Advertisement

GPS Solutions

, 23:24 | Cite as

Quality assessment of the affine-constrained GNSS attitude model

  • Jianfeng GuoEmail author
Original Article
  • 77 Downloads

Abstract

By mounting two or more GNSS antennas on one platform, the attitude of the platform can be determined. Rapid, reliable integer ambiguity resolution is the key to the viability of GNSS-based attitude determination. To reduce the complexity of the search space and retain the high ambiguity resolution success rates, Teunissen developed the affine-constrained multivariate attitude model. The quality measures of the affine-constrained GNSS attitude model are addressed. When there are enough satellites in common-view visibility, the affine constraints will probably provide a marginal contribution to the quality measures. However, the strength of the model validation can be improved significantly by equipping the array with more antennas in case that there are only five common-view satellites available. Although the phase-slip minimal detectable bias measures in a roving-platform case will be worse than those in a stationary-platform case, the code-spike minimal detectable bias measures are practically independent of whether the platform is moving or stationary. The main contribution of the affine constraints is that one can now ‘trade’ satellites for receiver/antennas.

Keywords

GNSS Attitude determination Affine constraint MDB Outlier Cycle slip 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The project was sponsored by the Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant nos. 41674020 and 40874007), the China Scholarship Council (File no. 2011317045), and the Henan Key Laboratory of Intelligent Public Opinion Analysis. The author wishes to acknowledge anonymous reviewers for their valuable and insightful comments.

References

  1. Baarda W (1968) A testing procedure for use in geodetic networks. Publications on geodesy, vol 2, No. 5. Netherlands Geodetic Commission, DelftGoogle Scholar
  2. Cohen CE, Parkinson BW, McNally BD (1994) Flight tests of attitude determination using GPS compared against an inertial navigation unit. Navigation 41(1):83–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Giorgi G, Teunissen PJG (2013) Low-complexity instantaneous ambiguity resolution with the affine-constrained GNSS attitude model. IEEE Trans Aerosp Electron Syst 49(3):1745–1759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Guo J (2014) Analytical quality assessment of iteratively reweighted least-squares (IRLS) method. Bol Cienc Geod 20(1):133–142Google Scholar
  5. Guo J (2015) A note on the conventional outlier detection test procedures. Bol Cienc Geod 21(2):433–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Guo J, Ou J, Yuan Y, Wang H (2008) Optimal carrier-smoothed-code algorithm for dual-frequency GPS data. Prog Natl Sci 18(5):591–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Knight NL, Wang J, Rizos C (2010) Generalised measures of reliability for multiple outliers. J Geodesy 84(10):625–635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Koch KR (1999) Parameter estimation and hypothesis testing in linear models, 2nd edn. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Koch KR (2015) Minimal detectable outliers as measures of reliability. J Geodesy 89(5):483–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Leick A, Rapoport L, Tatarnikov D (2015) GPS satellite surveying. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Li Y, Zhang K, Roberts C, Murata M (2004) On-the-fly GPS-based attitude determination using single- and double-differenced carrier phase measurements. GPS Solut 8(2):93–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Teunissen PJG (1998) Minimal detectable biases of GPS data. J Geodesy 72(4):236–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Teunissen PJG (2012) The affine constrained GNSS attitude model and its multivariate integer least-squares solution. J Geodesy 86(7):547–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Teunissen PJG (2018) Distributional theory for the DIA method. J Geodesy 92(1):59–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Teunissen PJG, Bakker PF (2013) Single-receiver single-channel multi-frequency GNSS integrity: outliers, slips, and ionospheric disturbances. J Geodesy 87(2):161–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Wang J, Satirapod C, Rizos C (2002) Stochastic assessment of GPS carrier phase measurements for precise static relative positioning. J Geodesy 76(2):95–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Willi D, Rothacher M (2017) GNSS attitude determination with non-synchronized receivers and short baselines onboard a spacecraft. GPS Solut 21(4):1605–1617CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Zhongyuan University of TechnologyZhengzhouChina

Personalised recommendations