<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">POS</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Positioning</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2150-850X</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/pos.2014.54013</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">POS-51701</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Earth&amp;Environmental Sciences</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Single Point Positioning Using GPS, GLONASS and BeiDou Satellites
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>ock</surname><given-names>Santerre</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Lin</surname><given-names>Pan</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Changsheng</surname><given-names>Cai</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Jianjun</surname><given-names>Zhu</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>School of Geosciences and Info-Physics, Central South University, Changsha, China</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Department of Geomatic Sciences, Laval University, Quebec City, Canada</addr-line></aff><author-notes><corresp id="cor1">* E-mail:<email>rock.santerre@scg.ulaval.ca(OS)</email>;</corresp></author-notes><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>07</day><month>11</month><year>2014</year></pub-date><volume>05</volume><issue>04</issue><fpage>107</fpage><lpage>114</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>7</day>	<month>October</month>	<year>2014</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>31</day>	<month>October</month>	<year>2014</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>24</day>	<month>November</month>	<year>2014</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  This paper introduces the Chinese BeiDou satellite system and its comparison with the actual completed American GPS and the Russian GLONASS systems. The actual BeiDou system consists of 14 satellites covering totally the Asia-Pacific area. A Single Point Positioning (SPP) test has been realised in Changsha, Hunan province, China, to show the advantage of using combined pseudorange solutions from these 3 satellite navigation systems especially in obstructed sites. The test shows that, with an elevation mask angle of 10
  &amp;#176;, the accuracy is improved by about 20% in horizontal coordinates and nearly 50% in the vertical component using the simultaneous observations of the 3 systems compared to the GPS/GLONASS solution. For the processing with an elevation mask angle of 30
  &#176;, most of the time less than 4 GPS satellites were available for the GPS-only case and no solution was possible. However, in this difficult situation, the combined GPS/GLONASS/ BeiDou solutions provided an accuracy (rms values) of about 5 m.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>BeiDou</kwd><kwd> GPS</kwd><kwd> GLONASS</kwd><kwd> Single Point Positioning</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>The American GPS system has already been used for more than 20 years. Today GPS and GLONASS receivers are used on a day to day basis, especially by the professional users, since the Russian GLONASS constellation reached again a 24-satellite constellation. Many manufacturers already offer truly GNSS receivers capable of receiving also the European Galileo and the Chinese BeiDou satellites along with SBAS (Satellite Based Augmentation System) like WAAS satellites.</p><p>Galileo is still in construction phase with 4 actual operational satellites. BeiDou Navigation Satellite System (BDS) has provided standard navigation and precise positioning services ability in the Asian-Pacific regions since November 27<sup>th</sup>, 2012 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.51701-ref1">1</xref>] . The actual BeiDou constellation consists of 14 satellites [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.51701-ref1">1</xref>] . The BeiDou full constellation should be completed by 2020 (and may be as soon as 2017).</p><p>This paper presents some SPP (Single Point Positioning) results obtained in kinematic mode in urban area using pseudorange observations from GPS (G) only, GPS and GLONASS (G/G) and combining GPS, GLONASS and BeiDou (G/G/B) satellites. The test has been realised in China where the BeiDou coverage is already completed. In addition, to simulate situations with difficult obstruction sites like in urban canyons and under tree covers (such as in forestry applications), the data have been reprocessed using a 30˚ elevation mask angle.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. BeiDou Status and Comparison with GPS and GLONASS</title><p>BeiDou Navigation Satellite System (BDS) built by China independently has got the ability applying standard navigation and precise positioning services for the Asian-Pacific regions since November 27<sup>th</sup>, 2012 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.51701-ref1">1</xref>] . The word BeiDou means Big Dipper in Chinese language.</p><p>The actual BeiDou constellation consists of 14 satellites covering the Asia-Pacific region [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.51701-ref1">1</xref>] . Five of them are geostationary (GEO) satellites (numbers 1 to 5 in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>). Five satellites have an Inclined Geosynchronous Orbit (IGSO) giving the 8 shape trajectories in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref> (numbers 6 to 10). Satellite numbers 11 to 14 (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>) are Medium Earth Orbit (MEO) satellites like GPS and GLONASS satellites but with different orbital parameter values (see <xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>).</p><p>According to China government’s plan, the full constellation of BDS will include 5 GEOs, 3 IGSOs and 27 MEOs by the end of 2020, which will provide global navigation service similar to GPS and GLONASS [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.51701-ref1">1</xref>] .</p><p><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref> presents the launch history of the actually operational BeiDou satellites. The other orbital characteristics of these satellites are given in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref> along with the comparison of the GPS, GLONASS and BeiDou systems. <xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref> content has been collected in [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.51701-ref2">2</xref>] and [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.51701-ref3">3</xref>] and the respective ICD documents.