modeling,” Int. J. Multiph. Flow 22, 145–146 (1996).Google Scholar
Hosseinalipour, M. S., Salimi, A. and Zarif, K., “Transient Flow and Pigging Operation in Gas-Liquid Two Phase Pipelines,” In: 16th Australasian Fluid Mechanics Conference, Crown Plaza, Gold Coast, Australia (2007), https://dx.doi.org/10.1061/41202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diego, P. J., Nelson, L., Janneth, G. and Armando, B., “3-D Transient Modeling of Pig Motion,” In: Proceedings of the 2016 11th International Pipeline Conference, Calgary, Alberta, Canada (2016).Google Scholar
Jean, S. M., An Analysis of the Motion of Pigs Through Natural Gas Pipelines (Rice University, Houston, Texas, 1981).Google Scholar
Azevedo, F. A. L., Braga, M. B. A., Nieckele, O. A. and Naccache, F. M., “Simple Hydrodynamic Models for the Prediction of Pig Motions in Pipelines,” In: 1996, Offshore Technology Conference, Houslon, Texas (1996). doi: 10.4043/8232-MS.Google Scholar
Tien, N. T., Kyu, K. D., Woo, R. Y. and Bong, K. S., “Dynamic Modeling and Its Analysis for PIG Flow Through Curved Section in Natural Gas Pipeline,” In: Proceedings of 2001 IEEE International Symposium on Computational Intelligence in Robotics and Ausomation, Banff, Alberta, Canada (2001), https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/CIRA.2001.1013250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hosseinalipour, M., Khalili Zarif, A. and Salimi, A., “Numerical Simulation of Pig Motion Through Gas Pipelines,” In: 16th Australasian Fluid Mechanics Conference, Crown Plaza, Gold Coast, Australia (2007).Google Scholar
Nieckele, A. O., Braga, A. M. B. and Azevedo, L. F. A., “Transient pig motion through gas and liquid pipelines,” J. Energy Resour. Technol. 123(4), 260–269 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lesani, M., Rafeeyan, M. and Sohankar, A., “Dynamic analysis of small pig through two and three-dimensional liquid pipeline,” J. Appl. Fluid Mech. 5(2), 75–83 (2012).Google Scholar
Alireza, S. A. and Masoud, D., “Analysis of transient PIG motion in natural gas pipeline,” Mech. Ind. Mech. Ind. 13(5), 293–300 (2012).Google Scholar
Deng, T., Gong, J., Zhou, J., Zhang, Y. and Li, H., “Numerical simulation of the effects of vaporization on the motion of PIG during pigging process,” Asia-Pac. J. Chem. Eng. 9(6), 854–865 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mirshamsi, M. and Rafeeyan, M., “Dynamic analysis and simulation of long pig in gas pipeline,” J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 23(May), 294–303 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nshuti, F. R., Dynamic Analysis and Numerical Simulation of PIG Motion in Pipeline (Chonnam National University, Korea, 2016).Google Scholar
Mirshamsi, M. and Rafeeyan, M., “Speed control of pipeline pig using the QFT method,” Oil Gas Sci. Technol. 67(4), 693–701 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liang, Z., He, H. and Cai, W., “Speed simulation of bypass hole PIG with a brake unit in liquid pipe,” J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 42, 40–47 (2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tien, N. T., Bong, K. S., Ryong, K. H. and Woo, R. Y., “Modeling and simulation for PIG flow control in natural gas pipeline,” KSME Int. J. 15(8), 1165–1173 (2001).Google Scholar
Tan, N. T., Sang, K. B., Hui, Y. R. and Yong, R. W., “Modeling and simulation for PIG with bypass flow control in natural gas pipeline,” KSME Int. J. 15(9), 1302–1310 (2001).Google Scholar
Li, J. Y., Jiang, S. Y., Wang, Y., Ren, L. R. and Gao, X. H., “Study on Speed Control System of In-Pipe Robot Power Self-Supported by Fluid,” In: Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE International Conference on mechatronics and Automation, Changchun, China (2009), https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICMA.2009.5246682.Google Scholar
