共查询到19条相似文献，搜索用时 46 毫秒
1.
天线相位中心是指微波天线的电气中心,其设计中心与天线几何中心不一致。天线相位中心最大平均偏差可达数厘米,为此,需对GNSS测量型接收机天线相位中心偏差进行标定。目前国内GNSS测量型接收机的检定规程中,天线相位中心采用室外天线旋转法进行标定,并以GNSS测量型接收机标称精度中所谓的“固定标准差”作为阈值进行判定。笔者认为GNSS测量型接收机标称精度中的固定标准差与星历类型、数据处理软件、观测时间长度、天线相位中心偏差等因素相关,不能作为天线相位中心偏差的检测门限;天线相位中心偏差有独立的指标要求,也有独立的精确检测方法,因此建议按照天线相位中心偏差的指标要求作为检测门限。 相似文献
2.
针对GNSS接收机检定费用较高、检定机构数量少且检定周期长的问题,该文提出了一种简易快速的GNSS接收机检定方法。该方法根据GNSS接收机天线相位中心的几何关系,通过自设简易检定场,利用相对定位法及超短基线法分别检测接收机天线的相位中心偏差和内部噪声水平,并编写了相应的计算程序对检测数据进行快速的处理。4次独立实验结果表明:该文实验方案具有较高的精度和可靠性,适用于快速对GNSS接收机天线相位中心偏差和内部噪声水平进行自检。 相似文献
3.
4.
魏来 《测绘与空间地理信息》2015,(2):207-208
通过GNSS天线相位中心偏差差值实验,对不同天线类型、不同机构的天线相位中心偏差进行组合,通过对数据比较分析,采用统一机构的天线相位中心偏差参数可有效降低天线相位中心偏差对GNSS点位精度的影响. 相似文献
5.
合理评定GPS接收机测量误差的不确定度是衡量GPS接收机性能的重要环节。本文论述了GPS接收机测量误差结果不确定度评定方法,对GPS静态测距和GPS天线相位中心偏差检定结果不确定度评定方法进行研究．并结合实际检定过程的测量数据加以验证。 相似文献
6.
GPS接收机天线相位中心偏差的一种检定与计算方法 总被引：6，自引：0，他引：6
GPSA接收机的天线相位中心是指微波天红线的电气中心,其理论设计应与天线几何中心一致,天线相位中心与天线几何中心之差称为天线相位中心偏差,在GPS检定中,天线相位中心偏差的是必不可少的,本文利用几何关系和最小二乘法来计算天线相位中心偏差。 相似文献
7.
北斗天线电气相位中心偏差检验试验研究 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
为满足北斗双星定位系统精密定位、定向的工程需要,提出一种北斗天线电气相位中心常值偏差3维检验方法,并建立了相应的数学模型.该方法通过基线旋转、单天线旋转、交换天线,利用载波相位单差、基线长度、天线高差测量信息来估计天线电气相位中心偏差,并且在单天线旋转条件下对不同方向、不同天线间单差观测方程求差,以减少未知参数个数.最后,应用此模型检验一对北斗天线,检验结果表明,在单差均方差为0.005周,基线长度、天线间高差均方差为1 mm的条件下,天线间电气相位中心偏差水平分量的检验精度达0.3 mm.论文所述方法操作简单,适合在野外对北斗天线进行电气相位中心偏差检验. 相似文献
8.
GNSS接收机天线相位中心偏差是仪器的一项重要指标,在日常检测、校准过程中往往会遇到相位中心误差超限情况,究竟是仪器本身问题还是测量数据问题？现主要分析GLONASS信号在GNSS接收机天线相位中心检测、校准过程中,由于数据的稳定性对检测、校准结果带来的误差和影响. 相似文献
9.
介绍了GNSS天线相位中心改正的基本概念和定义,分析了相位中心偏差（PCO）和变化（PCV）的改正公式,以及天线相位中心改正从相对相位中心模型到绝对相位中心模型的演变,最后结合软件对相位中心改正的实现方法进行了介绍。 相似文献
10.
通过设立分组实验,利用GAMIT软件重新处理了全球75个并置站2003~2008年的GPS数据,初步得出了GPS周年性系统误差随纬度的分布规律,量化了天线相位中心偏差对GPS周年性系统误差的贡献,并分析了天线相位中心偏差对测站N、E、U方向时间序列中非线性变化的影响。研究结果表明,GPS周年性系统误差随着纬度减小而呈现增大的趋势;天线相位中心偏差对测站N、E、U方向周年性系统误差的贡献为20%、27%、23%;天线相位中心偏差改正能够显著削弱N、E、U方向纬度介于40°~50°、45°~60°、0°~30°测站的GPS周年性系统误差;天线相位中心偏差可能是造成全球GPS测站N、E、U方向周年、U方向半周年、与中低纬度GPS测站N方向半周年运动的原因之一。 相似文献
11.
