跳到主要內容

global COMPASS system summary

The global COMPASS system will be built by 2020[4] and it is being designed to offer the following performances for each COMPASS Services[5][3]:
  • Open service: a free service for civilian users with positioning accuracy of within 10 meters, velocity accuracy of within 0.2 m/s and timing accuracy of within 20 nanoseconds. The Open Service is planned to be available a few years ahead of the system full operational capability;
  • Authorized service: a licensed service with higher accuracy even in complex situations for authorized and military users only.
  • Wide area differential positioning service: with positioning accuracy of 1 m.
  • Short message service (SMS): up to 120 Chinese characters.



Table 1: COMPASS Signals Characteristics[6]

Preliminary performance figures were presented in the COMPASS Workshop, integrated in the ION GNSS 2011 Conference. The COMPASS constellation available at the time (referred to as "3+3", standing for 3 GEO Satellites and 3 IGSO satellites), operational in July 2011, includes the signals depicted in Table 1.
These results show that a combined COMPASS("3+3")+GPS constellation provides:
  • higher availability: up to 14 satellites were visible in the test conditions (compared to up to 9 with GPS only);
  • better geometry: the PDOP for the combined constellation was lower than the PDOP for each individual constellation.
The results show that the accuracy of the combined solution (GPS and current COMPASS) is in general worse than the single GPS Solution - even though in the same order of magnitude. This was explained by the differences between systems and the preliminary status of the COMPASS constellation which is still expected to improve their satellite clocks and orbits accuracy as it reaches full operational capability.

 from ESA navipedia.net
_________________________________________________________________________________
As expected, GEO satellites have much larger RMS than IGSOs. On average, GEOs have an accuracy measured by 3D-RMS of 288 cm, whereas that of IGSOs is about 21 cm.

Satellite Clocks. Figure 6 compares the satellite clocks derived from two adjacent three-day solutions, as was done for the satellite orbits. Satellite C10 is selected as reference for eliminating the epoch-wise systematic bias. The averaged RMS is about 0.56 ns (17 cm) and the averaged standard deviation (STD) is 0.23 ns (7 cm). Satellite C01 has a significant larger bias than any of the others, which might be correlated with its orbits.
From the orbit and clock comparison, both orbit and clock can hardly fulfill the requirement of PPP of cm-level accuracy. However, the biases in orbit and clock are usually compensatable to each other in observation modeling. Moreover, the constant along-track biases produce an almost constant bias in observation modeling because of the slightly changed geometry for GEOs. This constant bias will not affect the phase observations due to the estimation of ambiguity parameters. Its effect on ranges can be reduced by down-weighting them properly. Therefore, instead of comparing orbit and clock separately, user range accuracy should be investigated as usual. In this study, the quality of the estimated orbits and clocks is assessed by the repeatability of the station coordinates derived by PPP using those products

Static PPP. In the static test, PPP is performed with session length of 2 hours, 6 hours, 12 hours, and 24 hours. Figure 7 and Table 4 show the statistics of the position differences of the static solutions with various session lengths over days 123 to 125.
The accuracy of the PPP-derived positions with 2 hours data is about 5 cm, 3 cm, and 10 cm in east, north, and vertical, compared to the GPS daily solution. Accuracy improves with session lengths. If data of 6 hours or longer are involved in the processing, position accuracy is about 1 cm in east and north and 4 cm in vertical. From Table 4, the accuracy is improved to a few millimeters in horizontal and 2 cm in vertical with observations of 12 to 24 hours. The larger RMS in vertical might be caused by the different PCO and PCV of the receiver antenna for GPS and Compass, which is not yet available

Kinematic PPP. Kinematic PPP is applied to the CHDU station using the same orbit and clock products as for the static positioning for days 123 to 125 in 2012.
The result of day 125 is presented here as example. The positions are estimated by means of the sequential least-squares adjustment with a very loose constraint of 1 meter to positions at two adjacent epochs. The result estimated with backward smoothing is shown in Figure 8. The differences are related to the daily Compass static solution. The bias and STD of the differences in east, north, and vertical are listed in Table 5. The bias is about 16 mm, 13 mm, and 1 mm, and the STD is 10 mm, 14 mm and 55 mm, in east, north, and vertical, respectively.

Summary

The three-day precise orbit and clock estimation shows an orbit accuracy, measured by overlap 3D-RMS, of better than 288 cm for GEOs and 21 cm for IGSOs, and the accuracy of satellite clocks of 0.23 ns in STD and 0.56 in RMS. The largest orbit difference occurs in along-track direction which is almost a constant shift, while differences in the others are rather small.
The static PPP shows an accuracy of about 5 cm, 3 cm, and 10 cm in east, north, and vertical with two hours observations. With six hours or longer data, accuracy can reach to 1 cm in horizontal and better than 4 cm in vertical. The post-mission kinematic PPP can provide position accuracy of 2 cm, 2 cm, and 5 cm in east, north, and vertical. The high quality of PPP results suggests that the orbit biases, especially the large constant bias in along-track, can be compensated by the estimated satellite clocks and/or absorbed by ambiguity parameters due to the almost unchanged geometry for GEOs.
The simulated real-time PPP service also confirms that real-time positioning services of accuracy at 1 decimeter-level and even cm–level is achievable with the Compass constellation of only nine satellites. The accuracy will improve with completion of the regional system.
This is a preliminary achievement, accomplished in a short time. We look forward to results from other colleagues for comparison. Further studies will be conducted to validate new strategies for improving accuracy, reliability, and availability. We are also working on the integrated processing of data from Compass and other GNSSs. We expect that more Compass data, especially real-time data, can be made available for future investigation.

gpsworld - What is achievable with Current Compass Constellation?

