測位航法学会 平成23年度全国⼤会 セミナー②

GNSS Precise Positioningg with RTKLIB

Part 2

2011-4-25,26 @東京海洋⼤学品川 楽⽔会館 東京海洋⼤学 ⾼須 知⼆

Timetable
1.
1 GPS/GNSS
G S/G SS A il 25
April 9 30 10 40
9:30‐10:40
2. Signal and Receiver 10:50‐12:00
3. Standard Positioning 13:00‐15:10
4
4. RTKLIB 15:30‐16:40
15:30 16:40

5. RTK April 26 9:30‐10:30

6. PPP 10:40‐11:50
7
7. RTK System 13:00‐14:20
13:00 14:20
8. Advanced Topics 14:40‐16:10

2
5 RTK
5.

3
Precise Positioning
Standard Positioning Precise Positioning
( d b d)
(code‐based) (
(carrier‐based)
i b d)
Pseudorange Carrier‐Phase +
Observables
(Code) Pseudorange
Receiver Noise 30 cm 3 mm
Multipath 30 cm ‐ 30 m 1 ‐ 3 cm
Sensitivity High (<20dBHz) Low (>35dBHz)
Discontinuity No Slip Cycle‐Slip
Ambiguity ‐ Estimated/Resolved
Receiver Low‐Cost (~$100) Expensive (~$20,000)
Accuracy 3 m (H), 5 m (V) (Single) 5 mm (H), 1 cm (V) (Static)
(RMS) 1 m (H), 2 m (V) (DGPS) 1 cm (H), 2 cm (V) (RTK)
Application Navigation Timing,
Navigation, Timing SAR
SAR,... Survey Mapping,
Survey, Mapping ...

4
Carrier Phase
Carrier‐Phase
Definition:
... actually being a measurement on the beat
frequency between the received carrier of
rs   s  r  N the satellite signal and a receiver‐generated
(cycle) reference frequency. (RINEX 2.10)

Received Satellite Carrier:  s (t

(t s )

Local Reference Frequency: r ((ttr )

Carrier Beat Frequency: rs   s  r  N

5
Carrier Phase Model (1)
Carrier‐Phase
Carrier‐Phase:
rs  r (tr )   s (t s )  N rs    (r ,0  r (t0 ),0s   s (t0 ))
 ( f (tr  dtr  t0 )  r ,0 )  ( f (t s  dT s  t0 )  0s )  N rs   
c c
 (tr  t s )  ( dtr  dT s )  (r ,0  0s  N rs )    ( l )
(cycle)
 
 rs  rs  c(tr  t s )  c(dtr  dT s )   (r ,0  0s  N rs )   
  rs  c ( dtr  dT s )  I rs  Trs   Brs  d rs   (m)
Carrier‐Phase Bias Other Correction Terms
P d
Pseudorange:
Prs   rs  c( dtr  dT s )  I rs  Trs   P

6
Carrier Phase Model (2)
Carrier‐Phase
Carrier‐Phase Bias:
Brs  r ,0  0s  N rs (cycle)
N rs : Integer Ambiguity
r , 0 : Receiver Initial Phase
0s : Satellite Initial Phase

Other Correction Terms:

 T
d rs  d r , pcoT ers,enu  E sat ecef d spco ers  d r , pcv  d pcv
s
 d dispT ers,enu
 d pw  d rel ((m))
d r, pco : Receiver Antenna Phase Center Offset
d r , pcv : Receiver Antenna Phase Center Variation
d spco : Satellite Antenna Phase Center Offset
s
d pcv : Satellite Antenna Phase Center Variation
d disp : Site Displacement
d pw : Phase Wind‐up Effect
d rel : Relativistic Effect
7
DD (Double Difference)
Φubijb   ((ui  bi )  (uj  bj ))
  ub
ij
 c(dtub
ij
 dTubij )  I ubij  Tubij  Bubij  d ubij   Φ
  ub
ij
b  I ij
ubb  T ij
ubb   N ij
ubb  d ubb   Φ
ij

ij
dtub  dtuij  dtbij  0, dTub
ij i
 dTub  dTubj  0
ij
Bub  (u ,0  0i  N ui )  (b,0  0i  N bi )  (u ,0  0j  N uj )  (b,0  0j  N bj )  N ub
ij

