DOCSLIB.ORG

Integrating GLONASS with GPS for Drone Orientation Tracking

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Integrating GLONASS with GPS for Drone Orientation Tracking Integrating GLONASS with GPS for Drone Orientation Tracking B Mahanth Gowda1( ), Justin Manweiler2, Ashutosh Dhekne1, Romit Roy Choudhury1, and Justin D. Weisz2 1 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL, USA [email protected] 2 IBM Research, Yorktown Heights, NY, USA Abstract. In addition to position sensing, GPS receivers can be lever- aged for orientation sensing too. We place multiple GPS receivers on drones and translate their relative positions into orientation. Such an orthogonal mode of orientation sensing provides failsafe under Inertial sensorfailures–aprimarycauseofdronecrashestoday.Thispaper integrates GLONASS satellite measurements with GPS for enhancing the orientation accuracy. Accurate estimate of orientation depends upon high precision rela- tive positioning of the GPS receivers. While GPS carrier phases pro- vide high precision ranging data, the phases are noisy and wrap after every wavelength which introduces ambiguity. Moreover, GPS signals experience poor SNR and loss of satellite locks under aggressive flights. This can severely limit both the accuracy and the amount of carrier phase data available. Fortunately, integrating the ubiquitously avail- able Russian GLONASS satellites with GPS can double the amount of observations and substantially improve the robustness of orientation esti- mates. However, the fusion is non-trivial because of the operational dif- ference between FDMA based GLONASS and CDMA based GPS. This paper proposes a temporal differencing scheme for fusion of GLONASS and GPS measurements, through a system called SafetyNet. Results from 11 sessions of 5–7 min flights report median orientation accuracies of 2◦ even under overcast weather conditions. 1 Introduction Multiple GPS receivers can be used for tracking drone orientation. A rigid body is formed by placing 3 or more GPS receivers on the body of a drone. The orientation of the drone is a simple function of relative positions of the GPS receivers on the rigid body. While inertial sensors (IMU) like accelerometers, gyroscopes and compasses are conventionally used for orientation tracking, they can fail – leading to crashes [1,2,4,8,33]. Many of the failures are correlated from common sources of engine vibration and on-board electromagnetic interference [18,21,22,26,31]. Hence, it is not possible to cope with such failures by having redundant sensors. Since GPS provides a completely orthogonal modality of orientation sensing, it can serve as a failsafe for IMU failures. c Springer International Publishing AG 2017 N. Sastry and S. Chakraborty (Eds.): COMSNETS 2017, LNCS 10340, pp. 77–92, 2017. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-67235-9 7 78 M. Gowda et al. Achieving an orientation accuracy of 2◦ with GPS requires the relative posi- tions between the GPS receivers to be known to an accuracy of 2 cm. Moreover, the accuracy needs to be upheld constantly over time, especially during periods of aggressive maneuvers, where the SNR is poor, locks with satellites break and other errors manifest. This is a challenging task since a basic GPS location is only 3 m accurate. Even the best differential GPS technique only provides a relative positioning accuracy of 15 cm [14,15]. They leverage carrier phase data, which is a pre- cise estimate of range from satellites, but polluted by ambiguity due to phase wrapping. Our recent Mobicom paper [10] shows how carrier phase data can be differenced over time and space and fused using an augmented particle filter framework. This results in accurate orientation estimate with a median accuracy of 2◦ and 95th percentile accuracy of 8◦. In this paper, we expand the GPS/GLONASS integration component of Safe- tyNet, which is a critical factor in achieving a high accuracy. Under aggressive flights, the carrier phase data is not only noisy, but also sparse in number because of poor SNR and loss of satellite locks. Fortunately, integrating the ubiquitously available GLONASS (GLObal NAvigation Satellite System – [19]) satellite mea- surements with GPS doubles the number of measurements and enhances the robustness of orientation estimates. However, the fusion is non trivial since GLONASS operates on FDMA whereas GPS uses CDMA. In the rest of the paper, we first provide a background of GPS, GLONASS and the basics of satellite positioning systems. We then revisit the math behind orientation sensing from [10]. We derive orientation as a function of various dif- ferences of carrier phases over, receivers, satellites and time. Finally, we integrate GLONASS measurements into our model. Evaluation results show substantial gains from the integration, especially in eliminating errors in the tail. 2 GPS Foundations We present GPS foundations from first principles and end with discussions on modern techniques. As a result, this section is long. However, given that this paper builds over core GPS algorithms, the material is necessary. We also believe the material is easy to follow. 