</p><p>The most important differences are the time scales and the coordinate systems used by these GNSS systems, which deserves more discussion.</p><p>The broadcast ephemerides are expressed in 3 different coordinate systems but fortunately they all are close together to the ITRF (International Terrestrial Reference Frame) at a few centimetres [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.51701-ref4">4</xref>] . The accuracy of the GPS broadcast ephemeris is better than 1 m [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.51701-ref5">5</xref>] . It is shown that GLONASS broadcast ephemerides have achie- ved stable sub-meter orbital accuracy [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.51701-ref6">6</xref>] . Finally, [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.51701-ref7">7</xref>] has showed that the broadcast ephemeris orbit accuracy of BeiDou system is better for non-GEO satellites than GEO satellites. The accuracy of BeiDou satellites orbit errors in radial direction is less than 1.5 m and 1.0 m for GEO and non-GEO satellites, respectively.</p><p>Since the time scales are different for the 3 navigation systems, one has to estimate a receiver clock parameter with respect to these time scales even if there is only a single receiver clock that assist the pseudorange (or carrier phase) observations. This means that for a Single Point Positioning with G/G/B receiver there are 6 parameters to estimate at each epoch, the 3D coordinates of the receiver (antenna) and the 3 receiver clock parameters. This is also the case in the calculation of DOP (Dilution of Precision) factors. In the future, GNSS satellites are going to broadcast precise time scale differences in their messages. In that case, only one receiver clock parameter will have to be estimated.</p><fig id="fig1"  position="float"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref></label><caption><title> The actual BeiDou constellation (as produced with Trimble Planning software)</title></caption><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/3-8501104x5.png"/></fig><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Comparison of GPS, GLONASS and BeiDou systems</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" ></th><th align="center" valign="middle" >GPS <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/3-8501104x6.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula></th><th align="center" valign="middle" >GLONASS <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/3-8501104x7.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula></th><th align="center" valign="middle" >BeiDou <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/3-8501104x8.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula></th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of sat.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >31</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14 (5 GEO, 5 IGSO, 4 MEO)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of nominal satellite</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >35 (5 GEO, 3 IGSO, 27 MEO)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Number of orbital plan</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3 (MEO)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Inclinaison plan</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >55˚</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >65˚</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >55˚ (MEO &amp; IGSO)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Altitude (km)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20,180</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19,100</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >21,530 (MEO)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Orbital period</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11 h 58 m</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11 h 16 m</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12 h 50 m (MEO)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Time scale</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >GPST UTC(USNO)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >UTC(SU)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >BDT UTC(NTSC)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Coord. system</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >WGS 84</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >PZ 90</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >CGCS 2000</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Ephemerides</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Kepler Elements and temporal variations</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Geocentric Cartesian Coord. and temporal variations</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Kepler Elements and temporal variations</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Ephemeris update</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >every 2 h</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >every 30 min</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >every 1 h</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Message length</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.5 min</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.5 min</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12 min (and 6 min)</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table2" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref></label><caption><title> Operational BeiDou satellite launch dates and longitude of GEO and IGSO orbits. Source: http://gpsworld.com/the-almanac/</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >GEO</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >C1</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >C2</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >C3</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >C4</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >C5</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Longitude</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >140˚E</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >80˚E</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >111˚E</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >160˚E</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >59˚E</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Launched</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16 