Tag: RTK

  • Septentrio, Altus Showcase High-Performance RTK at ION GNSS+

    Septentrio and Altus will be presenting their high-performance RTK systems at ION GNSS+ 2014. Attendees are invited to learn more at:

    • The Triple-frequency Multi-system RTK Engine for Challenging Environments (Session A1 room 18, Wed. 9/10 @11:48)
    • Gap Bridging in Precise Point Positioning (Session B6 room 19, Fri. 9/12 @3:20)

    High-performance RTK provides accurate positioning

    • in urban environments or under dense canopies
    • while suffering high ionosphere activities or
    • when coping with sparse networks
    • for maintaining a smooth transition during outages

    Plus, there is no baseline impact, even at greater than 40 kilometers. Visit booth 318/320 in the Exhibit Hall to learn more about the technology behind the performance.

  • Intel’s Mini-PC: A Cheap Server for an RTK Base

    I’ve written this many, many times in the past eight years that I’ve written for GPS World magazine, but I have to write it again — this is an exciting time for GNSS!

    For me, high-precision GNSS is particularly exciting. I’ve been traveling like crazy, and involved in a number of really fun projects that incorporate high-precision GNSS. Of course, on these various projects I usually incorporate many types of technologies that support GNSS, such as computing, communications, power, and mechanical.

    Along those lines, I find myself more and more frequently setting up custom RTK bases for companies because they’re getting cheaper and cheaper, regardless of the fact that  there are an increasing number of publicly available real-time kinematic (RTK) base stations. Setting one up doesn’t just involve plugging power into a RTK base receiver and hitting the on/off switch. As I mentioned above, setting up an RTK base involves several different types of technologies. Sometimes, I set up a desktop computer next to the RTK base to act as a server to manage the RTK GNSS base and communications (both network and RTK communications) equipment.

    In your mind, when you think of a desktop computer, you probably envision something that occupies 2-3 square feet (~one square meter) of desktop space, along with a keyboard and monitor. So, a consideration when deploying an RTK base is finding desk space somewhere in the user’s office to accommodate the desktop PC and other equipment.

    Recently, I took a different approach. I found (actually, my client found) an incredibly small computer to be our server. Just as high-precision GNSS receivers are getting smaller and smaller, so are computers. The Intel Mini-PC measures 4 inches x 4 inches (10.16 x 10.16 centimeters) and has no hard disk. It uses solid-state drive (SSD) memory for storage. SSD technology is still somewhat expensive ($1+ per gigabyte), but it is small compared to a classical disk drive, and doesn’t have any moving parts. Furthermore, the Mini-PC has ethernet ports: when we connect a network cable to it, we could access the Mini-PC via Remote Desktop. That meant we didn’t need a keyboard or monitor. The Mini-PC had all the power we needed, and we could load any sort of control software on it because it runs the standard Windows 7 (or 8) operating system. Last but not least, the Mini-PC costs only $149. However, you need to add memory, SSD, and so on, so the real cost is ~$400 depending on your configuration. While not cheaper than similarly performing “boxes” available, it’s certainly one of the smallest.

    Intel Mini-PC Measuring 4" x 4"
    Intel Mini-PC Measuring 4″ x 4″

    In fact, it’s so small that we stuffed it inside a 14” x 12” electronics enclosure box along with the RTK GNSS base and other network equipment, and hung it out of sight on a closet wall. No desktop space required. Without stretching your mind much, you can see where desktop computing is headed; very small and inexpensive enough to be dedicated to specific tasks. Think about this and then consider the Internet of Things concept. It’s very exciting.

    More RTK on Mobile Devices

    Later this week I’ll be experimenting with RTK on mobile devices with the CRTN (California Real Time Network), a collection of 330 RTK bases located throughout California. I’ll be using a Panasonic ToughPad running ArcGIS Mobile (and maybe ArcPad) and an iPad using a cloud-based mapping service. The latter is particularly interesting because there are lots of cloud-based GIS data collection apps on the market and under development. Specifically, there’s a lot of subscription-based, cloud-based software. The challenge is that they are even less geodesy-intelligent than the “professional grade” GIS data collection software on the market. In other words, they read coordinates (NMEA format) from GNSS receivers and feed them directly into their app. No datum transformations are provided, neither horizontal nor vertical. That’s going to be a problem.

    FCC Levies Record Fine Against Chinese Supplier of GPS and Mobile Phone Jammers

    The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) announced that it plans to issue the largest fine in its history against C.T.S. Technology Co., Limited, a Chinese electronics manufacturer and online retailer, for allegedly marketing 285 models of signal jamming devices to U.S. consumers for more than two years. The FCC plans to levy a $34.9 million fine against CTS. The FCC reported that CTS sold 10 high-powered signal jammers to undercover FCC personnel.

    The FCC is asking people to report the sale or use of an illegal jammer by contacting the FCC Enforcement Bureau through the FCC online complaint portal, or by calling 1-888-CALL-FCC (or 1-888-225-5322). To voluntarily relinquish a signal jammer, e-mail [email protected]. Additional information, including the FCC Consumer Alert on the jamming prohibitions and the FCC Enforcement Advisory to retailers regarding the marketing of illegal signal jammers, is available at www.fcc.gov/jammers.

    You can view the FCC enforcement action against C.T.S. here.

    Satellite Launch Pads are Warming Up

    Two GPS Block IIF satellites, one launched in February and one launched in May, were set healthy in the past three weeks, making a total of six IIF GPS satellites in orbit broadcasting on three civil frequencies; L1, L2C, L5.

    On July 31, the seventh GPS IIF satellite is scheduled for launch, followed by an October 2014 scheduled launch of the eighth GPS IIF satellite.

    On June 14, Russia launched a GLONASS-M satellite. It has not been set healthy yet. There are a total of 24 healthy GLONASS satellites in orbit. You can check the current status of GLONASS satellites here.

    On August 22, Europe is scheduled to launch the first two Galileo FOC (Full Operational Capability) satellites to add to the four test satellites in orbit that will be integrated into the final operational constellation. A second pair of Galileo satellites is scheduled for launch in November 2014. These are projected dates and subject to slippage.

    Dorese and Milena rest side by side in  clean room S1A.
    Galileo Satellites in the Clean Room

    Live Webinar from the Esri International User Conference on July 17

    In a GPS World first, we’ll be producing a live Webinar from the Esri International User Conference next month on Thursday, July 17 @ 10 am Pacific Time in the exhibit hall at the San Diego Convention Center. Of course, the webinar will be focus on one of the hottest topics, high-precision GNSS on mobile devices; from iPads to Android tablets to smartphones.