留言

這個網誌中的熱門文章

越南香草

Ngo ~ "N-gaw" Mui ~ "Moo-ee" Ngo ~ "N-gaw" Mui ~ "Moo-ee" Ngo ~ "N-gaw" Mui ~ "Moo-ee" Ngo (N-gaw) ,  Mui  (Moo-ee )  Cilantro Ngo Gai (N-gaw guy), Mui Tau (Moo-ee Tao), Ngo Tau (N-gaw Tao)   Mexican Coriander,  Sawtooth Coriander, Culantro    娥女帝(拼音), 刺芹   特徵:娥女帝是短株形的植物,氣味清淡,葉邊呈鋸齒形,十分容易辨認。來源地:越南。 功效:和白夏差不多,娥女帝亦有祛濕、解毒及驅風的療效。建議食法: Pho,  (Bánh Xeò) 越南煎餅, 炒菜,湯,咖哩 Ngo Gai ~ "N-gaw guy" Mui Tau ~ "Moo-ee Tao" Ngo Tau ~ "N-gaw Tao" - See more at: http://vietworldkitchen.typepad.com/blog/vietnamese-herb-primer.html#sthash.I9rzkzwI.dpuf Rau Ram (Rau Rahm) Vietnam Coriander, Laksa Leaf, "Vietnamese mint(actually not a mint)" Peppery, quite spicy. In salad Hung (Hoong), , Hung Lang (Hoong Lang) Spearmint.  Vietnamese coriander Hung Lui (Hoong Lou-ee), Hung Diu(Hoong Zee-ew) round mint used in salad Hung Cay (Hoong Kay) Mint Rau Que, Hung Que (H

copycat comandante C40 grinder

 from facebook 尋日朋友話係強國網上買左支C40,重要係斑馬木,話要拎嚟同我炫耀下,咁咪拎過嚟我到開箱囉。   斑馬木都停產左好耐,重要買到全新,重要係強國網,佢話買左二千四人仔,我當然半信半疑,見到面拎上手都好重手下,紙盒都算幾真,都幾結實,印刷都唔覺有太大問題,打開盒先開始覺得唔對路(圖1-14開箱圖)。 -1號圖,招紙貼得有d皺,但印刷都算幾清晰。 -2、3號圖,打開就爛左。 -4、5號圖,玻璃樽色澤、材質明顯有問題。 -7同9號係片,一定要聽下啲聲,好怪。 -8號圖,可以睇到冚蓋後,好大條罅。 -10號圖睇到,9號條片扭左幾下,不停有碎跌出黎。 -11號圖,拎出黎就花曬。 -12、13號圖,本身印刷品質數都高,但對番正版個張唔會有黑色油墨跡。 -14號圖,主體Logo係焫落去,有凹凸感,之後用正版對比,先發現問題。  立刻拎支正版出黎比對下。 -15-19號圖,如果無正版盒係手,就咁拎住個假盒都可能呃到下人,但真盒一拎上手,非常硬正,敲落去感覺好唔同。     -20-25號圖,基本重量無太大分別,假貨手柄比較重,正版高度比較多一點點。 -26-30號圖,透明、茶色粉杯一比之下就睇得出分別,正版比較通透、清晰,玻璃瓶品質高。 -31-33號圖,手柄膠片位有花、有明顯水口位,正版無水口,好平滑,木柄和連接轉軸位置都有所不同。 -34號片,正版磁力強,手柄好穩陣,假貨倒轉就跌出嚟,連磁石都甩埋(35號圖)。 -36-37號圖,歸零後正版手柄會卡住,假貨由於磁石位置甩咗,所以鎖唔住。 -38-39號圖,塑膠位置標誌以及文字正版都比較突顯、清晰。 -40號圖,未用內膽就有多處刮花。 -41-44號圖,驟眼睇真係好似,螺絲都跟都幾足,但網上搵左好多圖睇過,基本上文字同刀邊都會有距離,假野比較貼。 -45號圖,刀頭格數卡位用嘅孔,開箱個時扭左幾下已經有碎屑跌出嚟,放大睇更明顯睇到分別,正版手工好好,假野好似月球坑咁。 -46-47號圖,46正版歸零後好平,47扭到好盡,歸零唔順暢,有少許凸起。   -48號片,調節格數聲音,都唔洗講,一聽就知大問題 -49-50號圖,假貨膠料位置明顯水口,螺絲也有分別。 -51-52號圖,正版刀頭用左成年都好新,假貨扭左半日都無,就刮左個圈出黎蝕曬,鋼水差。   -53-56號圖,木面Logo雖然都做到好真,但都搵到分別

劣質洗衣機入水喉

上面白色是最易找到,$2x. 但漏水. 灰色, $4x, 是假冒 "MADE IN ITALY"  假冒 "MADE IN ITALY"  的標緻  左面是白色膠喉的喉頭, 右面是灰色膠喉的喉頭, 上圖左面是真正 好貨 ( MADE IN ITALY )灰色膠蓋.右面是冒牌 白色膠蓋. 膠蓋在安裝扭緊時爆開  上圖左面是真正 好貨 , 標了其他規格.右面是冒牌, 單單印了 MADE IN ITALY  好貨的膠蓋是可以下移, 露出喉頭及黑色軟膠墊 黑色軟膠墊是有坑紋. 質感較柔軟. 緊後可以"迫實"水龍頭 及喉蓋, 沒有滲漏 正板 MADE IN ITALY 賣 $4x, 價錢絕對合理. 冒牌貨在旺角新填地街買的, 也是$4x. 真是要小心!!! NB: MADE IN ITALY 是否真正 意大利制造實在無從考 証