Cargando…

Comparison of Four RTK Receivers Operating in the Static and Dynamic Modes Using Measurement Robotic Arm

While the existing research provides a wealth of information about the static properties of RTK receivers, less is known about their dynamic properties, although it is clear that the vast majority of field operations take place when the machine is moving. A new method using a MRA for the evaluation...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kadeřábek, Jan, Shapoval, Vadym, Matějka, Pavel, Kroulík, Milan, Kumhála, František
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8659645/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34883796
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s21237794
Descripción
Sumario:While the existing research provides a wealth of information about the static properties of RTK receivers, less is known about their dynamic properties, although it is clear that the vast majority of field operations take place when the machine is moving. A new method using a MRA for the evaluation of RTK receivers in movement with a precise circular reference trajectory (r = 3 m) was proposed. This reference method was developed with the greatest possible emphasis on the positional, time and repeatable accuracy of ground truth. Four phases of the measurement scenario (static, acceleration, uniform movement and deceleration) were used in order to compare four different types of RTK receiver horizontal operation accuracy over three measurement days. The worst result of one of the receivers was measured at SSR = 13.767% in dynamic movement. Since the same “low-cost” receiver without an INS unit had SSR = 98.14% in previous static measurements, so it can be assumed that the motion had a very significant effect on the dynamic properties of this receiver. On the other hand, the best “high-end” receiver with an INS unit had SSR = 96.938% during the dynamic testing scenarios. The median values of the deviations were always better during uniform movements than during acceleration or braking. In general, the positioning accuracy was worse in the dynamic mode than in the static one for all the receivers. Error indicators (RMS(err) and Me) were found several times higher in the dynamic mode than in the static one. These facts should be considered in the future development of modern agricultural machinery and technology.