Taking your words, I'm not good at GPS relative terms and algorithms too.
Me neither :-)
I think that the moving base must have an fixed and known lenght .
If you review the "setting2" tab on RTKNAVI 2.4.x options, you will see
that the "Baseline Length Constraint (m)" is an option, not a
requirement, even when "Moving Base" is selected as positioning mode on
"setting1" tab. Considering this, I thought that both options where
valid (constrained and unconstrained length). One may think that is just
a programming bug if it remains as an option and not as a requirement,
but if you select "moving base" you will see that on the "Positions" tab
automatically the option to input the base antenna position dissapeared,
from which I conclude that nothing is left to chance on this swiss knife
that RTKlib is :-).
This will not be your case.
May be you can use a fixed base ( two antennas on one car ), but in this case,
it would be better to put it over an reference station and let both car as
rovers.
I have realised some tests with one ublox-4T. I just have one and it was quite
difficult to buy this one :-(
I have stoped it for a while, but RTKLIB is great and nice and I plan use it.
I got very good results, cm accuracy for a 10 km base line.
I have modified a python code to set it up to output raw carrier phase and
navegation data. It runs under *NIX.
The basic code is here
http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/Neo_FreeRunner_GPS
regards,
julio menezes
PS: you can see my results here:
gpl2.com.br/americo
_______________________________________________
This message is sent to you from [email protected] mailing list.
Visit http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss-gps to manage your
subscription
For more information, check http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS-GPS
_______________________________________________
This message is sent to you from [email protected] mailing list.
Visit http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/foss-gps to manage your
subscription
For more information, check http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS-GPS
