And fact that horizontal error jumped along with

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: tor, but several times larger at higher latitudes. Table A-5-1 through Table A-5-4 present summary statistic estimates for single versus dualfrequency all-in-view receivers across the globe on 3 and 8 June 2000. Table A-5-1. GPS Single-Frequency All-in-View User Performance Summary, 3 June 2000 Vertical Error Statistics Horizontal Error Statistics 50% 95% 50% 95% 5.8 meters 16.8 meters 3.1 meters 8.3 meters Global Average 14.0 meters 44.0 meters 7.7 meters 19.7 meters Worst Site Page A-35 October 2001 GPS SPS Performance Standard Table A-5-2. GPS Dual-Frequency All-in-View User Performance Summary, 3 June 2000 Vertical Error Statistics Horizontal Error Statistics 50% 95% 50% 95% 2.1 meters 5.6 meters 1.6 meters 3.1 meters Global Average 3.3 meters 9.2 meters 2.1 meters 5.0 meters Worst Site Table A-5-3. GPS Single-Frequency All-in-View User Performance Summary, 8 June 2000 Vertical Error Statistics Horizontal Error Statistics 50% 95% 50% 95% 5.5 meters 16.2 meters 2.9 meters 7.8 meters Global Average 14.4 meters 39.3 meters 7.2 meters 19.2 meters Worst Site Table A-5-4. GPS Dual-Frequency All-in-View User Performance Summary, 8 June 2000 Vertical Error Statistics Horizontal Error Statistics 50% 95% 50% 95% 1.8 meters 4.3 meters 1.3 meters 2.6 meters Global Average 2.5 meters 7.1 meters 1.9 meters 4.2 meters Worst Site The most significant aspect of performance affected by single-frequency model error is time transfer. Figure A-5-19 provides an example of time transfer performance at the worst-case location from a position solution error perspective. Table A-5-5 presents a summary of single versus dual-frequency ensemble time transfer performance on 3 and 8 June 2000. Comparison of Single and Dual-Frequency Time Transfer Errors Worst Single-Frequency Performance Location, 8 June 2000 LOCAL MIDNIGHT LOCAL 100 ANALYSIS NOTES Time Transfer Error (ns) 90 - Worst Location on 8 June 2000 for All-in-View Solution: 80 70 20 Degrees South 154.30578 Degrees East 60 Dual-Frequency Ensemble Time Transfer Error Single-Frequency Ensemble Time Transfer Error 50 40 30 20 - Five degree mask angle - Sampled every minute over 24 hour sample interval - 80 cm (1σ) receiver noise - No tropo or multipath Summary Statistics 10 Dual Frequency Time Transfer Error: 6 nanoseconds (95%) 0 0 1 2 3 4 56 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Single Frequency Time Transfer Time of Day (Hours UTC) Error: 71 nanoseconds (95%) Figure A-5-19. Example Worst Site Single-Frequency Time Transfer Performance Table A-5-5. GPS End-User Ensemble Time Transfer Performance Summary Dual-Frequency 95% Single-Frequency 95% 3 June 2000 8 June 2000 3 June 2000 8 June 2000 6 nanoseconds 5 nanoseconds 46 nanoseconds 35 nanoseconds Global Average 7 nanoseconds 7 nanoseconds 119 nanoseconds 86 nanoseconds Worst Site 4 nanoseconds 4 nanoseconds 7 nanoseconds 6 nanoseconds Best Site Page A-36 October 2001 GPS SPS Performance Standard As discussed extensively throughout this document, SPS perform...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online