Next Article in Journal
A Quadrilateral Geometry Classification Method and Device for Femtocell Positioning Networks
Previous Article in Journal
Design and Experimental Study of a Current Transformer with a Stacked PCB Based on B-Dot
Article Menu
Issue 4 (April) cover image

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Sensors 2017, 17(4), 822;

Hazards in Motion: Development of Mobile Geofences for Use in Logging Safety

Department of Forest, Rangeland and Fire Sciences, University of Idaho, 875 Perimeter Drive, Moscow, ID 83844-1133, USA
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 17 February 2017 / Revised: 4 April 2017 / Accepted: 6 April 2017 / Published: 10 April 2017
Full-Text   |   PDF [12058 KB, uploaded 11 April 2017]   |  


Logging is one of the most hazardous occupations in the United States. Real-time positioning that uses global navigation satellite system (GNSS) technology paired with radio frequency transmission (GNSS-RF) has the potential to reduce fatal and non-fatal accidents on logging operations through the use of geofences that define safe work areas. Until recently, most geofences have been static boundaries. The aim of this study was to evaluate factors affecting mobile geofence accuracy in order to determine whether virtual safety zones around moving ground workers or equipment are a viable option for improving situational awareness on active timber sales. We evaluated the effects of walking pace, transmission interval, geofence radius, and intersection angle on geofence alert delay using a replicated field experiment. Simulation was then used to validate field results and calculate the proportion of GNSS error bearings resulting in early alerts. The interaction of geofence radius and intersection angle affected safety geofence alert delay in the field experiment. The most inaccurate alerts were negative, representing early warning. The magnitude of this effect was largest at the greatest intersection angles. Simulation analysis supported these field results and also showed that larger GNSS error corresponded to greater variability in alert delay. Increasing intersection angle resulted in a larger proportion of directional GNSS error that triggered incorrect, early warnings. Because the accuracy of geofence alerts varied greatly depending on GNSS error and angle of approach, geofencing for occupational safety is most appropriate for general situational awareness unless real-time correction methods to improve accuracy or higher quality GNSS-RF transponders are used. View Full-Text
Keywords: real-time positioning; GNSS-RF; GNSS; GPS-RF; GPS; geofence; virtual fence; situational awareness real-time positioning; GNSS-RF; GNSS; GPS-RF; GPS; geofence; virtual fence; situational awareness

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Zimbelman, E.G.; Keefe, R.F.; Strand, E.K.; Kolden, C.A.; Wempe, A.M. Hazards in Motion: Development of Mobile Geofences for Use in Logging Safety. Sensors 2017, 17, 822.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Related Articles

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics



[Return to top]
Sensors EISSN 1424-8220 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top