(short Baseline and same antenna type)

Φubij   ub
ij
 N ubij   Φ
ij j ij
I ub i
 I ub  I ub  0, Tub i
 Tub  Tubj  0, dub
ij i
 dub j
 dub 0

Satellite i Satellite j
bi uj
ui bj
Memo for Misra & Enge:
[Link]
[Link]
Receiver u Receiver b
Baseline
8
Carrier based Relative Positioning
Carrier‐based
Nonlinear‐LSE: s 2 s1
yt k  ( ub s3 s1 s m s1 T
,t , ub ,t ,..., ub ,t )
k k k
Parameter Vector:
s 2 s1 s3 s1 s m s1 T   s2 s1   s2 s1  N s2 s1 
x  ( ruT , N ub , N ub ,..., N ub )  u ,t k
 s3 s1
b ,t k
s3 s1
ub 
s m s1 
 u ,t  b,t  N ub 
ht k ( x )  k k

Measurement Vector:   
 sm s1 s m s1 
y  ( yt1 T , yt1 T ,..., yt n T )T  u ,t  bs,mt s1  N ub 
 k k 
 s2 s1 T 
  eu ,t  0  0
Meas Model, Design Matrix:  k

 
T
T   e s3 s1 0   0
h( x )  ht1 ( x )T , ht 2 ( x )T ,..., ht n ( x )T H t k   u ,t k 
      

H  H t1 T , H t 2 T ,..., H t n T 
T   e sm s1 T 0 0   
 u ,t k 
 4 2 2  2  2  2 
Meas Error Covariance:  
R  blkdiag 
blkdi Rt1 , Rt 2 ,..., Rt n   2 2
Rt k   
4  2  2  2 

     
Solution (Static/Float):  2 2 2  2  4  2 
 
xˆ  x0  ( H T R 1H ) 1 H T R 1 ( y  h( x0 )) rb : Fixed Base‐Station Position

9
 Effect of Baseline Length
BL=0.3 km BL=13.3 km
RMS Error: RMS Error:
E: 0.2cm E: 2.2cm
N: 0.6cm N: 2.4cm
U: 1.0cm U: 10.6cm
Fix Ratio: Fix Ratio:
99.9% 94.2%

BL=32.2 km BL=60.9 km
RMS Error: RMS Error:
E: 10.0cm E: 14.0cm
N: 12.0cm N: 14.8cm
U: 30.2cm U: 26.7cm
Fix Ratio: Fix Ratio:
64.3% 44.4%

(24 hr Kinematic : Fixed Solution : Float Solution)

10
Integer Ambiguity Resolution
• Objectives
– More accurate than float solutions
– Fast converge of solutions
• Manyy AR Strategies
g
– Simple Integer rounding
– Multi‐frequency
q y wide‐lane and narrow‐lane ggeneration
– Search in coordinate domain
– Search in ambiguity
g y domain
– AFM, FARA, LSAST, LAMBDA, ARCE, HB‐L3, Modified
Cholesy Decomposition, Null Space, FAST, OMEGA, ...

11
ILS (Integer Least Square Estimation)
Problem: x  (aT , bT )T , H   A, B 
y  Hx  v  Aa  Bb  v

g min ( y  Hx )T Q y 1 ( y  Hx )
x  arg
aZ n ,bR m
Strategy:
(1) Conventional LSE
 aˆ  Q Qab 
xˆ   ˆ   Q x H T Q y 1 y , Q x   a   ( H T Q y H ) 1
b  Qba Qb 
(2) Search Integer Vector with Minimum Squared Residuals

a  arg min (aˆ  a )T Qa 1 (aˆ  a )
aZ n

(3) Improve solution

 
b  bˆ  Qba Qa1 (aˆ  a )

12
LAMBDA
Teunissen, P.J.G.
Teunissen P J G (1995)
The least‐squares ambiguity decorrelation adjustment: a method for fast GPS
integer ambiguity estimation. Journal of Geodesy, Vol. 70, No. 1‐2, pp. 65‐82.

