Comparative Study of Positional Accuracies Using Three GPS Receivers

Abstract

The emergence of the Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver over the years has afforded the avenue to acquire data from various geospatial locations. This paper analyses and compares the accuracy of point positions collected using three Global Positioning System (GPS) receivers— South H66/H88, Sokkia radian IS, and ProMark 3. A field study was conducted on 5 control points within the Federal University of Technology Akure (FUTA) Campus. The One-way ANOVA test performed for the coordinates obtained from the three GPS receivers at an alpha level of 0.05 using SPSS version 16 reveals no statistically significant difference between the coordinates. Analysis of the result shows that South GPS, Sokkia GPS, and ProMark GPS receivers had horizontal misclosure values of 0.1337, 0.1625 and 0.2425 respectively, making South GPS best in obtaining accurate information onhorizontal positions. For the vertical position, misclosure values of 0.0902, 0.2336, and 0.2771 respectively were obtained for the Three GPS receivers, thereby revealing that Sokkia GPS performed optimally in obtaining heights above the ellipsoid. However, as a combination of horizontal and vertical positions (3-Dimension), Sokkia GPS performed best while ProMark GPS performed averagely and South GPS performed least. This study shows that any of the three GPS receivers can provide reasonable accurate geographic data. However, a definite conclusion remains that the selection of an optimal GPS receiver in this study for any project will largely depend upon the user’s needs and project requirements as the significant variation observed in the height coordinates should be further investigated.
 Keywords: GPS Receivers, Accuracy, Position Determination, GPS Coordinates

Establishment and Validation of Continuously Operating Reference Stations Geosystems Network on Static and Real-Time Kinematic in Benin City, Nigeria

“…Area of application includes but not limited to the following: real-time monitoring of high rising building, monitoring of dredging activities, real-time traffic flow monitoring, mining site elemental positioning system, local geoidal model integration and realization, flood and fire hazard monitoring, smart and precision farming, oil exploration and exploitation positioning, freight navigation and positioning, transport monitoring, surface and underground pipeline monitoring, disaster monitoring, logistic and delivery services, location-based services, water resources management, military and security management, surveying and mapping, construction management etc. (Nnamani and Ijaware, 2020;Peter and Oliver, 2017;Supinajaroen and Loenen, 2019;Canadian Geodetic Survey, 2017). According to Supinajaroen and Loenen, (2019) CORS network includes four main components viz: observation station, data transmission, central facility and data distribution.…”