2.1 Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) GNSS is the generic name given to satellite systems that provide localization services to receiver’s on earth. The Global Positioning System (GPS) [24]is one example of a GNSS, developed by the US Government during 1970–1980s. GPS consists of a constellation of 31 satellites orbiting the earth at a height of 20,000 km. The satellites are continuously transmitting unique pseudo-random noise (PRN) sequences using CDMA at 2 different frequencies –1575.42 (L1) and 1227.60 MHz (L2). They also broadcast ephemeris data using which the (satellite) position and time of transmission can be calculated. A GPS receiver Integrating GLONASS with GPS for Drone Orientation Tracking 79 on the ground localizes itself by trilateration, i.e., measuring and combining the time-of-flight (ToF) from different satellites. Velocity is computed from the doppler shifts from various satellites. GLObal NAvigation Satellite System (GLONASS) is another GNSS system launched by Russia in the 1980’s [19]. GLONASS has 24 operational satellites. Unlike GPS which uses CDMA for multiplexing, GLONASS uses a 15 channel FDMA with a center frequency of 1602 MHz and an inter-channel separation of 0.5625 MHz. Since, there are only 15 channels, but 24 operational satellites, those satellites that are antipodal (on opposite side of earth), reuse the same frequency, such that they are not simultaneously visible to a GPS receiver. Sim- ilarly, GALILEO [3] is an European GNSS system currently under development. Many GNSS receivers are capable of decoding signals from multiple GNSS sys- tems, providing increased accuracy. This paper will also use such receivers and exploit the advantages of satellite diversity. 2.2 GPS Localization and Error Sources A GNSS receiver on the ground can compute its 3D location, time, and velocity. The key idea is to measure various attributes of the arriving signal (e.g., time of flight, phase, etc.), and then apply statistical algorithms to estimate the errors and ambiguities in measurements. We give an overview of the techniques that underpin GPS; other GNSS systems are similar. Pseudorange When a satellite transmits a signal, it includes the starting time of the trans- mission (obtained from its atomic clock). The ground receiver records the time of reception also using its less accurate local clock. The time-of-flight (ToF) is the difference between these timestamps. When multiplied by the speed of light, the result gives the rough distance to the satellite, called pseudorange. Pseudorange = ToF * (speed of light) Of course, the measured ToF is inaccurate because the clock of a typical GPS receiver is not synchronized to the GPS satellites. The resulting error can be up to 300 km. In addition, when the GPS signal enters the Earth’s atmosphere, it can get delayed due to refractions in the Ionosphere and Troposphere. A signal also passes through a multipath channel, adding more errors. Assuming the true s s range between a satellite s and receiver i is ρi , the measured Pseudorange Pi , inclusive of all error sources, can be modeled as s s s s Pi = ρi + cti − ct + A + Mi + i (1) s Here, ti and t are receiver and satellite clock biases, respectively, with respect to true time. A represents the range error due to refractions in the atmosphere. s s Mi denotes Multipath, i is receiver’s hardware noise and c is the speed of light. s 1 In today’s systems, the satellite clock error t is small ,andcti proves to be the 1 Satellites estimate the errors themselves from mutually exchanged signals as well as from ground sources. 80 M. Gowda et al. s major source of error. Hence, cti is modeled as an unknown, and ρi is written as a function of the unknown 3D receiver location ρi and the known 3D satellite position ρs. This results in a total of 4 unknowns. Once we have a lock with 4 satellites, the time bias and the 3D locations can be jointly estimated resulting in a position fix. The ignored error sources, i.e., ts,A,M,and, could contribute to an error of 1–4 m, depending upon the environmental conditions. GPS receivers on phones and car dashboards use the above techniques. How- ever, higher accuracy applications such as 3D orientation tracking require better performance. To this end, modern GPS research has leveraged the phase of the arriving signals, as detailed next. Carrier Phase s Once a satellite lock is acquired, the phase of the arriving signal, φi , is constantly tracked by a phase lock loop (PLL). The true range between the satellite and the s receiver, ρi , can be expressed in terms of wavelength λ. s s s ρi = λNi + λφi (2) s s Ni is an unknown integer, meaning that the PLL measurement of φi only captures the fractional part of the range. However, due to atmospheric effects, multipath, and clock issues, the above equation can be updated: s s s s λφi = ρi + cti − ct + A + Mi + i − λNi (3) s Estimating Ni is non-trivial and several algorithms exist [20,32].
