tm11 D1

Methods of Practice and Guidelines for Using Survey-Grade
Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) to Establish

Vertical Datum in the United States Geological Survey
Chapter 1 of
Section D, Field Survey Methods
Book 11, Collection and Delineation of Spatial Data
Techniques and Methods 11–D1
U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
Front cover. Background: Grand Canyon looking down on the Little Colorado River, on the Navajo Nation. Photograph by
Jeffrey R. Kennedy, 2009, USGS.
Lower right: Paul Kinzel (USGS) measuring water-surface elevation along a rock-wing dam in the South Fork Shenandoah River near
Island Ford, Virginia. Photograph by Jennifer L. Krstolic, 2010, USGS.
Lower left: Western shore of Lake Sharpe near Lower Brule, South Dakota. Vaughn Big Eagle (Lower Brule Sioux Tribe) is in the
foreground, and Ryan F. Thompson (USGS) is in the background. Photograph by Kathy Neitzert, USGS.
Methods of Practice and Guidelines for
Using Survey-Grade Global Navigation
Satellite Systems (GNSS) to Establish
Vertical Datum in the United States
Geological Survey
By Paul H. Rydlund, Jr., and Brenda K. Densmore
Chapter 1 of
Section D, Field Survey Methods
Book 11, Collection and Delineation of Spatial Data
Techniques and Methods 11–D1

KEN SALAZAR, Secretary

Marcia K. McNutt, Director
U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2012
For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living
resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS.
For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications,
visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod
To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov
Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the
U.S. Government.
Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials
as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner.
Suggested citation:
Rydlund, P.H., Jr., and Densmore, B.K., 2012, Methods of practice and guidelines for using survey-grade global navi-
gation satellite systems (GNSS) to establish vertical datum in the United States Geological Survey: U.S. Geological
Survey Techniques and Methods, book 11, chap. D1, 102 p. with appendixes.
ISBN 978–1–4113–3500–4
iii
Preface
This series of manuals on techniques and methods (TM) describes approved scientific and data
collection procedures and standard methods for planning and executing studies and laboratory
analyses. The material is grouped under primary subject headings called “books” and further
subdivided into sections and chapters. This manual is Chapter 1 of Section D—Field Survey
Methods, Book 11—Collection and Delineation of Spatial Data.
The unit of publication, the chapter, is limited to a narrow field of subject matter. These publica-
tions are subject to revision because of experience in use or because of advancement in knowl-
edge, techniques, or equipment, and this format permits flexibility in revision and publication
as the need arises. Chapter D1 of book 11 (TM 11–D1) deals with vertical datum establishment
using survey-grade Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS).
This edition of “Methods of Practice and Guidelines for Using Survey-Grade Global Navigation
Satellite Systems (GNSS) to Establish Vertical Datum in the United States Geological Survey”
is published on the World Wide Web at http://pubs.usgs.gov/tm/tm11D1/ and is for sale by
the U.S. Geological Survey, Science Information Delivery, Box 25286, Federal Center, Denver,
Colorado, 80225.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Mr. Dave Doyle, Mr. William Henning, and Mr. Mark Sche-
newerk from the National Geodetic Survey for technical guidance contained within. Published
manuals from the National Geodetic Survey have been used as the foundation for this techni-
cal manual with modifications to adequately suit data collection and science needs within the
U.S. Geological Survey. The authors would also like to further thank Mr. Tom Bryant from Seiler
Instrument, Inc., for lengthy conversations regarding practice and quality of Global Navigation
Satellite System (GNSS) surveys.
iv
v
Contents
Preface............................................................................................................................................................iii
Acknowledgments.........................................................................................................................................iii
Conversion Factors........................................................................................................................................ix
Abbreviations and Acronyms.......................................................................................................................x
Abstract............................................................................................................................................................1
Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................1
Datum Establishment in the U.S. Geological Survey.......................................................................2
Evolution of Global Navigation Satellite Systems............................................................................2
Geodesy Background............................................................................................................................3
Purpose and Scope........................................................................................................................................4
Equipment........................................................................................................................................................5
Overview and Function.........................................................................................................................6
Receivers.......................................................................................................................................6
Antenna (Receiver and Radio) and Radio.................................................................................7
Data Collector..............................................................................................................................10
Tripods..........................................................................................................................................10
Benchmarks.................................................................................................................................12
Software.......................................................................................................................................12
GNSS Equipment Summary and Checklist.............................................................................16
Mission Planning and Error Sources.........................................................................................................16
Benchmark Assessment.....................................................................................................................17
CORS Assessment...............................................................................................................................18
Ionosphere and Troposphere.............................................................................................................18
Dilution of Precision............................................................................................................................20
Multipath...............................................................................................................................................22
Summary of Error Source and Mitigation........................................................................................23
Real-Time GNSS............................................................................................................................................23
Single-Base RTK..................................................................................................................................23
Approach......................................................................................................................................23
Quality Assurance......................................................................................................................25
Networks...............................................................................................................................................26
Approach......................................................................................................................................26
Static GNSS...................................................................................................................................................28
Single Base: Online Positioning User Service (OPUS)..................................................................29
Additions and Advancements...................................................................................................34
Network Surveying and Processing.................................................................................................35
Network Control..........................................................................................................................35
Planning........................................................................................................................................37
Processing and Adjustment......................................................................................................41
Post-Processed Kinematic Surveying..............................................................................................42
vi
GNSS Quality.................................................................................................................................................42
Level I Survey.......................................................................................................................................43
Level II Survey......................................................................................................................................45
Level III Survey.....................................................................................................................................47
Level IV Survey.....................................................................................................................................47
Level Quality Alternatives with Real-Time Positioning..................................................................50
Uncertainty Analysis...........................................................................................................................50
Metadata........................................................................................................................................................51
Database Storage................................................................................................................................53
GNSS Campaign............................................................................................................................................54
Objectives.............................................................................................................................................54
Benchmarks..........................................................................................................................................54
Decision Tree........................................................................................................................................54
Reconnaissance..................................................................................................................................54
Field Preparedness..............................................................................................................................56
Survey....................................................................................................................................................56
Data Download, Analysis, Storage, and Documentation..............................................................56
Future Direction of GNSS............................................................................................................................57
Selected References....................................................................................................................................58
Glossary..........................................................................................................................................................63
Appendix 1. Benchmark Recovery and Establishment Form.................................................................70
Appendix 2. Static Observation Form........................................................................................................72
Appendix 3. Real-Time GNSS Example Approaches..............................................................................73
High-Water Mark Surveys—Flood Studies.....................................................................................73
Establishment of Datum at Streamgages........................................................................................75
Establishment of Datum at Groundwater Well Fields....................................................................77
Appendix 4. Static GNSS Example Approaches......................................................................................80
Single-Base Static (OPUS)—Datum Establishment for River Survey.........................................80
Static Network Surveying—Datum Establishment for River Survey..........................................86
Static Network Surveying—Using OPUS-Projects for Datum Establishment for
Terrestrial Imaging and Streamgages................................................................................97
Figures
1. Illustration showing relation between the ellipsoid, geoid, and orthometric heights.......4
2. Photograph showing tribrachs used with tripods to attach Global Navigation
Satellite System receivers...........................................................................................................6
3. Photographs showing various types of Global Navigation Satellite System
receiver antennas..........................................................................................................................7
4. Photographs showing traditional real-time equipment profile..............................................8
5. Photograph showing “rubber duck” antenna used for radio communication....................9
6. Photographs showing Real-Time Kinematic bridge used to facilitate multiple
survey-grade receivers within a Real-Time Network for areas void of cellular
coverage.......................................................................................................................................10
7. Photographs showing data collectors used for Global Navigation Satellite
System positioning......................................................................................................................10
vii
8. Photographs showing fixed-height and adjustable fixed-height center pole tripod

