Performance of Multi-GNSS in the Asia-Pacific Region: Signal Quality, Broadcast Ephemeris and Precise Point Positioning (PPP)

被引:6
作者
Li, Mengyuan [1 ]
Huang, Guanwen [1 ,2 ]
Wang, Le [1 ]
Xie, Wei [1 ]
Yue, Fan [1 ]
机构
[1] Changan Univ, Coll Geol Engn & Geomat, Xian 710054, Peoples R China
[2] Minist Nat Resources, Key Lab Ecol Geol & Disaster Prevent, Xian 710054, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
C; N0; pseudorange multipath; broadcast ephemeris clock offset accuracy; broadcast ephemeris orbit accuracy; SISRE; PPP; SATELLITE; SYSTEM; GPS; IGS;
D O I
10.3390/rs14133028
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Since BeiDou Navigation Satellite System (BDS) and Japan's Quasi-Zenith Satellite System (QZSS) have more visible satellites in the Asia-Pacific region, and navigation satellites of Global Positioning System (GPS), Galileo satellite navigation system (Galileo), and GLONASS satellite navigation system (GLONASS) are uniformly distributed globally, the service level of multi-mode Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) in the Asia-Pacific region should represent the best service capability. Based on the observation data of 10 Multi-GNSS Experiment (MGEX) stations, broadcast ephemeris and precision ephemeris from 13 to 19 October 2021, this paper comprehensively evaluated the service capability of multi-GNSS in the Asia-Pacific region from three aspects of observation data quality, broadcast ephemeris performance, and precision positioning level. The results show that: (1) the carrier-to-noise-density ratio (C/N0) quality of the GPS and Galileo is the best, followed by BDS and GLONASS, and QZSS is the worst. GPS, BDS-2, GLONASS, and QZSS pseudorange multipath values range from 0 to 0.6 m, while Galileo system and BDS-3 pseudorange multipath values range from 0 to 0.8 m. (2) In terms of broadcast ephemeris accuracy, BDS-3 broadcast ephemeris has the best orbit, and the three-dimensional (3D) Root Mean Square (RMS) is 0.21 m; BDS-2 was the worst, with a 3D RMS of 1.99 m. The broadcast ephemeris orbits of GPS, Galileo, QZSS, and GLONASS have 3D RMS of 0.60 m, 0.62 m, 0.83 m, and 1.27 m, respectively. For broadcast ephemeris clock offset: Galileo has the best performance, 0.61 ns, GLONASS is the worst, standard deviation (STD) is 3.10 ns, GPS, QZSS, BDS-3 and BDS-2 are 0.65 ns, 0.75 ns, and 1.72 ns, respectively. For signal-in-space ranging errors (SISRE), the SISRE results of GPS and Galileo systems are the best, fluctuating in the range of 0 m-2 m, followed by QZSS, BDS-3, Galileo, and BDS-2. (3) GPS, BDS, GLONASS, Galileo, GPS/QZSS, and BDS/QZSS were used for positioning experiments. In static PPP, the convergence time and positioning accuracy of GPS show the best performance. The positioning accuracy of GPS/QZSS and BDS/QZSS is improved compared with that of GPS and BDS. In terms of kinematic PPP, the convergence time and positioning accuracy of GPS/QZSS and BDS/QZSS are improved compared with that of GPS and BDS. In addition to GLONASS and Galileo systems, the other combinations outperformed 3 cm, 3 cm, and 5 cm in the east, north, and up directions.
引用
收藏
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Investigation of the effect of different GNSS satellite systems on the performance of the precise point positioning (PPP) technique
    Ucarli, Ahmet Can
    Demir, Fatih
    Erol, Serdar
    Alkan, Reha Metin
    [J]. GEOMATIK, 2021, 6 (03): : 247 - 258
  • [42] The Performance Analysis of Multi-system Integrated Precise Point Positioning (PPP)
    Huang, Lingyong
    Lu, Zhiping
    Li, Baozhu
    Xin, Guodong
    An, Wen
    Lv, Hao
    Wang, Ning
    Zhou, Xinfeng
    [J]. CHINA SATELLITE NAVIGATION CONFERENCE (CSNC) 2016 PROCEEDINGS, VOL III, 2016, 390 : 317 - 326
  • [43] Inter-system biases solution strategies in multi-GNSS kinematic precise point positioning
    Li, Mowen
    Rovira-Garcia, Adria
    Nie, Wenfeng
    Xu, Tianhe
    Xu, Guochang
    [J]. GPS SOLUTIONS, 2023, 27 (03)
  • [44] Improving multi-GNSS ultra-rapid orbit determination for real-time precise point positioning
    Li, Xingxing
    Chen, Xinghan
    Ge, Maorong
    Schuh, Harald
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GEODESY, 2019, 93 (01) : 45 - 64
  • [45] Multi-GNSS (GPS/Galileo) single-frequency precise point positioning: a case study over Victoria
    Nobakht-Ersi, Fereydoun
    Safari, Abdolreza
    [J]. EARTH SCIENCE INFORMATICS, 2021, 14 (03) : 1303 - 1313
  • [46] Influence of stochastic modeling for inter-system biases on multi-GNSS undifferenced and uncombined precise point positioning
    Zhou, Feng
    Dong, Danan
    Li, Pan
    Li, Xin
    Schuh, Harald
    [J]. GPS SOLUTIONS, 2019, 23 (03)
  • [47] Performance of real-time undifferenced precise positioning assisted by remote IGS multi-GNSS stations
    Liu, Zhiqiang
    Yue, Dongjie
    Huang, Zhangyu
    Chen, Jian
    [J]. GPS SOLUTIONS, 2020, 24 (02)
  • [48] Real-time clock comparison and monitoring with multi-GNSS precise point positioning: GPS, GLONASS and Galileo
    Lyu, Daqian
    Zeng, Fangling
    Ouyang, Xiaofeng
    Zhang, Haichuan
    [J]. ADVANCES IN SPACE RESEARCH, 2020, 65 (01) : 560 - 571
  • [49] Modeling and assessment of real-time precise point positioning timing with multi-GNSS observations
    Ge, Yulong
    Ding, Shuo
    Dai, Peipei
    Qin, WeiJin
    Yang, Xuhai
    [J]. MEASUREMENT SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2020, 31 (06)
  • [50] Multi-GNSS precise point positioning with raw single-frequency and dual-frequency measurement models
    Lou, Yidong
    Zheng, Fu
    Gu, Shengfeng
    Wang, Charles
    Guo, Hailin
    Feng, Yanming
    [J]. GPS SOLUTIONS, 2016, 20 (04) : 849 - 862