BDS observation data quality and dynamic PPP performance analysis
-
摘要: 为分析北斗卫星导航系统(BeiDou Navigation Satellite System,BDS)在全球范围内的数据质量、动态精密单点定位(precise point positioning,PPP)性能及不同区域内的性能差异,选取三个不同区域内共9个多GNSS实验 (Multi-GNSS Experiment,MGEX) 连续跟踪站的观测数据,以GPS为参考,从卫星可见性、伪距多路径效应、数据完整率、信噪比(signal-to-noise ratio,SNR)及PPP定位精度五个方面对BDS 的数据测质量以及定位精度进行分析. 结果表明:BDS的卫星可见性具有区域差异,多路径效应及SNR并没有呈现出区域特征,其中北斗三号(BeiDou-3 Navigation Satellite System,BDS-3)的数据质量优于北斗二号(BeiDou-2 Navigation Satellite System,BDS-2)的,且BDS不同频点的数据质量也有明显差异,B1I频点数据质量较差. BDS的动态定位精度略弱于GPS,多系统对提高定位精度具有显著的效果.
-
关键词:
- 北斗卫星导航系统(BDS) /
- 质量分析 /
- 信噪比(SNR) /
- 指标评估 /
- 精密单点定位(PPP)
Abstract: In order to analyze the global data quality, dynamic precise point positioning (PPP) performance and performance differences of BeiDou Navigation Satellite System (BDS) in different regions, we select the observation data of a total of 9 Multi-GNSS Experiment (MGEX) continuous tracking stations in 3 different region, using GPS as a reference, and from the satellite visibility, pseudo-range multipath effect, data integrity rate and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), PPP positioning accuracy and other aspects to analyze the data quality and positioning accuracy of BDS in five aspects. The results show that the satellite visibility of BDS has regional differences, and the multipath effect and SNR ratio do not show regional characteristics. The data quality of BDS-3 is better than that of BDS-2, and the data quality of BDS at different frequency points is also significantly different. Difference, poor data quality at B1I frequency points. The dynamic positioning accuracy of BDS is slightly weaker than that of GPS, and multiple systems have a significant effect on improving positioning accuracy. -
表 1 测站信息
区域 测站名称 纬度 经度 亚洲 GAMG 35.59° 127.910° PTGG 14.53° 121.040° ULAB 47.86° 107.050° 欧洲 BAUT 51.19° 14.520° BRST 48.38° −4.490° DYNG 38.07° 23.930° 美洲 AREG −16.46° −71.490° SGPO 36.60° −97.480° YEL2 62.48° −114.481° 表 2 各测站不同频点SNR平均值
dB 测站 BDS-2 BDS-3 GPS B1I B3I B2I B1C B1I B2a B3I B2b L1 L2 L5 GAMG 42 46 47 45 48 46 48 48 45 44 49 DYNG 44 47 48 45 47 47 48 47 42 41 45 YEL2 44 47 48 44 47 45 47 46 44 43 47 表 3 不同区域平均定位精度
区域 系统 模糊度固定率/% 浮点解定位精度/cm 固定解定位精度/cm E N U E N U 亚洲 BDS 97.2 0.70 1.13 1.41 0.76 1.12 1.49 GPS 96.9 0.76 1.12 1.39 0.63 0.79 1.37 欧洲 BDS 92.2 0.71 0.99 1.77 0.64 1.01 1.63 GPS 97.1 0.57 0.97 1.42 0.47 0.82 1.34 美洲 BDS 90.9 0.78 0.68 1.93 0.66 0.72 1.93 GPS 96.2 0.65 0.74 1.39 0.52 0.63 1.29 -
[1] 杨元喜. 北斗卫星导航系统的进展、贡献与挑战[J]. 测绘学报, 2010, 39(1): 1-6. [2] 陈忠贵, 武向军. 北斗三号卫星系统总体设计[J]. 南京航空航天大学学报, 2020, 52(6): 835-845. [3] DENG C L, QI S F, LI Y Y, et al. A comparative analysis of navigation signals in BDS-2 and BDS-3 using zero-baseline experiments[J]. GPS solutions, 2021, 25(4): 143. DOI: 10.1007/s10291-021-01178-z [4] 李涌涛, 李建文, 潘林, 等. 北斗三号新信号B1C和B2a观测数据质量分析评估[J]. 地球科学进展, 2018, 33(11): 1161-1168. [5] YANG Y X, MAO Y, SUN B J. Basic performance and future developments of BeiDou Global Navigation Satellite System[J]. Satellite navigation, 2020, 1(1): 1-18. DOI: 10.1186/s43020-019-0006-0 [6] LI M Y, HUANG G W, WANG L, et al. Performance of Multi-GNSS in the Asia-Pacific region: signal quality, broadcast ephemeris and precise point positioning (PPP)[J]. Remote sensing, 2022, 14(13): 3028. DOI: 10.3390/rs14133028 [7] 虞顺. BDS-3试验星/Galileo卫星观测数据质量评估方法与结果对比分析[D]. 武汉: 武汉大学, 2020. [8] 何义磊. 多GNSS间系统偏差建模与预报方法研究[D]. 徐州: 中国矿业大学, 2019.何义磊. 多GNSS间系统偏差建模与预报方法研究[D]. 徐州: 中国矿业大学, 2019. [9] 张小红, 李星星, 李盼. GNSS精密单点定位技术及应用进展[J]. 测绘学报, 2017, 46(10): 1399-1407. [10] 张小红, 胡家欢, 任晓东. PPP/PPP-RTK新进展与北斗/GNSS PPP定位性能比较[J]. 测绘学报, 2020, 49(9): 1084-1100. [11] 王进. GNSS多频精密单点定位及快速模糊度固定算法研究[D]. 西安: 长安大学, 2021. [12] 万苏波. BDS/GPS组合精密单点定位关键技术研究[D]. 徐州: 中国矿业大学, 2019. [13] HU J H, ZHANG X H, LI P, et al. Multi-GNSS fractional cycle bias products generation for GNSS ambiguity-fixed PPP at Wuhan University[J]. GPS solutions, 2019, 24(1): 15. DOI: 10.1007/s10291-019-0929-9