• ILS Estimation with:

– Shrink Integer Search Space with "Decorrelation"
Decorrelation
– Efficient Tree Search Strategy
– Similar to Closest Point Search with LLL Lattice Basis Reduction
Algorithm
zˆ  Z T aˆ , Q z  Z T Qa Z
 
T 
a  arg min (aˆ  a ) Qa (aˆ  a )
1 z  arg min ( zˆ  z )T Qz 1 ( zˆ  z )
aZ n zZ n
 
a  Z T z

13
RTK (Real‐time
(Real time Kinematic)

• Technique with Carrier‐based Relative Positioning

– Real‐time Position of Rover Antenna
– Transmit Reference Station Data to Rover via Comm. Link
– OTF (On‐the‐Fly) Integer Ambiguity Resolution
– Typical Accuracy: 1 cm + 1ppm x BL RMS (Horizontal)
– Applications:
Land Survey, Construction Machine Control, Precision
Agriculture etc.

Communication Link Rover

Reference
Station Receiver

14
NRTK (Network RTK)
• Extension of RTK
– RTK without User Reference Station
– Sparse Networked Reference Stations
– Correction Messages via Mobile‐Phone Network
– Format: VRS, FKP, MAC, RTCM 2.3, RTCM 3.1
– Server S/W: Trimble GPSNet, GEO++ GNSMART, ...
– NTRIP Networked Transport of RTCM via Internet Protocol
• NRTK Service in Japan
p
– GEONET: ~1200 Reference Stations by GSI
– NGDS ([Link]), JENOBA ([Link])
15
GEONET

([Link] 16
5. RTK:
Exercise

17
RTK of Driving Vehicle
RTKNAVI
• Objective
RTK of Driving Vehicle
• Program
...¥rtklib_2.4.0¥bin¥[Link]
...¥rtklib_2.4.1b¥bin¥[Link]
¥ tklib 2 4 1b¥bi ¥ tk i
• Data
...¥seminar¥sample2¥
¥ i ¥ l 2¥
oemv_2009515c.gps (NovAtel)
0263 20090515c rtcm3 (VRS)
0263_20090515c.rtcm3
NovAtel OEMV‐3G,
GPS‐702‐GG

18
RTK Configuration
GEONET
Reference Stations
Rover
Antenna:
NovAtel Base
GPS‐702‐GG Station
(
(VRS))
E‐Mobile

NovAtel RTKNAVI NGDS

OEMV‐3G Internet
VRS
Server
NovAtel RAW,
RAW RTCM vv.3,
3 NTRIP Trimble
20 Hz 1 Hz GPSNet
19
RTKNAVI ‐ Options

Setting1 Setting2

20
RTK Solutions
RTKPLOT 2.4.1
(Real time Plot Mode)
(Real‐time

21
6 PPP
6.

22
PPP (Precise Point Positioning)
• Feature
– with Single Receiver (No Reference Station)
– Efficient Analysis for Many Receivers
– Precise Ephemeris
– Conventionally Post‐Processing
• Applications
pp
– GPS Seismometer
– GPS Meteorologygy
– POD (Precise Orbit Determination) of LEO Satellite
– Precise Time Transfer
23
Precise Ephemeris
• Precise Satellite Orbit and Clock
– By Post‐Processing or in Real‐time
– Observation Data of Tracking Stations World‐Wide
• Data Format
– Orbit: NGS SP3
– Clock: NGS SP3 or RINEX Clock Extension
• Contents
– Orbit: ECEF‐Positions of Satellite Mass Center
– Clock: Clock‐biases wrt Time Scale Aligned to GPS Time

24
IGS (International GNSS Service)
Data (GPS/GLONASS
Raw, Ephemeris,...) Global Data Centers
CDDIS SIO
Analysis Centers (ACs)
CODE NRCan IGN KASI

ESOC SIO
GFZ USNO ACC
JPL MIT Products
(Satellite Orbit/Clock, Station
NOAA ... Pos/Vel, ERP, Atmos,...)
...
GNAACs Regional DCs

RNAACs Oper DCs

Oper.
Tracking Network
25
IGS Products
Final Rapid Ultra‐Rapid (IGU)
Product Broadcast
(IGS) (IGR) Observed Predicted