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Comparing Four Methods of Correcting GPS Data: DGPS, WAAS, L-Band, and Postprocessing Dick Karsky, Project Leader
    United States Department of Agriculture Engineering Forest Service Technology & Development Program July 2004 0471-2307–MTDC 2200/2300/2400/3400/5100/5300/5400/ 6700/7100 Comparing Four Methods of Correcting GPS Data: DGPS, WAAS, L-Band, and Postprocessing Dick Karsky, Project Leader he global positioning system (GPS) of satellites DGPS Beacon Corrections allows persons with standard GPS receivers to know where they are with an accuracy of 5 meters The U.S. Coast Guard has installed two control centers Tor so. When more precise locations are needed, and more than 60 beacon stations along the coastal errors (table 1) in GPS data must be corrected. A waterways and in the interior United States to transmit number of ways of correcting GPS data have been DGPS correction data that can improve GPS accuracy. developed. Some can correct the data in realtime The beacon stations use marine radio beacon fre- (differential GPS and the wide area augmentation quencies to transmit correction data to the remote GPS system). Others apply the corrections after the GPS receiver. The correction data typically provides 1- to data has been collected (postprocessing). 5-meter accuracy in real time. In theory, all methods of correction should yield similar In principle, this process is quite simple. A GPS receiver results. However, because of the location of different normally calculates its position by measuring the time it reference stations, and the equipment used at those takes for a signal from a satellite to reach its position. stations, the different methods do produce different Because the GPS receiver knows exactly where results.
    [Show full text]
  • Location Corrections Through Differential Networks (LOCD-IN)
    Location Corrections through Differential Networks (LOCD-IN) A thesis presented to the faculty of the Russ College of Engineering and Technology of Ohio University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Science Russell V. Gilabert December 2018 © 2018 Russell V. Gilabert. All Rights Reserved. 2 This thesis titled Location Corrections through Differential Networks (LOCD-IN) by RUSSELL V. GILABERT has been approved for the School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science and the Russ College of Engineering and Technology by Maarten Uijt de Haag Edmund K. Cheng Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Dennis Irwin Dean, Russ College of Engineering and Technology 3 ABSTRACT GILABERT, RUSSELL V., M.S., December 2018, Electrical Engineering Location Corrections through Differential Networks (LOCD-IN) Director of Thesis: Maarten Uijt de Haag Many mobile devices (phones, tablets, smartwatches, etc.) have incorporated embedded GNSS receivers into their designs allowing for wide-spread on-demand positioning. These receivers are typically less capable than dedicated receivers and can have an error of 8-20m. However, future application, such as UAS package delivery, will require higher accuracy positioning. Recently, the raw GPS measurements from these receivers have been made accessible to developers on select mobile devices. This allows GPS augmentation techniques usually reserved for expensive precision-grade receivers to be applied to these low cost embedded receivers. This thesis will explore the effects of various GPS augmentation techniques on these receivers. 4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my academic advisor, Maarten Uijt de Haag, for providing guidance and opportunities in both my academic and professional careers.
