[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: gpsrinex test
From: |
Gary E. Miller |
Subject: |
Re: gpsrinex test |
Date: |
Tue, 5 May 2020 12:22:00 -0700 |
Yo John!
On Tue, 5 May 2020 15:15:20 -0400
John Ackermann N8UR <address@hidden> wrote:
> I did 24 hour data runs of ZED-M8P and ZED-F9P capturing raw data with
> gpspipe. Then I fed that data into both gpsrinex and the rtklib
> convbin tool and sent both off to NRCan for processing. See the
> attached summary.
Cool! How about OPUS, Trimble, etc?
> Good news -- the results are very similar, though not identical. The
> errors are in the 1 mm range so nothing to complain about.
Well within the Sigma(95%). But someone will complain...
> I believe the differences may result mainly from gpsrinex generating
> fewer epochs from the same data than convbin. Starting with the same
> nominally 24 hour raw .ubx file, gpsrinex generated 30 second epochs
> covering 23:57:29.990 while convbin generated 30 second epochs
> covering 23:59:29.990, so 4 epochs more.
AFAIK, ubxtool is processing the data just once. So the first epoch is
when gpsrinex has a complete UTC data/time. That takes a few cycles to
get at the start.
> See another message for info about the high number of rejected epochs
> in both result sets.
Pretty normal.
RGDS
GARY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary E. Miller Rellim 109 NW Wilmington Ave., Suite E, Bend, OR 97703
address@hidden Tel:+1 541 382 8588
Veritas liberabit vos. -- Quid est veritas?
"If you can't measure it, you can't improve it." - Lord Kelvin
pgpE_Tubn4amg.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- gpsrinex test, John Ackermann N8UR, 2020/05/05
- Re: gpsrinex test,
Gary E. Miller <=