Singh, A. and Henkes, R. A. W. M., “CFD Modeling of the Flow Around a By-Pass Pig,” In: 8th North American Conference on Multiphase Technology, Banff, Alberta, Canada (2012).Google Scholar
Zhu, X., Zhang, S., Tan, G., Wang, D. and Wang, W., “Experimental study on dynamics of rotatable bypass-valve in speed control pig in gas pipeline,” Measurement 47, 686–692 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Azpiroz, J. E., Hendrix, M. H. W., Breugem, W. P. and Henkes, R. A. W. M., “CFD Modelling of Bypass Pigs with A Deflector Disk,” In: 17th International Conference on Multiphase Production Technology, Cannes, France (2015) pp. 141–155.Google Scholar
Mohammad, D., Amir, F. and Ali, N., “Investigation of Dynamics and Vibration of Pig in Oil and Gas Pipelines,” In: ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, Seattle, Washington, USA (2007) pp. 2015–2024, https://dx.doi.org/10.1115/IMECE2007-43301.Google Scholar
Gao, J., Wang, D. and He, R., “Vibration of Suspension Pipeline Bridge Subjected to Process of Pigging,” In: International Conference on Computer Distributed Control and Intelligent Environmental Monitoring, Changsha, Hunan, China (2011) pp. 2404–2407.Google Scholar
Ming, W. W., Min, Z. S., Na, S. S. and Yin, L., “Vibration analysis for pigging of suspension pipe bridge,” Appl. Mech. Mater. AMM 201–202, 669–672 (2012).Google Scholar
Hang, Z., Shimin, Z., Shuhai, L., Xiaoxiao, Z. and Biao, T., “Chatter vibration phenomenon of pipeline inspection gauges (PIGs) in natural gas pipeline,” J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 27, 1129–1140 (2015).Google Scholar
Hang, Z., Simin, Z., Shuhai, L. and Yan, A., “Collisional vibration of PIGs (pipeline inspection gauges) passing through girth welds in pipelines,” J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 37, 15–28 (2017).Google Scholar
Aidan, O. F., On the Steady State Motion of Conventional Pipeline Pigs Using Incompressible Drive Media (Cranfield University, Bedfordshire, England, 1996).Google Scholar
Li, N., Chen, L., Zhang, J., Hu, A. and He, F., “Mechanical properties analysis of sealing disc for straight plate pig during pigging,” Rev. Téc. Ing. Univ. Zulia 38, 12–19 (2015).Google Scholar
Xing, Z., Yan, W., Shiming, Z. and Kang, Z., “Finite-element analysis on mechanical properties of sealing disc for pig,” Oil Gas Storage Transp. 11, 1225–1230 (2015).Google Scholar
Zhu, X., Wei, W., Shimin, Z. and Shuhai, L., “Experimental research on the frictional resistance of fluid-driven pipeline robot with small size in gas pipeline,” Tribol. Lett. 65(2), 49 (2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hang, Z., Carlos, S., Shuhai, L., Shimin, Z. and Hong, L., “Wear of a polyurethane rubber used in dry gas pipeline as inspection gauges,” J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 41, 40–48 (2017).Google Scholar
Tolmasquim, S. T. and Nieckele, A. O., “Design and control of pig operations through pipelines,” J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 62, 102–110 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jiman, L., Lulu, D., Hui, Y. and Zeming, L., “Design of coordinated motion control system for pipeline dredging robot,” J. Shenyang Jianzhu Univ. (Nat. Sci. Ed.) 37(03), 556–562 (2021).Google Scholar
Guoying, T., Research on Robot Scanning Control System for Ultrasonic Oil Storage Tank Bottom Corrosion Detection [D] (Shenyang University of Technology Liaoning, Shenyang, China, 2019).Google Scholar
Weijie, Z., Design and Analysis of Offshore Pipeline Inspection Robot [D] (Southwest Petroleum University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China, 2019). doi:10.27420/d.cnki.gxsyc.2019.000589.Google Scholar