    [Show full text]
  • And Dual-Frequency GPS and GLONASS Observations on Point Accuracy Under Forest Canopies
    Effects of Differential Single- and Dual-Frequency GPS and GLONASS Observations on Point Accuracy under Forest Canopies Erlk Naesset Deckert and Bolstad (1996) and Sigrist et al. (1999) reported A 20-channel, dual-frequency receiver observing dual-fie- accuracies of approximately 3.1 to 4.4 m and 1.8 to 2.5 m for the quency pseudorange and carrier phase of both GPS and average position of 500 and 480 repeated measurements of indi- GLONASS was used to determine the positional accuracy of 29 vidual points under tree canopies, respectively, based on differ- points under tree canopies. The mean positional accuracy ential pseudorange. Nsesset (1999)found that, even under tree based on differential postprocessing of GPS+GLONASS single- canopies, carrier phase observations represent valuable addi- frequency observations ranged from 0.16 m to 1.I 6 m for 2.5 tional information as compared to traditional pseudorange min to 20 min of observation at points with basal area ranging acquisition. By using both single-frequency pseudorange and from <20 m2/ha to 230 m2/ha. The mean positional accuracy carrier phase observations in an adjustment with coordinates of differential postprocessing of dual-frequency GPS+GLONASS and carrier phase ambiguities as unknown parameters (float observations ranged from 0.08 m to 1.35 m. Using the dual- solution), an accuracy of 0.8 m was reported for two 12-chan- frequency carrier phase as main observable and fixing the nel receivers based on 30 min of observation. The correspond- initial integer phase ambiguities, i.e., a fixed solution, gave ing accuracy using pseudorange only was 1.2 to 1.9 m.
    [Show full text]
  • Differential Global Positioning System Navigation Using High-Frequency Ground Wave Transmissions
    J. R. VETTER AND W. A. SELLERS TEST AND EVALUATION Differential Global Positioning System Navigation Using High-Frequency Ground Wave Transmissions Jerome R. Vetter and William A. Sellers Since 1992, the Strategic Systems Department of the Applied Physics Laboratory has been investigating the use of high-frequency (HF) ground wave transmissions in the upper HF band for sea-based communications. This effort has examined the optimization of shipboard antennas for two-way communications with ground stations. This article describes early tests using differential Global Positioning System navi- gation for investigating the accuracy of determining a ship’s position from a base station using HF ground wave transmissions. (Keywords: Differential GPS, HF signal transmissions, Kalman filtering, Navigation.) INTRODUCTION In late 1990, the U.S. Coast Guard undertook a reference and remote stations into the system was comprehensive data link study to determine which RF costly. Although the system could provide broadcasts broadcast systems could be used to support differential beyond LOS, it was affected by poor performance due Global Positioning System (DGPS) correction trans- to propagation variations in spite of a predicted 700- missions over the continental United States (CO- km sky wave mode range. NUS) and to determine which radio systems were The purpose of APL’s early high-frequency ground appropriate for a given operating area. The broadcast wave (HFGW) experiments at sea was to improve constraints for the system design had to meet accura- two-way voice and data communications between cies of ±3 m at data rates of 100 bits/s with data submerged submarines and surface ships; previous latencies of less than 4 s.
    [Show full text]
  • Starfire™ GNSS: the Next Generation Starfire Global Satellite Based Augmentation System
    StarFire™ GNSS: The Next Generation StarFire Global Satellite Based Augmentation System Chaochao Wang and Ronald Hatch NavCom Technology, Inc. ABSTRACT StarFire receiver hardware and software. NavCom Technology has made numerous advancements in NavCom’s next generation StarFire GNSS system Satellite Based Augmentation Systems (SBAS) over performance is described in this paper. The StarFire the past 15 years and has continued to improve GNSS system is a Global Satellite Based receiver performance to a customer base that now Augmentation System (GSBAS) developed entirely consists of multiple thousands of users. The first by NavCom Technology. Significant improvements StarFire Wide Area Differential GPS correction have been made to each component of the system service, originally named Wide Area Correction including the ground reference network, new Transform (WCT), was introduced by NavCom in proprietary real-time orbit and clock generation, dual 1998. Like the current system it used dual- redundant delivery of corrections via commercial frequency GPS measurements for navigation and communication satellites, and the GNSS receiver precise point positioning. This continental WADGPS navigation software. Among the most significant StarFire system delivered better than 30cm position improvements is the incorporation of orbit and clock accuracy for users in North America. corrections for GLONASS satellites. At the same time, the orbital and clock correction accuracy for In 2002, NavCom introduced a truly global StarFire GPS satellites has been dramatically improved and GPS augmentation service. Using a global reference the receiver navigation software has been modified receiver network and an enhanced version of the to take advantage of both the GLONASS satellites Real-Time GIPSY (RTG) clock and orbital correction and the improved orbit and clock accuracy for GPS.