Jan 2010</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >25 Oct. 2012</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2 June 2010</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >31 Oct. 2010</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24 Feb. 2012</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >IGSO</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >C6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >C7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >C8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >C9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >C10</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Longitude</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >118˚E</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >118˚E</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >118˚E</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >95˚E</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >95˚E</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Launched</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >31 July 2010</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >17 Dec. 2010</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9 Apr. 2011</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >26 July 2011</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1 Dec. 2011</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >MEO</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >C11</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >C12</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >C13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >C14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Launched</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29 Apr. 2012</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29 Apr. 2012</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18 Sep. 2012</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18 Sep. 2012</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>The GNSS satellites are (are going) to broadcast on 3 frequencies, all of them close to the actual L1, L2 and L5 GPS frequency bands. The description of the codes and carriers used by GPS, GLONASS and BeiDou satellites can be found in the official ICD documents and several Internet sites (see the list of Internet sites at the end of this paper).</p></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Test Description</title><p>A kinematic test was conducted on the campus road of the Central South University (N28.17˚, E112.92˚, H: 60 m), China, on December 22, 2013. The test was carried out from 7:45 to 9:15 GPS time (15:45 to 17:15 local time) for a duration of one and a half hour.</p><p>A car carried a Trimble NetR9 receiver with a Trimble Zephyr Model 2 geodetic antenna which allows simultaneous tracking of GPS, GLONASS and BeiDou signals. The sampling rate was 1 s and the observation elevation mask angle was 10˚ (even though the obstructions did not always permit the observation reception above 10˚). The used receiver can track code and phase observations on 3 frequencies but for the test purpose (Single Point Positioning: SPP), we only used single frequency code observations. Several loops of the same trajectory have been repeated (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>). Each loop lasted about 5 minutes and the length of each loop was about 0.8 km. A car stop has been done between 8:30 and 9:00. The road is very close to mature trees and campus building (see <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>) as typical urban conditions.</p><p>A similar receiver with a TRM55971.00 antenna with a radome was set up on the roof of the Mining Building of the Central South University as a base station to determine the reference coordinates of the rover moving vehicle from a RTK solution. The distance between the base and rover stations was less than 1 km. Most of the time, the RTK have ambiguity-fixed solutions providing a few centimetre positioning accuracy. But for some parts of the loops, the floated ambiguity solutions degraded the position accuracy to a few decimetres. For the purpose of SPP (Single Point Positioning) comparison, those reference positioning accuracies are still acceptable.</p><p><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref> presents the satellite configurations at the beginning (7:40) and at the end (9:20) of the kinematic test, respectively (without the obstructions taken into account). The blue and the red-dot circles correspond to the 10˚ and 30˚ elevation mask angle, respectively. The GPS, GLONASS and BeiDou satellites are identified with circles of different colors in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>.</p><fig id="fig2"  position="float"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref></label><caption><title> Kinematic test trajectory on the CSU campus</title></caption><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/3-8501104x9.png"/></fig><fig-group id="fig3"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref></label><caption><title> Receiver and antenna of the rover (left) and the base station (right).</title></caption><fig id ="fig3_1"><label></label><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/3-8501104x10.png"/></fig><fig id ="fig3_2"><label></label><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/3-8501104x11.png"/></fig></fig-group><fig id="fig4"  position="float"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref></label><caption><title> Satellite polar plots at the beginning (left) and at the end (right) of the kinematic test. Source: Trimble GNSS Planning software</title></caption><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/3-8501104x12.png"/></fig></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Processing Strategies of the GNSS Code Observations</title><p>The Single Point Positioning (SPP) solutions has been done at every epoch (each 1 second) using only L1/G1/ B1 code (pseudorange) observations from GPS, GLONASS and BeiDou satellites, respectively. The data processing has been realized with the Multi-GNSS Integrated Positioning Software for SPP (MIPS-SPP) software developed and coded at Central South University (CSU).