and bipod used for Global Navigation Satellite System positioning...................................11
9. Photographs showing circular level vial adjustment on fixed-height center poles.........13
10. Photographs showing examples of monumented and non-monumented
benchmarks and anchoring construction used for Global Navigation Satellite
System observations...................................................................................................................15
11. Map showing depth of frozen ground for the lower 48 United States................................16
12. Map showing density and proximity of Continually Operating Reference Station
(managed by the National Geodetic Survey in the Midwest................................................19
13. Graph showing progression and forecast of ionospheric disturbance because of
strong magnetic fields associated with sun spots.................................................................19
14. Illustration showing elevation mask angle in relation to Global Navigation
Satellite System signals traveling through the ionosphere and troposphere...................20
15. Illustrations showing horizontal and vertical relation to quality dilution of precision.....21
16. Illustration showing multipath development from illustrated objects................................22
17. Illustration showing example approach using single-base Real-Time Kinematic
as a level.......................................................................................................................................24
18. Illustration showing Real-Time Network positioning with a 4-point localization
to known benchmarks.................................................................................................................28
19. Illustration showing Real-Time Network positioning using the interpolation
methodology of a virtual base station......................................................................................29
20. Screen capture showing modified output of a position generated from the
Online Position User Service–Rapid Static.............................................................................33
21. Illustration showing simple network design with resurveys and baselines......................38
22. Screen capture showing example results as displayed in the data collector of
a localization with Global Navigation Satellite System ........................................................46
23. Diagram showing decision tree for a level quality Global Navigation Satellite
System survey approach............................................................................................................55
Appendix Figures
3–1. Map showing background for a high-water mark survey along the Salt River near
Brashear, Missouri......................................................................................................................74
3–2. Map showing background for streamgage datum establishment......................................76
3–3. Map showing background for a groundwater well field survey.........................................78
4–1. Map showing recovered and established benchmarks for the topographic and
bathymetric survey at Lewis and Clark Lake..........................................................................81
4–2. Figures and graphs showing time series and data availability plots downloaded from
the National Geodetic Survey Continuously Operating Reference Station website...........82
4–3. Map showing objective points established at locations 1013 and 1014 using a static
network survey that includes controlling National Geodetic Survey benchmarks.............87
4–4. Screen capture showing adjustment software depicting Global Navigation
Satellite System receiver data file information and location; including antenna
type and height, and observation times...................................................................................89
4–5. Screen capture showing network adjustment output representing initial processing
steps and a minimally constrained adjustment of the Missouri River network................90
4–6. Screen capture showing adjustment software package depicting processed
and deselected baselines in the Missouri River network.....................................................91
viii
4–7. Screen capture showing adjustment software depicting coordinates entered for
National Geodetic Survey benchmarks and one benchmark held as fixed for the
minimally constrained adjustment............................................................................................92
4–8. Screen capture showing adjustment software package depicting results of the
minimally constrained network adjustment............................................................................93
4–9. Screen capture showing adjustment software depicting control tie information
and quality-assurance test from the minimally constrained Missouri River
network adjustment.....................................................................................................................95
4–10. Screen capture showing adjustment software depicting coordinates for the newly
established benchmarks resulting from the Missouri River final network adjustment.......96
4–11. Screen capture showing an editable mock-up survey datasheet within the Online
Position User Service Projects web-based utility identifying an objective point
established at a local streamgage............................................................................................98
4–12. Screen capture showing an editable mock-up survey datasheet within the Online
Position User Service Projects web-based utility identifying an objective point
established as a ground control point for a terrestrial laser scan......................................99
4–13. Screen capture showing static survey network developed within Online Position
Users Service projects web-based utility.............................................................................100
4–14. Screen capture showing Online Position User Service projects session processing
of a network of Global Navigation Satellite System observations....................................101
4–15. Screen capture showing adjustment performed within the Online Position User
Service Projects web-based utility.........................................................................................102
Tables
1. Primary navigation satellite systems.........................................................................................3
2. Residual differences between the Geoid 2009 hybrid model and known
separation distance as determined from Global Positioning System-derived
ellipsoid heights and leveled North American Vertical Datum 1988 orthometric
heights at benchmarks within the conterminous United States............................................5
3. Global Navigation Satellite System equipment checklist and quality-assurance
recommendations........................................................................................................................17
4. Global Navigation Satellite System error source summary and mitigation.......................23
5. User benefits and drawbacks to Real-Time Network Global Navigation Satellite
Systems.........................................................................................................................................27
6. Example of Real-Time Network reference station positioning change in Missouri
after adoption into the National Geodetic Survey Continually Operating
Reference Station network........................................................................................................30
7. Real-time Global Navigation Satellite System quality assurances for single-base
Real-Time Kinematic and a Real-Time Network.....................................................................31
8. NAD 83 realizations, marks used in each realization, and comments about each
adjustment....................................................................................................................................36
9. Accuracy standard for leveled, triangulated, and traversed benchmarks........................37
10. Accuracy standard for Global Positioning System-derived benchmarks..........................37
11. Level-quality descriptions for Global Navigation Satellite System positioning in
the U.S. Geological Survey.........................................................................................................44
12. An example of summarized observations and quality criteria upheld for a Level II
real-time survey using a Real-Time Network..........................................................................48
13. Uncertainty of high-water marks for coastal storm surge and upland rivers...................50
ix
Appendix Tables
3–1. Assessment of benchmarks for perpetuating datum to U.S. Geological Survey
streamgages.................................................................................................................................77
4–1. Benchmark quality indicators from Online Position Users Service results
for datum establishment used for a river survey....................................................................83
4–2. Static network survey uncertainty analysis using Online Position User Service
projects results..........................................................................................................................102
Conversion Factors and Datums

Inch/Pound to SI
Multiply By To obtain
Length
inch (in.) 2.54 centimeter (cm)
inch (in.) 25.4 millimeter (mm)
foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)
mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)
mile, nautical (nmi) 1.852 kilometer (km)
yard (yd) 0.9144 meter (m)
Area
acre 4,047 square meter (m2)
acre 0.004047 square kilometer (km2)
square foot (ft ) 2
929.0 square centimeter (cm2)
square foot (ft2) 0.09290 square meter (m2)
square inch (in ) 2
6.452 square centimeter (cm2)
square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer (km2)
Temperature in degrees Celsius (°C) may be converted to degrees Fahrenheit (°F) as follows:
°F=(1.8×°C)+32
Temperature in degrees Fahrenheit (°F) may be converted to degrees Celsius (°C) as follows:
°C=(°F-32)/1.8
Vertical coordinate information is referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988
(NAVD 88).
Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 83).
Altitude, as used in this manual, refers to distance above the vertical datum.
Global Positioning Systems (GPS) is used in this manual to define the U.S. space-based Global
Navigation Satellite System (GNSS).
x
Abbreviations and Acronyms

3D Three Dimensional
APC Antenna Phase Center
ARP Antenna Reference Point
C/A Code Coarse Acquisition Code
CAD Computer Automated Drafting
CBN Cooperative Based Network
CMR+ Compact Measurement Record
CONUS Conterminous United States
CORS Continuously Operating Reference Station
DOT Department of Transportation
ECEF Earth Centered Earth Fixed
FBN Federal Based Network
FGCC Federal Geodetic Control Committee
FOC Fully Operational Capability
GDOP Geometric Dilution of Precision
GEOID 2009 Hybrid Geoid Model of 2009
GIS Geographic Information System
GLONASS GLObal NAvigation Satellite System—Russian
GNSS Global Navigation Satellite System—Universal
GPS U.S. Space-based Global Positioning System
GRAV-D Gravity for the Redefinition of the American Vertical Datum
GRS 80 Geodetic Reference System 1980
GWSI Ground-Water Site-Inventory
HDOP Horizontal Dilution of Precision
IERS International Earth Rotation and Reference System Service
IGS International GNSS Service
ITRF International Terrestrial Reference Frame
ITRS International Terrestrial Reference System
LAN Local Area Network
L1 GNSS L band carrier wave at 1575.42 MHz
L1C GNSS L band carrier wave at 1575.42 MHz with optimized signal design
L2 GNSS L band carrier wave at 1227.60 MHz
L2C GNSS L band carrier wave at 1227.60 MHz with optimized signal design
L5 GPS L band carrier wave at 1176.45 MHz
xi
LiDAR Light Detection and Ranging

LMR 200 Standard Type Coaxial Cable
MHz Megahertz (1 million cycles per second)
NAD 83 North American Datum 1983
NANU Notice Advisory to NAVSTAR Users
NAVD 88 North American Vertical Datum 1988
NAVSTAR Navigation Satellite Timing and Ranging
NDEP National Digital Elevation Program
NGS National Geodetic Survey
NGS IDB National Geodetic Survey Integrated Database
NGVD 29 National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929
NMD National Mapping Division
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NSRS National Spatial Reference System
NSSDA National Standard for Spatial Data Accuracy
NWS National Weather Service
OPUS Online Position Users Service
OPUS-DB Online Position Users Service Database
OPUS GNSS Online Position Users Service—GNSS
OPUS LOCUS Online Position Users Service—Leveling Online Computing Service
OPUS-RS Online Position Users Service—Rapid Static
OPUS-S Online Position Users Service—Static
P Code Precision Code
PAGES Program for the Adjustment of GPS Ephemerides
PDOP Position Dilution of Precision
PID Permanent Identifier
PPM Part(s) per Million
PPP Precise Point Positioning
PRVD 02 Puerto Rico Vertical Datum of 2002
QA Quality Assurance
RG 58 Radio Guide Standard Type Coaxial Cable
RINEX Receiver Independent Exchange format conversion
RMS Root Mean Square
RSGPS Rapid Static Global Positioning System
RT Real-Tme Positioning
xii
RTCM Radio Technical Commission for Maritime Services

