Advertisement

Journal of Geodesy

, Volume 89, Issue 1, pp 49–71 | Cite as

Positioning configurations with the lowest GDOP and their classification

  • Shuqiang XueEmail author
  • Yuanxi Yang
Original Article

Abstract

The positioning configuration optimization is a basic problem in surveying, and the geometric dilution of precision (GDOP) is a key index to handle this problem. Simplex graphs as regular polygons and regular polyhedrons are the well-known configurations with the lowest GDOP. However, it has been proved that there are at most five kinds of regular polyhedrons. We analytically solve the GDOP minimization problem with arbitrary observational freedom to extend the current knowledge. The configuration optimization framework established is composed of the algebraic and geometric operators (including combination, reflection, collinear mapping, projection and three kinds of equivalence relations), basic properties to GDOP minimization (including continuity, combination invariant, reflection invariant, rotation invariant and collinear invariant) and the lowest GDOP configurations (including cones, regular polygons, regular polyhedrons, Descartes configuration, helical configuration and generalized Walker configuration, and their reflections and combinations). GDOP minimization criterion and D-maximization criterion both reduce to the same criterion matrices that the optimization becomes the problem for solving an underdetermined quadratic equation system. Making use of the concepts for solving underdetermined linear equation system, the concepts of base configuration (single classification) and general configuration (combined classification) are applied to the GDOP minimization to analytically solve the quadratic equation system. Firstly, the problems are divided into two subproblems by two kinds of GDOP to reveal the impact of the clock-offset on the configuration optimization, and it shows that the symmetry and uniformity play a key role in identifying the systematic errors. Then, the solution of the GDOP minimization is classified by the number of symmetry axes, that the base configurations with at least one symmetry axis and the general configurations without symmetry axis are categorized to be two large classifications. Complex configurations can be then generated by the combination and the reflection of those base configurations with simplex structure, and this indicates that completely solving the GDOP minimization needs to solve the simplex classifications primarily. Ultimately, constrained or unconstrained configuration optimization examples including GDOP distribution analysis, single-global satellite navigation system (GNSS) or multi-GNSS constellation design, configuration optimization of pseudolites and configuration design of buoys for underwater positioning are performed by employing the properties, lemmas, theorems and corollaries proposed.

Keywords

Positioning Optimization GDOP Cone Helix Satellite orbit Walker constellation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work is partly supported by National Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 41020144004, 41104018) and National High-tech R&D Program (Grant No. 2009AA121405, 2013AA122501), GFZX0301040308-06, Fujian provincial key laboratory of coast and island management technology study (201403).