    Tune in or join us live from the exhibit hall floor! Register here.

    Thanks, and see you next month.

    Follow me on Twitter at https://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • Leica Releases Viva GNSS Unlimited Series

    Leica Releases Viva GNSS Unlimited Series

    Leica_Viva_GS100-W
    Leica Viva GS100

    The Leica Viva GNSS Unlimited Series, available in August, will allow customers to make a safe investment with future-proof GNSS receivers and smart antennas, Leica Geosystems said in announcing the new series. With a flexible design, the Viva GNSS sensors can be upgraded for maximum performance whenever needed.

    The Leica Viva GNSS range fully supports the Chinese BeiDou navigation system. It can even provide BeiDou-only and GLONASS-only high-precision positioning. The unlimited series includes a future upgrade to a GNSS board with more than 500 channels and will serve users’ needs beyond 2020, the company said. Outages of real-time kinematic (RTK) communication links are bridged for up to 10 minutes with SmartLink to increase centimeter position availability in areas where RTK communications links are unstable.

    Leica Viva GS15
    Leica Viva GS15

    The Leica Viva GNSS Unlimited Series can be upgraded to the full range of GNSS signals. The sensors’ future-proof design is equipped for GNSS modernization, providing users with confidence in their investment. The series embraces the future-proof concept by including an upgrade to a GNSS board with more than 500 channels. To fully guarantee future proof GNSS, board exchanges are inevitable because any likely modifications in GNSS signals require a new GNSS ASIC (Application Specific Integrated Circuit).

    Leica SmartTrack technology guarantees accurate signal tracking, while SmartCheck technology evaluates and verifies RTK measurements to ensure reliable results. Both SmartTrack and SmartCheck technologies have been extended to support the BeiDou GNSS. BeiDou reached full operational regional capability in 2012 and has a total of 14 satellites. Leica Viva GNSS also supports features like BeiDou-only and GLONASS-only positioning to accommodate governmental regulations.

    In addition, Leica Geosystems now offers SmartLink, a correction service delivered via satellite for uninterrupted centimeter positioning in areas where RTK communication links are unstable.

    Leica Viva GS14
    Leica Viva GS14

    All Leica Viva GNSS products exceed the toughest environmental specifications, going beyond industrial standards such as IP68. This ensures flawless performance even in the most challenging environments. Applications for the range include construction and field surveying, mining, seismic work in dense forest, desert or mountains, as well as demanding work in extreme heat at 65°C (149 °F) or at extreme latitudes at -30°C (-22 °F). Premium precision and attention to detail ensure that the Leica Viva GNSS products can be trusted throughout the complete product lifetime.

    Leica Viva offers a complete range of unlimited GNSS and TPS solutions made with Swiss precision, combining the highest accuracy with maximum versatility and optimized data flow. Leica Viva solutions include Active Customer Care (ACC) with an expansive organization of knowledgeable professionals to provide valuable support, training and service whenever needed. Combined with innovative services such as online support in the field with Leica Active Assist and an instant data exchange between field and office with Leica Exchange, Leica Viva enables continuous productivity.


    Webinar on Multi-GNSS OEM

    Thursday, June 5
    10 a.m. PT / 1 p.m. ET / 5 p.m. GMT

    GPS World’s upcoming webinar features an expert panel with informed viewpoints from GNSS high-precision and mass-market manufacturing, signal simulation, and alternative PNT providers. Registration is free.

  • Intuicom Announces Next-Generation RTK Bridge-X with Wi-Fi

    Intuicom Announces Next-Generation RTK Bridge-X with Wi-Fi

    Intuicom RTK Bridge-X.
    Intuicom RTK Bridge-X.

    Intuicom, Inc., a wireless data solutions provider for the survey, machine control and precision agriculture industries, has added to its line of RTK Bridge solutions with the Intuicom RTK Bridge-X.

    Along with providing reliable access to RTK corrections, the RTK Bridge-X features a Wi-Fi hotspot. Users can connect other Wi-Fi devices such as laptops, tablets and smartphones and access the Internet via the RTK Bridge-X’s cellular connection. Also new with the RTK Bridge-X is cable-free configuration. Configuration can now be accomplished through a wireless connection using any web browser.

    Users can then access email, send files, and perform other Internet-based tasks using the connection provided by the RTK Bridge-X. With new Remote Access, the RTK Bridge-X can be reached over the Internet from anywhere.

    The RTK Bridge-X also comes with internal GPS. Users can choose between an internal license-free 900-MHz radio, industry-standard UHF radio, or no radio.

    Other improvements include a real-time cellular signal strength indicator on the re-designed front panel, as well as an Ethernet port that can be used for configuration or Internet connectivity. A numerical LED display now shows which of the four configurable profiles is active as well as which radio channel is selected. Bluetooth connections are also supported.

    Like all Intuicom Bridge Products, The RTK Bridge-X is designed for easy setup and operation and is compatible with all major cellular carriers and equipment manufacturers including Leica Geosystems, Trimble, and others.

    RTK-Bridge-X-and-buttons-W

  • Altus Announces Second-Generation GNSS RTK Rover

    Altus Announces Second-Generation GNSS RTK Rover

    The Altus APS-NR2.
    The Altus APS-NR2.

    Altus Positioning Systems has introduced its new APS-NR2 RTK surveying receiver. The new product is being previewed at the 2014 Geo Business conference and exhibition in London May 28-29, and will be commercially available in July.

    “The APS-NR2 provides a powerful combination of high GNSS RTK performance, light weight, low power consumption, versatile Quad-band modem, remote Web-based access and connectivity with Esri’s cloud-based platform,” said Neil Vancans, Altus president and CEO. “The result is a versatile product designed to enhance productivity and minimize downtime in the field for a wide range of surveying and geolocation jobs.”

    The APS-NR2 is Altus’ second-generation RTK rover, building on the highly successful APS-3 product series. It features an easily accessible on-board web interface and integrated Wi-Fi for easy remote configuration and status monitoring, as well as Bluetooth for real-time data streaming, providing true cable-free operation. In parallel to RTK positioning, data can be recorded on a removable 2-GB SD memory card for post-processing.