RTK Real-Time Kinematic
RTN Real-Time Network(s)
SBAS Satellite Based Augmentation System
SNR Signal-To-Noise Ratio
SWPC Space Weather Prediction Center
TDOP Time Dilution of Precision
TEC Total Electron Content
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USCGS U.S. Coastal and Geodetic Survey
USGG 2009 U.S. Gravimetric Geoid of 2009
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
USNO U.S. Naval Observatory
UTM Universal Transverse Mercator
VDOP Vertical Dilution of Precision
WAAS Wide Area Augmentation System
WGS 84 World Geodetic System 1984
Methods of Practice and Guidelines for Using Survey-Grade
Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) to Establish
Vertical Datum in the United States Geological Survey
By Paul H. Rydlund, Jr., and Brenda K. Densmore
Abstract uncertainties can be misleading. GNSS users can benefit from

a blueprint of data collection standards used to ensure consis-
tency among USGS mission areas. A classification of GNSS
Geodetic surveys have evolved through the years to the survey qualities provide the user with the ability to choose
use of survey-grade (centimeter level) global positioning to from the highest quality survey used to establish objective
perpetuate and post-process vertical datum. The U.S. Geologi- points with low uncertainties, identified as a Level I, to a
cal Survey (USGS) uses Global Navigation Satellite Sys- GNSS survey for general topographic control without qual-
tems (GNSS) technology to monitor natural hazards, ensure ity assurance, identified as a Level IV. A Level I survey is
geospatial control for climate and land use change, and gather strictly limited to post-processed methods, whereas Level II,
data necessary for investigative studies related to water, the Level III, and Level IV surveys integrate variations of a RT
environment, energy, and ecosystems. Vertical datum is funda- approach. Among these classifications, techniques involving
mental to a variety of these integrated earth sciences. blunder checks and redundancy are important, and planning
Essentially GNSS surveys provide a three-dimensional that involves the assessment of the overall satellite configura-
position x, y, and z as a function of the North American tion, as well as terrestrial and space weather, are necessary to
Datum of 1983 ellipsoid and the most current hybrid geoid ensure an efficient and quality campaign. Although quality
model. A GNSS survey may be approached with post- indicators and uncertainties are identified in post-processed
processed positioning for static observations related to a methods using CORS, the accuracy of a GNSS survey is most
single point or network, or involve real-time corrections to effectively expressed as a comparison to a local benchmark
provide positioning “on-the-fly.” Field equipment required that has a high degree of confidence. Real-time and post-pro-
to facilitate GNSS surveys range from a single receiver, cessed methods should incorporate these “trusted” benchmarks
with a power source for static positioning, to an additional as a check during any campaign.
receiver or network communicated by radio or cellular for Global positioning surveys are expected to change
real-time positioning. A real-time approach in its most com- rapidly in the future. The expansion of continuously operat-
mon form may be described as a roving receiver augmented ing reference stations, combined with newly available satellite
by a single-base station receiver, known as a single-base signals, and enhancements to the conterminous geoid, are all
real-time (RT) survey. More efficient real-time methods sufficient indicators for substantial growth in real-time posi-
involving a Real-Time Network (RTN) permit the use of tioning and quality thereof.
only one roving receiver that is augmented to a network of
fixed receivers commonly known as Continually Operating
Reference Stations (CORS). A post-processed approach in its
most common form involves static data collection at a single Introduction
point. Data are most commonly post-processed through
a universally accepted utility maintained by the National Aside from geodetic surveying, Global Navigation Satel-
Geodetic Survey (NGS), known as the Online Position User lite System (GNSS) positioning has become a well-known
Service (OPUS). More complex post-processed methods technology used heavily in many scientific studies, in addi-
involve static observations among a network of additional tion to real estate, transportation, agriculture, and recreational
receivers collecting static data at known benchmarks. Both industries. As science and technology continue to increase
classifications provide users flexibility regarding efficiency demands on global positioning, additional satellites will be
and quality of data collection. placed in orbit, and modernization efforts will continue to
Quality assurance of survey-grade global position- provide stronger civilian frequencies to increase quality and
ing is often overlooked or not understood and perceived efficiency.
2 Methods of Practice and Guidelines for Using Survey-Grade GNSS to Establish Vertical Datum in the USGS
Datum Establishment in the U.S. Geological part of field data collection in the USGS, documentation is
needed to provide guidance regarding the proper use and
Survey
expression of data uncertainty acquired by GNSS. A sufficient
Historically, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has example is the current USGS streamgage network, consisting
used geodetic leveling to establish elevations that were used of approximately 7,500 streamgages (U.S. Geological Survey,
as the framework in the development of topographic maps National Streamflow Information Program, 2006). Data from
(U.S. Geological Survey, 1966). Typically, the USGS followed the streamgage network are used in many capacities, such as
third-order quality-control standards (issued by the Bureau of flood control, navigation, transportation infrastructure, flood
Budget in 1958) when establishing elevation, except in cases forecasting, wastewater treatment, hydro-electric power,
where a greater detail of mapping was required (U.S. Geologi- recreation, and other water-supply and resource management
cal Survey, 1966). These elevations supplemented the exist- applications vital to human supply and health. Consequently,
ing network of first- and second-order quality of elevation this network is one of the largest sources of public and coop-
control established by the U.S. Coastal and Geodetic Survey erative interest (funded in partnership with Federal, State, and
(USCGS). A lesser degree of accuracy than the third-order local agencies), which highlights the need for perpetuated
standard was documented by Kennedy (1990), who stated that datum in terms of consistency, reliability, and accuracy. Other
USGS gaging stations are tied to the National Geodetic Verti- survey-grade global positioning applications and requirements
cal Datum of 1929 (NGVD 29) by “ordinary levels.” Used in specific to the USGS arise from field data collection that
this context, an “ordinary level” may be classified as fourth- supports multi-disciplinary science among the USGS mission
order accuracy, which differs from a third-order accuracy areas (http://www.usgs.gov/start_with_science/).
by omitting special equipment and meticulous procedures
designed to minimize systematic errors (Kennedy, 1990).
Evolution of Global Navigation Satellite Systems
Kennedy defined the “ordinary level” approach essentially as a
third-order accuracy, keeping errors smaller than 0.05 M feet The original U.S. space-based Global Positioning System
(ft), (where M is the total distance run, out and back, in miles), (GPS) has greatly evolved after a 24 operational satellite
but using ordinary equipment. Preserving techniques outlined constellation was declared fully operational in 1995, identified
in the “Topographic Instructions of the United States—Level- as the Navigation Satellite Timing and Ranging (NAVSTAR)
ing” (U.S. Geological Survey, 1966), Kennedy limited sight system (GlobalSecurity.org, 2010). Upon completion of the
lengths to 300 ft and required level rods to be read within fully functional constellation, the availability of selective
0.01 ft during geodetic leveling. Kennedy identified the first civilian-use signals was approved as part of a comprehen-
indication of an accuracy requirement in perpetuating a datum sive national policy by former president Bill Clinton in 1996
to a streamgage (0.05 M ft), including an exception for hilly (Office of Science and Technology Policy, 1996). As outlined
or rough terrain where allowable closure errors were kept by the 1996 policy, civilian selective availability (a technique
employed to degrade GPS signal for national security reasons)
under 0.10 M ft.
was then discontinued in May of the year 2000, thereby ben-
Moving forward from Kennedy (1990), the evolution of
efiting worldwide safety and scientific commercial interests by
technology, particularly GNSS, can satisfy, if not exceed, these
elimination of the degraded signal. Removal of the degraded
expectations in perpetuating a datum from an existing network
signal provided substantial improvement in autonomous global
of benchmarks. The history of global positioning in the USGS
originates from the spring of 1986 when the National Mapping positioning. In 2006, global positioning technology started to
Division (NMD) and Geologic Division of the USGS invested evolve to a state of global geo-spatial positioning, known as
in early dual-frequency receivers that had the ability to track Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS). GNSS essen-
4 of the 6 satellites in orbit for crustal motion and subsidence tially combines globally-functional satellite constellations
studies (D. Benson, U.S. Geological Survey, written comm., with global and regional ground-based reference stations (at
2010). As global positioning technology advanced in 1989, accurately surveyed locations) to enhance and broaden posi-
the USGS began using receivers that stored data internally (as tioning. The primary navigation satellite systems, composed
opposed to external cassette tapes) and were much more por- of GPS, the Russian GLObal NAvigation Satellite System
table. In late 1992, NMD purchased dual-frequency receivers (GLONASS), the European Galileo, and the Chinese Compass
that were used during the next 13 years (D. Benson, U.S. Geo- are further defined in table 1 (Federal Space Agency, 2011).
logical Survey, written commun., 2010). As the constellation These navigation satellite systems are augmented with global-
expanded to 24 available satellites, observation time for data and regional-based reference stations that maintain geosta-
collection was reduced, and these receivers were successful in tionary satellites as part of the Satellite Based Augmentation
providing orthophoto control sufficient for mapping and other System (SBAS). One of the most common systems is known
projects, such as the monitoring of earthquakes. as the Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS), developed
As interagency efforts and cooperative interests con- by the Federal Aviation Administration for flight navigation.
tinue to increase within the scientific community, and the use Other common commercial subscription-based GNSS aug-
of survey-grade global positioning is growing as an integral mentation systems are proprietary.
Introduction 3
Table 1. Primary navigation satellite systems. The separation distance, or geoid height, is positive
away from the Earth center and negative towards it (Henning,
[GPS, Global Positioning System; ≥, greater than or equal to; GLONASS,
GLObal NAvigation Satellite System] 2010). In the conterminous United States, the geoid is always
a negative value, such that the geoid surface is below the
Number of
ellipsoid surface. Referring to figure 1, an example calcula-
Constellation Owner Year 2010 status tion may be indicated as follows: A GNSS observation taken
satellites*
at 37°08′23.64535 north and -93°26′28.22070 west computes
GPS United States ≥ 24 Operational.
a height of 361.756 meters. The geoid height located at this
GLONASS Russia ≥ 24 Operational with restric- latitude and longitude is -29.24 meters. The elevation is:
tions.
Galileo Europe ≥ 27 In preparation, operational H=h-N (1)
expected 2013.
Compass China 35 In preparation, operational where
expected 2013. H = orthometric height,
*
Number does not include satellites that may be on reserve for backup or h = ellipsoid height, and
more recent additions as part of modernization efforts. Statistics provided in N = geoid height, therefore,
year 2010 (Federal Space Agency, 2011).
H = 361.756 - (-29.24) = 390.996 meters.
Geodesy Background In summary, GNSS observations are measurements of
ellipsoid height which are converted to orthometric heights
The science of measuring the size and shape of the (elevations) using a hybrid geoid model based on a network
Earth, and its relation to precise locations on the Earth’s of known vertical benchmarks (Henning, 2010). Currently,
surface is needed to relate and further define applications of the 2009 geoid model (GEOID 09) is the most current hybrid
global positioning. To define points on the Earth’s surface, a geoid model used in the conterminous United States; however,
spheroidal reference surface is needed in which to perform new geoid models will be produced in the future to update
geodetic computations. The surface of the earth is most effec- physical characteristics of the Earth. New geoid models are
tively represented by an ellipsoid, a mathematically-defined produced out of necessity as plate tectonic shifting, subsid-
surface flattened slightly at the poles, and bulging somewhat ence, and anthropogenic disturbances alter the coordinates of
at the equator (Burkard, 1985). The most current ellipsoid physical survey monumentation used to develop these models.
reference surface is identified by World Geodetic System A point of concern about the usefulness of a hybrid geoid
1984 (WGS 84) and is the standard used by the Depart- model is the accuracy of the model for the area in which a
ment of Defense for GPS positioning, mapping, timing, and GNSS campaign is led. A comparison between the number
navigation. In addition to the WGS 84 ellipsoid, it is impor- of locations in each state for which a GNSS ellipsoid height
tant to define the associated reference system, which reflects and a leveled NAVD 88 orthometric height is known (thus
the monitoring of all fixed station coordinates on the Earth defining the separation distance) and the 2009 geoid model
as they change within a particular epoch of time because of (GEOID 09) for that state is represented in table 2. This table
continental drift (Henning, 2010). The International Ter- essentially represents an indication of geoid accuracy for
restrial Reference System (ITRS) describes procedures for each state. The standard deviation in table 2 is expressed at
creating reference frames in their usable form, such as the the 68-percent confidence level; therefore, each value should
International Terrestrial Reference Frame (ITRF). This global be doubled to achieve a more confident measure (95-percent
reference frame is used to reference the motion of the Earth’s confidence interval). For example, in the state of Missouri,
crust and is considered the basis for computations that are one could generally expect a standard deviation of 2 centi-
transformed to a geodetic reference system, such as the North meters (cm) (95-percent confidence level) from the modeled
American Datum for the United States. geoid as compared to 138 benchmarks (or known separation
The definition of the geoid is adopted from the National distances) consisting of GPS-derived ellipsoidal height and
Geodetic Survey (NGS) and is stated as “the equipotential leveled orthometric height data (Roman and others, 2009).
surface of the Earth’s gravity field which best fits, in a least Continuing with the example; the quality of the geoid model
squares sense, global mean sea level” (http://www.ngs.noaa. appears to be slightly more favorable in Missouri as compared
gov/GEOID/geoid_def.html). It is important to distinguish to Georgia, where the standard deviation from nearly the same
between ellipsoid and geoid heights to understand how number of benchmarks is 0.8 cm greater in Georgia (2.8 cm at
elevations are derived. GNSS observations measure the dis- 95-percent confidence level) than Missouri.
tance above or below the ellipsoid reference surface, defined To fully understand how orthometric heights are refer-
as ellipsoid heights (h) (fig. 1). These ellipsoid heights are enced, the geodetic reference system containing horizontal
converted to orthometric heights (H) or elevations by the and vertical datum must be defined. The official national
separation distance between the ellipsoid and the geoid (N) geometrical datum for the United States is the North Ameri-
(fig. 1). can Datum of 1983 (NAD 83), which is usually expressed in
Mountains
Geoid Earth
’s su
rface
Ell
ips
oid
an Oc
ce ea
O n
Separation distance positive away from the earth

