Науковий вісник НГУ

Strategies of GNSS processing and measuring under various operational conditions

• 
• 

User Rating:  / 0

PoorBest 

Details

Category: Content №3 2022

Last Updated on 29 June 2022

Published on 30 November -0001

Hits: 3852

Authors:

Elmira Orynbassarova, orcid.org/0000-0001-6421-4698, Satbayev University, Almaty, the Republic of Kazakhstan, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Ainur Yerzhankyzy, orcid.org/0000-0003-2559-3220, Satbayev University, Almaty, the Republic of Kazakhstan, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Roman Shults, orcid.org/0000-0003-2581-517X, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI, USA, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Keniel Roberts, orcid.org/0000-0003-2061-7131, University of Technology, Kingston, Jamaica

Anuar Togaibekov, orcid.org/0000-0002-5634-8140, University of Grenoble Alps, Grenoble, the French Republic

повний текст / full article

Naukovyi Visnyk Natsionalnoho Hirnychoho Universytetu. 2022, (3): 146 - 150

https://doi.org/10.33271/nvngu/2022-3/146

Abstract:

Purpose. GNSS technology is one of the key elements of maintenance of the mining works. Mostly, the GNSS observations in mining regions are accomplished under adverse surveying conditions. The presented paper is aimed at studying the problem of GNSS accuracy under various adverse operational conditions that may encounter during surveying works in deposit fields and downgrade the GNSS accuracy.

Methodology. Despite the well-defined problem of GNSS accuracy, each year, new receiver models and software versions come into use, which in turn, needs a more profound analysis of their reliability, accuracy, and efficiency. This study provides relevant information about the static tests that were executed in the canopy, multipath, and open environments to assess the performance of the user segment from different manufacturers. The equipment of three manufactures was tested: Leica, Trimble, and Javad. The test results for two satellite systems, GPS and GLONASS, are presented.

Findings. The obtained results can be generalized to the following outputs. Trimble performed the best on the canopy site in terms of position quality and fix solution. Javad had the best agreement for horizontal, height, and 3D solutions between dual and single frequency processing on the multipath site. On the open spot, Leicas horizontal solution between dual and single frequency processing was the most consistent. It is challenging to state which receiver performed better in the vegetation cover.

Originality.The study aims to develop a general procedure to estimate the accuracy of different GNSS processing strategies under different environments.

Practical value. The given research has a strong hands-on background insofar as the principal stress is made on field measurements. The research results can be employed to refine the GNSS surveying workflow for open-pit mines.

Keywords: multipath, canopy site, static survey, GNSS, precision positioning

References.

1. Leick, A., Rapoport, L., & Tatarnikov, D. (2015). GPS Satellite Surveying. Wiley&Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119018612.

2. Teunissen, P.J.G., & Montenbruck, O. (Eds.). (2017). Springer Handbook of Global Navigation Satellite Systems. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42928-1.

3. Tae, H., Kim, H.-I., & Park, K.-D. (2018). Analysis of Multi-Differential GNSS Positioning Accuracy in Various Signal Reception Environments. Journal of Positioning, Navigation, and Timing, 7(1), 15-24. https://doi.org/10.11003/JPNT.2018.7.1.15.

4. Nurpeissova, M., Bitimbayev, M.Zh., Rysbekov, K.., urumbetov,., & Shults, R. (2020). Geodetic substantiation of the saryarka copper ore region. News of the National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Series of Geology and Technical Sciences, 6(444), 194-202. https://doi.org/10.32014/2020.2518-170X.147.

5. Uteshov, Y., Rysbekov, K., Galiyev, D., Nuryzbayeva, D., & Galiyev, S. (2021). Potential for increasing the efficiency of design processes for mining the solid mineral deposits based on digitalization and advanced analytics. Mining of Mineral Deposits, 15(2), 102-110. https://doi.org/10.33271/mining15.02.102.

6. Sdvyzhkova, O., Golovko, Y., Dubytska, M., & Klymenko, D. (2016). Studying a crack initiation in terms of elastic oscillations in stress strain rock mass. Mining of Mineral Deposits, 10(2), 72-77. https://doi.org/10.15407/mining10.02.072.

