Abstract
Double-difference (DD) analysis and precise point positioning (PPP) are two widely used processing approaches to analyze ground-based GNSS measurements. We investigate the quality of the zenith tropospheric delay (ZTD) estimates produced from both processing approaches for a regional network over 1 year and show that DD solutions contain more numerous and larger ZTD outliers. The accuracy of both DD and PPP solutions strongly depends on the data processing procedure and models. We analyze the impact of mapping functions, satellite orbit and clock products and ambiguity resolution (fixed vs. float) on ZTD estimates. The results are assessed from station position repeatability and ZTD differences with respect to the ERA5 reanalysis. As expected, mapping functions have the strongest impact, with VMF1 being more accurate than GMF. Surprisingly, the impact of the ambiguity resolution and satellite products is rather weak in the PPP solution. We speculate that this results from the fact that final satellite products have reached a high level of accuracy and that other error sources now dominate static PPP solutions. A time and frequency analysis reveal unprecedented spurious sub-daily signals in the ZTD time series, which occur at the frequency of the GPS satellite repeat period and its harmonics. This suggests that sub-daily GPS ZTD estimates contain a significant part of the residual modeling errors due to satellite orbits, tidal models, mapping functions and multipath, which still need to be improved.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The data sets used in this study are available from the corresponding author on request.
References
Bertiger W, Desai SD, Haines B, Harvey N, Moore AW, Owen S, Weiss JP (2010) Single receiver phase ambiguity resolution with GPS data. J Geod 84:327–337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-010-0371-9
Bock O, Parracho AC (2019) Consistency and representativeness of integrated water vapour from ground-based GPS observations and ERA-Interim reanalysis. Atmos Chem Phys 19:9453–9468. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-19-9453-2019
Boehm J, Niell AE, Tregoning P, Schuh H (2006) The Global Mapping Function (GMF): a new empirical mapping function based on numerical weather model data. Geophys Res Lett 33(L07):304. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL025546
Chen G, Herring TA (1997) Effects of atmospheric azimuthal asymmetry on the analysis of space geodetic data. J Geophys Res 102:20489–20502. https://doi.org/10.1029/97JB01739
Choi K, Bilich A, Larson KM, Axelrad P (2004) Modified sidereal filtering: implications for high-rate GPS positioning. Geophys Res Lett 31:L22608. https://doi.org/10.1029/2004GL021621
Dach R, Lutz S, Walser P, Fridez P (eds) (2015) Bernese GNSS software version 5.2. User manual. Astronomical Institute, University of Bern, Bern Open Publishing. https://doi.org/10.7892/boris.72297
Dee DP et al (2011) The ERA5 reanalysis: configuration and performance of the data assimilation system. Q J R Meteorol Soc 137(656):553–597. https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.828
Douša J, Vaclavovic P, Elias M (2017) Tropospheric products of the second GOP European GNSS reprocessing (1996–2014). Atmos Meas Tech 10:3589–3607. https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-3589-2017
Estey L, Meertens C (1999) TEQC: the multi-purpose toolkit for GPS/GLONASS data. GPS Solut 3:42–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/PL00012778
Grejner-Brzezinska DA, Kashani I, Wielgosz P (2005) On accuracy and reliability of instantaneous network RTK as a function of network geometry, station separation, and data processing strategy. GPS Solut 9:212–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-005-0130-1
Guerova G, Jones J, Douša J, Dick G, de Haan S, Pottiaux E, Bock O, Pacione R, Elgered G, Vedel H, Bender M (2016) Review of the state of the art and future prospects of the ground-based GNSS meteorology in Europe. Atmos Meas Tech 9(335):5385–5406. https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-9-5385-2016
Hadaś T, Hobiger T, Hordyniec P (2020) Considering different recent advancements in GNSS on real-time zenith troposphere estimates. GPS Solut. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-020-01014-w
Hersbach H et al (2020) The ERA5 global reanalysis. Q J R Meteorol Soc 146(730):1999–2049. https://doi.org/10.1002/qj.3803
Kedar S, Hajj GA, Wilson BD, Heflin MB (2003) The effect of the second order GPS ionospheric correction on receiver positions. Geophys Res Lett 30:1829. https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GL017639
King MA, Watson CS (2010) Long GPS coordinate time series: multipath and geometry effects. J Geophys Res 115:B04403. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JB006543