and negative towards the earth
h
Ellipsoid
H
N
el Geoid
v
a le
Se
EXPLANATION
H=h-N
h Ellipsoid height
H Orthometric height
N Geoid height
Figure 1. Relation between the ellipsoid, geoid, and orthometric heights.
Figure 1. Relation between the ellipsoid and geoid.

three dimensions as latitude, longitude, and ellipsoid height values with ellipsoid heights, an application of the current
(Henning, 2010). This Earth-centered datum has become more hybrid geoid model yields an orthometric height referenced
refined and has been adjusted as a result of satellite and grav- to the official national vertical datum of the United States,
ity measurements that contributed to the level of precision. better known as the North American Vertical Datum of 1988
The NAD 83 datum adjustments are labeled with a certain (NAVD 88). The NAVD 88 datum is based on the height of the
time stamp, or “epoch,” a reference frame denoted by a par- primary tidal bench mark referenced to the new International
ticular year. The most current realization that is generally used Great Lakes Datum of 1985, representing local mean sea level
throughout the United States is the NAD 83 (CORS96), epoch at Father Point/Rimouski, Quebec, Canada (National Geodetic
2002.0, which constitutes the framework for the definition Survey, 2010a). This height was held fixed during a minimum-
of the National Spatial Reference System (NSRS) (Soler and constraint adjustment of leveling observations that were
Marshall, 2003). This realization is most commonly adopted applied throughout the United States, Mexico, and Canada.
in real-time or post-processed positioning. An example of The NAVD 88 vertical datum is applicable to the contermi-
a NAD 83 realization, as defined by Henning (2010) as its nous United States and Alaska, but there are other vertical
physical, useable manifestation of this datum, is NAD 83 datum used, such as the Puerto Rico Vertical Datum of 2002
(NSRS2007), an approximation for the distribution at nearly (PRVD 02) in Puerto Rico and a refined gravimetric model of
70,000 geodetic control monuments. A realization of the pas- the geoid (USGG 2009) in Hawaii (offset by 50–60 cm from
sive marks that occurred January 1, 2012, used the multi-year some local tidal benchmark values), that are applied as the
CORS adjustment that combines global stations and CORS to vertical datum surface.
assess positional differences resulting from velocities owing
to crustal motion (Stone, 2011). This realization is known as
NAD 83 (2011), epoch 2010.0 for the United States including Purpose and Scope
Alaska, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands. The realization
for the Pacific tectonic plate (including Hawaii) is NAD 83 This manual outlines approaches and guidelines to
(PA11), epoch 2010.0. ensure quality survey-grade GNSS surveying when establish-
Once the earth centered, earth fixed (ECEF) “x, y and z” ing vertical datum for various applications within the USGS.
coordinates derived from GPS are transformed to the NAD 83 The focus of this manual is on the application and execution
Equipment 5
Table 2. Residual differences between the Geoid 2009 (GEOID 09) hybrid model and known separation distance as determined from
Global Positioning System (GPS)-derived ellipsoid heights and leveled North American Vertical Datum 1988 (NAVD 88) orthometric
heights at benchmarks within the conterminous United States.
[Modified from Roman, 2009. m, meter]
Number of Average Standard Number of Average Standard

