4.6 Article

Assessment of Three Tropospheric Delay Models (IGGtrop, EGNOS and UNB3m) Based on Precise Point Positioning in the Chinese Region

期刊

SENSORS
卷 16, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/s16010122

关键词

zenith tropospheric delay; IGGtrop model; EGNOS model; UNB3m model; precise point positioning

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41231064, 41574032, 41574033, 41321063]
  2. National Basic Research Program of China [2012CB825604]
  3. CAS/SAFEA International Partnership Program for Creative Research Teams [KZZD-EW-TZ-05]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tropospheric delays are one of the main sources of errors in the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS). They are usually corrected by using tropospheric delay models, which makes the accuracy of the models rather critical for accurate positioning. To provide references for suitable models to be chosen for GNSS users in China, we conduct herein a comprehensive study of the performances of the IGGtrop, EGNOS and UNB3m models in China. Firstly, we assess the models using 5 years' Global Positioning System (GPS) derived Zenith Tropospheric Delay (ZTD) series from 25 stations of the Crustal Movement Observation Network of China (CMONOC). Then we study the effects of the models on satellite positioning by using various Precise Point Positioning (PPP) cases with different tropospheric delay resolutions, the observation data processed in PPP is from 21 base stations of CMONOC for a whole year of 2012. The results show that: (1) the Root Mean Square (RMS) of the IGGtrop model is about 4.4 cm, which improves the accuracy of ZTD estimations by about 24% for EGNOS and 19% for UNB3m; (2) The positioning error in the vertical component of the PPP solution obtained by using the IGGtrop model is about 15.0 cm, which is about 30% and 21% smaller than those of the EGNOS and UNB3m models, respectively. In summary, the IGGtrop model achieves the best performance among the three models in the Chinese region.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据