    The APS-NR2 is built around a low-power 132-channel GPS/GLONASS L1/L2/L2C SBAS receiver, which offers robust RTK performance, as well as DGPS capability. The internal 3.5G Quad-band GSM/GPRS/EDGE cellular modem supports RTK network connectivity. Dual internal cellular antennae ensure a positive signal lock and minimize disruptions due to dropped calls.

    The new Altus receiver comes with two Li-Ion batteries. It has a built-in USB battery charger, as well as a separate two-bay external charger. The batteries are hot-swappable, allowing uninterrupted productivity on the job.

    With Altus’ open-architecture philosophy, the user has a choice of data collector software from Carlson SurvCE, MicroSurvey FIELDGenius or direct interface to Esri ArcGIS Online, as well as proprietary customer-developed software.

    The APS-NR2 doesn’t sacrifice essential processing power or connectivity and still weighs only 0.7 kg (1.5 lbs). The compact receiver is just 69 mm (2.7 in) high and 167 mm (6.6 in) in diameter. The rugged unit is waterproof to IP67 and has an operating temperature range of -40 to +85°C.

  • NovAtel Launches OEM617D Single-Card GNSS Receiver with RTK

    NovAtel Launches OEM617D Single-Card GNSS Receiver with RTK

    NovAtel's OEM617D receiver.
    NovAtel’s OEM617D receiver.

    NovAtel Inc. has released the OEM617D receiver, a compact, dual-antenna, dual-frequency, single-card receiver with NovAtel’s ALIGN heading functionality and RT-2 Real Time Kinematic (RTK) GNSS positioning technology, in dynamic and static environments.

    NovAtel made the announcement at AUVSI’s Unmanned Systems 2014, being held this week in Orlando, Florida.

    The OEM617D offers complete dual-frequency operation with GPS, GLONASS, and BeiDou signals maximizing GNSS availability globally. It also tracks Galileo, SBAS, and QZSS. It is designed for rotary-wing aircraft, marine, autonomous ground vehicle, and other applications requiring precise position and heading accuracy.

    NovAtel’s advanced firmware and correction capabilities enhance the positioning performance of the OEM617D receiver, the company said. Firmware is field upgradable and scalable, depending on application needs. In addition to RTK centimeter-level real-time positioning, and ALIGN precise heading and relative positioning, the OEM617D offers GLIDE for decimeter-level pass-to-pass accuracy and RAIM for increased GNSS pseudorange integrity.

    “We continually listen to our customers to ensure we develop new innovations that address their performance requirements and ensure their competitive success in the marketplace,” said Cameron Henderson, NovAtel’s product manager, Core Cards. “With the release of OEM617D, we’ve delivered robust and accurate positioning on our smallest form factor, making it a great solution for the unmanned market.”

  • UAV Shipboard Landing with RTK

    plane_landing-O

    Carrier Phase Compensates for Wind and Wave Motion

    Limited landing area as well as interference due to wind disturbance and wave motion make shipboard landings of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) extremely difficult. Use of UAVs at sea can enhance the efficiency of intelligence gathering and surveillance, and could also increase long-range air-strike capability. To successfully land aircraft in such a challenging environment requires a high-precision navigation system; this prototype applies RTK measurements.

    By Chiu-Jung Huang and Shau-Shiun Jan

    UAVs can perform functions such as surveying, imaging, detection, sensor work, rescue, and geographic information systems (GIS) data collection. The exploitation of UAVs with portable launching and recovery systems using an automatic guidance equipment can enhance their flexibility in many practical applications. In particular, UAVs can achieve great effectiveness from launch and recovery aboard ships at sea. However, the landing area is narrow on a ship, and interference related to the maritime environment due to wind disturbance and wave motions varies greatly, making maritime UAV landings quite difficult. Recovering these aircraft in such a rapid-dynamic environment requires a high-precision UAV navigation system.

    Generally, UAVs use a differential GPS (DGPS) aiding station to continuously transmit positioning correction information during landing approach; this method can provide about 0.7 to 1-meter accuracy. However, shipboard landings require more stringent accuracy. According the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS), the requirements of shipboard landing include vertical accuracy on the order of 0.3 meters, and the requirement for the vertical protection level is 1.1 meters. To fulfill these accuracy requirements, we have chosen the real-time kinematic (RTK) technique. Recently, researchers have studied the use of RTK satellite navigation. The Boeing Unmanned Little Bird program has been examining shipboard launch and recovery using related navigation techniques.

    The accuracy of using RTK navigation is 1 centimeter + 1 part per million.

    Figure 1. Flow chart for software-in-the-loop.
    Figure 1. Flow chart for software-in-the-loop.

    Since development of shipboard landing is costly in terms of time and many resources, including human resources, this research is an attempt to evolve a software-in-the-loop (SIL) simulation system to analyze the accuracy of using RTK for landing navigation. The SIL system uses the MATLAB Simulink interface becasue of its helpfulgraphic user interface and block diagrams. A flowchart of the SIL system is shown in Figure 1.

    The simulated RTK message provides the navigational data used as the analysis results from the experiments. To ensure the stability of the landing process, the aircraft models were control by a linear quadratic Gaussian regulator (LQG), which is able to reject the environmental disturbances encountered in the landing process. The ship motions were simulated using the factors and the model formulated by the International Towing Tank Conference. A combined position error consisting of the aircraft controls and ship motions was calculated and then fed back to the RTK navigation message.

    RTK Performance

    RTK navigation provides high positioning performance in the range of a few centimeters; the technique can eliminate main errors, including ionospheric and tropospheric errors and satellite clock errors, among others. A base station and a rover station can cover a service area of about 10 to 20 square kilometers. The data transition should be in real time using a wireless VHF or Wi-Fi modem.

    Because data for shipboard landings are difficult to acquire, the navigation message in the SIL was simulated using experiments involving a variety of conditions. In this article, four kinds of experiments were included to help verify the availability and reliability of using RTK information as a navigational message.

    We started with a basic kinematic experiment, which was simply used to assess the RTK performance. Next, a relative positioning experiment was conducted to ensure the RTK relative positioning accuracy was adequate. After that, an antenna reversal experiment was designed in order to understand the ship’s swing effect in which aircraft altitude might cause a lack of common view satellites. Finally, an antenna forward flip experiment was conducted intended to show the different RTK positioning results for a variety of sea state effects.

    All of the experimental data were collected by a workshop computer through a program data file. The analyses of the results included the mean, standard deviations of positioning error, unavailable RTK percentages and the positioning accuracy when RTK was unavailable. All of the analysis results were imported to the SIL simulation using the Gaussian random variable model.

