Assessing the accuracy of online GNSS processing services and commercial software on short baselines

IF 0.3 Q4 REMOTE SENSING South African Journal of Geomatics Pub Date : 2022-09-07 DOI:10.4314/sajg.v9i2.21
Tata Herbert, Nzelibe Ifechukwu Ugochukwu, R. Olatunji
{"title":"Assessing the accuracy of online GNSS processing services and commercial software on short baselines","authors":"Tata Herbert, Nzelibe Ifechukwu Ugochukwu, R. Olatunji","doi":"10.4314/sajg.v9i2.21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With the rapid establishment of free online processing services to provide users with reliable solutions, it is important to determine the reliability of using free online processing software for the Global Navigation Satellite System post-processing. The study aim at assessing the accuracy of two (2) free online processing software, AUSPOS, and CSRS-PPP and two (2) commercial software, compass post-processing, and GNSS solutions. Field observations were carried out on seven (7) control points using static GNSS observation techniques with an observation period of 1hr for three (3) consecutive days and conventional surveying using total station instruments to establish a closed traverse. The acquired data were post-processed using both online and commercial software. The co-ordinates generated from each software were then compared with the ones obtained using total station instruments to determine their relative discrepancies and accuracies. Root mean square error and T-test were used for the analysis of the result. The result obtained is (0.004m, 0.003m and 0.007m) for compass post-processing software and (0.015m, 0.012m and 0.016m) for GNSS solutions software and the online software had the Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) values of (0.025m, 0.023m and 0.027m) for AUSPOS and (0.034m, 0.037m and 0.041m) for CSRS-PPP both in X, Y, and Z direction i.e. UTM East, North and ellipsoidal height respectively. Analysis at a 5% level of significance shows no significant difference between the two methods. Online GNSS processing services are easy to use, do not require the knowledge of GNSS data processing and can be adopted for engineering and geodetic applications.","PeriodicalId":43854,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal of Geomatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Journal of Geomatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/sajg.v9i2.21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"REMOTE SENSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

With the rapid establishment of free online processing services to provide users with reliable solutions, it is important to determine the reliability of using free online processing software for the Global Navigation Satellite System post-processing. The study aim at assessing the accuracy of two (2) free online processing software, AUSPOS, and CSRS-PPP and two (2) commercial software, compass post-processing, and GNSS solutions. Field observations were carried out on seven (7) control points using static GNSS observation techniques with an observation period of 1hr for three (3) consecutive days and conventional surveying using total station instruments to establish a closed traverse. The acquired data were post-processed using both online and commercial software. The co-ordinates generated from each software were then compared with the ones obtained using total station instruments to determine their relative discrepancies and accuracies. Root mean square error and T-test were used for the analysis of the result. The result obtained is (0.004m, 0.003m and 0.007m) for compass post-processing software and (0.015m, 0.012m and 0.016m) for GNSS solutions software and the online software had the Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) values of (0.025m, 0.023m and 0.027m) for AUSPOS and (0.034m, 0.037m and 0.041m) for CSRS-PPP both in X, Y, and Z direction i.e. UTM East, North and ellipsoidal height respectively. Analysis at a 5% level of significance shows no significant difference between the two methods. Online GNSS processing services are easy to use, do not require the knowledge of GNSS data processing and can be adopted for engineering and geodetic applications.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估在线GNSS处理服务和商业软件在短基线上的准确性
随着免费在线处理服务的迅速建立,为用户提供可靠的解决方案,确定使用免费在线处理软件进行全球卫星导航系统后处理的可靠性是非常重要的。本研究旨在评估两种免费在线处理软件(AUSPOS和csr - ppp)和两种商业软件(罗盘后处理和GNSS解决方案)的准确性。采用静态GNSS观测技术对7个控制点进行了野外观测,观测周期为1小时,连续3天,采用全站仪进行常规测量,建立封闭导线。采集的数据使用在线和商业软件进行后处理。然后将每个软件生成的坐标与使用全站仪获得的坐标进行比较,以确定它们的相对差异和精度。采用均方根误差和t检验对结果进行分析。罗盘后处理软件的结果分别为(0.004m、0.003m和0.007m), GNSS解决方案软件的结果分别为(0.015m、0.012m和0.016m),在线软件在X、Y和Z方向(UTM东、北和椭球面高度)上的均方根误差(RMSE)分别为(0.025m、0.023m和0.027m)和CSRS-PPP的均方根误差(RMSE)分别为(0.034m、0.037m和0.041m)。在5%显著性水平下的分析表明两种方法之间没有显著差异。在线GNSS处理服务易于使用,不需要GNSS数据处理知识,可用于工程和大地测量应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
82
期刊最新文献
Classification of 3D Sonar Point Clouds derived Underwater using Machine and Deep Learning (CANUPO and RandLA-Net) Approaches Characterising the evolution of the urban form of zones that accommodate warehousing clusters in the City of Cape Town municipality Error Analysis in Multibeam Hydrographic Survey System Temporal Characterization of Land Use Change and Land-scape Processes in Informal Settlements in the City of Cape Town, South Africa Analysis of thermally-induced displacements of the HartRAO Lunar Laser Ranger optical tube: impact on pointing
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1