Orbit ~2.5cm ~2.5cm ~3cm ~5cm ~100cm

Accuracy ~150ps
~75ps RMS ~75ps RMS ~3ns RMS ~5ns RMS
Clock RMS
~20ps STD ~25ps STD ~1.5ns STD ~2.5ns STD
50ps ST
~50ps STD
17‐41
Latency 12‐18 days 3‐9 hours realtime realtime
hours
every at 17 UTC at 03, 09, at 03, 09,
Updates ‐
Thursday daily 15, 21 UTC 15, 21 UTC

Orbit 15min 15min 15min 15min daily

Sample
Interval Sat: 30s
Clock 5min 15min 15min daily
Stn: 5min
(2009/8, [Link]
26
Iono free LC (Linear Combination)
Iono‐free
C  a1  b 2  cP1  dP2 (1  11 ,  2  22 )
Coefficients Wave Ionos Typical
LC Length Effect Noise
a b c d (cm) wrt L1 (cm)
L1 L1 Carrier‐Phase 1 0 0 0 19.0 1.0 0.3
L2 L2 Carrier‐Phase 0 1 0 0 24.4 1.6 0.3
LC/L3 Iono‐Free Phase C1 C2 0 0 ‐ 0.0 0.9
LG/L4 Geometry‐Free Phase 1 ‐1 0 0 ‐ 0.6 0.4
WL Wide‐Lane Phase W / 1 W / 2 0 0 86.2 1.3 1.7
NL Narrow‐Lane Phase N / 1 N / 2 0 0 10.7 1.3 1.7
MW Melbourne‐Wübbena W / 1 W / 2 N / 1 N / 2 86 2
86.2 00
0.0 21
MP1 L1‐Multipath 2C2  1 2C2 1 0 ‐ 0.0 30
MP2 L2‐Multipath 2C1 2C1  1 0 1 ‐ 0.0 30
C1  f12 /( f12  f 2 2 ), C2   f 2 2 /( f12  f 2 2 ), W  1 /(1 / 1  1 / 2 ), N  1 /(1 / 1  1 / 2 )
27
Tropospheric Model
Tropospheric Delay:
T  mh ( El ) ZHD  mw ( El ) ZWD
0.0022768 p
ZHD  Zenith
1  0.00266 cos 2  2.8  10 7 H
Delay Slant
: Zenith Hydrostatic Delay (m)
ZWD : Zenith Wet Delay (m) El Delay
m h (El ) : Hydrostatic Mapping Function
m w (El ) : Wet Mapping Function

ZWD to PWV (Precipitable Water Vapor):

Tm  70.2  0.72T
Rv  461, k1  77.6,
1  105
PWV  ZWD k2  71.98, k3  3.754  105
 m k 
Rv  k2  k1 v  3  mv  18.0152, md  28.9644
 md Tm 

28
Antenna PCV (Phase Center Variation)
Receiver Antenna Antenna Phase Center Variation ((PCV))
Phase Center: Choke‐Ring Type Zero‐Offset Type

Antenna
Phase
Center
d r , pcv L1

d r, pco
Antenna Antenna Phase
Reference C
Center Off
Offset
Point (ARP) L2
z (U)
y (N) x (E)
IGS Absolute Antenna Model ([Link])
29
Earth Tides
Solid Earth Tide, Ocean Tide Loading, Pole Tide,
Atmospheric Loading

IERS Conventions 1996 + NAO99.b, 2007/1/1‐1/31, TSKB

30
Static PPP vs Kinematic PPP
Static PPP Results Kinematic PPP Results
Station: GEONET 0837 Station: IGS CONZ

2009/1/1‐2009/12/31 2010/2/27 6:28‐6:45 GPST

I
Interval:
l 1day
1d I t
Interval:
l 1s
31
Real time PPP
Real‐time
Commercial RT‐PPP/GDPS Services
Communication Ref. Orbit/
Service Provider Engine Accuracy
Coverage Link Stations Clock

