Abstract
Worldwide, the determination of the coordinates from a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) survey (in Network Real Time Kinematic, Precise Point Positioning, or static mode) has been analysed in several scientific and technical applications. Many of those have been carried out to compare Precise Point Positioning (PPP), Network Real Time Kinematic (NRTK), and static modes’ solutions, usually, using the latter as the true or the most plausible solution. This approach is not always possible as the static mode solution depends on several parameters (baseline length, acquisition time, ionospheric, and tropospheric models, etc.) that must be considered to evaluate the accuracy of the method. This work aims to show the comparison among the GNSS survey methods mentioned above, using some benchmark points. The tests were carried out by comparing the survey methods in pairs to check their solutions congruence. The NRTK and the static solutions refer to a local GNSS CORS network’s analysis. The NRTK positioning has been obtained with different methods (VRS, FKP, NEA) and the PPP solution has been calculated with two different software (RTKLIB and CSRS-PPP). A statistical approach has been performed to check if the distribution frequencies of the coordinate’s residual belong to the normal distribution, for all pairs analysed. The results show that the hypothesis of a normal distribution is confirmed in most of the pairs and, specifically, the Static vs. NRTK pair seems to achieve the best congruence, while involving the PPP approach, pairs obtained with CSRS software achieve better congruence than those involving RTKLIB software.
Highlights
The coordinates from a Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) survey, as it is known throughout literature, can be computed with different approaches
Test, differences belong to a normal distribution at a According to test, thethe differences belong to a normal distribution at a signifisignificance α
“jointly distributed”, i.e., their pairs must have multivariate normal distribution normally distributed”, i.e., their pairs must have multivariate normal distribution these results, the AD test shows that the differences belong to a normal distribution (Figure 7 panel b, α = 0.05) excluding one more time ΔE in the Static vs. Flächen Korrektur Parameter (FKP) pair, ΔN in the RTKLIB vs. Virtual Reference Station (VRS) and RTKLIB vs. NEA differences, and ΔZ in the Static vs. RTKLIB
Summary
The coordinates from a Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) survey, as it is known throughout literature, can be computed with different approaches (relative and differential techniques, or absolute precise point positioning method). According to the relative survey, there are many differences distinguishing the static and the kinematic modes (RTK, real time kinematic or NRTK, network-based RTK). To overcome the above mentioned constrain, in the last few years, the GNSS Continuously Operating Reference Stations (CORS) networks have been widely used for real time positioning with high-precision. The presence of widely spread GNSS CORS networks encouraged the use of the NRTK technique that allows overcoming the limits of the distances among the stations. The use of GNSS CORS network, allows applying differential corrections more reliable on wide areas, such as the Virtual Reference Station (VRS) approach [6], the Multi Reference
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