State GPS bias deviation State GPS bias deviation
benchmarks (m) (m) benchmarks (m) (m)
Alabama 283 0.000 0.011 Nebraska 145 0.000 0.007
Arizona 227 0.000 0.016 Nevada 70 0.001 0.012
Arkansas 133 0.001 0.018 New Hampshire 14 -0.003 0.009
California 738 0.000 0.022 New Jersey 326 0.000 0.011
Colorado 562 0.000 0.025 New Mexico 107 0.000 0.015
Connecticut 20 0.000 0.015 New York 185 0.000 0.011
Delaware 35 0.001 0.012 North Carolina 1,676 0.000 0.015
District of Columbia 16 0.004 0.020 North Dakota 47 0.001 0.007
Florida 2,181 0.000 0.014 Ohio 297 0.000 0.022
Georgia 137 0.000 0.014 Oklahoma 79 0.000 0.008
Idaho 97 0.001 0.011 Oregon 202 0.000 0.015
Illinois 334 0.001 0.011 Pennsylvania 96 -0.001 0.013
Indiana 119 0.000 0.013 Rhode Island 29 0.000 0.018
Iowa 100 -0.001 0.009 South Carolina 1,315 0.000 0.012
Kansas 105 0.000 0.009 South Dakota 242 0.000 0.008
Kentucky 123 -0.001 0.013 Tennessee 302 0.000 0.018
Louisiana 217 -0.001 0.012 Texas 218 0.000 0.012
Maine 65 0.000 0.011 Utah 55 0.000 0.016
Maryland 511 0.000 0.016 Vermont 317 0.000 0.013
Massachusetts 35 0.000 0.012 Virginia 434 0.000 0.021
Michigan 410 0.000 0.015 Washington 259 0.000 0.017
Minnesota 4,089 0.000 0.009 West Virgina 55 0.001 0.013
Mississippi 243 0.000 0.019 Wisconsin 758 0.000 0.007
Missouri 138 0.000 0.010 Wyoming 101 -0.001 0.017
Montana 151 0.000 0.009
of GNSS as it pertains to the USGS. Fundamentals, including Positioning Systems or GPS is used in this manual to define
operational theory, firmware algorithms, and detailed geod- the U.S. space-based system (U.S. GPS) of global positioning
esy are left to other well-documented sources, more specifi- exclusively, whereas the term “Global Navigation Satel-
cally those disseminated by the National Geodetic Survey lite Systems” or “GNSS” represents satellite constellations
(NGS) at www.ngs.noaa.gov. This manual also focuses on available throughout space, including the U.S. GPS. To avoid
quality-assurance measures while achieving the maximum confusion, the term “Global Navigation Satellite System” or
efficiency of a GNSS campaign to establish vertical datum. “GNSS” will be used when describing the technology and
Different quality-control standards may apply to the estab- system of terrestrial positioning with satellite signals, unless
lishment of vertical datum for special investigative studies in specifically referring to the U.S. GPS system.
comparison to USGS standardized data collection efforts on
a nationwide scale. This manual recognizes GNSS strategies
that are largely dependent upon the quality of the datum to
be established (as dictated by the overall science), support- Equipment
ing benchmarks, and the spatiality of the campaign. Typical
scenarios for which GNSS surveys are undertaken in the GNSS equipment is composed of different components,
USGS are investigated and an approach that ensures qual- such as receivers, antennas (receiver and radio), tripods,
ity and efficiency is formulated. Note that the term Global tribrachs, radios, data collector, software, batteries, and
connective cables that permit the system to function. Varia- fixed receivers known as a Real-Time Network (RTN), acces-
tions of GNSS equipment components are contingent upon sible by wireless communication. These RTNs use a central-
the type of survey to be led and whether one will use post- ized server to facilitate quality-assurance checks, network
processed or real-time methods. modeling, estimation of systematic errors, and calculation of
Post-processed methods of GNSS surveying are gener- corrected data that is submitted back to the end user (rover).
ally referred to as static surveys. These surveys are not mobile During a RTN survey, the radio and accessories are omitted
and collect data at the receiver to be processed at a later date. because the network of fixed receivers is linked through the
Data collection occurs within the receiver that is mounted on application of wireless broadband. RTN surveys often do not
a tripod over a point of interest. Typically, occupation times require an additional fixed-base receiver because the network
range anywhere from 15 minutes for rapid-static sessions to as itself provides the needed real-time corrections and coordinate
much as 24 hours for longer static sessions. Applications and basis. Applications and approaches of both real-time methods
approaches of post-processed methods of global positioning of global positioning will be described in greater detail later in
will be described in greater detail in the "Static GNSS" section this manual.
of this report.
For post-processed methods, equipment needs are
simplified. Essentially a receiver with a receiver antenna and Overview and Function
power supply is needed on top of a tripod. In many cases, a
tribrach is used to attach and level the receiver to the tripod. Function and detail of GNSS equipment electronics and
GNSS radio communication is well documented in other
The tribrach has an adjustable top plate that can be leveled
sources and will not be described in this text; however, it is
by way of three thumb screws relative to a fixed bottom plate
important for the user to recognize the general purpose and
that attaches to the top of the tripod (fig. 2). A data collector is
limitations of GNSS equipment to plan appropriately for
typically used to initiate and conclude the observation ses-
a specific campaign. The primary components of a GNSS
sion, although internal configuration files often exist that can
system are the receiver, receiver antenna, radio, radio antenna,
be uploaded to a receiver to start and stop logging data when
data collector, tripod, and software.
powering up and powering down the receiver.
There are generally two methods involving real-time
(RT) GNSS surveying. The traditional method, known as Receivers
single-base Real-Time Kinematic (RTK) surveying, is a global
positioning approach that involves a single stationary receiver The receiver is the most integral part of global posi-
(known as a base station) that provides a real-time differential tioning infrastructure. Survey-grade receivers are typically
correction from signals received at the base, applied to those dual frequency, defined as utilizing satellite signals fre-
signals received by a mobile unit (known as a rover) by way quencies in the L-band at 1575.42 Megahertz (MHz) for L1
of radio. Single-base RTK methods involve equipment such and 1227.60 MHz for L2. Most receivers have power-input
as a fixed-base receiver in addition to radio and accessories, levels that vary from 10.5 to 28 volts (Henning, 2010).
including an external radio whip antenna, power supply, and Dual-frequency receivers are known for their resolution of
support tripod. Another RT method involves a network of ionospheric delay. Ionospheric delay is an important concept
Figure 2. Tribrachs used

with tripods to attach Global
Navigation Satellite System
(GNSS) receivers.
Figure 2. Tribrachs used with tripods to attach Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) receivers.
Equipment 7
to GNSS surveys, defined as the change in speed in which

signals are transmitted through the electron- and ion-charged
atmosphere between 40 and 400 miles above the Earth’s
surface. Changes in signal speed (most commonly a delay)
through the ionosphere are usually the result of energetic
events from the sun, and a dual-frequency receiver is benefi-
cial because it uses differences between the frequencies to
correct the resulting error. Dual-frequency receivers permit
longer baselines (distances) in addition to shorter times of
satellite acquisition and trilateration (initialization). At this
time of this writing, receivers are being manufactured with Receiver and micro-centered antenna with
the allowance for a third frequency, known as L5, and other and without prominent ground plane.
enhancements (L1C and L2C with optimized signal design) to