<10 cm H
World‐ 3 GEO 1 min/ JPL
StarFire NavCom 60 <15 cm V
wide L‐band 1‐2 s RTG
(1 sigma)
World‐
OmniSTAR 6 GEO 1 min/
wide 100 Fuguro dm‐class
XP/HP+ L‐band 10 s
((Land))
Fuguro
World‐ Fuguro/
SeaSTAR 6 GEO 1 min/
wide 100 ESOC dm‐class
XP/G2 L‐band 10 s
(Sea) (G2)
10 cm H
VERIPOS World‐ 7 GEO 30 s/ JPL/
VERIPOS 80 20 cm V
Ultra/Apex wide LL‐band
band 30 s ESOC
(95%)
32
IGS Real
Real‐time
time Ephemeris
• Developed by IGS‐RTPP
– RTCM v.3 MT1057‐1068 (SSR)
– Corrections to broadcast ephemeris
– Real‐time NTRIP stream
– Interval: 10 s, Latency: 5 ‐ 10 s
– GPS and GLONASS
• Analysis Strategy
– Orbit: fixed to IGU or estimated
– Clock: estimated with IGS real‐time
tracking network [Link]

33
RT PPP Performance with IGS
RT‐PPP
BKG: CLK10 BKG: CLK11 (GPS+GLO) GSOC/DLR: CLK20

RMS 3.8,
RMS: 3 8 5.5,
5 5 7.7cm
77 RMS 3.8,
RMS: 3 8 5.0,
5 0 7.1cm
71 RMS 4.0,
RMS: 4 0 5.2,
5 2 6.9cm
69
ESA/ESOC: CLK31 ESA/ESOC: CLK51 TUW: CLK61

RMS: 14.0, 12.1, 23.4cm RMS: 5.7, 5.4, 11.6cm RMS: 23.3, 21.0, 25.0cm
2010/9/18 0:00‐23:59, 1Hz, Kinematic PPP, NovAtel OEMV‐3+GPS‐702, RTKLIB 2.4.1
34
JAXA QZSS LEX‐PPP
LEX PPP Experiment
• Implementation for LEX‐PPP user algorithm
– Based on Real‐time PPP by RTKLIB 2.4.1
– Support QZSS LEX Message Type 10, 11
– Support LEX‐Receiver (Furuno LPY‐10000) Message
• Preliminary Evaluation
GEONET 0001 Wakkanai,
W kk i
2010/8/3 0:00:00‐23:59:30

RMS Error E/N/U:

15.2, 14.2, 21.6 cm
(Dual Frequency)
([Link], Space Sciences and Technology Conference , 2011) 35
6. PPP:
Exercise

36
PPP Analysis for Reference Point
RTKPOST
• Objective
PPP Analysis for Reference Point
• Program
...¥rtklib_2.4.0¥bin¥[Link]
...¥rtklib_2.4.1b¥bin¥[Link]
¥ tklib 2 4 1b¥bi ¥ tk t
• Data
...¥seminar¥sample4¥
¥ i ¥ l 4¥ Date:
09160700.11o, 09160700.11n (RINEX) 2011/3/11 GPST
(GPS week 1626‐5, DOY 070)
21100700 11o 21100700.11n
21100700.11o, 21100700 11n (RINEX) GEONET Station:
igs16265.sp3 (Precise Orbit) 020916: Minamikata
igs16265.clk_30s (Precise Clock) 92110: Tsukuba