    [Show full text]
  • Dynamic Performance Evaluation of Various GNSS Receivers and Positioning Modes with Only One Flight Test
    electronics Technical Note Dynamic Performance Evaluation of Various GNSS Receivers and Positioning Modes with Only One Flight Test Cheolsoon Lim 1, Hyojung Yoon 1, Am Cho 2, Chang-Sun Yoo 2 and Byungwoon Park 1,* 1 School of Aerospace Engineering, Sejong University, 209 Neungdong-ro, Gwangjin-gu, Seoul 05006, Korea; [email protected] (C.L.); [email protected] (H.Y.) 2 Future Aircraft Research Division, Korea Aerospace Research Institute, Daejeon 34133, Korea; [email protected] (A.C.); [email protected] (C.-S.Y.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +82-02-3408-4385 Received: 20 November 2019; Accepted: 7 December 2019; Published: 11 December 2019 Abstract: The performance of global navigation satellite system (GNSS) receivers in dynamic modes is mostly assessed using results obtained from independent maneuvering of vehicles along similar trajectories at different times due to limitations of receivers, payload, space, and power of moving vehicles. However, such assessments do not ensure valid evaluation because the same GNSS signal environment cannot be ensured in a different test session irrespective of how accurately it mimics the original session. In this study, we propose a valid methodology that can evaluate the dynamic performance of multiple GNSS receivers in various positioning modes with only one dynamic test. We used the record-and-replay function of RACELOGIC’s LabSat3 Wideband and developed a software that can log and re-broadcast Radio Technical Commission for Maritime Services (RTCM) messages for the augmented systems. A preliminary static test and a drone test were performed to verify proper operation of the system.
    [Show full text]
  • Overview of GNSS Navigation Sources, Augmentation Systems, and Applications
    Overview of GNSS Navigation Sources, Augmentation Systems, and Applications The Ionosphere and its Effects on GNSS Systems 14 to 16 April 2008 Santiago, Chile Dr. S. Vincent Massimini © 2008 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved. Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) • Global Positioning System (GPS) – U.S. Satellites • GLONASS (Russia) – Similar concept • Technically different • Future: GALILEO – “Euro-GPS” • Future: Beidou/Compass 13 of 301 © 2008 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved. GPS 14 of 301 © 2008 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved. Basic Global Positioning System (GPS) Space Segment User Segment Ground Segment 15 of 301 © 2008 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved. GPS Nominal System • 24 Satellites (SV) • 6 Orbital Planes • 4 Satellites per Plane • 55 Degree Inclinations • 10,898 Miles Height • 12 Hour Orbits • 16 Monitor Stations • 4 Uplink Stations 16 of 301 © 2008 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved. GPS Availability Standards and Achieved Performance “In support of the service availability standard, 24 operational satellites must be available on orbit with 0.95 probability (averaged over any day). At least 21 satellites in the 24 nominal plane/slot positions must be set healthy and transmitting a navigation signal with 0.98 probability (yearly averaged).” Historical GPS constellation performance has been significantly better than the standard. Source: “Global Positioning System Standard Positioning Service Performance 17 of 301 Standard” October 2001 © 2008 The MITRE Corporation. All rights reserved. GPS Constellation Status (30 March 2008) • 30 Healthy Satellites – 12 Block IIR satellites – 13 Block IIA satellites – 6 Block IIR-M satellites • 2 additional IIR-M satellites to launch • Since December 1993, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Accuracy Improvement of DGPS for Low-Cost Single-Frequency Receiver Using Modified Flächen Korrektur Parameter Correction