    Figure 2. Kinematic experimental setup.
    Figure 2. Kinematic experimental setup.

    Kinematic Experiment. The base station setup included an antenna, tripod, and receiver. The rover station setup included a portable vehicle with a battery, antenna, and receiver placed as shown in Figure 2. The data were transmitted and received using a wireless modem for which the transmitted rate was 115200 bps. The receiver was connected to a laptop used as a workshop to monitor satellite quality and collect the data. The region in which the experiment took place is shown in Figure 3: on the roof of the Aeronautics and Astronautics department building at National Cheng Kung University in Taiwan. The red star is the known position of the base station. The broken rectangular red line is 25 meters by 10 meters along which the moving rover station moved clockwise.

    Figure 3. Kinematic experimental region.
    Figure 3. Kinematic experimental region.

    However, it is difficult to show the true positions of the experiment. In this article, we tried to get the true position by using a linear regression method which used the time, t, as the explanatory variable and the position, y(t), as the dependent variable. The linear regression used the past five epoch positions as the dependent variables by which to obtain the linear polynomial, and the fifth position was put into the polynomial to get the position error. For example, in order to calculate an error at t=4, the position results from t=0 to t=4 must be taken into Equation (1) to form the second order polynomials with parameters P, Q, and R

    Eq-1 (1)

    The experimental results are shown in Figure 4, which is the ENU positioning error, and Table 1 shows the analysis error mean and standard deviations. The experimental results show that the horizontal positioning accuracy is 0.037 meters (95 percent).

    Figure 4. ENU error results for the kinematic experiment.
    Figure 4. ENU error results for the kinematic experiment.
    Table 1. Positioning results for the kinematic experiment.
    Table 1. Positioning results for the kinematic experiment.

    Relative Experiment. This experiment had one base station as before and included two rover stations which were placed on a T-bar, the relative distance being known, on a portable cart as shown in Figure 5. The region of the experiment is shown in Figure 6, where the star marks the location of the base station, with the rover station moving along the black arrow.

    Figure 5. Experimental setup.
    Figure 5. Experimental setup.
    Figure 6. Relative experimental region.
    Figure 6. Relative experimental region.

    The relative error was calculated using a known distance, 0.72 meters, to compare the two rover station positions. Figure 7 shows the relative results of the experiment for which the mean value and standard deviations were recorded in Table 2. In this experiment, only about 4.5 percent of the positioning results failed to meet the requirement of 0.3 meters.

    Figure 7. Relative error results.
    Figure 7. Relative error results.
    Table 2. Positioning results for the relative experiment.
    Table 2. Positioning results for the relative experiment.

    Common-View Satellite Experiment. Aircraft landing altitude and the ship’s swing motion caused by the state of the sea might affect GNSS information received by the antenna. This experiment had one base station and one rover station at fixed positions as before, but we attempted to flip the antenna of the base station toward the north by 80 degrees, as shown in Figure 8, and the rover station changed direction according to Table 3. The antenna directional change of 80 degrees were chosen for the extreme case that the base station and rover station could experience completely different satellites in view.

    Table 3. Common view satellite experimental setup for antenna.
    Table 3. Common view satellite experimental setup for antenna.
    Figure 8. Common view satellite experimental setup.
    Figure 8. Common view satellite experimental setup.

    Results of the experiment are shown in Figure 9, in which the vertical lines indicate antenna directional changes. For this experiment, every change is 30 seconds. This experiment demonstrates that the position performance definitely varies. The position analysis is shown in Table 4, which shows a horizontal error of 0.116meters (95 percent).

    Figure 9. ENU results of the common view satellite experiment.
    Figure 9. ENU results of the common view satellite experiment.
    Table 4. Positioning results for the common view satellite experiment.
    Table 4. Positioning results for the common view satellite experiment.

    Sea-State Experiment. In this experiment, one base station and one rover station were required in a fixed position, but the rover station changed the direction of the antenna, as shown in Figure 10, where the angle of x is decided according to the sea state in Table 5. On the other hand, the antenna changing toward a different direction simulated the swing motion of the boat.

    Figure 10. Swing experimental setup.
    Figure 10. Swing experimental setup.
    Table 5. Antenna angle in the swing experiment.
    Table 5. Antenna angle in the swing experiment.

    The experimental results shown in Table 6 are the mean values, and Table 7 shows the standard deviations. The simulation provides the analysis results in order to authenticate the integration simulations. The results show that the sea state slightly influences RTK positioning.

    UAV and Ship Motion Simulations

    During shipboard landing processing, many complicated conditions must be taken into account, including crosswinds, an air-wake model, wind gusts, and deck motion. The ship deck motion and crosswind effects are two key factors that further increase the difficulty of ship-borne operations.

    For this reason, the UAV controller must have anti- interference features. An LQG controller is able to reject the environmental disturbances encountered during landing in a lateral motion. For the ship deck motion, the chosen spectrum (the International Towing Tank Conference, or ITTC two-parameter spectrum) was used as the power spectrum of the sea waves to be simulated.

    Aircraft Simulation. The aircraft was in the simulation, the SP.X-6, was designed by the Remotely Piloted Vehicle and Microsatellite Research Laboratory of National Cheng Kung University (see opening photo and cover). For the longitudinal motion, a combination of a linear quadratic integral (LQI) controller and a Kalman filter in the inner-loop system was used to control the vertical velocity and height mainly using an elevator. For the lateral motion, the LQG autopilots were designed with guaranteed robustness properties that allowed quick return to the designed point.

    The SP.X-6 aircraft state functions are shown in Equation 2, in which the x, u, y, w, and v mean the system state vector, input, measurement, process error vector, and the measurement error, respectively. A, B, C, and K refer to the system state matrices, which can be evaluated by the system identifications that are derived by using the subspace identification to obtain an initial model. After that, the initial model will feed into the recursive prediction error method algorithm in order to arrive at further refined models.

    Eq-2 (2)

    Figure 11. Linear quadratic Gaussian regulator block diagram.
    Figure 11. Linear quadratic Gaussian regulator block diagram.

    After obtaining the aircraft’s model, the LQG controller is used, a block diagram for which is shown in Figure 11 and for which the close-loop dynamic is given by Equation 3. The Eq-x means the estimated states are feedback by which to form the optimal control law, u=−KEq-x. The y means the output command with the LQG variables F, G, K, and L.