12.
分析了 目前广播星历精度评估中存在的问题,详细论述了广播星历精度评估过程中对精密星历进行天线相位中心改正的取值方法,提出了利用单颗星单日钟差均值作二次差对广播星历钟差的系统性偏差进行改正的方法.选取2019-09-01-2019-11-01 共计62天的多模 GNSS 实验(multi-GNSS experiment,... 相似文献
13.
在精密定位中,GNSS接收机天线相位中心变化是必须进行改正的影响因素。目前成熟的微波暗室法和自动机器人法,对于一般用户而言,不具备相关实验条件,而野外相对法相对简单、易操作。为此,本文利用相对检测法,对GNSS接收机天线相位中心变化进行检测。实例表明,此方法可获得精度优于±3 mm的检测结果,因此可利用此方法对其他类型天线PCV值进行检测,也可借鉴此方法对北斗接收机天线相位中心变化进行检测。同时论文分析了影响检测精度,提出了有益改进建议。 相似文献
14.
Phase center modeling for LEO GPS receiver antennas and its impact on precise orbit determination 总被引：12，自引：5，他引：7
Adrian Jäggi R. Dach O. Montenbruck U. Hugentobler H. Bock G. Beutler 《Journal of Geodesy》2009,83(12):1145-1162
Most satellites in a low-Earth orbit (LEO) with demanding requirements on precise orbit determination (POD) are equipped with
on-board receivers to collect the observations from Global Navigation Satellite systems (GNSS), such as the Global Positioning
System (GPS). Limiting factors for LEO POD are nowadays mainly encountered with the modeling of the carrier phase observations,
where a precise knowledge of the phase center location of the GNSS antennas is a prerequisite for high-precision orbit analyses.
Since 5 November 2006 (GPS week 1400), absolute instead of relative values for the phase center location of GNSS receiver
and transmitter antennas are adopted in the processing standards of the International GNSS Service (IGS). The absolute phase
center modeling is based on robot calibrations for a number of terrestrial receiver antennas, whereas compatible antenna models
were subsequently derived for the remaining terrestrial receiver antennas by conversion (from relative corrections), and for
the GNSS transmitter antennas by estimation. However, consistent receiver antenna models for space missions such as GRACE
and TerraSAR-X, which are equipped with non-geodetic receiver antennas, are only available since a short time from robot calibrations.
We use GPS data of the aforementioned LEOs of the year 2007 together with the absolute antenna modeling to assess the presently
achieved accuracy from state-of-the-art reduced-dynamic LEO POD strategies for absolute and relative navigation. Near-field
multipath and cross-talk with active GPS occultation antennas turn out to be important and significant sources for systematic
carrier phase measurement errors that are encountered in the actual spacecraft environments. We assess different methodologies
for the in-flight determination of empirical phase pattern corrections for LEO receiver antennas and discuss their impact
on POD. By means of independent K-band measurements, we show that zero-difference GRACE orbits can be significantly improved
from about 10 to 6 mm K-band standard deviation when taking empirical phase corrections into account, and assess the impact
of the corrections on precise baseline estimates and further applications such as gravity field recovery from kinematic LEO
positions. 相似文献
15.
对于高精度的GNSS数据处理,特别是当多种品牌的GNSS接收机共同作业时,对天线进行相位中心改正是非常有必要的。当采用TBC处理非天宝类型GNSS接收机数据时,在导入数据时,有时会出现不识别接收机和天线类型的错误或警告。通过修改Rinex格式文件头的接收机及天线类型,使其与TBC软件中接收机及天线配置文件中信息一致,问题得到解决。本文还对此类问题做了一些引申,结语给出了若干条建议。 相似文献
16.
系统误差是指由于某种客观原意造成的可再现误差,其数值符号保持不变或按某种规定的规律变化.在相同的观测条件下,误差在大小、符号上表现出系统性,或者在观测过程中按一定的规律变化,或者为某一常数,传统测量中系统误差可以在平差前后得到很好的补偿.随着现在测量仪器和测绘技术的发展,许多系统误差难以从观测手段中予以剔除,为尽量消除或减弱系统误差的影响以达到高精度测量的目的.本文介绍了系统误差的三种处理方法,主要包括：附加系统参数法、半参数回归法及基于系统误差延续性的附加系统参数法[1][7]. 相似文献
17.