Acknowledgment: Sample Data are provided by GSI and IGS

37
Online GNSS Data Sources
IGS Data/Products GEONET Data

[Link] [Link]
38
RTKPOST ‐ Options

39
7 RTK System
7. S t

40
RTK Application

41
Considerations for RTK System
• Rover
– Single vs. Dual‐freq, Update Rate, GNSS, Receiver‐cost
– CPU Power for external processing
– INS‐integration for obstacles
• Reference Station
– Baseline‐Length
g vs. Performance
– Self‐provided vs. NRTK Service
– Coverage,
g , Receiver‐cost,, Operational‐cost,
p , Service‐fee
• Communication Link
– Coverage,
Coverage Band‐width,
Band width Latency,
Latency Link
Link‐cost
cost
42
CPU power Bandwidth
CPU‐power, Bandwidth, Latency
• CPU‐power
– ~2 ms/epoch for dual‐freq RTK on Intel Core 2 Q 2.4 GHz
– ~20ms/epoch for single‐freq RTK on ARM 600 MHz
– H/W DP floating‐point is necessary
• Bandwidth
– ~3 kbps
p for 1 Hz GPS only,
y, RTCM 3
– ~20 kbps for 1 Hz GPS+GLO+QZS+SBAS, JAVAD GREIS
• Latency
– > 5 s Latency degrades RTK performance
– "Low
Low‐latency
latency" vs.
vs "Matched"
Matched Solution
43
Communication Link for RTK
• Local (<300 m)
– Serial, USB, LAN, ... (wired)
– Radio Modem, WiFi, ZigBee, DSRC, ... (wireless)
• Regional
g (<1,000
( km))
– Analog‐phone, ISDN, Dedicated Link, ... (wired)
– Mobile‐phone
p ((Analog,
g, 2G,, 3G,, …),
), ... ((wireless))
• Global (<10,000 km)
– Internet
– GEO Satellite Link (Inmarsat, WideStar II, ...)
– LEO Satellite Link (Iridum,
(Iridum Orbicom,
Orbicom …))
44
Coverage by Mobile‐phone
Mobile phone N/W

NTT docomo FOMA (2008/9)

([Link]
45
RTK Configurations (1)
Base Station Rover
Receiver Receiver

PC Serial PC Serial
WiFi
STRSVR RTKNAVI
TCP TCP
Server Client
(0) Input =Serial (1) Input Rover=Serial
(1) Output 1=TCP Server (2) Input Base Station=TCP Client
(3) Output Solution 1=File

Mobile
Base Station
B S i Phone Rover
R
Receiver N/W Receiver
PC Serial PC Serial

STRSVR Internet RTKNAVI

Mobile
Phone
(0) Input
I t =Serial
S i l Terminal (1) Input
I t Rover=Serial
R S i l
(1) Output 1=TCP Server (2) Input Base Station=TCP Client
(3) Output Solution 1=File
46
RTK Configuration (2)
Ntrip
Base Station Rover
Caster
Receiver Receiver

PC Serial PC Serial

STRSVR Internet RTKNAVI

(0) Input =Serial

Serial (1) Input Rover=Serial
Rover Serial
(1) Output 1=NTRIP Server (2) Input Base Station=NTRIP Client
(3) Output Solution 1=File

Reference
Reference Rover
Reference
St ti
Station
Reference
Station Receiver
Station
Stations
PC Serial

NTRIP Caster Internet RTKNAVI

NRTK provider
id (1) Input
I R
Rover=Serial
S i l
(2) Input Base Station=NTRIP Client
(3) Output Solution 1=File
47
RTK Configuration (3)
Reference
Reference
Reference
Station
Reference
Station
Station
Stations (1) Input =NTRIP Client
(2) Output=TCP Server

PC
NTRIP Internet STRSVR
Caster

NRTK provider LAN

PC PC PC PC

RTKNAVI RTKNAVI RTKNAVI RTKNAVI

Rover Rover Rover Rover

Receiver 1 Receiver 2 Receiver 3 Receiver 4
(1) Input Rover=Serial
(2) Input Base Station=TCP Client
48
7. RTK System:
y
Exercise

49
Communication Link for RTK
• Objective
Network Connection for RTK
• Program
...¥rtklib_2.4.1b¥bin¥[Link]
...¥rtklib_2.4.1b¥bin¥[Link]
¥ tklib 2 4 1b¥bi ¥ t
• Stream (TCP Client) STRSVR
JAV1: 192
JAV1 [Link]:
168 1 1 3 2101 (Format:
( J d)
Javad)
JAV2: [Link]: 2102 (Format: Javad)

Acknowledgment:
Sample data were captured by JAVAD DELTA and FURUNO LPY‐10000
LPY 10000 receiver
provided by JAXA
50
Network Configuration
RTKNAVI 2.4.1b (TCP Client)

STRSVR (TCP server)

Javad

J d
Javad Format:
Javad
Javad

[Link]:2101 (Javad1)
[Link]:2102 (Javad2) Javad2: 35.666496867 139.792366358 59.3696
51
8 Advanced
8. Ad d Topics
T i