</p><p>Klobuchar model [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.51701-ref8">8</xref>] along with the associated GPS broadcast coefficients have been used to correct L1 code observations for the ionospheric effects for GLONASS and BeiDou satellites as well. During the test, the TEC values reached about 50 TECU (Trimble Planning software). This value of 50 TECU (Total Electron Content Unit) corresponds to an 8 m delay (before corrections) for the L1 code observations for a satellite at the zenith. The tropospheric corrections have been taken into account with the Saastomoinen model [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.51701-ref9">9</xref>] using standard meteorological values.</p><p>The satellite positions and clock error corrections have been calculated using their respective broadcast ephe- meris and satellite clock coefficients. Relativistic effects have been corrected and time group delays (<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/3-8501104x13.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula>) or differential code biases (DCB) have been properly applied for single-frequency code observations.</p><p>The weight P of a single satellite is assigned dependent on its elevation angle E [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.51701-ref10">10</xref>] , as shown below:</p><disp-formula id="scirp.51701-formula920"><graphic  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/3-8501104x14.png"  xlink:type="simple"/></disp-formula><p>The standard deviations <inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/3-8501104x15.png" xlink:type="simple"/></inline-formula> of the GPS, GLONASS and BDS code observations were set to 0.3 m, 0.6 m and 0.3 m, respectively, i.e., their initial weight is 1:4:1 in combined G/G/B Single Point Positioning solutions. The readers can refer to [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.51701-ref11">11</xref>] and [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.51701-ref12">12</xref>] for an analysis of the standard deviations of BDS code observations. As mentioned above a receiver clock parameter has to be estimated, at every epoch, with respect to each system time scale.</p><p>To simulate heavy urban conditions, the processing has been repeated with a 30˚ elevation mask angle.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Analysis of the Test Results</title><p>The results are presented for the 10˚ elevation mask angle on the left and the 30˚ mask angle on the right in the following Figures and Tables. Keep in mind that due to the obstructions it does not mean that the satellite observations were possible down to 10˚ elevation angle. For each mask angle the results are presented for 1) GPS only (G), 2) GPS and GLONASS (G/G) and 3) GPS, GLONASS and BeiDou (G/G/B) observations.</p><p>Let us note that for the 30˚ mask angle and for the GPS only case, just a few epochs had more than 4 satellites available, so this solution is not presented at all. This fact effectively shows the advantage of using GNSS receiver under severe obstructed conditions like in urban canyons or under forest covers.</p><p><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref> and <xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref> present the DOP values in the East (E), North (N) and Vertical (V) components and the Position Dilution Of Precision (PDOP) values for each processing cases along with the number of observed satellites. As expected, the values get better with the increase of the number of observed satellites. The stable DOP values between 8:30 and 9:00 GPS time is explained by the fact that the car was stationary during this period, so the obstructions do no change continuously during that interval. The numbers in parentheses in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref> indicate the improvement from the previous solution when the satellites of an additional constellation are added to the solution. Also, from a purely geometrical point of view, the DOP values increased (and the number of satellites decreased) as the elevation mask angle increased from 10˚ to 30˚.</p><p><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref> and <xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref> show the position errors (with respect to the RTK solution as a reference) in the East (E), North (N) and Vertical (V or Up) components for each processing cases. <xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref> presents the RMS of the residuals for each constellation/system for the G/G/B solution for a 10˚ and 30˚ elevation mask angles, respectively.</p><p>Obvious offset in the North direction can be due to multipath effect from the buildings and trees along the road (trajectory) which is mainly in the East-West direction (see <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>). The improvement in the horizontal component reaches 10% with the addition of GLONASS satellites and another 20% more with the further addition of BeiDou satellites. The improvement in the vertical component was not really significant with the addition of GLONASS satellites but with the addition of BeiDou satellites the vertical improvement reached about 50%.</p><p><xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref> shows an improvement of positioning accuracy in East and North components with a 30˚ mask angle compared to the 10˚ mask angle results, despite the fact that the EDOP and NDOP values get worse from 10˚ to 30˚ elevation mask angle (see <xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref>). The reason may be that the satellites with low elevation angle which are seriously affected by the tree environments and produce larger multipath, noise and code residuals (see values in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref>), are excluded when the elevation mask angle is set to 30˚. For the vertical component the RMS value is</p><fig-group id="fig5"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref></label><caption><title> The DOP values and the number of satellites during the kinematic test for a 10˚ (left) and a 30˚ (right) elevation mask angles.