...
首页> 外文期刊>Remote Sensing >Performance of Multi-GNSS Precise Point Positioning Time and Frequency Transfer with Clock Modeling
【24h】

Performance of Multi-GNSS Precise Point Positioning Time and Frequency Transfer with Clock Modeling

机译:采用时钟建模的多GNSS精确点定位时间和频率传输的性能

获取原文
           

摘要

Thanks to the international GNSS service (IGS), which has provided multi-GNSS precise products, multi-GNSS precise point positioning (PPP) time and frequency transfer has of great interest in the timing community. Currently, multi-GNSS PPP time transfer is not investigated with different precise products. In addition, the correlation of the receiver clock offsets between adjacent epochs has not been studied in multi-GNSS PPP. In this work, multi-GNSS PPP time and frequency with different precise products is first compared in detail. A receiver clock offset model, considering the correlation of the receiver clock offsets between adjacent epochs using an a priori value, is then employed to improve multi-GNSS PPP time and frequency (scheme2). Our numerical analysis clarify how the approach performs for multi-GNSS PPP time and frequency transfer. Based on two commonly used multi-GNSS products and six GNSS stations, three conclusions are obtained straightforwardly. First, the GPS-only, Galileo-only, and multi-GNSS PPP solutions show similar performances using GBM and COD products, while BDS-only PPP using GBM products is better than that using COD products. Second, multi-GNSS time transfer outperforms single GNSS by increasing the number of available satellites and improving the time dilution of precision. For single-system and multi-GNSS PPP with GBM products, the maximum improvement in root mean square (RMS) values for multi-GNSS solutions are up to 7.4%, 94.0%, and 57.3% compared to GPS-only, BDS-only, and Galileo-only solutions, respectively. For stability, the maximum improvement of multi-GNSS is 20.3%, 84%, and 45.4% compared to GPS-only, BDS-only and Galileo-only solutions. Third, our approach contains less noise compared to the solutions with the white noise model, both for the single-system model and the multi-GNSS model. The RMS values of our approach are improved by 37.8–91.9%, 10.5–65.8%, 2.7–43.1%, and 26.6–86.0% for GPS-only, BDS-only, Galileo-only, and multi-GNSS solutions. For frequency stability, the improvement of scheme2 ranges from 0.2 to 51.6%, from 3 to 80.0%, from 0.2 to 70.8%, and from 0.1 to 51.5% for GPS-only, BDS-only, Galileo-only, and multi-GNSS PPP solutions compared to the solutions with the white noise model in the Eurasia links.
机译:多亏了提供了多个GNSS精确产品的国际GNSS服务(IGS),多重GNSS精确点定位(PPP)的时间和频率传输在计时界引起了极大的兴趣。目前,尚未使用不同的精确产品研究多GNSS PPP时间传输。另外,在多GNSS PPP中尚未研究相邻历元之间的接收器时钟偏移的相关性。在这项工作中,首先将详细比较具有不同精确产品的多GNSS PPP时间和频率。然后,考虑使用先验值的相邻历元之间的接收器时钟偏移的相关性,使用接收器时钟偏移模型来改善多GNSS PPP时间和频率(方案2)。我们的数值分析阐明了该方法在多GNSS PPP时间和频率传输中的性能。基于两个常用的多GNSS产品和六个GNSS站,可以直接得出三个结论。首先,仅GPS,仅伽利略和多GNSS PPP解决方案使用GBM和COD产品显示出相似的性能,而使用GBM产品的仅BDS PPP优于使用COD产品。其次,通过增加可用卫星的数量并改善精度的时间稀释,多GNSS时间传输优于单GNSS。对于具有GBM产品的单系统和多GNSS PPP,与仅GPS,仅BDS相比,多GNSS解决方案的均方根(RMS)值最大提高了7.4%,94.0%和57.3% ,和仅伽利略解决方案。为了稳定,与仅GPS,仅BDS和仅伽利略的解决方案相比,multi-GNSS的最大改进为20.3%,84%和45.4%。第三,与单系统模型和多GNSS模型的白噪声模型解决方案相比,我们的方法包含的噪声更少。对于仅GPS,仅BDS,仅伽利略和多GNSS解决方案,我们的方法的RMS值分别提高了37.8–91.9%,10.5–65.8%,2.7–43.1%和26.6–86.0%。对于频率稳定性,对于仅GPS,仅BDS,仅Galileo和multi-GNSS,方案2的改进范围为0.2至51.6%,3至80.0%,0.2至70.8%和0.1至51.5%。 PPP解决方案与欧亚大陆链接中具有白噪声模型的解决方案相比。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号