Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 48 |
| Number of pages | 21 |
| Journal | Journal of Geodesy |
| Volume | 96 |
| Issue number | 7 |
| Publication status | Published - 14 Jul 2022 |
Abstract
Precise values for absolute receiver antenna phase centre corrections (PCC) are one prerequisite for high-quality GNSS applications. Currently, antenna calibrations are performed by different institutes using a robot in the field or in an anechoic chamber. The differences between the antenna patterns are significant and require a sound comparison concept and a detailed study to quantify the impact on geodetic parameters, such as station coordinates, zenith wet delays (ZWDs) or receiver clock estimates. Furthermore, a discussion on acceptable pattern uncertainties is needed. Therefore, a comparison strategy for receiver antenna calibration values is presented using a set of individually and absolutely calibrated Leica AR25 antennas from the European Permanent Network (EPN), both from the robot (Geo++ company) and from the chamber approach (University of Bonn). Newly developed scalar metrics and their benefits are highlighted and discussed in relation to further structural analysis. With our metrics, properties of 25 patterns pairs (robot/chamber) could be used to successfully assign seven individual groups. The impact of PCC on the estimated parameters depends on the PCC structure, its sampling by the satellite distribution and the applied processing parameters. A regional sub-network of the EPN is analysed using the double difference (DD) and the precise point positioning (PPP) methods. For DD, depending on the antenna category differences in the estimated parameters between 1 and 12 mm are identified also affecting the ZWDs. For PPP, the consistency of the observables, i.e. potential differences in the reference point of carrier phase and code observations, additionally affects the distribution among the different parameters and residuals.
Keywords
- Antenna, Calibration, GNSS, carrier phase centre variation, carrier phase centre offset, regional GNSS networks, PCC, PCV, PPP, Gnss antennas, Carrier phase centre offset, Carrier phase centre variation, PCO, Regional GNSS networks
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Engineering(all)
- Aerospace Engineering
- Engineering(all)
- Electrical and Electronic Engineering
- Earth and Planetary Sciences(all)
- Computers in Earth Sciences
- Earth and Planetary Sciences(all)
- Geochemistry and Petrology
- Earth and Planetary Sciences(all)
- Geophysics
Research Area (based on ÖFOS 2012)
- TECHNICAL SCIENCES
- Electrical Engineering, Electronics, Information Engineering
- Electrical Engineering, Electronics, Information Engineering
- Microelectronics
- TECHNICAL SCIENCES
- Environmental Engineering, Applied Geosciences
- Geodesy, Surveying
- Satellite geodesy
- TECHNICAL SCIENCES
- Environmental Engineering, Applied Geosciences
- Geodesy, Surveying
- Geodesy
Sustainable Development Goals
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
In: Journal of Geodesy, Vol. 96, No. 7, 48, 14.07.2022.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison concept and quality metrics for GNSS antenna calibrations
T2 - Cause and effect on regional GNSS networks
AU - Kersten, Tobias
AU - Kröger, Johannes
AU - Schön, Steffen
N1 - Funding information: The authors grateful acknowledge the centre of Orbit Determination in Europe (CODE) for providing orbits and products of superior quality. In addition, we thank the European Permanent Network Central Bureau (EPN CB) for providing metadata for the network and station specific products. Individual patterns of all antennas used in this study are available on the EPN FTP server (EPN 2019). Finally, we thank our colleagues of Positioning and Navigation (PosNav) group at IfE for the fruitful discussions on the manuscript. The valuable comments of the three reviewers helped to improve the paper.
PY - 2022/7/14
Y1 - 2022/7/14
N2 - Precise values for absolute receiver antenna phase centre corrections (PCC) are one prerequisite for high-quality GNSS applications. Currently, antenna calibrations are performed by different institutes using a robot in the field or in an anechoic chamber. The differences between the antenna patterns are significant and require a sound comparison concept and a detailed study to quantify the impact on geodetic parameters, such as station coordinates, zenith wet delays (ZWDs) or receiver clock estimates. Furthermore, a discussion on acceptable pattern uncertainties is needed. Therefore, a comparison strategy for receiver antenna calibration values is presented using a set of individually and absolutely calibrated Leica AR25 antennas from the European Permanent Network (EPN), both from the robot (Geo++ company) and from the chamber approach (University of Bonn). Newly developed scalar metrics and their benefits are highlighted and discussed in relation to further structural analysis. With our metrics, properties of 25 patterns pairs (robot/chamber) could be used to successfully assign seven individual groups. The impact of PCC on the estimated parameters depends on the PCC structure, its sampling by the satellite distribution and the applied processing parameters. A regional sub-network of the EPN is analysed using the double difference (DD) and the precise point positioning (PPP) methods. For DD, depending on the antenna category differences in the estimated parameters between 1 and 12 mm are identified also affecting the ZWDs. For PPP, the consistency of the observables, i.e. potential differences in the reference point of carrier phase and code observations, additionally affects the distribution among the different parameters and residuals.
AB - Precise values for absolute receiver antenna phase centre corrections (PCC) are one prerequisite for high-quality GNSS applications. Currently, antenna calibrations are performed by different institutes using a robot in the field or in an anechoic chamber. The differences between the antenna patterns are significant and require a sound comparison concept and a detailed study to quantify the impact on geodetic parameters, such as station coordinates, zenith wet delays (ZWDs) or receiver clock estimates. Furthermore, a discussion on acceptable pattern uncertainties is needed. Therefore, a comparison strategy for receiver antenna calibration values is presented using a set of individually and absolutely calibrated Leica AR25 antennas from the European Permanent Network (EPN), both from the robot (Geo++ company) and from the chamber approach (University of Bonn). Newly developed scalar metrics and their benefits are highlighted and discussed in relation to further structural analysis. With our metrics, properties of 25 patterns pairs (robot/chamber) could be used to successfully assign seven individual groups. The impact of PCC on the estimated parameters depends on the PCC structure, its sampling by the satellite distribution and the applied processing parameters. A regional sub-network of the EPN is analysed using the double difference (DD) and the precise point positioning (PPP) methods. For DD, depending on the antenna category differences in the estimated parameters between 1 and 12 mm are identified also affecting the ZWDs. For PPP, the consistency of the observables, i.e. potential differences in the reference point of carrier phase and code observations, additionally affects the distribution among the different parameters and residuals.
KW - Antennen
KW - Kalibrierung
KW - GNSS
KW - GNSS Antennen
KW - carrier phase centre variation
KW - carrier phase centre offset
KW - Regionale GNSS Netwerkes
KW - PCC
KW - PCV
KW - PPP
KW - Antenna
KW - Calibration
KW - GNSS
KW - carrier phase centre variation
KW - carrier phase centre offset
KW - regional GNSS networks
KW - PCC
KW - PCV
KW - PPP
KW - Gnss antennas
KW - Carrier phase centre offset
KW - Carrier phase centre variation
KW - PCO
KW - Regional GNSS networks
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85134265974&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00190-022-01635-8
DO - 10.1007/s00190-022-01635-8
M3 - Article
VL - 96
JO - Journal of Geodesy
JF - Journal of Geodesy
SN - 0949-7714
IS - 7
M1 - 48
ER -