King MA, Watson CS, Penna NT, Clarke PJ (2008) Subdaily signals in GPS observations and their effect at semiannual and annual periods. Geophys Res Lett 35:L03302. https://doi.org/10.1029/2007GL032252
Klos A, Hunegnaw A, Teferle FN, Abraha KE, Ahmed F, Bogusz J (2018) Statistical significance of trends in Zenith Wet Delay from reprocessed GPS solutions. GPS Solut. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-018-0717-y
Kouba J (2009) Testing of global pressure/temperature (GPT) model and global mapping function (GMF) in GPS analyses. J Geod 83:199–208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-008-0229-6
Kouba J, Lahaye F, Tétreault P (2017) Precise point positioning. In: Teunissen PJ, Montenbruck O (eds) Springer handbook of global navigation satellite systems. Springer, Cham
Landskron D, Böhm J (2018) VMF3/GPT3: refined discrete and empirical troposphere mapping functions. J Geod 92:349–360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-017-1066-2
Li X, Zus F, Lu C, Ning T, Dick G, Ge M, Wickert J, Schuh H (2015) Retrieving high-resolution tropospheric gradients from multiconstellation GNSS observations. Geophys Res Lett 42:4173–4181. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL063856
Lu C, Li X, Li Z, Heinkelmann R, Nilsson T, Dick G, Ge M, Schuh H (2016) GNSS tropospheric gradients with high temporal resolution and their effect on precise positioning. J Geophys Res Atmos 121:912–930. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JD024255
Petit G, Luzum B (2010) IERS conventions 2010, IERS Technical Note, 36, 179, Verlag des Bundesamts für Kartographie und Geodäsie, Frankfurt am Main: ISBN 3-89888-989-6
Press WH, Rybicki GB (1989) Fast algorithm for spectral analysis of unevenly sampled data. Astrophys J 338:277–280. https://doi.org/10.1086/167197
Ray J, Altamimi Z, Collilieux X, van Dam T (2008) Anomalous harmonics in the spectra of GPS position estimates. GPS Solut 12:55–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-007-0067-7
Selle C, Desai S (2016) Optimization of tropospheric delay estimation parameters by comparison of GPS-based precipitable water vapor estimates with microwave radiometer measurements, IGS Workshop 2016, 8-12 February, Sydney, Australia
Stępniak K, Bock O, Wielgosz P (2018) Reduction of ZTD outliers through improved GNSS data processing and screening strategies. Atmos Meas Tech 11:1347–1361. https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-11-1347-2018
Teunissen PJG, Khodabandeh A (2015) Review and principles of PPP-RTK methods. J Geodesy 89(3):217–240. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-014-0771-3
Tregoning P, Watson C (2009) Atmospheric effects and spurious signals in GPS analyses. J Geophys Res 114:B09403. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JB006344
Vey S, Dietrich R, Fritsche M, Rülke A, Rothacher M, Steigenberger P (2006) Influence of mapping function parameters on global GPS network analyses: comparisons between NMF and IMF. Geophys Res Lett 33:L01814. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL024361
Watson C, Tregoning P, Coleman R (2006) Impact of solid Earth tide models on GPS coordinate and tropospheric time series. Geophys Res Lett 33:L08306. https://doi.org/10.1029/2005GL025538
Weiss JP, Steigenberger P, Springer T (2017) Orbit and clock product generation. In: Teunissen PJ, Montenbruck O (eds) Springer handbook of global navigation satellite systems. Springer, Cham
Wilgan K, Dick G, Zus F, Wickert J (2022) Towards operational multi-GNSS tropospheric products at GFZ Potsdam. Atmos Meas Tech 15:21–39. https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-21-2022
Zhou F, Li X, Li W, Chen W, Dong D, Wickert J, Schuh H (2017) The impact of estimating high-resolution tropospheric gradients on multi-GNSS precise positioning. Sensors 17(4):756. https://doi.org/10.3390/s17040756
Zumberge JF, Heflin MB, Jefferson DC, Watkins MM, Webb FH (1997) Precise point positioning for the efficient and robust analysis of GPS data from large networks. J Geophys Res 102(1997):5005–5017. https://doi.org/10.1029/96JB03860
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by Polish National Science Centre, grant no. UMO-2015/19/B/ST10/02758, and by the CNRS program LEFE/INSU through the project VEGAN. The publication was written as a result of the K. Stępniak’s internship in IGN-LAREG, Paris, co-financed by the European Union under the European Social Fund (Operational Program Knowledge Education Development), carried out in the project Development Program at the University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn (POWR.03.05. 00-00-Z310/17).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Stępniak, K., Bock, O., Bosser, P. et al. Outliers and uncertainties in GNSS ZTD estimates from double-difference processing and precise point positioning. GPS Solut 26, 74 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-022-01261-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-022-01261-z