未加星标

GPS module measurements, part 3

字体大小 | |
[数据库(综合) 所属分类 数据库(综合) | 发布者 店小二04 | 时间 2018 | 作者 红领巾 ] 0人收藏点击收藏
Recap

To pick up frompart 2: I wanted to test one of u-blox's TCXO based modules to see if that improves getting a signal.

I'm also comparing these modules to each other to see how closely they agree on the current time. Expectations for GPS modules are to agree around +/- 20 nanoseconds, but that isn't a guarantee.

TCXO based modules!
GPS module measurements, part 3

I bought two u-blox TCXO based modules: a NEO-7N and a NEO-M8N. The main difference between the two is the 8 series adds support for Galileo and BeiDou satellites. They both support the GPS and GLONASS satellites.

I bought them off of two random vendors shipped from China. I suspect the NEO-7N I got was counterfit because I couldn't update its firmware. I peeled back the labels to see if the RF shields matched what other people said of their counterfit modules, and my NEO-7N did match their description. The NEO-M8N looks legit to me, and I was able to update its firmware.

Comparing the 7N with the M8N

Despite all this, these two modules agreed with each other pretty well:


GPS module measurements, part 3

This is slightly higher than I would have expected, so I compared the time offset data to a few different things. Altitude difference had an amazingly large correlation with the time offset:


GPS module measurements, part 3

This is probably from two factors: I'm using an indoor antenna - an outdoor one would have a better signal, and I'm using standard GPS modules instead of a timing one.

If I take the altitude difference (in light-nanoseconds) and remove it from the time difference, I get this graph:


GPS module measurements, part 3

Which is much better, and pretty close to my measurement limit.

Extra graph

This is the reported frequency of the GPS module's TCXO:


GPS module measurements, part 3

I shifted the NEO-7N's line down by 457ppb to make it easier to compare the two. The M8N's frequency was much more stable, but the 7N was pretty decent even if it was counterfit.

Summary of M8N vs 7N

The M8N also had better satellite reception, on average it saw 1 more signal than the 7N. Both of them reported a full 3D navigation lock over this entire time period, so it wasn't a large difference. Because the M8N supports more satellite systems, has a better TCXO, and had slightly better reception, I'd recommend it over the 7N.

Other GPS modules

I also compared a few other GPS modules:

Navspark-GL vs Adafruit GPS (MTK MT3339)


GPS module measurements, part 3

NEO-M8N vs Adafruit GPS


GPS module measurements, part 3

All of these modules also had an altitude based additional error. Comparing the altitude difference with the time difference with the M8N/Adafruit pair:


GPS module measurements, part 3

And comparing the time difference with the altitude difference removed:


GPS module measurements, part 3

To show that it isn't just one of the modules having large changes in altitude, here's a comparison of both of the GPS modules against what I believe is the "true altitude".


GPS module measurements, part 3
Final words

I've learned I need to change my expectation of these modules being within +/- 20ns of each other! However, GPS modules being within +/-100ns of each other seems like a reasonable expectation that would be true most of the time.

本文数据库(综合)相关术语:系统安全软件

tags: modules,GPS,M8N,difference,7N,time,NEO,other,two
分页:12
转载请注明
本文标题:GPS module measurements, part 3
本站链接:https://www.codesec.net/view/586921.html


1.凡CodeSecTeam转载的文章,均出自其它媒体或其他官网介绍,目的在于传递更多的信息,并不代表本站赞同其观点和其真实性负责;
2.转载的文章仅代表原创作者观点,与本站无关。其原创性以及文中陈述文字和内容未经本站证实,本站对该文以及其中全部或者部分内容、文字的真实性、完整性、及时性,不作出任何保证或承若;
3.如本站转载稿涉及版权等问题,请作者及时联系本站,我们会及时处理。
登录后可拥有收藏文章、关注作者等权限...
技术大类 技术大类 | 数据库(综合) | 评论(0) | 阅读(87)