    Eq-3 (3)

    The aircraft landing controls were divided into the longitudinal and lateral dynamics. For the longitudinal dynamics, the landing command was the vertical discrete height. In the case of the lateral dynamics, the stable condition was used when disturbances were encountered.

    Up till now, navigation of SP.X-6 relied solely on the GPS signal. Using RTK technique for the landing process will enhance navigation accuracy. The navigation method is the point-to-point guidance law illustrated in Figure 12.

    Figure 12. The point-to-point guidance law.
    Figure 12. The point-to-point guidance law.

    The basic concept of the point-to-point guidance law can be derived from the aircraft initial position A and the target position B in two-dimensional coordinate frame at every epoch. Desired heading angle θT and the distance between two points d can computed at each control loop via Equation 4.

    Eq-4 (4)

    The navigation signal used in the simulation is of 20 Hz.

    Deck Motion Simulation. Variations in waves are formed by the wind, and waves do not propagate only in one direction; the other direction will also affect wave propagation. The wave always is set as a stationary random process for the purpose of processing. The Longuet-Higgins model assumes that random waves are composed of many different wavelengths and harmonic amplitude superposition. Assuming the wave travels in a fixed direction, the peaks and troughs of the wave lines are parallel to each other and perpendicular to the forward direction of the waves, which are called two irregular waves or crested waves. Crested waves cause greater ship motion. The crested wave model indicates that point a at t epoch on a random sea wave height can be expressed as Equation 5, where ai -th represents harmonic waves with ωi frequency and εi initial condition.

    Eq-5 (5)

    It can be seen that the wave function can be expressed as a superposition of individual harmonics, so as long as waves establishing harmonic amplitudes and harmonic frequencies can be simulated in order to create the wave model. In this research, the amplitudes and the initial conditions are obtained from the sea wave spectrum of the ITTC model:

    Eq-6 (6)

    Four different sea state conditions were designed, as shown in Table 8 in the integrated simulation. Using the parameters from the spectrum analysis and the frequency divide method, the sea wave simulation could be obtained. Figures 13 and 14 show the simulation results of sea state A. Figure 15 shows all four state spectrum simulations results, and Figure 16 shows the sea wave height.

    Figure 13. Sea State A spectrum.
    Figure 13. Sea State A spectrum.
    Figure 14. Sea State A wave height.
    Figure 14. Sea State A wave height.
    Figure 15. Wave spectrum simulation results.
    Figure 15. Wave spectrum simulation results.
    Figure 16. Wave height simulation results.
    Figure 16. Wave height simulation results.

    Integrated Simulations

    In the integrated simulation, first the health of the RTK information was examined, and then, according the environment parameter settings, sea wave simulations were conducted. Subsequently, the aircraft landing process errors were presented using the experimental positioning analysis.

    The integrated simulation system is shown in Figure 17; it can be divided into three parts. The first part is the sea state options shown in the black line region, and the sea wave change is displayed and the maximum changing rate is calculated after the sea state option is selected. The second part is shown in the green line region that is the landing analysis which includes RTK health status, ENU error size. The last part is the landing animation which is enclosed in the red line region.

    Figure 17. Integrated simulations graphic user interface.
    Figure 17. Integrated simulations graphic user interface.

    Four sea-wave height simulation statuses can be selected, and the chosen sea state can be used to determine the corresponding landing environment, as shown in Figure 18, which illustrates the ship motion simulated by the wave height.

    Figure 18. Sea wave change.
    Figure 18. Sea wave change.

    RTK health information was simulated according to the experimental results in Table 9, in which the RTK information unavailability was 1.1 percent. A random Gaussian number was used to simulate the health of the RTK satellite information.

    After the sea-wave simulation and the RTK health simulation, the second concern was the landing process simulation. The landing process simulation has two conditions, namely the “normal landing” condition and the “landing with common-view satellite problem” condition. The normal landing process errors were presented using the Sea State Experiment results, while the landing with common-view satellite problem process errors was simulated by the result of Common View Satellite Experiment positioning analysis.

    For example, a ship was traveling at a velocity of 10 m/s in East, and an aircraft was cruising at a velocity of 20 m/s toward the East. The initial position of the ship was at (ES, NS, US) = (200, 0, 0) and the aircraft was at (EA, NA, UA) = (0,150,100). In the landing process, the desired heading angle and the distance to the waypoint were evaluated every epoch. The simulated landing process example is shown in Figure 19; the blue line is the ship’s trajectory and the red line indicates the aircraft’s trajectory.

    Figure 19. The simulated landing process example.
    Figure 19. The simulated landing process example.

    The guidance accuracy includes the control accuracy and the navigation sensor measurement accuracy. In the simulation result, the control accuracy (that is, controller error) was neglected. Therefore, the error for the landing process becomes only the navigation sensor measurement error which was the RTK error in this article. Users have the options to add different controllers as well as the controller error in the simulations.

    The landing positioning error was simulated using the imported analysis results in the correspondence sea state included in the RTK status shown in Figure 20 and the landing ENU errors are shown in Figure 21.

    Figure 20. RTK state simulation results.
    Figure 20. RTK state simulation results.
    Figure 21. The ENU errors of the simulated landing process example.
    Figure 21. The ENU errors of the simulated landing process example.

    Red stars in Figure 20 indicate the warning window when the simulated RTK statuses were unhealthy. For example, the 114th, 126th, 169th and 240th epochs in Figure 21 indicate that RTK data is unavailable during this time simulation. The unhealthy RTK signal might cause interruptions in navigation service in the landing process, as shown as the red stars in Figure 21. For the epochs with red stars, the simulated position results were exceeding the performance requirement for RTK shipboard landing. When this situation happened, the monitoring system might raise a flag to the aircraft’s guidance system not to use the RTK signal for landing at this period of time. Excluding these unhealthy RTK epochs, the simulated landing errors were well met the performance requirement for RTK shipboard landing, as shown in Figure 22.

    Figure 22. The ENU errors of the simulated landing process after excluding the unhealthy RTK results.
    Figure 22. The ENU errors of the simulated landing process after excluding the unhealthy RTK results.

    An overall simulation result is illustrated in Figure 23, when the successful landing message was shown in a pop-up window, the landing information of the whole landing process would be shown in the graphic user interface.

    Figure 23. Example simulation result.
    Figure 23. Example simulation result.