</title></caption><fig id ="fig5_1"><label></label><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/3-8501104x16.png"/></fig><fig id ="fig5_2"><label></label><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/3-8501104x17.png"/></fig></fig-group><table-wrap id="table3" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref></label><caption><title> <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref> averages values for the complete test (the numbers in parentheses indicate the % of improvement in comparison to the previous solution)</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" ></th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >10˚ elevation mask angle</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >30˚ elevation mask angle</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >G</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >G/G</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >G/G/B</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >G</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >G/G</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >G/G/B</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >EDOP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.6 (45%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.4 (33%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >-</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.7 (30%)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >NDOP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.8 (43%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.5 (38%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >-</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.6 (54%)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >VDOP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.7 (32%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.2 (29%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >-</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.3 (41%)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >PDOP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.0 (35%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.4 (30%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >-</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.4 (44%)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Num. Sat.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.8 (83%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >19.4 (80%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >-</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14.1 (86%)</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><fig-group id="fig6"><label><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref></label><caption><title> The East, North and Vertical (Up) position errors during the kinematic test for a 10˚ (left) and a 30˚ (right) elevation mask angles.</title></caption><fig id ="fig6_1"><label></label><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/3-8501104x18.png"/></fig><fig id ="fig6_2"><label></label><graphic mimetype="image"   position="float"  xlink:type="simple"  xlink:href="http://html.scirp.org/file/3-8501104x19.png"/></fig></fig-group><table-wrap id="table4" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref></label><caption><title> <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref> RMS values for the complete test (the numbers in parentheses indicate the % of improvement in comparison to the previous solution)</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" ></th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >10˚ elevation mask angle</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >30˚ elevation mask angle</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Unit: m</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >G</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >G/G</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >G/G/B</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >G</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >G/G</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >G/G/B</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >RMS E</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.1 (13%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.1 (1%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >-</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.8 (22%)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >RMS N</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.8 (5%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.3 (22%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >-</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.1 (0%)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >RMS V</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.2 (3%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.8 (48%)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >-</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.1 (48%)</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table5" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref></label><caption><title> RMS residuals for each constellation for the GPS/GLONASS/BeiDou solution for a 10˚ (left) and a 30˚ (right) elevation mask angles</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Mask angle</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >10˚</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >30˚</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GPS sat.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.8 m</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.1 m</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >GLO sat.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.1 m</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.4 m</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >BDS sat.</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.8 m</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.2 m</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>larger for the 30˚ elevation mask angle solution but remains within the expected accuracy of a SPP solution even with a 30˚ elevation mask angle, typical of heavy obstructed conditions (like in urban canyons and under tree covers).</p><p>Finally, let us note that the RMS values of the code observations residuals of the BeiDou satellites are comparable to the one associated to GPS satellites. This is another indication of the good quality of the newly developed Chinese satellite navigation system.