52
Advanced Topics
• Multi‐GNSS RTK
• Long‐Baseline RTK
• INS‐Aided RTK
• Ambiguity Resolution for PPP
• "CM‐Accuracy Anywhere"

53
GNSS Evolution
Number of Planned GNSS Satellites
System 2010 2013 2016 2019
GPS 31 32 32 32
GLONASS 23 (+2) 24 (+3) 24 (+3) 24 (+3)
Galileo 0 4 18 27 (+3)
Compass 6 12 30 32 (+3)
QZSS 1 1 7 7
IRNSS 0 7 7 7
SBAS 7 8 11 11
Total 68 88 129 140

L3 GNSS Signal Frequencies

L5/E5a E5b L2 L2 E6/LEX L1/E1 L1

([Link], COMPASS: View on Compatibility and Interoperability, 2009)

54
 Multi GNSS RTK Performance
Multi‐GNSS
RTK Performance: Baseline 13.3 km, Instantaneous AR
El Mask=15°
M k 15° El Mask=30°
M k 30°
Fixing RMS Error (cm) Fixing RMS Error (cm)
GPS Galileo
Ratio E‐W N‐S U‐D Ratio E‐W N‐S U‐D
L1 ‐ 49.7% 4.6 8.1 19.0 23.3% 71.4 115.0 289
GPS L1+L2
L1 L2
L1,L2 ‐ 99 0%
99.0% 14
1.4 13
1.3 19
1.9 87 6%
87.6% 34
3.4 10 5
10.5 15 5
15.5

L1,L2,L5 ‐ 99.0% 1.4 1.3 1.9 87.3% 3.4 10.5 15.6

L1 E1 98.8% 1.3 1.2 1.9 90.1% 1.2 2.1 2.7

GPS+GAL
GPS GAL L1
L1,L2 E1 98.9% 1.4 1.2 1.7 98.7% 1.2 1.0 1.6
E1,E5a,
L1,L2,L5 98.9% 1.5 1.3 2.0 98.9% 1.3 1.1 1.8
E5b
55
Multi GNSS Receiver
Multi‐GNSS
• Moore's Law
– More correlators
– More tracking channels
– More powerful embedded CPU
• Consumer‐grade Multi‐GNSS Receiver
– SkyTraq:
y q GPS + GLONASS
– STMicro: GPS + GLONASS
– Broadcom: GPS + GLONASS + QZSS
Q
– u‐blox: GPS + Galileo

56
Issues for Multi
Multi‐GNSS
GNSS RTK
• Multi‐GNSS Integration Issue
– Time‐system, Coordinate‐system
– Receiver H/W Biases
• Multi‐code System
y Issue
– L1C/A‐L1P(Y)‐L1Cd‐L1Cp, L2P(Y)‐L2C, L5I‐L5Q
–QQuarter cycle
y phase‐shift
p p
problem
• GLONASS FDMA Issue
– Receiver Inter‐channel biases (Receiver Interoperability)
– Calibration Message Standard
– Antenna Calibration
57
Long Baseline RTK
Long‐Baseline

100 km

GPS Tsunami
1,000 km Monitoring System
(
(Currently
l ~15 km
k off‐shore)
ff h )
[Link]
58
Long Baseline RTK Strategy
Long‐Baseline
BL Error Elimination
Strategy
(km) Ephem Ionos Tropos Others

S 0 – 10 Broadcast ‐ ‐ ‐ Conventional
RTK
10 – Dual‐Freq
Dual Freq ‐ ‐
M Broadcast
100 Interpolation ‐ Network RTK
Real‐time
Real time
100 – Estimate Earth Long‐Baseline
L Precise Dual‐Freq
1,000 ZTD + MF Tides RTK
(IGU)
Non‐RT Earth Post‐
Estimate
VL >1,000 Precise Dual‐Freq Tides, Processing
ZTD + MF
(IGR IGS)
(IGR, Ph‐WU
Ph WU or PPP