    Conclusions

    Experimental results showed that 99 percent of the horizontal positioning was in the range requirement of 0.3 meters. Using the common view satellite experiment and the sea state variation experiment conducted in this study, the limitations of RTK positioning can be understood. Monitoring the RTK status can provide high-quality accuracy with regard to guidance of the landing process. We hope that the results of this study will become a reference for building a shipboard landing system in Taiwan.

    Manufacturers

    All of the experimental data were collected by a workshop computer through a NovAtel (www.novatel.com) Connect program data file. The base station setup included a NovAtel GPS-703-GGG antenna with a Sokkia tripod and the NovAtel Propak-V3 RT2-G receiver. The rover station setup included a portable vehicle with a battery, a NovAtel GPS-703-GGG antenna and the NovAtel Propak-V3 RT2-G receiver.


    Chiu-Jung Huang received her B.S. degree from National Cheng Kung University (NCKU) in Taiwan. She is currently studying for her M.S. degree in aeronautics and astronautics at NCKU.

    Shau-Shiun Jan is an associate professor of aeronautics and astronautics at NCKU. He directs the NCKU Communication and Navigation Systems Laboratory (CNSL). His research focuses on GNSS augmentation system design, analysis, and application. He received his Ph.D. degree in aeronautics and astronautics from Stanford University.

  • RTK on a Smartphone Running AutoCAD: I Did It Last Week

    Last week was spring break (for high school and college) for my kids. We decided to drive to San Francisco and the surrounding area to do a little sightseeing. It’s a beautiful place. This is a view from our 3rd floor room in the hotel, looking over the bay.

    SF_Panorama

     

     

    Of course, while traveling, I usually manage to work in some GNSS activities.

    The first stop was Autodesk, the makers of AutoCAD and other engineering, design and visualization software in downtown San Francisco. AutoCAD occupies 100,000+ square feet at One Market St. in downtown San Francisco and another 20,000+ square feet at Pier 9 right on the Bay. How anyone gets work done with an office on a San Francisco Pier is beyond me. It’s buzzing with people and activity, including a shuttle to the famous Alcatraz Prison, which we enjoyed.

    The Autodesk meeting is deserving of an article in itself, but I’ll keep it short with bullet points for the purposes of this article:

    • AutoCAD 2014 includes a datum/coordinate system library for mapping/surveying users. This is new in AutoCAD.
    • Infraworks (introduced last year) was built from the ground up with a new workflow for engineers and planners (and surveyors). Most people have never heard of it. It can do things that AutoCAD can’t, such as managing surveying data for large-scale projects. Think BIM (Building Information Modeling).
    • Model Builder (just introduced), is a tool to build quick and dirty 3D visualizations using data from Autodesk’s cloud service.
    • Autodesk 123. This is a really cool free app you can use to create 3D models using your own images. The images can come from smartphone pictures or images you already have. It’s a really cool app.
    20140325_153149
    Photogrammetry Chair in the Autodesk Gallery at One Market St. in downtown San Francisco.
    • AutoCAD 360 (formerly AutoCAD WS). First of all, any Autodesk product with 360 in the name is a cloud app, whether it’s mobile or desktop. I’ll focus on the mobile apps. There are two AutoCAD 360 mobile apps: one for Android and one for iOS. The mobile apps are free tools that allow you to take AutoCAD drawings in the field. There are also Pro versions available on a subscription basis.
    Screenshot of AutoCAD 360 on iPad/iPhone
    Screenshot of AutoCAD 360 on the Apple iPad.

    Last week, I had a chance to use AutoCAD 360 in the field with RTK. It was a last-minute exercise that I hadn’t planned on, so my expectations were set so that even if I couldn’t get it to work, at least it would be a solid learning experience.

    The goal was to receive 1-2 cm RTK GNSS positions on an Android smartphone running AutoCAD 360 using a public (free) RTK base station. I knew I could access the free RTK base via PBO real-time streaming because I’ve done that before. However, I didn’t know, or have experience in two areas:

    • Accessing RTK base data via NTRIP on an Android device.
    • The ability of AutoCAD 360 mobile app to consume GPS data.

    For the Android device, we used a Samsung Galaxy Note. It’s a smartphone, but also a tablet with a 5.7-inch color touchscreen.

    Samsung Galaxy Note with a 5.7" color touchscreen
    Samsung Galaxy Note with a 5.7-inch color touchscreen.

    The first challenge was the Android utility software needed to access the RTK base. NTRIP (Networked Transport of RTCM via Internet Protocol). As I’ve written in previous articles, there are lots of free RTK base stations (330+) in California. To access them, all you need is internet connectivity and an NTRIP program to manage the connection to the RTK base. For Windows and Windows Mobile, there are several free NTRIP software programs. For Android, it’s limited (but growing). I found a free Android NTRIP utility on the Google Play store. It’s very easy to install and set up. If you have your RTK base credentials (IP address, port#, login, password), if you have a Bluetooth RTK receiver,  you can install the program and be running RTK within a few minutes.

    Android NTRIP Utility (Lefebure Design)
    Android NTRIP Utility (Lefebure Design)

    Once I entered the RTK login credentials, I was presented with a list of RTK bases. The list of PBO RTK bases are all single-baseline RTK bases (not networked) so I needed to select the closest one to the project site. In this case, it was P178 (see the screen shot above). It was about five miles from the project site. At this point, I can see the RTK base data streaming on the Samsung Note tablet. I didn’t mention before, but I had already Bluetoothed the Samsung to a small RTK GNSS receiver. Once the RTK base data starts streaming, the RTK GNSS receiver goes into FLOAT mode and heading for FIX (1-2cm precision).

    At that point, we (I wasn’t operating AutoCAD 360 on the Samsung) started AutoCAD 360 on the Samsung Note tablet and loaded a drawing that we’d planned to use. Following are a couple of screen shots from our exercise.

    AutoCAD3603
    AutoCAD 360 running on a Samsung Note Tablet/smartphone
    AutoCAD3601
    AutoCAD 360 running on a Samsung Note Tablet/smartphone.

    It took a minute to figure out how to”turn on” GPS in AutoCAD 360 (we were all newbies), but once we did, our position showed up on the drawing where we expected it. By this time, we were getting an RTK FIX position from the RTK GNSS receiver. We were getting 1-2 cm precision in a native AutoCAD drawing, in real-time, in the field, on an Android smartphone. I was impressed.

    We were ready to start our accuracy testing. Our accuracy testing consisted of two parts:

    1. To test precision, take RTK shots on two points and measure the distance between the two with a tape measure. We did this several times.

