Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 9 – uploaded by Prof.Dr.Mahmoud El-Mewafi

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Figure 8: The differences between the relative resulted coordinates using final precise ephemeris with the ITRF threshold values at all selected stations with different periods of observation in x direction.

Figure 8 The differences between the relative resulted coordinates using final precise ephemeris with the ITRF threshold values at all selected stations with different periods of observation in x direction.

Related Figures (24)

Figure 1: The selected IGS stations for analysis In order to make a comparative study between Precise Point Positioning (PPP) versus relative positioning, 38 IGS stations (Figure 1) were selected for this study. These stations make a centered shape and the base line technique was applied in relative solution. These base lines have different lengths ranging from 128 kms. to 5000 kms. and the BZRG station was taken as a control point for relative solution. 4.1 Data Collection
Figure 1: The selected IGS stations for analysis In order to make a comparative study between Precise Point Positioning (PPP) versus relative positioning, 38 IGS stations (Figure 1) were selected for this study. These stations make a centered shape and the base line technique was applied in relative solution. These base lines have different lengths ranging from 128 kms. to 5000 kms. and the BZRG station was taken as a control point for relative solution. 4.1 Data Collection
4.3 Software applied in analysis Trimble business center 3.5 (TBC 3.5) for relative solution. Trimble Business Center software is your complete office solution for post-processing satellite and terrestrial survey data. Easily import field and reference data from a variety of sources including transferred data files, field devices, and the Internet. After processing, export your processed data directly to field devices or to a variety of file formats that can be imported into other design software packages. Trimble Business Center lets users easily combine and manage data from multiple sources to generate accurate, integrated survey results (http://www.trimble.com/survey/trimble-business- center).
4.3 Software applied in analysis Trimble business center 3.5 (TBC 3.5) for relative solution. Trimble Business Center software is your complete office solution for post-processing satellite and terrestrial survey data. Easily import field and reference data from a variety of sources including transferred data files, field devices, and the Internet. After processing, export your processed data directly to field devices or to a variety of file formats that can be imported into other design software packages. Trimble Business Center lets users easily combine and manage data from multiple sources to generate accurate, integrated survey results (http://www.trimble.com/survey/trimble-business- center).
Figure 2: GNSS RINEX data using final precise ephemeris Methodology
Figure 2: GNSS RINEX data using final precise ephemeris Methodology
Figure 5: Station errors with observation period in PPP technique after the final precise ephemeris in z direction. Figure 4: Station errors with observation period in PPP technique after the final precise ephemeris in y direction.
Figure 5: Station errors with observation period in PPP technique after the final precise ephemeris in z direction. Figure 4: Station errors with observation period in PPP technique after the final precise ephemeris in y direction.
Figure 6: Station errors with observation period in PPP technique after the final precise ephemeris in 3D direction.
Figure 6: Station errors with observation period in PPP technique after the final precise ephemeris in 3D direction.
Figure 3: Station errors with observation period in PPP technique after the final precise ephemeris in x direction.
Figure 3: Station errors with observation period in PPP technique after the final precise ephemeris in x direction.
Figure 7: Station errors with observation period in PPP technique after the final precise ephemeris in z direction. Using Trimble Business Center (TBC v3.5), BZRG station was taken as a control point for relative solution. Also, the final precise ephemeris IGS products (igs18245.sp3) was downloaded and used in relative solution. The following Figure 7 shows the solution type of base lines with base line length and different observation periods of using the final precise ephemeris. As it is depicted in Figure 7, Using final precise ephemeris, the relative solution type is fixed for all observation periods listed in this thesis (more than 1 hr.) and for all base lines less than 1800 kms.. the relative solution type is float for all observation periods listed in this thesis (more than 1 hr.) and for all base lines more than 1800 kms..
Figure 7: Station errors with observation period in PPP technique after the final precise ephemeris in z direction. Using Trimble Business Center (TBC v3.5), BZRG station was taken as a control point for relative solution. Also, the final precise ephemeris IGS products (igs18245.sp3) was downloaded and used in relative solution. The following Figure 7 shows the solution type of base lines with base line length and different observation periods of using the final precise ephemeris. As it is depicted in Figure 7, Using final precise ephemeris, the relative solution type is fixed for all observation periods listed in this thesis (more than 1 hr.) and for all base lines less than 1800 kms.. the relative solution type is float for all observation periods listed in this thesis (more than 1 hr.) and for all base lines more than 1800 kms..
