Comparison of classical-RTK and network-RTK surveying methods in coastal regions

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 1, 29 - 36, 24.10.2023

Şeri Dilan Oğuz , Kemal Yurt

https://doi.org/10.48053/turkgeo.1277051

Öz

Since the beginning of human life, human beings have wanted to know their location, and have therefore tried to find out where they are and where they are going throughout their lives. Researches and inventions that have shaped this situation have followed one another. Throughout history, the methods used to obtain location information have improved day by day, and the possibilities of obtaining precise location information faster with more ergonomic devices have emerged. Recently, the Real Time Kinematics have attracted attention in this respect. In this study, "Comparison of Classical-RTK and Network-RTK surveying methods in Coastal Regions" was conducted in Coastal Regions. For this purpose, 12 point locations were determined by creating two separate study areas in two different regions with an approximate surface area of 3.078 km2 and 1.346 km2 in the coastal region. When a base was created between TUSAGA-Active points namely, N4, N5, N6, IN1, IN2, IN3 were located in the inside and N1, N2, N3, DN1, DN2, DN3 points were located in the outside part of the network structure. Static, Classical-RTK and Network-RTK measurement methods were used at 12 points in the study areas in both regions. First of all, static measurements were made at 12 points were taken into account as a reference values for the comparison of the measurements from both Classical-RTK and Network-RTK methods. The differences of the static measurement values and the measurement values obtained by Classical-RTK and Network-RTK measurement methods were taken respectively. These measurement differences were analyzed and compared in various aspects.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Classic-RTK, Network-RTK, Static

Kaynakça

• Aykut, N.O., Gülal, E., & Akpinar, B. (2015). Performance of single base RTK GNSS method versus network RTK. Earth Sciences Research Journal, 19(2), 135-139.
• Aykut, N.O., Doğan, U., Ata, E., & Arı, A. (2005). Determination of Coastline with GPS, The Case of Karaburun. 2nd Engineering Surveying Symposium, November 23-25, Istanbul, Turkey.
• Cansız, Y. (2013). The effect on location precision of the satellite elevation angle and number of epoch at network RTK applications (MSc thesis). Yıldız Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey (in Turkish).
• Dabove, P. (2019). The usability of GNSS mass-market receivers for cadastral surveys considering RTK and NRTK techniques. Geodesy and Geodynamics, 10(4), 282-289.
• Inal, C., Bulbul, S., & Bilgen, B. (2018). Statistical analysis of accuracy and precision of GNSS receivers used in network RTK. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 11, 1-8.
• Inal, C., Gündüz, A.M., & Bulbul, S. (2015). Comparison of Classic-RTK and Network-Rtk Methods. Selcuk University Journal of Engineering, Science and Technology, 2(2), 21 - 30.
• Kahveci, M., & Yıldız, F. (2007). GPS (Global Positioning System). Nobel Publication Distribution, 3rd Edition, 1-215, Ankara Turkey.
• Kahveci, M. (2009). Kinematic GNSS and RTK CORS Networks. 1st Edition Zerpa Publication, Ankara, Turkey.
• Kalkan, Y. & Alkan, R.M. (2005). Deformation Measurements in Engineering Structures. Engineering Surveying STB Commission 2nd Engineering Surveying Symposium, 64-74 Turkey.
• Lachapelle, G., & Ryan, S. (2002). Servicing the GPS user, Chapter 14 in Manual of Geospatial Science and Technology, J. Bossler, J. Jenson, R. McMaster & C. Rizos.
• Landau, H., Vollath, U., & Chen, X. (2002). Virtual reference station systems. Journal of Global Positioning Systems, 1(2), 137-143.
• Mekik, Ç., & Arslanoğlu, M. (2003). 'Accuracy Analysis of Real-Time Kinematic GPS Locations and a Sample Application. 9th Turkish Map Scientific and Technical Congress, March 31 - April 04, 2003, 549-558, Ankara, Turkey.
• Mekik, Ç. (2004). Positioning with Real Time Kinematic GPS Network (Network RTK). TUJK-Engineering Surveys Geodetic Networks Workshop, Session IV, 202-207, October, Zonguldak, Turkey.
• Raquet, J. (1998). Development of a Method for Kinematic GPS Carrier-Phase Ambiguity Resolution Using Multiple Reference Receivers (PhD thesis). University of Calgary, Calgary Canada.
• Sezer, S. (2008). Organizing the data of static GPS stations in the computer and designing a database and web page to present in internet (MSc thesis). Selçuk University, Konya, Turkey (in Turkish).
• Sickle, V.J. (2015). GPS for Land Surveyors, 4th Edition, CRC Press Inc., Boca Raton, Florida, USA.
• Telli, A.K., Pırtı, A., & Hoşbaş, R.G. (2014). Next Generation Surveying System and the Evric GNSS. Journal of Geoinformation and Land Management 101,2.
• Uzel, T., & Eren, K. (2008). Establishment of National Cors System and Datum Conversion Project. TUSAGA-AKTİF (CORS-TR) 3rd Workshop November 28-29, Turkey.
• Yurt, K. (2005). Local geoid determination and modeling by geometric and gravimetric methods: Case study for Trabzon municipilaty (PhD thesis). Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Turkey (in Turkish).
• Url-1: https://www.tusagaaktif.gov.tr/Web/SSS_Teknik.aspx (last accessed 27 February 2023)