References

  1. Akyildiz IF, Pompili D, Melodia T (2005) Underwater acoustic sensor networks: research challenges. Ad hoc Netw 3:257–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alcocer A, Oliveira P, Pascoal A (2006) Underwater acoustic positioning systems based on buoys with GPS. In: Proceedings of the Eighth European Conference on Underwater Acoustics 8:1–8Google Scholar
  3. Altamimi Z, Sillard P, Boucher C (2002) ITRF2000: a new release of the international terrestrial reference frame for earth science applications. J Geophys Res Solid Earth (1978–2012) 107: ETG 2-1-ETG 2–19Google Scholar
  4. Atiyah M, Sutcliffe P (2003) Polyhedra in physics, chemistry and geometry. Milan J Math 71:33–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chebotarev P (2011) A class of graph-geodetic distances generalizing the shortest-path and the resistance distances. Discret Appl Math 159:295–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cornwell JF (1997) Group theory in physics : an introduction. Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  7. Coulot D, Pollet A, Collilieux X, Berio P (2009) Global optimization of core station networks for space geodesy: application to the referencing of the SLR EOP with respect to ITRF. J Geod 84:31–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Coxeter HSM (1973) Regular polytopes, 3d/Ed. Dover Publications, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Dare P, Saleh H (2000) GPS network design: logistics solution using optimal and near-optimal methods. J Geod 74:467–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dempster A (2006) Dilution of precision in angle-of-arrival positioning systems. Electron LetT 42:291–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dufour F, Bertrand R, Sarda J, Lasserre E, Bernussou J (1995) Constellation design optimization with a dop based criterion. In: 14th International Symposium On Space Fligt DynamicsGoogle Scholar
  12. Even-Tzur G (2001) Graph theory applications to GPS networks. GPS Solut 5:31–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gilmore JP, McKern RA (1972) A redundant strapdown inertial reference unit (SIRU). J Spacecr Rockets 9:39–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Greenwalt CR, Shultz ME (1962) Principles of error theory and cartographic applications. DTIC DocumentGoogle Scholar
  15. Gustafsson F, Gunnarsson F (2005) Mobile positioning using wireless networks: possibilities and fundamental limitations based on available wireless network measurements. IEEE Signal Process Mag 22:41–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hsu DY (1994) Relations between dilutions of precision and volume of the tetrahedron formed by four satellites. In: Position location and navigation symposium, 1994, IEEE, pp 669–676Google Scholar
  17. Johnson DL (2001) Symmetries. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Katambi S, Guo J, Kong X (2002) Applications of graph theory to gross error detection for GPS geodetic control networks. Geospatial Inf Sci 5:26–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kihara M, Okada T (1984) A satellite selection method and precision for the global positioning system. Navigation 31:8–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kleusberg A, Teunissen PJG (1996) GPS for geodesy. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Langley RB (1999) Dilution of precision. GPS world 10:52–59Google Scholar
  22. Lannes A, Gratton S (2009) GNSS networks in algebraic graph theory. J Glob Position Syst 8:53–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lannes A, Teunissen PJG (2011) GNSS algebraic structures. J Geod 85:273–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lansard E, Frayssinhes E, Palmade J-L (1998) Global design of satellite constellations: a multi-criteria performance comparison of classical walker patterns and new design patterns. Acta Astronaut 42:555–564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Leick A (2004) GPS satellite survey. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Levanon N (2000) Lowest GDOP in 2-D scenarios. IEEE Proc Radar Sonar Navig 147:149–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Massatt P, Rudnick K (1990) Geometric formulas for dilution of precision calculations. Navigation 37:379–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Meyer CD (2000) Matrix analysis and applied linear algebra. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  29. Okeke F, Krumm F (1998) Graph, graph spectra and partitioning algorithms in a geodetic network structural analysis and adjustment. Bollettino di Geodesia e Scienze Affini LVII:1–24Google Scholar
  30. Pejsa AJ (1974) Optimum skewed redundant inertial navigators. AIAA J 12:899–902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Phillips AH (1984) Geometrical determination of PDOP. Navigation 31:329–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Seber GAF (2008) A matrix handbook for statisticians. Wiley-Interscience, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  33. Sharp I, Yu K, Guo YJ (2009) GDOP analysis for positioning system design. IEEE Trans Vehicular Technol 58:3371–3382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sharp I, Yu K, Hedley M (2012) On the GDOP and accuracy for indoor positioning. IEEE Trans Aerosp Electron Syst 48:2032–2051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Shim D-S, Yang C-K (2010) Optimal configuration of redundant inertial sensors for navigation and FDI performance. Sensors 10:6497–6512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sirola N (2010) Closed-form algorithms in mobile positioning: myths and misconceptions. In: Positioning navigation and communication (WPNC), 2010 7th Workshop on, pp 38–44Google Scholar
  37. Sukkarieh S (2000) Low cost, high integrity, aided inertial navigation systems for autonomous land vehicles, The University of SydneyGoogle Scholar
  38. Teunissen PJ (1989) First and second moments of non-linear least-squares estimators. J Geod 63:253–262Google Scholar
  39. Walker JG (1984) Satellite constellations. J Br Interplanet Soc 37:559–571Google Scholar
  40. West DB (2001) Introduction to graph theory, 2nd/Ed. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  41. Xu G (2007) GPS : theory, algorithms, and applications, 2nd/Ed. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  42. Xue S, Yang Y, Dang Y (2014) A closed-form of Newton method for solving over-determined pseudo-distance equations. J Geod 88:441–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Xue S, Yang Y, Dang Y, Chen W (2014) Dynamic positioning configuration and its first-order optimization. J Geod 88:127–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Xue S, Yang Y, Dang Y, Chen W (2014) A conditional equation for minimizing the GDOP of multi-GNSS constellation and its boundary solution with geostationary satellites. In: Rizos C,Willis P (eds) Proceedings of joint IAG assembly. Springer, Berlin HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  45. Yarlagadda R, Ali I, Al-Dhahir N, Hershey J (2000) GPS GDOP metric. IEEE Proc Radar Sonar Navig 147:259–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Yuksel Y (2011) Design and analysis of inertial navigation systems with skew redundant inertial sensors. UCGE, Report 20328Google Scholar
  47. Zhang M, Zhang J (2009) A fast satellite selection algorithm: beyond four satellites. IEEE J Select Topics Signal Process 3:740–747CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Geological and Surveying EngineeringChang’an UniversityXi’anChina
  2. 2.National Key Laboratory for Geo-information EngineeringXi’an Research Institute of Surveying and MappingXi’anChina
  3. 3.Chinese Academy of Surveying and MappingBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations