<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://repozitorij.uni-lj.si/IzpisGradiva.php?id=146466"><dc:title>Low-cost dual-frequency GNSS receivers and antennas for surveying in urban areas</dc:title><dc:creator>Hamza,	Veton	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Stopar,	Bojan	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Sterle,	Oskar	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Pavlovčič Prešeren,	Polona	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:subject>geodesy</dc:subject><dc:subject>GNSS</dc:subject><dc:subject>surveying</dc:subject><dc:subject>low-cost receivers</dc:subject><dc:subject>low-cost antennas</dc:subject><dc:description>Low-cost dual-frequency global navigation satellite system (GNSS) receivers have recently been tested in various positioning applications. Considering that these sensors can now provide high positioning accuracy at a lower cost, they can be considered an alternative to high-quality geodetic GNSS devices. The main objectives of this work were to analyze the differences between geodetic and low-cost calibrated antennas on the quality of observations from low-cost GNSS receivers and to evaluate the performance of low-cost GNSS devices in urban areas. In this study, a simple RTK2B V1 board u-blox ZED-F9P (Thalwil, Switzerland) was tested in combination with a low-cost calibrated and geodetic antenna in open-sky and adverse conditions in urban areas, while a high-quality geodetic GNSS device was used as a reference for comparison. The results of the observation quality check show that low-cost GNSS instruments have a lower carrier-to-noise ratio (C/N0 ) than geodetic instruments, especially in the urban areas where the difference is larger and in favor of the geodetic GNSS instruments. The root-mean-square error (RMSE) of the multipath error in the open sky is twice as high for low-cost as for geodetic instruments, while this difference is up to four times greater in urban areas. The use of a geodetic GNSS antenna does not show a significant improvement in the C/N0 and multipath of low-cost GNSS receivers. However, the ambiguity fix ratio is larger when geodetic antennas are used, with a difference of 1.5% and 18.4% for the open-sky and urban conditions, respectively. It should be noted that float solutions may become more evident when low-cost equipment is used, especially for short sessions and in urban areas with more multipath. In relative positioning mode, low-cost GNSS devices were able to provide horizontal accuracy lower than 10 mm in urban areas in 85% of sessions, while the vertical and spatial accuracy was lower than 15 mm in 82.5% and 77.5% of the sessions, respectively. In the open sky, low-cost GNSS receivers achieve a horizontal, vertical, and spatial accuracy of 5 mm for all sessions considered. In RTK mode, positioning accuracy varies between 10–30 mm in the open-sky and urban areas, while better performance is demonstrated for the former.</dc:description><dc:date>2023</dc:date><dc:date>2023-06-02 09:30:08</dc:date><dc:type>Članek v reviji</dc:type><dc:identifier>146466</dc:identifier><dc:language>sl</dc:language></rdf:Description></rdf:RDF>