existing signals L1 and L2 as part of an ongoing effort to mod-
ernize GPS with new advanced capabilities to meet military,
civil, and commercial needs (U.S. Department of Commerce,
2010). The new civilian signal L5 provides a higher power
level than other signals and has a greater bandwidth, which
makes it easier to acquire and track weaker satellite signals.
Another classification of receiver is one that has the capacity
of augmenting GPS signals with signals from the GLONASS
and Galileo constellation of satellites (table 1). Although
many existing dual-frequency receivers are only equipped for
GPS signals, many (including multi-frequency receivers) are
compatible to receive signals from GLONASS and Galileo
(Galileo will have the L5 availability; NavtechGPS, 2012).
As future constellations are made available for civilian use,
receivers will be manufactured to ensure the greatest benefit
of signal tracking.
It is important to upgrade firmware and maintain current
versioning with any GNSS receiver. Firmware upgrades are
offered to increase performance and usability. GNSS manu-
Integrated recievers and antennas with micro-centered
facturers usually have a web link that offers the upgrades, and built-in ground plane.
it is the user’s responsibility to ensure installation of these
upgrades as they become available. These upgrades offer Figure 3. Various types of Global Navigation Satellite System
many benefits, including improved radio communication (GNSS) receiver antennas.
range, optimized storage and data transfer, wireless enhance- Figure 3. Various types of Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS)
ments, and assorted handling of satellite messages. receiver antennas.
A radio link is typically used when employing a single-
base RTK approach, which requires a broadcast radio and
Antenna (Receiver and Radio) and Radio antenna at the base receiver location, and a receiving radio
and antenna at the rover location; however, many single-base
Receivers may have an external or an internal antenna real-time approaches employ a data modem for the wire-
that holds the electronic phase center to which a baseline less communication method of choice. This radio or modem
vector is computed to form a baseline solution. This antenna system communicates and maintains a differential correction
receives satellite signals that include the time the message was “on-the-fly” during these surveys. A longer whip antenna or
sent, orbital information of the GNSS satellite network, and an optional extended range antenna pole will enhance com-
general system health of all GNSS satellites. The antenna of a munications by ensuring a higher signal to noise ratio (Hen-
GNSS receiver is identified as “micro-centered,” which means ning, 2010). Antenna enhancements can be made at the base
that there is no specific orientation that needs to be preserved receiver, rover receiver, or both (fig. 4). During single-base
once established in the field, unless explicitly specified by RTK campaigns with long baselines, radio communica-
the manufacturer. There are several different types of anten- tions have been substantially improved by incorporating
nas that have varying degrees of “on-board” signal quality- an extended range pole antenna at the rover unit. For linear
assurance capabilities; examples of different types of GNSS surveys without obstructions, a directional antenna for the
receiver antennas are depicted in figure 3. broadcast radio may be considered (Henning, 2010).
Radio antenna
for Real-Time
Base receiver on Kinematic (RTK)
fixed-height tripod surveying
Rover receiver
on fixed-height
RTK Data bipod
broadcast collector
radio
Power source
for RTK radio
Power source
for base receiver
Extended range
antenna for
rover receiver
Figure 4. Traditional real-time equipment profile. Note extended range antenna enhancement for rover receiver.
Figure 4. Traditional real-time equipment profile. Note extended range antenna enhancement for rover receiver.
Equipment 9
The required wireless communication can be a source

of frustration when communications fail. For radio commu-
nication, there are five factors, derived from the Pacific Crest Base receiver on
fixed-height
Corporation (2009) that should be analyzed to ensure radio center pole tripod
communication and range: with no offset
1. Environment—
• Assessment of radio range as comparing flat or “Rubber duck”

hilly terrain, with or without buildings and trees; antenna used for
radio communication
and
• Proximity of radio towers or airports as other

radar and radio emissions can greatly reduce
range.
2. Antenna—
• “Mobile whip” antennas for RTK surveying

(fig. 4) out-perform “rubber duck” antennas
(fig. 5);
• Upper and lower frequency range limits of the

antenna should be equivalent to that of the radio;
• Upper and lower elements of the whip antenna

should have the same gain (that is 0 db or 5 db
gain); and
• Elevate antenna as high as possible (usually with

an antenna mast). Studies have indicated that dou-
bling the antenna height will increase the range by
Figure 5.5. “Rubber
Figure duck”
“Rubber antenna
duck” used
antenna for radio
used communication.
for radio communication.
40 percent (Henning, 2010).
3. Antenna cables—
5. Broadcast radio—
• Shorter cable lengths promote better range • Use the latest firmware release in the radio; and
because losses are minimized. For extended
antenna heights, a low-loss cable should be used; • Assure that the digisquelch or sensitivity is
appropriately set to “low” or “high,” depending
• Cable types of LMR200 are more efficient than upon the application (receiving signals over short
RG58; and or long distances) and potential for any external
• Cable damage can be determined by swapping radio interference.
antenna cables. The GNSS broadcast radio used during single-base RTK
surveys should maintain a 12-volt supply at all times. Base
4. Battery cable and connectors— radios usually vary from 25 to 35 watts and have a typical
• Battery age (commonly replace after 2 years); range of 3 to 5 miles (Henning, 2010). For lengthy surveys
involving single-base RTK positioning, a secondary radio may
• Extreme hot or cold temperature will reduce the be considered to be used as a repeater along a particular base-
power output of the battery; line. A repeater radio is simply used to pick up the base station
radio signal and re-broadcast the signal to the rover receiver
• Condition of the battery cable; a frayed or cracked over a longer baseline distance with minimal latency.
cable may fail to deliver full power; For RTN surveys, the GNSS base receiver and broadcast
• Condition of battery connectors; assure periodic radio are always omitted, and a wireless broadband or cellular
cleaning with a brush and contact cleaner every modem is substituted to communicate with the network over
few months; and the internet using cellular networks. Nevertheless, it is good
practice to include the base receiver and a broadcast radio as a
• Clip usage; battery may fail to deliver full power “back-up” for occurrences where broadband or cellular com-
when using alligator clips. munication is lacking; however, there are devices such as a
RTK bridge (fig. 6) that can be used to interface to the internet

through a cellular modem, established connectivity with a
RTN server, and authenticate and broadcast correction mes-
sages to the field rover by way of radio. Devices such as these
are useful for areas void of cellular coverage while permitting
multiple rover units without additional cellular modems.
For GNSS radios, it is important to identify the frequency
band in which the USGS is authorized to operate as a fed-
eral agency. The range for survey-grade GNSS is between
410 MHz and 420 MHz (R. Pardee, U.S. Geological Survey,
written commun., Feb. 24, 2011). It is therefore important to
convey to vendors and procurement officers the permissible
range before purchasing equipment and ensuring the acquisi-
tion of special certifications that may be applicable.
Figure 7. Data collectors used for Global

