A comparative analysis of the performance of various GNSS positioning concepts dedicated to precision agriculture

IF 0.3 Q4 REMOTE SENSING
Wiktoria Zofia Kowalczyk, Tomasz Hadas
{"title":"A comparative analysis of the performance of various GNSS positioning concepts dedicated to precision agriculture","authors":"Wiktoria Zofia Kowalczyk, Tomasz Hadas","doi":"10.2478/rgg-2024-0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Automated guidance systems for precision agriculture rely on Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) and correction services for high accuracy and precision in field operations. This study evaluates the performance of selected GNSS positioning services for precision agriculture in a field experiment. We use three correction services: SF1, SF3, and RTK, which apply varying positioning concepts, i.e., Wide Area Differential GNSS, Precise Point Positioning, and Real-Time Kinematics, respectively. The tractor is autonomously steered along multiple predefined paths located in open-sky areas as well as near the heavy tree cover. The reference route of the vehicle is determined by classical surveying. Tractor trajectories, a SF1 and SF3 corrections, are shifted from predefined straight paths, unlike in the case for RTK. Offsets of up to several decimeters are service- and area-specific, indicating an issue with the stability of the reference frame. Additionally, the varying performance of the correction services implies that environmental conditions limit the precision and accuracy of GNSS positioning in precision agriculture. The pass-to-pass analysis reveals that SF1 improves the declared accuracy, while SF3 is less reliable in obstructed areas. RTK remains a stable source for determining position. Under favorable conditions, the pass-to-pass accuracy at 95% confidence level is better than 11.5 cm, 8.5 cm, and 4.5 cm for SF1, SF3, and RTK, respectively. In the worst-case scenario, the corresponding accuracies are: 25.5 cm, 65.5 cm, and 22.5 cm.","PeriodicalId":42010,"journal":{"name":"Reports on Geodesy and Geoinformatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reports on Geodesy and Geoinformatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/rgg-2024-0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"REMOTE SENSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Automated guidance systems for precision agriculture rely on Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) and correction services for high accuracy and precision in field operations. This study evaluates the performance of selected GNSS positioning services for precision agriculture in a field experiment. We use three correction services: SF1, SF3, and RTK, which apply varying positioning concepts, i.e., Wide Area Differential GNSS, Precise Point Positioning, and Real-Time Kinematics, respectively. The tractor is autonomously steered along multiple predefined paths located in open-sky areas as well as near the heavy tree cover. The reference route of the vehicle is determined by classical surveying. Tractor trajectories, a SF1 and SF3 corrections, are shifted from predefined straight paths, unlike in the case for RTK. Offsets of up to several decimeters are service- and area-specific, indicating an issue with the stability of the reference frame. Additionally, the varying performance of the correction services implies that environmental conditions limit the precision and accuracy of GNSS positioning in precision agriculture. The pass-to-pass analysis reveals that SF1 improves the declared accuracy, while SF3 is less reliable in obstructed areas. RTK remains a stable source for determining position. Under favorable conditions, the pass-to-pass accuracy at 95% confidence level is better than 11.5 cm, 8.5 cm, and 4.5 cm for SF1, SF3, and RTK, respectively. In the worst-case scenario, the corresponding accuracies are: 25.5 cm, 65.5 cm, and 22.5 cm.
用于精准农业的各种全球导航卫星系统定位概念的性能比较分析
用于精准农业的自动制导系统依靠全球导航卫星系统(GNSS)和校正服务来实现田间作业的高精度和高准确性。本研究在一项田间试验中评估了用于精准农业的选定全球导航卫星系统定位服务的性能。我们使用了三种校正服务:SF1、SF3 和 RTK 分别应用了不同的定位概念,即广域差分 GNSS、精确点定位和实时运动学。拖拉机沿着多条预定路径自主转向,这些路径既有开阔天空地区,也有树木茂密的地方。车辆的参考路线由经典测量法确定。与 RTK 不同的是,拖拉机轨迹(SF1 和 SF3 修正)会偏离预定义的直线路径。服务和区域的偏移量最多可达几分米,这表明参考框架的稳定性存在问题。此外,校正服务的不同性能意味着环境条件限制了精准农业中全球导航卫星系统定位的精度和准确性。逐次分析表明,SF1 提高了申报精度,而 SF3 在受阻区域的可靠性较低。RTK 仍是确定位置的稳定来源。在有利条件下,SF1、SF3 和 RTK 在 95% 置信度下的通过精度分别优于 11.5 厘米、8.5 厘米和 4.5 厘米。在最坏情况下,相应的精度分别为25.5 厘米、65.5 厘米和 22.5 厘米。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
28.60%
发文量
5
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信