Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Fig. 1 IGS network with tropospheric estimates (Sites in gray have meteorologicalpackages)
Fig.2 Geographical distribution for mean standard deviation of ZPD estimates
analysed by >2 AC analysed by 2 AC analysed by 1 AC
.
large stddev small stddev
.
0.3.6.9.
12.15.
ZP
D[m
m]
ZPD Stddev Repea.Sta*0.3 CODE
0.3.6.9.
12.15.
ZP
D[m
m]
EMR
0.3.6.9.
12.15.
ZP
D[m
m]
ESA
0.3.6.9.
12.15.
ZP
D[m
m]
GFZ
0.3.6.9.
12.15.
ZP
D[m
m]
JPL
0.3.6.9.
12.15.
ZP
D[m
m]
NGS
AL
BH
AL
GO
AU
CK
BA
HR
BR
MU
CA
S1
C
HA
T
C
RO
1
DR
AO
FA
IR
G
OL
2
HO
B2
IR
KT
KIT
3
KO
SG
M
AC
1
MA
DR
MA
TE
MC
M4
M
DO
1
MD
VO
ME
TS
M
KE
A
N
LIB
ON
SA
P
ER
T
R
CM
6
RE
YK
STJO
TH
U1
T
ID2
U
SUD
WE
S2
W
HIT
WT
ZR
YA
R1
Y
EL
L
Z
WE
N
K
OU
R
L
HA
S
AR
EQ
ASC
1
BR
AZ
DG
AR
GU
AM
HA
RK
FO
RT
IISC
KE
RG
KO
KB
KW
J1
M
AL
I
MA
S1
SA
NT
SHA
O
T
AE
J
TA
HI
T
SKB
WU
HN
CO
CO
LP
GS
Fig.3 Difference between AC ZPD and IGS Combined ZPD. Mean of weekly standarddeviation for individual sites. Repeatability of station solutions (scaled by correlationfactor 0.3) are given for comparison.
0.3.6.9.
12.15.
ZP
D[m
m]
Repea. Bias |Bias| CODE
0.3.6.9.
12.15.
ZP
D[m
m]
EMR
0.3.6.9.
12.15.
ZP
D[m
m]
ESA
0.3.6.9.
12.15.
ZP
D[m
m]
GFZ
0.3.6.9.
12.15.
ZP
D[m
m]
JPL
0.3.6.9.
12.15.
ZP
D[m
m]
NGS
AL
BH
AL
GO
AU
CK
BA
HR
BR
MU
CA
S1
C
HA
T
C
RO
1
DR
AO
FA
IR
G
OL
2
HO
B2
IR
KT
KIT
3
KO
SG
M
AC
1
MA
DR
MA
TE
MC
M4
M
DO
1
MD
VO
ME
TS
M
KE
A
N
LIB
ON
SA
P
ER
T
R
CM
6
RE
YK
STJO
TH
U1
T
ID2
U
SUD
WE
S2
W
HIT
WT
ZR
YA
R1
Y
EL
L
Z
WE
N
K
OU
R
L
HA
S
AR
EQ
ASC
1
BR
AZ
DG
AR
GU
AM
HA
RK
FO
RT
IISC
KE
RG
KO
KB
KW
J1
M
AL
I
MA
S1
SA
NT
SHA
O
T
AE
J
TA
HI
T
SKB
WU
HN
CO
CO
Fig. 4. Difference between AC ZPD and IGS Combined ZPD. Mean of weekly bias(magnitude of bias) and bias repeatability from week to week
890. 893. 896. 899. 902. 905. 908. 911. 914. 917. 920. 923. 926. 929. 932. 935. 938.2.
4.
6.
8.
10.
ZP
D[m
m]
Stddev
890. 893. 896. 899. 902. 905. 908. 911. 914. 917. 920. 923. 926. 929. 932. 935. 938.-4.-3.
-2.
-1.
0.
1.
2.
3.4.
ZP
D[m
m]
Bias
890. 893. 896. 899. 902. 905. 908. 911. 914. 917. 920. 923. 926. 929. 932. 935. 938.-4.-3.