Hendrix, M. H. W., IJsseldijk, H. P., Breugem, W.-P. and Henkes, R. A. W. M., “Experiments and modeling of by-pass pigging under low-pressure conditions,” J. Process Control 71, 1–13 (2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenney, A., “Genesis Pipeline Crawlers: Pigging the Unpiggable,” In: Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, USA (2011). doi: 10.4043/21210-MS.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, K., “Pipeline crawlers: pigging the unpiggable,” J. Pet. Technol. 8(08), 72–76 (2011).Google Scholar
Hendrix, M. H. W., Heijer Den, A., Breugem, W.-P. and Henkes, R. A. W. M., “Frictional Forces During Pigging of Multiphase Pipelines,” In: 10th North American Conference on Multiphase Technology, Banff, Canada (2016).Google Scholar
Zhang, H., Zhang, S., Lin, L. and Tang, B., Mechanical Characteristics Analysis of Pig’s Sealing Disc in Offshore Pipeline (Twenty-fifth, International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers, Kona, Big Island, Hawaii, USA, 2015).Google Scholar
Yves, G. and Larry, P., A New Technique for the Control of Top of the Line Corrosion: TLCC-PIG (NACE International, San Diego, CA, 2003).Google Scholar
Alan, L. D., Gene, S. H. and Joe, E. O., Jetting Pig, US: 5875803, 1999-3-2.Google Scholar
Aidan, O., “Pigging as a flow assurance solution – estimating pigging frequency for dewaxing,” Pipeline World 49(2), 13–17 (2004).Google Scholar
Groote, G. A., Van De Camp, P. B. J., Veenstra, P., Broze, G. and Hen Kes, R. A. W. M., “By-Pass Pigging Without or with Speed Control for Gas-Condensate Pipelines,” In: Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference, Abu Dhabi, UAE (2015). doi:10.2118/177819-MS.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darcy, S., Newman, B. and Broze, G., “A Contraflow Tetherless Mechanical Pipeline Crawler,” In: 2003 Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, U.S.A (2003).Google Scholar
Pan, Q., Guo, S. and Okada, T., “Mechanism and Control of A Spiral Type Microrobot,” In: Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE International Conference on Information and Automation, Harbin, China (2010) pp. 735–740, doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICINFA.2010.5512476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ludlow, J., Glass, K., Warkentin, J. and Laursen, P., Speed Control Drive Sections with Failsafe Valve, US: 8479345B2, 2013-6-9.Google Scholar
Willems, H., Jaskolla, B. and Sickinger, T., “Advanced possibilities for corrosion inspection of gas pipelines using EMAT technology,” Bartin Orman Fakultesi Dergisi 5(15), 51–59 (1996).Google Scholar
Jia, W., Research on the Thechnology of Pulsed Eddy Current Pipeline Detection Method (Shenyang University of Technology, Liaoning, Shenyang, China, 2014).Google Scholar
Corrosion and Metal Loss Characterisation, https://www.geoilandgas.com/pipeline-storage/pipeline-integrity-services/corrosion-and-metal-loss-characterisation.Google Scholar
Yanxu, Z., Xiangyang, T., Xuan, Z. and Yuan, Z., “Structure design for probe of fluid-driven pipeline crack detect robot,” Mach. Tool Hydraul. 44(11), 50–53 (2016).Google Scholar
Zheng, S., Yongqian, L., Jinxu, Y. and Guofu, Z., “Thickness gauging equiment for ILI of pipelines using EMATs,” China Meas. Test 43(2), 69–72 (2017).Google Scholar
Rocd emat-c service in-line high resolution axial crack detection and sizing, http://www.rosen-group.com/global/solutions/services/service/rocd-emat-c.html.Google Scholar
Ravan, M., Amineh, R. K., Koziel, S., Nikolova, N. K. and Reilly, J. P., “Sizing of 3-D arbitrary defects using magnetic flux leakage measurements,” IEEE Trans Magn. 46(4), 1024–1033 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lijian, Y., Gen, W. and Songwei, G., “Ferromagnetic tubes testing based pulsed remote field eddy current technique,” Instr. Tech. Sensor 11, 141–144 (2012).Google Scholar
Rogeo ec service in-line basic geometry and passage analysis, http://www.rosen-group.com/global/solutions/services/services/service/rogeo-ec.html.Google Scholar