Improved antenna phase center models for GLONASS 总被引：6，自引：2，他引：4
Rolf Dach Ralf Schmid Martin Schmitz Daniela Thaller Stefan Schaer Simon Lutz Peter Steigenberger Gerhard Wübbena Gerhard Beutler 《GPS Solutions》2011,15(1):49-65
Thanks to the increasing number of active GLONASS satellites and the increasing number of multi-GNSS tracking stations in
the network of the International GNSS Service (IGS), the quality of the GLONASS orbits has become significantly better over
the last few years. By the end of 2008, the orbit RMS error had reached a level of 3–4 cm. Nevertheless, the strategy to process
GLONASS observations still has deficiencies: one simplification, as applied within the IGS today, is the use of phase center
models for receiver antennas for the GLONASS observations, which were derived from GPS measurements only, by ignoring the
different frequency range. Geo++ GmbH calibrates GNSS receiver antennas using a robot in the field. This procedure yields
now separate corrections for the receiver antenna phase centers for each navigation satellite system, provided its constellation
is sufficiently populated. With a limited set of GLONASS calibrations, it is possible to assess the impact of GNSS-specific
receiver antenna corrections that are ignored within the IGS so far. The antenna phase center model for the GLONASS satellites
was derived in early 2006, when the multi-GNSS tracking network of the IGS was much sparser than it is today. Furthermore,
many satellites of the constellation at that time have in the meantime been replaced by the latest generation of GLONASS-M
satellites. For that reason, this paper also provides an update and extension of the presently used correction tables for
the GLONASS satellite antenna phase centers for the current constellation of GLONASS satellites. The updated GLONASS antenna
phase center model helps to improve the orbit quality. 相似文献
18.
Driven by the comprehensive modernization of the GLONASS space segment and the increased global availability of GLONASS-capable
ground stations, an updated set of satellite-specific antenna phase center corrections for the current GLONASS-M constellation
is determined by processing 84 weeks of dual-frequency data collected between January 2008 and August 2009 by a worldwide
network of 227 GPS-only and 115 combined GPS/GLONASS tracking stations. The analysis is performed according to a rigorous
combined multi-system processing scheme providing full consistency between the GPS and the GLONASS system. The solution is
aligned to a realization of the International Terrestrial Reference Frame 2005. The estimated antenna parameters are compared
with the model values currently used within the International GNSS Service (IGS). It is shown that the z-offset estimates are on average 7 cm smaller than the corresponding IGS model values and that the block-specific mean value
perfectly agrees with the nominal GLONASS-M z-offset provided by the satellite manufacturer. The existence of azimuth-dependent phase center variations is investigated
and uncertainties in the horizontal offset estimates due to mathematical correlations and yaw-attitude modeling problems during
eclipse seasons are addressed. Finally, it is demonstrated that the orbit quality benefits from the updated GLONASS-M antenna
phase center model and that a consistent set of satellite antenna z-offsets for GPS and GLONASS is imperative to obtain consistent GPS- and GLONASS-derived station heights. 相似文献
19.
在高精度GNSS定位中,接收机天线相位中心偏差(PCO)和天线相位中心变化(PCV)的影响不可忽略。目前,IGS发布的绝对天线相位模型文件中包含了GPS/GLONASS系统的标定值,但是没有发布北斗系统(BDS)的标定值。本文借助机械臂可以控制天线自由旋转,在数小时内实现全方位GNSS观测的特性,采用历元间差分的方法对接收机天线包括GPS L1/L2和BDSB1I/B2I/B3I等多个频点的PCO和PCV分别进行标定和拟合。标定结果表明,比较最小二乘估计的GPS PCO与IGS发布值,其STD和RMS在L1/L2上均小于1 mm;BDS PCO估计值的STD在B1I/B2I/B3I上分别为0.5、0.3、0.3 mm。利用球谐函数拟合的GPS PCV格网值与IGS发布值相比,其偏差在天顶距小于75°时均小于1.5 mm。BDS PCV拟合值范围均在-5~8 mm,且随天顶距变化曲线呈现波谷状。BDS PCV在低高度角处拟合值波动较大,随方位角变化曲线峰值-峰值最大达到了5.6 mm。 相似文献