Figure 6. Real-Time Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) positioning.
Figure 7. Data collectors used for Global Navigation Satellite System
Kinematic bridge used (GNSS) positioning.
to facilitate multiple
survey-grade receivers Tripods
within a Real-Time
Network (RTN) for A fixed-height tripod is recommended for all GNSS
areas void of cellular receivers in the static mode and the base receiver for RT. The
coverage. fixed-height tripod essentially has a centered fixed-height
range pole (usually 2 meters) that is supported by three adjust-
Data Collector able external legs (fig. 8). Many tripod assemblies have an
Figure 6. Real-Time Kinematic (RTK) bridge used to facilitate multiple adjustable center pole with fixed-height dowel stops. During
survey-grade receivers within a Real-Time Network (RTN) for areas void
The data collector serves as an interface to communicate a single-base RTK survey, a fixed-height, single-carbon, fiber
of cellular coverage.
with receivers to initiate a GNSS observation (fig. 7). In addi- range pole with associated bipod is often used with the rover
tion, data collectors facilitate satellite tracking, data storage, receiver (as opposed to the fixed-height tripod used for the
processing, dissemination, transformations between datum and base receiver). Similar to fixed-height tripods, some bipod
projections, and provide other quality-assurance diagnostics. assemblies have an adjustable center pole with fixed-height
Data collectors communicate either by data cable or wire- stops. Several manufacturers have been developing fixed-
less. Most data collectors possess features such as enhanced height tripods and bipods for the purpose of providing stability
graphics, large memory capacities, and tough weather-resistant by prohibiting movement of the center pole. Additionally,
construction. Data collectors should be used to provide quality these fixed-height platforms provide assurance for antenna
assurance during a campaign by reviewing and contrasting centering, prevent height measurement error, and reduce set-
redundant observations, and often possess functionality used up time. Traditional tripods are not as vertically stable as tri-
for various coordinate geometry computations. Although pods with fixed-height center poles, and are not recommended
data collectors minimize the need for hand-written notes in for GNSS receivers because they are more likely to be subject
the field, it is considered good general practice to document to movement for long observations; however, a traditional
primary aspects of a GNSS campaign in hand-written form tripod that employs dual clamps may be considered for base
that is well organized in a field notebook. These aspects will stations during RT observations or static observations. Dual
be detailed in the "Metadata" section. clamps are usually a combination of wing screws and quick
Equipment 11
Fixed-height center pole tripod.
Quick
clamp
Wing
screw
Adjustable center pole with fixed-height stops, supported Traditional tripod with dual clamps. May be used for
by a bipod. Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) receivers.
Figure 8. Fixed-height and adjustable fixed-height center pole tripod and bipod used for Global Navigation Satellite System
Figure 8. Fixed-height
(GNSS) and adjustable fixed-height center pole tripod and bipod used for Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) positioning.
positioning.
clamps (fig. 8). Other traditional tripods may be used for a shifting, subsidence, or heave that may depreciate confidence
broadcast radio and antenna setup, as this use does not require in the mark in the area of recovery. Using the benchmark as
a high degree of stability. When using a traditional tripod, it “truth” simply identifies the mark or set of marks as absolutes
should be in good condition such that all legs, hinges, clamps, that dictate the uncertainty of the effort.
and feet are secure and functioning. Non-monumented benchmarks (also referred to as “tem-
Circular bubble level vials, or “bulls eye” levels, are located porary,” “intermediate” or “supplementary”) may consist of
on the fixed base tripod and rover bipod. It is good practice to any of the following: chiseled squares; crosses or circles on
ensure an adequate plumb of the circular level vial (and adjust concrete or masonry structures; bolt heads in steel, concrete,
if necessary by evaluating the bubble location before and after or masonry structures; and metal pins or magnetic (mag) nails
a 180 degree rotation of the fixed center pole (fig. 9). Figure 9 in concrete or asphalt (U.S. Geological Survey, 1966) (fig. 10).
illustrates a recommended procedure documented by Henning Non-monumented benchmarks are simply a mark with no
(2010). This procedure is only applicable for fixed-height tripods identifying information.
with rotating center poles, or a fixed-height pole removed from a For GNSS campaigns within the USGS, the vertical
set of bipod legs that could be used in a door jam. component of positioning is usually the primary concern. Sta-
bility and an open view of the sky are key considerations for
benchmarks. The identification of the frost line (if applicable)
Benchmarks is essential in determining long term stability for those bench-
For any GNSS survey campaign, a proper benchmark marks constructed with Earth anchoring (fig. 11). Benchmarks
is essential to preserve measurement location and elevation. that are to be occupied using GNSS need to have a minimal
Historically, leveling field operations for second- and third- amount of surrounding obstruction in the hemisphere of appli-
order geodetic leveling, provided in the topographic instruc- cable sky. An attempt should be made to establish benchmarks
tions of the USGS, distinguished survey benchmarks as either where obstructions such as buildings, overhangs, terrain, trees,
monumented or non-monumented benchmarks (U.S. Geologi- fences, utility poles, or overhead lines exist below a 10 degree
cal Survey, 1966). Examples of monumented and non-monu- plane above the horizon. As a rule of thumb, it is much better
mented benchmarks are described in figure 10. Monumented to establish a new, completely open sky view site for a GNSS
benchmarks have a tablet consisting of identifying informa- observation than to try to occupy an existing, reliable, well-
tion surrounding a stamped center point. These marks are known benchmark with a somewhat obscured sky view (Hen-
represented as a standard metal tablet, disk, cap, or steel rod ning, 2010).
used to describe the elevation. These tablets are commonly
set in concrete, stone posts, firm rock outcroppings, masonry
structures, and buildings (U.S. Geological Survey, 1966).
Software
Another unique monumented benchmark that may be used
in areas void of rock substrate is known as a FENO marker. Software used for GNSS processing is complex with a
FENO markers utilize 1-meter long stakes with extendible variety of tools to process data. Most software programs pro-
anchors at the bottom to keep them secure (fig. 10). FENO vide the following basic utilities:
markers are monumented benchmarks because a tablet is • Data transfer.—Allows the transfer of files from the
secured to the top of the stake. If monumented benchmarks GNSS receiver or data collector to a personal computer
are selected to be used, they must be marked with identifying (PC) processing package. Conversely, files can be
information, generally the agency setting the benchmark plus transferred from the computer to external devices.
other information that the agency can use to uniquely identify
the benchmark [NGS uses a Permanent Identifier (PID) and • Receiver INdependent EXchange (RINEX) format
designate, whereas the USGS Nebraska Water Science Center conversion.—Converts proprietary formatted GNSS
uses a four-digit numbering system]. In addition, monu- data to a universal format known as RINEX; this
mented benchmarks are often stamped with elevation and the conversion creates a raw observation file with station
established year. and antenna information, a navigation file contain-
The selection of benchmarks used in a GNSS campaign ing GNSS orbits, and a meteorological file containing
is critical to ensuring quality orthometric heights. As defined pressure, temperature, and relative humidity (Trimble,
later in the Real-Time and Static GNSS sections, there are 1992–2002). These files are used for post-processing
many different quality indicators and assurances that can be GNSS solutions.
taken to produce heights with minimal uncertainty; one of the • Data collector file editor.—Allows the correction of
most fundamental assurances is the acceptance of a bench- field-entered data to be added into the data collector.
mark that is “trusted” with its subsequent use as “truth” in
evaluating the quality of the campaign. The decision to “trust” • Feature and attribute editor.—Allows the management
a benchmark must be made after a thorough evaluation of the of processing geographic information systems (GIS)
history and stability of the mark as well as any plate tectonic data collection.
Equipment 13
Position 1
EXPLANATION
Preparation of circular level vial adjustment on fixed-height tipod
1. Turn center pole 180 degrees after centering bubble on center pole
2. If any part of the bubble goes out of the black circle, move quick release
legs until bubble is half way between position 1 and position 2 Position 2
3. Use adjusting screws until bubble is centered
Adjustment with legs
Position 1 and 2
after adjusting screws
Modified from Henning, 2010
Adjustment
screw
Figure 9. Circular
Figure level vial
9. Circular leveladjustment on fixed-height
vial adjustment center poles.
on fixed-height center poles.
Using a plumb bob to ensure a vertical plumb line in a door jam. Establish shoe points on both ends of the adjustable fixed-height center pole
and compress in the door jam.
Modified from Henning, 2010

EXPLANATION
Preparation of an adjustable fixed-height center pole used for a cicular level vial adjustment
1. Centerpunch a notch and establish an eyelet screw on the top of a door jam
2. String a plumb bob through the eyelet and mark a point (plumb) on the floor
3. Remove the adjustable fixed-height pole from the bipod legs and install a shoe
point on both ends of the fixed-height pole
4. Set the bottom shoe point on the mark on the floor and adjust the adjustable fixed-height
pole so the top shoe is compressed in the top jam
5. Proceed with the circular level vial adjustment
Figure 9. Circular level vial adjustment on fixed-height center poles.—Continued
• Mission planning tools.—Provides satellite information • Coordinate system manager.—Allows access and editing
necessary for GNSS users to plan a GNSS campaign of a geodetic database that contains coordinate systems,
based on time, date, and geographic area. datum transformations, ellipsoids, and geoid models.
• Grid manipulation tools.—Provides a mapping util- • Survey network adjustment.—A utility using a least
ity in which to extract geoid grids used to convert squares adjustment among GNSS observations and
ellipsoid heights to orthometric heights. A grid over known benchmarks.
the conterminous United States uses a large amount
of memory, which may not be available in some data Project software contains many additional functions, includ-
9. Circular level
Figure collectors. vial adjustment on fixed-height center
An extraction of the geoid grid is usually ing the processing of GNSS baseline data, quality assurance
poles.—Continued
performed for the area in which a GNSS campaign is closure reports, and digital terrain modeling and contouring.
led. Additionally, many software programs have a built in form
of computer automated drafting (CAD) that illustrates GNSS
benchmarks, baselines, and measurements.
Equipment 15
Non-monumented
magnetic nails used in
concrete and asphalt
Monumented benchmark in top of concrete structure.
Example of U.S. Geological Survey benchmark

historically used for topographic control.
Non-monumented chiseled square benchmark in
firm outcropping rock.
Standard metal tablet

cemented in hole drilled 3/8-inch brass bolt and washer
in rock outcrop in concrete or masonry structure
Note: Centerpunch useful for

Non-monumented chiseled square benchmark in concrete constructing fixed-height pole points
structure.
Earth anchor
4-inch polyvinyl
Steel rod in 4-inch polyvinyl
chloride pipe
concrete base chloride pipe
lining
3–4 inches Gravel
3/8-inch
reinforcing
steel Below
belowfrostfrost
Below frost
line
lineororatata
line or at a
minimum
a minimum of
minimum of
3 of
feet deepdeep
3 feet
3 feet deep
Clean gravel
Concrete
base
Non-monumented sawed groove benchmark in iron

manhole structure.
Modified from Kenney, 2010
Figure 10. Examples of monumented and non-monumented benchmarks and anchoring construction used for Global Navigation
Figure Examples
10.System
Satellite of monumented
(GNSS) and non-monumented benchmarks and anchoring construction used for Global Navigation
observations.
Satellite System (GNSS) observations.
Monumented Feno Markers GNSS Equipment Summary and Checklist