    The results were as follows:

    • P1 – P2. Measured distance: 20′ 9.75″. RTK distance: 20′ 9.0″.
    • P2 – P3. Measured distance: 21′ 11.5″. RTK distance: 21′ 11.75″
    • P1, P2, P3 were about 12 feet east of a 18-20 foot high concrete wall.
    • B1-1 – B1-2. Measured distance: 6′ 3.0″. RTK distance: 6′ 2.25″.
    • B1-1 and B1-2 were 15-18 feet from the 18-20 foot high concrete wall.
    • Lt-1 – Lt-2. Measured distance: 12′ 2.0″. RTK distance: 12′ 3.0″
    • Lt-1 and Lt-2 were on top of a platform with no substantial obstructions.

    Lastly, we took a shot underneath a platform with greater than 50% of the skyview obstructed. It didn’t hold RTK in that environment and I didn’t expect it to. The precision was 5 feet (DGPS).

    2. The second test was to test accuracy by taking an RTK shot on a survey marker that had published State Plane Coordinates in NAD83/2007 epoch 2007.0

    After recording an RTK FIX shot on the marker (albeit I was holding the antenna so I expected a little slop), we compared our result to the survey marker coordinates. Not good…3.0 feet difference.

    My first suspicion was that the RTK base was referenced to ITRF, so there would be significant difference between the two coordinate values. No dice. I adjusted the RTK GNSS coordinate to NAD83/2007 (2007.0) assuming it was referenced to ITRF08. The adjusted coordinate was further than the original (6.95 feet). That wasn’t the problem.

    My second thought was to double-check what the PBO folks used for a reference position for there RTK bases. They confirmed ITRF08 current epoch. However, after talking to a few people familiar with PBO sites (RTK Network operator and Mark Silver), they suggested to run an OPUS solution on the PBO RTK base and compare it to the reference coordinate being used by the PBO RTK base. Sure enough, there’s a 6.40 feet difference between the 24 hour OPUS ITRF08 coordinate and the ITRF08 reference coordinate being used by the P178 RTK base.

    It still doesn’t reconcile the difference we saw between the RTK GNSS coordinate and the survey mark, but I’m still trying to confirm which epoch date the PBO RTK base is using. In California, tectonic plate movement is significant. In that area, the ground is moving 1.7 cm north and 3.4 cm west each year, so the epoch date of the coordinate is significant, especially if the epoch date is 1997.0 or 2002.0. However, that doesn’t prevent you from using RTK Bases like P178 and “localizing” to NAD83/2007 or whichever datum your data is referenced to.

    Thanks, and see you next time.

    Follow me on Twitter at https://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • Centimeter-Level RTK Accuracy More and More Available — for Less and Less

    Eric Gakstatter
    Eric Gakstatter

    Last month, I started off 2014 with a bang by listing all the public RTK bases available in the United States, most of them being free. I received a lot of positive feedback and some enlightenment. For example, I didn’t know that in California, there are more than 330 RTK public base stations accessible by anyone for free via the California Real Time Network website at the University of California at San Diego! What a tremendous resource for California surveyors and GISers.

    Remember that RTK will give you 1-2 cm accuracy horizontally and twice that for vertical. If you know that and also know that there are 330 free RTK bases in California, why would anyone use post-processing for high-precision (e.g., sub-foot) GIS data collection? RTK technology used to be reserved for people who could spend tens of thousands of dollars on a GNSS receiver. Not any longer. RTK receivers are available for under $7,000, and you don’t need to invest in a RTK base unit if you’re in range of a public one on my list (or a commercial one not on my list).

    I’m pretty sure it was Charlie Trimble (founder of Trimble Navigation) who said “accuracy is addictive.” It sure is. Once you experience real-time centimeter-level accuracy (RTK) in the field, you won’t be satisfied with anything less, and neither will your GIS.

    I’ll keep updating the List of Public RTK Base Stations in the U.S. as people continue to inform me of ones that aren’t on my list. If you know of one, please email me.

    Keeping on the subject of RTK, 2014 might be the year of inexpensive RTK receivers. Whereas today you can find L1/L2 GNSS RTK receivers (in the U.S.) ranging from US$6,500 to US$25,000, there are rumors that some manufacturers are going to break through the US$6,500 price point.

    This is in line with the prediction I made a few years ago, but for a different reason. In 2010, I wrote that RTK receivers would become very inexpensive due to the new L5 signal being introduced, which would increase competition among GNSS receiver designers. I speculated that with more competition, the selling prices would significantly decline. Well, we are still without a usable L5 signal (although making progress) due to the slow deployment of modernized GPS satellites and the delay in Europe’s Galileo system, but we are still seeing a steady decline in the price of RTK receivers. Why is this?

    Even though there are a limited number of designers of RTK GNSS receivers, an increasing number of companies are buying RTK GNSS boards from these designers and making their own finished RTK GNSS receivers that look and perform very similar to receivers available today, for a fraction of the price. This is especially true in China, where there are several manufacturers buying RTK GNSS receiver boards from Trimble, Novatel, Hemisphere et al, making their own finished products and selling them. They were initially selling to very price-sensitive markets such as Africa, but now you see them setting up distribution in North America.

    This “OEM Syndrome” has put tremendous price pressure on existing brand-name RTK GNSS receivers as the Chinese-equivalent products are priced as little as 25% of the equivalent brand-name products. Of course, this drives the leading brand-name companies crazy. They are forced to either drop their price or otherwise convince buyers that their products are worth a significant premium. During these times of tight capital budgets, it’s increasingly difficult to do the latter. When enough satellites are in orbit broadcasting the L5 signal, you’ll really see this effect gain traction because there will be a lot more RTK GNSS designs to choose from, and the result will be better quality. More competition always results in better product quality and performance.

    The fact is that RTK receivers are moving towards becoming a commodity. As much as your local salesperson would like you to think they are selling a better RTK GNSS receiver, the technology gap between leading-brand designers and others is closing and probably unnoticeable to most of you. The major differences end up being the quality and reliability of the finished product (system design, battery, display, antenna integration, power supply, etc.). Having a great RTK GNSS receiver board inside is useless if the system design is unreliable.

    More Real-time PPP Competition

    For the longest time, it’s only been OmniStar (now owned by Trimble) and Starfire (owned by Deere & Co.) in the L-band high-precision correction game. Then, last year, the International GNSS Service announced its free decimeter real-time PPP service.  The catch is that receiver designers must incorporate IGS firmware to make use of the signal and…it’s only an Internet-based service (no satellite communications).

