Testing the Performance of Multi-Frequency Low-Cost GNSS Receivers and Antennas

Abstract

Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) low-cost multi-frequency receivers are argued as an alternative to geodetic receivers for many applications. Calibrated low-cost antennas recently became available on the market making low-cost instruments more comparable with geodetic ones. The main goal of this research was to evaluate the noise of low-cost GNSS receivers, to compare the positioning quality from different types of low-cost antennas, and to analyze the positioning differences between low-cost and geodetic instruments. The results from a zero baseline test indicated that the u-blox multi-frequency receiver, namely, ZED-F9P, had low noise that was at the sub-millimeter level. To analyze the impact of the antennas in the obtained coordinates, a short baseline test was applied. Both tested uncalibrated antennas (Tallysman TW3882 and Survey) demonstrated satisfactory positioning performance. The Tallysman antenna was more accurate in the horizontal position determination, and the difference from the true value was only 0.1 mm; while, for the Survey antenna, the difference was 1.0 mm. For the ellipsoid height, the differences were 0.3 and 0.6 mm for the Survey and Tallysman antennas, respectively. The comparison of low-cost receivers with calibrated low-cost antennas (Survey Calibrated) and geodetic instruments proved better performance for the latter. The geodetic GNSS instruments were more accurate than the low-cost instruments, and the precision of the estimated coordinates from the geodetic network was also greater. Low-cost GNSS instruments were not at the same level as the geodetic ones; however, considering their cost, they demonstrated excellent performance that is sufficiently appropriate for various geodetic applications.

Evaluation of Low-Cost GNSS Receiver under Demanding Conditions in RTK Network Mode

“…In addition, it was noted that the main source of height error was the use of low-cost antennas. Further tests for this receiver were performed by Hamza et al [ 24 ], who used low-cost antennas from various manufacturers to determine position using the static method. Their results allowed them to conclude that low-cost instruments give a coordinate accuracy of a few millimeters, but their precision is four times worse than that of geodetic receivers (based on adjustment of the established geodetic network).…”

Free Station Task With Drone

“…Position accuracy from manufacture is confirmed by testing this module [10]. Some studies also confirmed this claim in open space without multipath [11] [12].…”

A low-cost, mobile real-time kinematic geolocation service for engineering and research applications

“…Recently, the u-blox ZED-F9P performance was thoroughly evaluated by the University of Ljubljana in Slovenia [55] . The aim of this specific study was to evaluate the noise of low-cost GNSS receivers, compare the positioning quality from different low-cost antennas and to analyse the positioning differences between low-cost and geodetic receivers.…”