-2.
-1.
0.
1.
2.
3.4.
ZP
D[m
m]
Bias (extract) CODE
GFZ JPL
Fig. 5 Difference between AC ZPD and IGS Combined ZPD. Mean values (mean over all sites) per week and Analysis Center
890. 893. 896. 899. 902. 905. 908. 911. 914. 917. 920. 923. 926. 929. 932. 935. 938.-18.-12.-6.0.6.
12.18.
ZP
D[m
m]
KOSG Fiducial
890. 893. 896. 899. 902. 905. 908. 911. 914. 917. 920. 923. 926. 929. 932. 935. 938.-18.-12.-6.0.6.
12.18.
ZP
D[m
m]
YELL Fiducial
890. 893. 896. 899. 902. 905. 908. 911. 914. 917. 920. 923. 926. 929. 932. 935. 938.-18.-12.-6.0.6.
12.18.
ZP
D[m
m]
FORT
890. 893. 896. 899. 902. 905. 908. 911. 914. 917. 920. 923. 926. 929. 932. 935. 938.-18.-12.-6.0.6.
12.18.
ZP
D[m
m]
GUAM
890. 893. 896. 899. 902. 905. 908. 911. 914. 917. 920. 923. 926. 929. 932. 935. 938.-18.-12.-6.0.6.
12.18.
ZP
D[m
m]
KERG
Fig. 6 Difference between AC ZPD and IGS Combined ZPD. Mean bias per week and Analysis Center
910 915 920 925 930 935 940 915 920 925 930 935 940-18.
-12.
-6.
0.
6.
12.
18. Z
PD
[mm
]
IGS IGS-calibrated
FORT
910 915 920 925 930 935 940 915 920 925 930 935 940-18.
-12.
-6.
0.
6.
12.
18.
ZP
D[m
m]
IGS IGS-calibrated
GUAM
910 915 920 925 930 935 940 915 920 925 930 935 940-18.
-12.
-6.
0.
6.
12.
18.
ZP
D[m
m]
IGS IGS-calibrated
KERG
Fig. 7 Difference between AC ZPD and IGS Combined ZPD. Mean bias per week andAnalysis Center. Left: Values from Fig. 6. Right: Results with bias corrections bycorrelation between station height and ZPD.
0. 30. 60. 90. 120. 150. 180. 210. 240. 270. 300. 330. 360.
AUCK BAHR CHAT FAIR GODE HERS KIT3 KOKB LHAS MDO1 METS MLRS OBER POTS REYK USNO WTZR ZIMM ZWEN
Fig.8 Statistics for existing RINEX Met Files at CDDIS. Days with gaps > 2 hours are marked with ■.
97200. 97220. 97240. 97260. 97280. 97300. 97320. 97340. 973600.
1.
2.
3.
PW
V [m
m]
CODE - WVR
GFZ - WVR Stddev
97200. 97220. 97240. 97260. 97280. 97300. 97320. 97340. 97360-2.
-1.
0.
1.
2.
3.
4.
PW
V [m
m]
Bias
Fig. 9 Comparison of PWV estimates from GPS and WVR at POTS. GPS results are from IGS site POTS (CODE and GFZ solutions) and WVR data are from the Meteorological Observatory Potsdam, 400 apart from GPS receiver
97250. 97260. 97270.0.5.
10.
15.
20.
25.
30.
35.40.
PW
V [
mm
]
COD GFZ WVR
97280. 97290. 97300.0.5.
10.
15.
20.
25.
30.
35.40.
PW
V [
mm
]
97292. 97293.15.
20.
25.
97310. 97320. 97330.0.5.
10.
15.
20.
25.
30.
35.40.
PW
V [
mm
]
97322. 97323. 97324.2.
4.
6.
8.
10.
12.
Fig. 10 Comparison of PWV estimates from GPS and WVR at POTS. GPS results are from IGS site POTS (CODE and GFZ solutions) and WVR data are from the Meteorological Observatory Potsdam, 400 apart from GPS receiver