59
Long Baseline RTK with RTKLIB
Long‐Baseline
January 1‐7, 2009 BL=471.2 km July 1‐7, 2009
E‐W
W
N‐S
U‐D
U

STD=0.7,0.9,2.3 cm FIX=99.8% STD=1.1,1.3,3.8 cm FIX=99.0%

BL=961.3 km
E‐W
W
N‐‐S
U‐D
U

STD=1.6,1.3,3.0 cm FIX=98.8% STD=1.1,1.5,3.6 cm FIX=96.2%

60
Mobile AP issues for RTK
• Cycle‐Slips
– Frequent cycle‐slip with around obstacles
– Miss‐detection of cycle‐slip
• Low Solution Availabilityy
– Long acquisition time by weak signal (Low C/N0)
– Half‐cycle
y ambiguityg y resolution with Costas‐PLL
– Low fixing ratio
• High Noise Level
– High multipath level even in carrier‐phase
– Jamming by RFI
61
Cycle Slips
Cycle‐Slips
(Half Cycle
(Half-Cycle
Cycle Slip Slip)
Time

Carrier-Phase
Signal Outage/
Receiver Data Gap Half-Cycle Ambiguity
Detects R
Reacquisition
i iti Resolution
Loss-of-Lock (<1s) (0-12s) *
* Depend on Receiver
500
T<1s:
T 1 724(68.2%)
724(68 2%)

of Samples
400 T<3s: 869(81.8%)
T<5s: 932(87.8%)
300

Number o
200

100

0
0 10 20
Span of Data Gap (s) (EL>15°)
62
INS Aided RTK
INS‐Aided

ω,f C,r,v
ω,f ω,f
IMU Filter IMU C,r,v IMU C,r,v

r0,vv0 Filt
Filter NCO Filt
Filter

BB Navi BB BB
PD
P,D Is,Q
Qs

Loosely Coupled
Loosely‐Coupled Tightly Coupled
Tightly‐Coupled Deep Integration
Integration Integration (Ultra‐Tightly)
High sensitivity
(DLL PLL)
(DLL,
Slip resistance
63
Ambiguity Resolution for PPP
• with AR for PPP
– Improve Convergence Time
– Improve Accuracy of Static Solution (EW, UD)
– Improve Stability of Kinematic Solution
• Difficulties of AR for PPP
– Unknown Satellite Initial Phase Biases
– Effect of Precise Orbit/Clock Error
– Effect of Ionospheric
p Delayy
– Code/Phase Bias Instability
– Multipath Effect at Reference Station Network
64
M Ge et al.,
[Link] al EGU 2007
WL Phase Bias Stability NL Phase Bias Stability

Repeatability of PPP‐AR RMS Error of PPP‐AR

[Link] et al., Resolution of GPS carrier‐phase ambiguity in precise point positioning, EGU
Assembly 2007 65
D Laurichesse ION 2010
[Link],
• Real‐Time Implementation of PPP‐AR
– Network WL ambiguity fixing
– Parameter estimation by EKF with iono‐free code/phase:
phase‐clock, code‐phase‐bias, ZTD, station position, orbit
correction
ti to
t IGU,
IGU phase
h ambiguity
bi it
– Orbit construction + high‐rate clock generation
• Evaluation of Accuracy
– Orbit: 4cm, code‐clock: 5 cm, phase‐clock: 1cm
• RT‐PPP with AR ("CNES Integer PPP")
– 1 cm HRMS

66
"CM
CM‐Accuracy
Accuracy Anywhere"
Anywhere
Requirement Target in 2020 Developing/Future Technologies
Global Precise Ephemeris with AR,
Coverage
(world‐wide) Broadcast via GEO/QZSS Satellite
Latency Real‐time (1 s) Real‐time Multi‐GNSS Orbit/Clock Estimation
1 cm (HRMS) Local iono/tropos corrections (land)
Accuracy
2 cm (VRMS) Iono estimation by triple‐freq (sea)
99 % (open‐sky) Multi‐GNSS 30 Sats + triple‐freq
Availability Multi‐GNSS 30 Sats +
95 % (urban)
INS‐aided PLL, slip‐resistant
10 s (land) Local iono/tropos corrections
TTFF
1 min (sea) Iono estimation by triple‐freq
User Cost < $100 No patent problem,
problem need killer‐AP
killer AP
67
8. Advanced Topics:
p
Q&A

68