Russell, D. and Latimer, R., “Development of a Pig Based Inspection Tool Utilising Maps Stress Measurement Technology,” In: Pigging Products and Services Association Aberdeen Seminar, UK (2007) pp. 1–8.Google Scholar
Mingsheng, W., Study on Localization Method of Pig Robot Through Low Frequency Electromagnetic Signal (China Mining University, Xuzhou Jiangsu, China 2016).Google Scholar
Donghui, Z. and Lijian, Y., “Research on extremely low frequency positioning technology of oil gas pipeline internal testing equipment,” Sens. Detect. Internet Things Syst. 7, 135–136 (2016).Google Scholar
Yue, S., “Research on flaw location algorithms of the smart PIG for pipeline inspection,” Sci. Technol. Eng. 8(20), 5603–5607 (2008).Google Scholar
Liang, C., Application of Inertial Navigation System in Pipeline Inspection (Shengyang University of Technology, Liaoning, Shenyang, China 2009).Google Scholar
Bo, S., The Application of Inertial Navigation Technology in the Pipeline in the Pipeline Inner Inspection (Shenyang University of Technology, Liaoning, Shenyang, China 2013).Google Scholar
Ramachandram, D. and Rajeswari, M., “Neural network-based robot visual positioning for intelligent assembly,” J. Intell. Manuf. 15(2), 219–231 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sahin, T. and Zergeroğlu, E., “Adaptive 3D visual servo control of robot manipulators via composite camera inputs,” Turk. J. Electr. Eng. Comput. Sci. 14(2), 253–266 (2006).Google Scholar
Yun, Y. W. and Wang, H., “Coordinating the eyes, head and arm of an autonomous robot,” Eng. Appl. Artif. Intel. 11(2), 163–174 (1998).Google Scholar
Tu, D. W. and Lin, C. X., “Spy quantitative inspection with a machine vision light sectioning method,” Meas. Sci. Technol. 11(8), 1187 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gang, L. and Yinlin, K., “Study on total distance positioning of in-pipe robot based on fiber bragg grating curvature spatial sensor,” J. Zhejiang Univ. (Eng. Sci.) 38(6), 36–39 (2004).Google Scholar
Zhongwei, W., Qixin, C. and Nan, Y., “Autonomous localization technique of submarine in-pipe robot based on multi-sensor data fusion,” J. Shanghai Jiaotong Univ. (Sci.) 42(10), 1707–1711 (2008).Google Scholar
Xiao, W., Research on Above Ground Marking and Tracking of Oil and Gas Pipeline Internal Inspection Instrument Based on Geophone Array (Tianjin University, Tianjin, China, 2010).Google Scholar
Mingsheng, W., Minming, T., Chunya, Z. and Jing, X., “Electromagnetic positioning system of pipeline blockage clearing robot,” Ind. Mine Autom. 42(6), 1–4 (2016).Google Scholar
Xiong, C., Shuiping, C. and Zhiwen, Z., “Experimental research on the transmitting and receiving system for ELF magetic signals for oil and gas pipeline inspection,” Tsinghua Univ. (Sci. Technol.) 54(12), 1615–1620 (2014).Google Scholar
Shu, D., Maser, J., Holt, M., Winarski, R., Preissner, C., Lai, B., Vogta, S. and Stephenson, G. B., “A robot-based detector manipulator system for a hard X-ray nanoprobe instrument,” Nucl. Instr. Methods Phys. Res. Sec. A 582(1), 159–161 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathieu, C., Yukio, S. and Yukio, C., “Development of an automatic and mobile X-ray robot: an innovative approach to medical imaging through mechatronics,” J. Frankl. 349(7), 2313–2322 (2012).Google Scholar
Yanwei, S., Research on Magnetic Flux Leakage and Electromagnetic Acoustic Hybrid Inspecting System of Boiler Water-Wall Tubes (Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, China, 2012).Google Scholar
Hui, L., Chaona, L. and Xiaofang, Z., A Method of GPS Assisted Real Time Geographic Location for Pipeline Robot, CN: 201610353705.0, 2016-11-16.Google Scholar
Yuebing, W., Xinzhao, Y., Honglin, J., Tao, C. and Weiping, L., “Accuacy compariison of precise point positioning of beidou navigation system with GPS,” J. Geodesy Geodyn. 34(4), 110–115 (2014).Google Scholar