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>6. Conclusions</title><p>The test shows that, with an elevation mask angle of 10˚, the accuracy is improved by about 20% in horizontal coordinates and nearly 50% in the vertical component using the simultaneous observations of the GPS/GLONASS/ BeiDou systems compared to the GPS/GLONASS solution. For the processing with an elevation mask angle of 30˚, most of the time less than 4 GPS satellites were available for the GPS-only case and no solution was possible. However, in this difficult situation, the combined GPS/GLONASS/BeiDou solutions provided an accuracy (rms values) of about 5 m.</p><p>The use of GNSS receivers will be the standard in the future even for low cost receivers. Some intelligent phones have already the BeiDou option included. The addition of satellites from Galileo, in construction, will further improve the accuracy, the coverage and the reliability of GNSS positioning, especially in obstructed observation sites.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>The first author would like to acknowledge Laval University and Central South University for the partial funding of his sabbatical leave of absence in summer 2014 and the CSU GNSS Team for the fruitful discussions about BeiDou satellite systems. This research work has been supported by the freedom exploration program of Central South University (No. 2014zzts246).</p></sec><sec id="s8"><title>Other Internet Sites</title><p>GPS (official site): http://www.gps.gov/governance/excom/</p><p>GLONASS (official site in English): http://www.glonass-ianc.rsa.ru/en/</p><p>BeiDou (official site in English): http://en.beidou.gov.cn/</p><p>Interface Control Documents for GPS: http://www.losangeles.af.mil/library/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=9364</p><p>Interface Control Document for GLONASS: http://gge.unb.ca/Resources/GLONASS%20ICD_2008_51en.pdf</p><p>Interface Control Document for BeiDou: http://www2.unb.ca/gge/Resources/beidou_icd_english_ver2.0.pdf</p><p>MGEX (IGS Multi-GNSS Experiment): http://igs.org/mgex/</p><p>Trimble GNSS Planning software: http://www.trimble.com/GNSSPlanningOnline/#/SatelliteVisibility</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.51701-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Gao, Z., Zhang, H., Zhao, Q., Hu, Z. and Shen, W. (2014) Analyzing the Impact of Satellite Clock-TGD Coupled Error on BDS Positioning Accuracy. In: Sun, J., et al., Eds., China Satellite Navigation Conference (CSNC) 2014 Proceedings: Volume I, Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering Volume 303, 267-278. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54737-9_24</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.51701-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bhatta, B. (2011) Global Navigation Satellite Systems. CRC Press, Boca Raton.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.51701-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Jing, Y., Zeng, A. and Xu, T. (2014) Fusion Positioning of BDS/GPS Based on Variance Component Estimation and Its Application for Geodetic Control Network. In: Sun, J., et al., Eds., China Satellite Navigation Conference (CSNC) 2014 Proceedings: Volume I, Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering Volume 303, 115-123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54737-9_12</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.51701-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Navipedia-ESA (2014). http://www.navipedia.net/index.php/Main_Page</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.51701-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">IGS-International GNSS Service (2014). http://igscb.jpl.nasa.gov/</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.51701-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Heng, L., Gao, G.X., Walter, T. and Enge, P. (2011) Statistical Characterization of GLONASS Broadcast Ephemeris Errors. Proceedings of the 24th International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of the Institute of Navigation (ION GNSS 2011), Portland, September 2011, 3109-3117.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.51701-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Chen, L., Jiao, W., Huang, X., Geng, C., Ai, L., Lu, L. and Hu, Z. (2013) Study on Signal-In-Space Errors Calculation Method and Statistical Characterization of BeiDou Navigation Satellite System. China Satellite Navigation Conference (CSNC) 2013 Proceedings, Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, 243, 423-434. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37398-5_39</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.51701-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Klobuchar, J. (1987) Ionospheric Time-Delay Algorithms for Single-Frequency GPS Users. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, AES-23, 325-331. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TAES.1987.310829</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.51701-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Saastamoinen, J. (1973) Contribution to the Theory of Atmospheric Refraction. Bulletin Géodésique, 107, 13-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02522083</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.51701-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gerdan, G.P. (1995) A Comparison of Four Methods of Weighting Double Difference Pseudorange Measurements. The Australian Surveyor, 40, 60-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00050334.1995.10558564</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.51701-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Cai, C., Pan, L. and Gao, Y. (2014) A Precise Weighting Approach with Application to Combined L1/B1 GPS/Bei-Dou Positioning. Journal of Navigation, 67, 911-925.  
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0373463314000320</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.51701-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Cai, C., Gao, Y., Pan, L. and Dai, W. (2014) An Analysis on Combined GPS/COMPASS Data Quality and Its Effect on Single Point Positioning Accuracy under Different Observing Conditions. Advances in Space Research, 54, 818-829. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2013.02.019</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>