    In the past couple of months, Hexagon (which owns both Leica and Novatel), made a bid for Veripos. Veripos operates an L-band GNSS correction service for the oil and gas industry. Last year, TerraStar, a subsidiary of Veripos, announced its new decimeter service that is very similar to OmniStar and Starfire. It uses satellite communications for a data link. Altus Positioning Systems incorporated the TerraStar service into its receivers. Hexagon is very close to closing the deal with Veripos and just last week announced a partnership with competitor Topcon Positioning Systems. The result is that Leica and Topcon both will start offering high-precision L-band GNSS correction services with their receivers. If you’re an L-band decimeter user, this is probably good news for you. More competition = higher quality and lower price.

    Thanks, and see you next month.

    Follow me on Twitter at https://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric

  • NovAtel Launches Correct OEM Positioning Solution

    NovAtel Launches Correct OEM Positioning Solution

    NovAtel Correct.
    NovAtel Correct.

    NovAtel, Inc., OEM provider of high-precision GNSS positioning products, has launched its NovAtel Correct positioning technology. NovAtel Correct optimally combines data from multiple GNSS satellite constellations with corrections from a variety of sources, to deliver the best position solution possible.

    NovAtel Correct provides integrators with the opportunity to choose pricing and subscription options that best match their OEM business objectives. Delivery of correction data is available via satellite or Internet, depending on the requirements of the application. With NovAtel in control of the entire positioning solution, future innovation including seamless integration with all positioning modes and correction types is assured.

    Designed for NovAtel’s OEM6 high-precision receivers, the NovAtel Correct precise point positioning (PPP) solution delivers decimeter-level accuracy worldwide. L-band delivered PPP corrections from TerraStar are supported by NovAtel Correct without users having to add base-station infrastructure. Developers of land, airborne and near shore applications can purchase subscriptions to TerraStar’s correction service directly through NovAtel.

    “For a number of reasons, many of our customers have been eager for an end-to-end NovAtel OEM positioning service,” said Jason Hamilton, VP, Marketing for NovAtel. “NovAtel Correct rounds out our product and service offering and gives customers one-stop shopping for receivers, antennas and correction services.”

    Satellite and NTRIP-based solutions will be available for OEM6 products in Q1 2014 for all applications requiring decimetre-level positioning.

    NovAtel OEM628 triple-frequency +  L-Band GNSS receiver.
    NovAtel OEM628 triple-frequency + L-Band GNSS receiver.
  • Altus Positioning Introduces GIS-1 for Data Collection

    Altus Positioning Introduces GIS-1 for Data Collection

    Photo: Altus Positioning Systems
    Photo: Altus Positioning Systems

    Altus Positioning Systems is expanding its line of GNSS surveying products with the introduction of the GIS-1, a versatile personal digital assistant (PDA) for data collection and geolocation.

    The GIS-1 is a powerful PDA that integrates modern wireless technologies on a rugged Windows Mobile platform for effective portable computing for mobile survey applications. It can be used as a data collection device with Altus’ APS-series GNSS survey instruments, providing up to eight hours of operation time in the field between charges. In addition, the unit’s built-in L-1 GPS receiver and 3.2 megapixel camera can be used for navigation and GIS applications. It can even be used as a smartphone.

    “The GIS-1 is a versatile tool for surveyors and GIS professionals,” said Neil Vancans, president of Altus Positioning Systems. “With the Windows  Mobile operating system, it supports a wide range of software applications for data collection. By itself, the GIS-1 is a convenient low-cost GPS navigation device with 2.5-meter accuracy.”

    “It’s ideal for GIS work,” Vancans added. “The user can quickly and easily locate assets with 2.5-meter accuracy with the GIS-1, then switch to the APS-3 for more precise RTK work if needed.”

    The GIS-1 supports a wide range of wireless options, including Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and a Tri-Band GSM/GPRS/EDGE/HSPA cellular modem.

  • Hemisphere GNSS Offers New Eclipse Positioning Modules

    Hemisphere GNSS Offers New Eclipse Positioning Modules

    Photo: Hemisphere GNSS
    Photo: Hemisphere GNSS

    Today, Hemisphere GNSS introduces the Eclipse P306 and P307, the latest models in the Eclipse series. The Eclipse P306 and P307 track multi-frequency GPS, GLONASS, and BeiDou satellite signals and are Galileo and QZSS ready. By tracking more signals, RTK positioning performance improves especially in challenging environments.

    The Eclipse P306 and P307 are the first products to utilize the company’s new SX4 ASIC. Capable of simultaneously tracking code and phase signals on 89 satellites, SX4 boasts 372 channels and can be configured to address several diverse applications through software.

    Smaller than a business card, the Eclipse P306 upgrades existing designs using Hemisphere’s standard 34-pin modules. The Eclipse P307 is a drop-in upgrade for designs based on the industry accepted 20-pin module. Both products offer scalable performance. RTK accuracy is achieved in either single- or dual-frequency mode. When subscribed for multi-frequency, multi-constellation RTK, Eclipse receivers have fast RTK initialization times even over long distances.

    “While the Eclipse P306 and P307 provide outstanding RTK performance,” commented Dr. Mike Whitehead, Chief Technology Officer of Hemisphere GNSS, “non-RTK users benefit from our COAST, SureTrack, and HeadStart technologies.” COAST and SureTrack work together to maintain sub-meter positioning for 40 minutes when differential corrections are lost. HeadStart reduces the occurrence of cold starts by keeping time while the receiver module is powered off, providing faster startup times.

    Support of the Chinese BeiDou GNSS constellation is significant. The BeiDou constellation not only fully covers China, but extends beyond, covering 2/3 of the world’s land mass, benefiting 5.8 billion people. Coverage currently includes Asia, Australia, New Zealand to South Africa, Europe and all of Russia, as well as Hawaii with, on average, three or more BeiDou satellites visible above 15°.

    In February 2013, Hemisphere GPS changed its name to Hemisphere GNSS, Inc., after parting ways with its agriculture unit. While both names are owned by the company, in order to reflect the company’s support of all GNSSs and update the company’s image, “Hemisphere” has been adopted as its brand name. The company also has adopted a new logo and has launched an updated website, www.HemisphereGNSS.com.

    Hemisphere will be introducing the new Eclipse P306 and P307 OEM positioning modules at the annual Intergeo conference in Essen, Germany, October 8th-10th, 2013 at Booth #A3.070.