    International Journal of Geo-Information Article Accuracy Improvement of DGPS for Low-Cost Single-Frequency Receiver Using Modified Flächen Korrektur Parameter Correction Jungbeom Kim 1, Junesol Song 1, Heekwon No 1, Deokhwa Han 1, Donguk Kim 1, Byungwoon Park 2,* and Changdon Kee 1,* 1 School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering and Institute of Advanced Aerospace Technology, Seoul National University, 1 Gwanak-ro, Gwanak-gu, Seoul 08826, Korea; [email protected] (J.K.); [email protected] (J.S.); [email protected] (H.N.); [email protected] (D.H.); [email protected] (D.K.) 2 School of Aerospace Engineering, Sejong University, 209 Neungdong-ro, Gwangjin-gu, Seoul 05006, Korea * Correspondence: [email protected] (B.P.); [email protected] (C.K.); Tel.: +82-02-3408-4385 (B.P.); +82-02-880-1912 (C.K.) Academic Editor: Wolfgang Kainz Received: 17 June 2017; Accepted: 18 July 2017; Published: 20 July 2017 Abstract: A differential global positioning system (DGPS) is one of the most widely used augmentation systems for a low-cost L1 (1575.42 MHz) single-frequency GPS receiver. The positioning accuracy of a low-cost GPS receiver decreases because of the spatial decorrelation between the reference station (RS) of the DGPS and the users. Hence, a network real-time kinematic (RTK) solution is used to reduce the decorrelation error in the current DGPS system. Among the various network RTK methods, the Flächen Korrektur parameter (FKP) is used to complement the current DGPS, because its concept and system configuration are simple and the size of additional data required for the network RTK is small.
    [Show full text]
  • Edloran – Next Generation of Differential Loran
    eDLoran – next generation of differential Loran Durk van Willigen1, René Kellenbach2, Cees Dekker3 and Wim van Buuren4 1 Reelektronika, Netherlands, [email protected] 2 Reelektronika, Netherlands, [email protected] 3 Reelektronika, Netherlands, [email protected] 4 Dutch Pilots’ Corporation, Netherlands, [email protected] Abstract: To counteract vulnerability of GNSS, dissimilar backup systems are needed for harbour approaches. Rotterdam pilots want accuracies of 5 metres for such systems. Loran is likely the best basic candidate for this. Reelektronika has, on request of, and in close cooperation with the Rotterdam Pilots, developed and tested a new differential Loran system called eDLoran, enhanced Differential Loran. Extensive research made clear that 5-metre accuracy cannot be met by the currently tested DLoran system. The main reason for that is twofold: latency of the broadcast (Eurofix) DLoran data is far too large causing loss of temporal correlation, and, accurately measuring correction data (ASF) is in a technical sense problematic. Therefore, a much simpler and more accurate method of measuring ASF data has been applied. Finally, the construction of enhanced differential Loran reference stations showed to be much less complex and expensive. For pilots’ use it is also needed that the equipment is wireless, portable, small, and battery-powered. A full prototype eDLoran system has been implemented and extensively tested in the Europort area. Instead of applying the usual pseudorange correction technique, well known in the GNSS world, position corrections are used instead. To reduce correction data latency by at least one to two orders of magnitude, standard mobile telecom networks and the Internet are used.
