检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:周要宗 匡翠林[1] 刘紫平[2] 何芮瑶 ZHOU Yaozong;KUANG Cuilin;LIU Ziping;HE Ruiyao(School of Geosciences and Info-Physics,Central South University,Changsha 410083,China;Hunan Provincial Mapping and Science and Technology Investigation Institute,Changsha 410007,China)
机构地区:[1]中南大学地球科学与信息物理学院,长沙410083 [2]湖南省测绘科技研究所,长沙410007
出 处:《导航定位学报》2018年第3期113-118,共6页Journal of Navigation and Positioning
基 金:国家自然科学基金项目(41774040)
摘 要:针对由于4个GNSS在线PPP数据处理系统内核数据处理算法不同,服务性能存在差异,用户在选择在线系统时会存在盲目性的问题,分析比较4个在线系统的性能:给出4个系统的特点,然后通过处理18个全球均匀分布IGS站点的GNSS数据,对比4个在线系统动静态定位的精度和稳定性。实验结果表明,不同在线系统的动静态定位结果存在差异,APPS和CSRS-PPP系统动静态定位的精度和稳定性明显优于GAPS和magicGNSS系统,更能满足厘米级或毫米级用户的定位需求。Aiming at the problem that because the kernel data processing algorithms and service performance of four GNSS online PPP data processing systems are different,and the users will be blind in the choice of online systems,the paper comparatively analyzed the performance of the four online systems:the characteristics of the systems were given,and the GNSS data of 18 globally distributed IGS stations were processed,then the kinematic and static positioning accuracy and stability of the four online systems were analyzed.Experimental result showed that different online systems would have different kinematic and static positioning accuracy,meanwhile the kinematic and static positioning accuracy and stability of APPS and CSRS-PPP could be obviously higher than those of GAPS and magicGNSS,the former would better meet the positioning requirement of cm or mm level for GNSS users.
分 类 号:P228[天文地球—大地测量学与测量工程]
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.117