7. Shashenko, O.M., Sdvyzhkova, O.O., & Kovrov, O.S. (2010). Modeling of the rock slope stability at the controlled failure, 2010. Proceedings of the European Rock Mechanics Symposium Switzerland: European Rock Mechanics Symposium, EUROCK 2010. Lausanne; Switzerland, 581-584. https://doi.org/10.1201/b10550-138.

8. Kamza, A., Levin, E., Kuznetcova, I., Yerzhankyzy, A., & Orynbassarova, E. (2018). Investigation of changes in DEM, constructed from time to time data from the seabed. International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference Surveying Geology and Mining Ecology Management, SGEM, 18(2.3), 449-454. https://doi.org/10.5593/sgem2018/2.3/S11.057.

9. Jansson, P., & Persson, C.G. (2013). The effect of correlation on uncertainty estimates with GPS examples. Journal of Geodetic Science, 3(2), 111-120. https://doi.org/10.2478/jogs-2013-0016.

10. Moore, M., Watson, C., King, M., McClusky, S., & Tregoning, P. (2014). Empirical modelling of site-specific errors in continuous GPS data. Journal of Geodesy, 88(9), 887-900. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-014-0729-5.

11. Ma, L., Lu, L., Zhu, F.,Liu, W., & Lou, Y. (2021). Baseline length constraint approaches for enhancing GNSS ambiguity resolution: comparative study. GPS Solutions, 25, 40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-020-01071-1.

12. Lau, L., Tateshita, H., & Sato, K. (2015). Impact of Multi-GNSS on Positioning Accuracy and Multipath Errors in High-Precision Single-Epoch Solutions A Case Study in Ningbo China. The Journal of Navigation, 68(5), 999-1017. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0373463315000168.

13. Cai, C., He, C., Santerre, R., Pan, L., & Cui, X. (2016). A comparative analysis of measurement noise and multipath for four constellations: GPS, BeiDou, GLONASS and Galileo, Survey Review, 48, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1179/1752270615Y.0000000032.

14. Fuhrmann, T., Garthwaite, M.C., & McClusky, S. (2021). Investigating GNSS multipath effects induced by co-located Radar Corner Reflectors. Journal of Applied Geodesy, 15(3), 207-224. https://doi.org/10.1515/jag-2020-0040.

15. Schnemann, E., Becker, M., & Springer, T. (2011). A new Approach for GNSS Analysis in a Multi-GNSS and Multi-Signal Environment. Journal of Geodetic Science, 1(3), 204-214. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10156-010-0023-2.

16. Abd Rabbou, M., & El-Rabbany, A. (2015). Performance analysis of precise point positioning using multi-constellation GNSS: GPS, GLONASS, Galileo and BeiDou. Survey Review, 49(352), 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396265.2015.1108068.

17. Hamza, V., Stopar, B., & Sterle, O. (2021). Testing the Performance of Multi-Frequency Low-Cost GNSS Receivers and Antennas. Sensors, 21, 2029. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21062029.

18. Xue, C., Psimoulis, P., & Zhang, Q. (2021). Analysis of the performance of closely spaced low-cost multi-GNSS receivers. Applied Geomatics, 13, 415-435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12518-021-00361-8.

19. Omirzhanova, Z.T., Kartbayeva, K.T., Aimenov, A.T., & Jazbayev, A.T. (2017). Geodetic measurements of modern movements of the earth surface on almaty geodynamic polygon. International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference Surveying Geology and Mining Ecology Management, SGEM, 17(22), 337-346. https://doi.org/10.5593/sgem2017/22/S09.042.

20. Gilgien, M., Sprri, J., Limpach, P., Geiger, A., & Mller, E. (2014). The Effect of Different Global Navigation Satellite System Methods on Positioning Accuracy in Elite Alpine Skiing. Sensors, 14, 18433-18453. https://doi.org/10.3390/s141018433.

• < Prev
• Next >