    [Show full text]
  • The Global Differential GPS (GDGPS) System
    The Global Differential GPS (GDGPS) System Operating since 2000 with 99.999% reliability Sub-10 cm positioning accuracy globally Customer-supported by industry, NASA, and DoD National Security Real-Time Tracking Network Triple Hot Redundant Operation Centers (100+ sites) Precision Industrial Positioning Measurements Products, Services Internet, Internet, Frame Frame Personal Geolocation Based on Real Time GIPSY (RTG) software • Licensed to FAA and to Raytheon for WAAS, MSAS (Japan), and GAGAN (India) Prototype system and software for the Next Generation GPS Control Segment (OCX) • Testbed for the development of RTGX – the new OCX orbit determination and positioning software RTGX has now replaced RTG in GDGPS operations • Deliver OCX software with years of operational soaking • Keeping a live software will reduce lifecycle cost Y. Bar-Sever, JPL. May 2013 GDGPS Product Line and Applications Provide Mission Critical Services and Societal Benefits Assisted GPS Precise positioning anywhere Integrity monitoring and situational awareness Space weather monitoring Free public services: Automatic Precise Positioning Service (APPS) Tsunami prediction Repeat path interferometry with UAV-SAR GREAT Alert: Natural hazards monitoring and predictions Y. Bar-Sever, JPL. May 2013 Real-Time Point Positioning Accuracy < 6 cm 1D RMS for high-quality dual-frequency GPS or GPS/GLONASS sites The addition of properly- modeled GLONASS data slightly improves positioning, most of the time… Y. Bar-Sever, JPL. May 2013 Full GNSS and Modernized Signals Capability Monitoring
    [Show full text]
  • Basics of the GPS Technique: Observation Equations§
    Basics of the GPS Technique: Observation Equations§ Geoffrey Blewitt Department of Geomatics, University of Newcastle Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, United Kingdom [email protected] Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................................................2 2. GPS DESCRIPTION................................................................................................................................................2 2.1 THE BASIC IDEA ........................................................................................................................................................2 2.2 THE GPS SEGMENTS..................................................................................................................................................3 2.3 THE GPS SIGNALS .....................................................................................................................................................6 3. THE PSEUDORANGE OBSERVABLE ................................................................................................................8 3.1 CODE GENERATION....................................................................................................................................................9 3.2 AUTOCORRELATION TECHNIQUE .............................................................................................................................12 3.3 PSEUDORANGE OBSERVATION EQUATIONS..............................................................................................................13
    [Show full text]
  • Differential Gps: Concepts and Quality Control
    DIFFERENTIAL GPS: CONCEPTS AND QUALITY CONTROL prof.dr.ir. P.J.G. Teunissen Delft Geodetic Computing Centre (LGR) Department of Geodesy Delft University of Technology Thijsseweg II, 2629 JA Delft The Netherlands INVITED LECTURE for the Netherlands Institute of Navigation (NIN) .Amsterdam, September 27 1991 Copyright © by P.J.G. Teunissen Delft Geodetic Computing Centre (LGR) ThiJsseweg ii, 2629 JA DELFT, The Netherlands CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. GPS-OBSERVABLES AND SINGLE POINT POSITIONING .............•.. 2 2. 1. The pseudo range observable ....................•....... 2 2.2. Single point positioning .............•.........•....•.. 3 2.3. The carrier phase observable 9 3. RELATIVE POSITIONING WITH GPS ........................•...... 11 3.1. Static GPS surveying 12 3.2. Semi-kinematic GPS surveying 19 3.3. Kinematic GPS surveying 23 3.4. DGPS navigation 2S 4. QUAL ITY CONTROL ...................................•......... 32 4. 1. Introduction .....................................•..... 32 4.2. On GPS-based civil aviation quality monitoring ...•..... 33 4.3. Detection and Identification 3S 4.4. Reliability 38 S. REFERENCES ......•.....•.................................•... 43 1. INTRODUCTION The satellite-based Global Positioning System (GPS) is rapidly becoming the major positioning system for a variety of geodetic applications. \lith the completion of the satellite constellation in the early 1990s, the system will provide 24-hour all-weather precise positioning capabilities that extend to virtually all parts of the globe. Positioning with GPS can be divided into single-receiver single point positioning and multi-receiver positioning relative to a simultaneously observing reference receiver. Although the GPS system has originally been designed for single point positioning to support military navigation needs, LAN D SEA AIR o Geodynamics (plate o Hydrographic survey­ o Aero-triangulation tectonics, sealevel ing (0.
    [Show full text]