Figure 10: The differences between the relative resulted coordinates using final precise ephemeris with the ITRF threshold values at all selected stations with different periods of observation in z direction. Figure 9: The differences between the relative resulted coordinates using final precise ephemeris with the ITRF threshold values at all selected stations with different periods of observation in y direction.
Figure 10: The differences between the relative resulted coordinates using final precise ephemeris with the ITRF threshold values at all selected stations with different periods of observation in z direction. Figure 9: The differences between the relative resulted coordinates using final precise ephemeris with the ITRF threshold values at all selected stations with different periods of observation in y direction.
Figure 11: The differences between the relative resulted coordinates using final precise ephemeris with the ITRF threshold values at all selected stations with different periods of observation in 3D direction.
Figure 11: The differences between the relative resulted coordinates using final precise ephemeris with the ITRF threshold values at all selected stations with different periods of observation in 3D direction.
Figure 13: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 24 hrs. period of observation in y direction. Figure 12: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 24 hrs. period of observation in x direction.
Figure 13: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 24 hrs. period of observation in y direction. Figure 12: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 24 hrs. period of observation in x direction.
Figure 14: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 24 hrs. period of observation in z direction. Volume 6 Issue 2, February 2018
Figure 14: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 24 hrs. period of observation in z direction. Volume 6 Issue 2, February 2018
Figure 16: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 12 hrs. period of observation in x direction.
Figure 16: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 12 hrs. period of observation in x direction.
All stations 12 hrs. period of observation RINEX data submitted to TBC v3.5 and CSRS-PPP. After getting the final coordinates from CSRS-PPP and TBC v3.5 for each station, all coordinates compared with the ITRF threshold values at all selected stations. The following Figures 16, 17, 18 and 19 show the relation between the base line length and the differences between the PPP and relative resulted coordinates using final precise ephemeris with the ITRF threshold values at all selected stations at 12 hrs. period of observation ranged from 128 kms to 5000 kms in x, y, z, and 3D directions respectively.
All stations 12 hrs. period of observation RINEX data submitted to TBC v3.5 and CSRS-PPP. After getting the final coordinates from CSRS-PPP and TBC v3.5 for each station, all coordinates compared with the ITRF threshold values at all selected stations. The following Figures 16, 17, 18 and 19 show the relation between the base line length and the differences between the PPP and relative resulted coordinates using final precise ephemeris with the ITRF threshold values at all selected stations at 12 hrs. period of observation ranged from 128 kms to 5000 kms in x, y, z, and 3D directions respectively.
Figure 19: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 12 hrs. period of observation in 3D direction.
Figure 19: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 12 hrs. period of observation in 3D direction.
Figure 18: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 12 hrs. period of observation in z direction. Figure 17: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 12 hrs. period of observation in y direction.
Figure 18: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 12 hrs. period of observation in z direction. Figure 17: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 12 hrs. period of observation in y direction.
Figure 20: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 4 hrs. period of observation in x direction. Figure 21: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 4 hrs. period of observation in y direction.
Figure 20: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 4 hrs. period of observation in x direction. Figure 21: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 4 hrs. period of observation in y direction.
Figure 22: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 4 hrs. period of observation in z direction.
Figure 22: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 4 hrs. period of observation in z direction.
from 128 kms to 5000 kms in x, y, z, and 3D directions respectively.
from 128 kms to 5000 kms in x, y, z, and 3D directions respectively.
Figure 23: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 4 hrs. period of observation in 3D direction.
Figure 23: PPP and relative errors using final precise ephemeris with base line length at 4 hrs. period of observation in 3D direction.
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved