Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Publication status | E-pub ahead of print - 1 Jul 2024 |
| Event | IGS Symposium and Workshop 2024: 30 years of IGS - University of Bern (UniBE), Bern, Switzerland Duration: 1 Jul 2024 → 5 Jul 2024 https://igs.org/workshop/2024/ |
Workshop
| Workshop | IGS Symposium and Workshop 2024 |
|---|---|
| Abbreviated title | IGS2024 |
| Country/Territory | Switzerland |
| City | Bern |
| Period | 1 Jul 2024 → 5 Jul 2024 |
| Internet address |
Abstract
With support from the IGS Antenna Committee, the authors organized a “ring calibration” or “ringcal” experiment to directly compare results from multiple techniques. The campaign aims to understand technique differences, identify the degree of agreement, improve the consistency of calibration results, and develop a strategy and quality assessment of carrier phase and code calibrations.
Towards these goals, six antennas were circulated to 9 different institutions worldwide, for individual calibration. Participants shared their multi-GNSS phase calibrations in ANTEX format, as well as detailed information on their equipment and technique. This contribution reviews the current status of this campaign, and provides new comparison and evaluation results for carrier phase patterns.
Assessment of the ringcal results is obviously crucial to this campaign, yet to date there are no community-accepted comparison maths or software to validly compare and analyze PCCs. The authors developed new formulae for PCC comparison and PCO computation, and new metrics to summarize the 3D nature of each calibration. The authors also introduce new open-source software to implement these strategies and compare calibration values, numerically and graphically. We use the current software to compare the ringcal data, and call upon the community to help with additional development.
Ultimately, the impact of different PCC definitions on the IGS station positions and reference frame determination is of utmost importance. We call on the IGS community to provide feedback on preferred analysis methods and assistance in studying the impact of these PCCs on IGS products and services.
Keywords
- GNSS, antenna calibration, antenna phase centre variations, antenna phase centre offsets
Research Area (based on ÖFOS 2012)
- TECHNICAL SCIENCES
- Environmental Engineering, Applied Geosciences
- Geodesy, Surveying
- Satellite geodesy
Sustainable Development Goals
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
2024. Poster session presented at IGS Symposium and Workshop 2024, Bern, Switzerland.
Research output: Contribution to conference › Poster › Research
}
TY - CONF
T1 - Uniting Global Efforts to Calibrate GNSS Antennas
T2 - IGS Symposium and Workshop 2024
AU - Kersten, Tobias
AU - Sutyagin, Igor
AU - Bilich, Andria
AU - Schön, Steffen
PY - 2024/7/1
Y1 - 2024/7/1
N2 - Calibrations of GNSS receiver antennas to compute phase center corrections (PCCs) is an important product for reference frame determination. Research also demonstrates that PCCs affect position accuracy, troposphere modeling, and clock estimation. In recent years, multiple institutions have started calibrating receiver antennas, with a desire to contribute their PCCs to the IGS ANTEX. These institutions have a large variety of environments, equipment, software, and computation techniques. Thus it is important to verify the consistency of calibration results before the PCCs can be validly combined into a master IGS ANTEX file.With support from the IGS Antenna Committee, the authors organized a “ring calibration” or “ringcal” experiment to directly compare results from multiple techniques. The campaign aims to understand technique differences, identify the degree of agreement, improve the consistency of calibration results, and develop a strategy and quality assessment of carrier phase and code calibrations.Towards these goals, six antennas were circulated to 9 different institutions worldwide, for individual calibration. Participants shared their multi-GNSS phase calibrations in ANTEX format, as well as detailed information on their equipment and technique. This contribution reviews the current status of this campaign, and provides new comparison and evaluation results for carrier phase patterns.Assessment of the ringcal results is obviously crucial to this campaign, yet to date there are no community-accepted comparison maths or software to validly compare and analyze PCCs. The authors developed new formulae for PCC comparison and PCO computation, and new metrics to summarize the 3D nature of each calibration. The authors also introduce new open-source software to implement these strategies and compare calibration values, numerically and graphically. We use the current software to compare the ringcal data, and call upon the community to help with additional development.Ultimately, the impact of different PCC definitions on the IGS station positions and reference frame determination is of utmost importance. We call on the IGS community to provide feedback on preferred analysis methods and assistance in studying the impact of these PCCs on IGS products and services.
AB - Calibrations of GNSS receiver antennas to compute phase center corrections (PCCs) is an important product for reference frame determination. Research also demonstrates that PCCs affect position accuracy, troposphere modeling, and clock estimation. In recent years, multiple institutions have started calibrating receiver antennas, with a desire to contribute their PCCs to the IGS ANTEX. These institutions have a large variety of environments, equipment, software, and computation techniques. Thus it is important to verify the consistency of calibration results before the PCCs can be validly combined into a master IGS ANTEX file.With support from the IGS Antenna Committee, the authors organized a “ring calibration” or “ringcal” experiment to directly compare results from multiple techniques. The campaign aims to understand technique differences, identify the degree of agreement, improve the consistency of calibration results, and develop a strategy and quality assessment of carrier phase and code calibrations.Towards these goals, six antennas were circulated to 9 different institutions worldwide, for individual calibration. Participants shared their multi-GNSS phase calibrations in ANTEX format, as well as detailed information on their equipment and technique. This contribution reviews the current status of this campaign, and provides new comparison and evaluation results for carrier phase patterns.Assessment of the ringcal results is obviously crucial to this campaign, yet to date there are no community-accepted comparison maths or software to validly compare and analyze PCCs. The authors developed new formulae for PCC comparison and PCO computation, and new metrics to summarize the 3D nature of each calibration. The authors also introduce new open-source software to implement these strategies and compare calibration values, numerically and graphically. We use the current software to compare the ringcal data, and call upon the community to help with additional development.Ultimately, the impact of different PCC definitions on the IGS station positions and reference frame determination is of utmost importance. We call on the IGS community to provide feedback on preferred analysis methods and assistance in studying the impact of these PCCs on IGS products and services.
KW - GNSS
KW - antenna calibration
KW - antenna phase centre variations
KW - antenna phase centre offsets
KW - GNSS
KW - antenna calibration
KW - antenna phase centre variations
KW - antenna phase centre offsets
U2 - 10.15488/17845
DO - 10.15488/17845
M3 - Poster
Y2 - 1 July 2024 through 5 July 2024
ER -