Cargando…

Testing the Performance of Multi-Frequency Low-Cost GNSS Receivers and Antennas

Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) low-cost multi-frequency receivers are argued as an alternative to geodetic receivers for many applications. Calibrated low-cost antennas recently became available on the market making low-cost instruments more comparable with geodetic ones. The main goal of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hamza, Veton, Stopar, Bojan, Sterle, Oskar
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7998556/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33809368
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21062029
_version_ 1783670578857639936
author Hamza, Veton
Stopar, Bojan
Sterle, Oskar
author_facet Hamza, Veton
Stopar, Bojan
Sterle, Oskar
author_sort Hamza, Veton
collection PubMed
description Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) low-cost multi-frequency receivers are argued as an alternative to geodetic receivers for many applications. Calibrated low-cost antennas recently became available on the market making low-cost instruments more comparable with geodetic ones. The main goal of this research was to evaluate the noise of low-cost GNSS receivers, to compare the positioning quality from different types of low-cost antennas, and to analyze the positioning differences between low-cost and geodetic instruments. The results from a zero baseline test indicated that the u-blox multi-frequency receiver, namely, ZED-F9P, had low noise that was at the sub-millimeter level. To analyze the impact of the antennas in the obtained coordinates, a short baseline test was applied. Both tested uncalibrated antennas (Tallysman TW3882 and Survey) demonstrated satisfactory positioning performance. The Tallysman antenna was more accurate in the horizontal position determination, and the difference from the true value was only 0.1 mm; while, for the Survey antenna, the difference was 1.0 mm. For the ellipsoid height, the differences were 0.3 and 0.6 mm for the Survey and Tallysman antennas, respectively. The comparison of low-cost receivers with calibrated low-cost antennas (Survey Calibrated) and geodetic instruments proved better performance for the latter. The geodetic GNSS instruments were more accurate than the low-cost instruments, and the precision of the estimated coordinates from the geodetic network was also greater. Low-cost GNSS instruments were not at the same level as the geodetic ones; however, considering their cost, they demonstrated excellent performance that is sufficiently appropriate for various geodetic applications.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7998556
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79985562021-03-28 Testing the Performance of Multi-Frequency Low-Cost GNSS Receivers and Antennas Hamza, Veton Stopar, Bojan Sterle, Oskar Sensors (Basel) Article Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) low-cost multi-frequency receivers are argued as an alternative to geodetic receivers for many applications. Calibrated low-cost antennas recently became available on the market making low-cost instruments more comparable with geodetic ones. The main goal of this research was to evaluate the noise of low-cost GNSS receivers, to compare the positioning quality from different types of low-cost antennas, and to analyze the positioning differences between low-cost and geodetic instruments. The results from a zero baseline test indicated that the u-blox multi-frequency receiver, namely, ZED-F9P, had low noise that was at the sub-millimeter level. To analyze the impact of the antennas in the obtained coordinates, a short baseline test was applied. Both tested uncalibrated antennas (Tallysman TW3882 and Survey) demonstrated satisfactory positioning performance. The Tallysman antenna was more accurate in the horizontal position determination, and the difference from the true value was only 0.1 mm; while, for the Survey antenna, the difference was 1.0 mm. For the ellipsoid height, the differences were 0.3 and 0.6 mm for the Survey and Tallysman antennas, respectively. The comparison of low-cost receivers with calibrated low-cost antennas (Survey Calibrated) and geodetic instruments proved better performance for the latter. The geodetic GNSS instruments were more accurate than the low-cost instruments, and the precision of the estimated coordinates from the geodetic network was also greater. Low-cost GNSS instruments were not at the same level as the geodetic ones; however, considering their cost, they demonstrated excellent performance that is sufficiently appropriate for various geodetic applications. MDPI 2021-03-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7998556/ /pubmed/33809368 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21062029 Text en © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Hamza, Veton
Stopar, Bojan
Sterle, Oskar
Testing the Performance of Multi-Frequency Low-Cost GNSS Receivers and Antennas
title Testing the Performance of Multi-Frequency Low-Cost GNSS Receivers and Antennas
title_full Testing the Performance of Multi-Frequency Low-Cost GNSS Receivers and Antennas
title_fullStr Testing the Performance of Multi-Frequency Low-Cost GNSS Receivers and Antennas
title_full_unstemmed Testing the Performance of Multi-Frequency Low-Cost GNSS Receivers and Antennas
title_short Testing the Performance of Multi-Frequency Low-Cost GNSS Receivers and Antennas
title_sort testing the performance of multi-frequency low-cost gnss receivers and antennas
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7998556/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33809368
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21062029
work_keys_str_mv AT hamzaveton testingtheperformanceofmultifrequencylowcostgnssreceiversandantennas
AT stoparbojan testingtheperformanceofmultifrequencylowcostgnssreceiversandantennas
AT sterleoskar testingtheperformanceofmultifrequencylowcostgnssreceiversandantennas