Quality GNSS measurements are dependent upon equip-
ment being in sufficient working condition. GNSS equipment
should be thoroughly inspected before and after a survey
campaign to ensure an adequate inventory and proper qual-
ity assurance. Table 3 provides an outline of the necessary
equipment and quality-assurance recommendations for various
GNSS campaign types.
1 METER
Mission Planning and Error Sources

The concept of mission planning is crucial to all GNSS
campaigns and is often overlooked, potentially compromis-
ing the quality of data as well as introducing delays in the
Feno spike High-strength prongs process. For any GNSS campaign, a schedule of observation
driven to firmly anchor
Feno spike times should be evaluated with a logistics map that is used to
assess observation locations and any localized baselines that
may develop using single-base RTK or RTN surveys. A simple
Example of U.S. Geological Survey
benchmark more recently used for topographic map (often geo-referenced) is useful in illustrat-
datum control. ing open canopies for satellite reception of GNSS receivers,
and the presence of contour lines can be used to evaluate
radio communication potential for baselines. Online-acquired
Figure 10. Examples of monumented and non-monumented
mapping utilities and satellite imagery are sufficient planning
benchmarks and anchoring construction
resources. A handheld GPS unit is quite useful for navigating
used for Global benchmarks and anchoring construction used for Global Navigation
Figure 10. Examples of monumented and non-monumented to locations in the field.
Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) observations.—Continued
Satellite System (GNSS) observations.—Continued
0.49 0.82 8.20

1.64 2.46
3.28
4.10 7.38
OMAK 4.92 5.74 6.56 7.38 8.20 8.20 6.56
SEATTLE SPOKANE KALISPELL 8.20 7.38 CARIBOU
LONGVIEW YAKIMA HAVRE
DEVILS 7.38
MISSOULA MINOT
LAKE
GREAT
LEWISTON FALLS GLENDIVE
WILLISTON BEMIDJI
ELY
AUGUSTA 5.74
SALEM PENDLETON HELENA MARQUETTE
FARGO DULUTH
MONTPIELIER
BEND BAKER
SALMON
BUTTE BILLINGS
MILES CITY BISMARK 4.92
WAUSAU CONCORD
MEDFORD BURNS ABERDEEN GRAYLING
IDAHO MINNEAPOLIS
BOISE EAU CLAIRE ALBANY
LAKEVIEW
FALLS CODY SHERIDAN 4.10 SYRACUSE BOSTON
TWIN JACKSON
GILLETTE LEAD
PIERRE
MANKATO LA CROSSE
GRAND BUFFALO 4.10
FALLS RAPIDS
WINNEMUCCA MITCHELL FORT MASON MADISON DETROIT SCRANTON
REDDING ROCK SPRINGS
CASPER
DODGE CITY
KALAMAZOO
ERIE 3.28
ELKO CHADRON CHICAGO READING
LOGAN CHEYENNE NORFOLK CEDAR NEW YORK
RENO AUSTIN DES MOINES CANTON
RAPIDS LIMA PHILADELPHIA
AURORA PITTSBURGH
SACRAMENTO PEORIA COLUMBUS
2.46
OTTUMWA INDIANAPOLIS
ELY PROVO GREEN CRAIG
NORTH PLATTE
DECATUR
CLARKSBURG 1.64
RIVER DENVER LINCOLN WASHINGTON
SAN FRANCISCO DAYTON
RICHFIELD ST JOSEPH
TONOPAH CLARKSBURG
FRESNO
GRAND
HAYS
MT VERNON
LOUIS VILLE CHARLESTON
RICHMOND
0.82
CEDAR CITY JUNCTION PUEBLO
LAMAR TOPEKA COLUMBIA NORFOLK
LAS VEGAS MARION LEXINGTON ROANOKE
BAKERSFIELD GRAND CANYON
DURANGO
DODGE CITY
WICHITA BOWLING GREEN
RALEIGH
0.49
SAN RATON SPRINGFIELD KNOXVILLE
GALLUP ASHEVILLE
LOS BERNARDINO FLAGSTAFF SANTA FE
ANGELES KINGMAN ENID FAYETTEVILLE NASHVILLE WILMINGTON
AMARILLO
TULSA
0 PRESCOTT ALBUQUERQUE
LITTLE ROCK COLUMBIA
SAN DIEGO PHOENIX LAWTON FLORENCE ATLANTA
SILVER PORTALES
MIAMI CITY EL DORADO OXFORD CHARLESTON
ROSWELL BIRMINGHAM MACON
LUBBOCK
MERIDIAN
TUCSON LAS CURCES ALBANY
DALLAS SHREVEPORT MONTGOMERY
ABILENE JACKSON
PECOS
0 WACO
PENSACOLA TALLAHASSEE
BATON
ROUGE BILOXI GAINSVILLE
AUSTIN
ORLANDO 0
DEL RIO GALVESTON
CORPUS
CHRISTI
0
EXPLANATION FT MEYERS
MIAMI
3.28 Line of equal depth, in feet, of possible

frozen soil during winter Modified from Kenney (2010)
Figure 11. Depth of frozen ground for the lower 48 United States.
Figure 11. Depth of frozen ground for the conterminous 48 United States.
Mission Planning and Error Sources 17
Table 3. Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) equipment checklist and quality-assurance recommendations.
[GPS, Global Positioning System; GLONASS, GLObal NAvigation Satellite System; RTK, Real-Time Kinematic]
Post-processed GNSS-static
Equipment Quality assurance and accessories
Fixed-height GNSS receiver tripod* Check height with tape, condition not warped or bent, sandbags for stability.
GNSS receiver* Dual frequency required, backup batteries, GPS+GLONASS+Galileo**
tracking preferred, latest firmware upgrades, minimize multipath design,
operating manual.
Data collector Bluetooth or data cables checked, sufficient battery charge, backup batteries.
Benchmarks Monumented or non-monumented considerations, anchoring construction
materials, datasheets with directions “to-reach” the benchmark location.
Real-time GNSS-single-base RTK
Equipment Quality assurance and accessories
Fixed-height GNSS base receiver tripod Check height with tape, condition not warped or bent, sandbags for stability.
Fixed-height GNSS rover receiver bipod Check height with tape, condition not warped or bent.
Traditional tripod for GNSS broadcast radio and antenna mast Tribrach or flat plate for antenna mast; no loose legs.
GNSS broadcast radio antenna Full-size whip antenna, tribrach or flat plate, cables, range pole.
GNSS broadcast radio battery Marine (hybrid deep cycle) battery for long occupations, backup battery.
GNSS rover receiver extended range antenna Full-size whip antenna, mounting brackets, cables, range pole.
GNSS base receiver Dual frequency required, backup batteries, GPS+GLONASS+Galileo**
operating manual.
GNSS rover receiver Dual frequency required, backup batteries, GPS+GLONASS+Galileo
operating manual.
Real-time GNSS-networks
Equipment*** Quality assurance and accessories
Fixed-height GNSS rover receiver bipod Check height with tape, condition not warped or bent.
GNSS rover receiver Dual frequency required, backup batteries, GPS+GLONASS+Galileo track-
ing preferred, latest firmware upgrades, minimize multipath design.
Wireless modem with static internet protocol (IP) address Assess broadband or cellular coverage area before campaign.
*
Networks surveys involving GNSS would involve additional equipment.
**
Global Positioning System (GPS) United States space-based satellite network combined with the GLObal NAvigation Satellite System (GLONASS)
Russian space-based satellite network combined with the Galileo European space-based satellite network.
***
All GNSS equipment noted for single-base RTK should be included as a backup for those instances where wireless modem coverage is not attainable.
Benchmark Assessment radial, rectangular, and map search, as well as a search for
benchmarks by USGS 1:24,000 scale topographic map, by
For GNSS surveys concerned with quality assurance, county, and by benchmark attributes assigned by the NGS,
benchmarks provide the most effective mechanism to tie the such as permanent identifiers and station names (National
survey to local conditions and assess the quality of the survey; Geodetic Survey Datasheet, 2010c). Another source that
therefore, one mission planning necessity is the research of should be accessed by the web, researched, and contacted, is
suitable benchmarks in the area of interest. The NGS data- the list of identified state geodesy advisors: http://geodesy.
sheet retrieval (National Geodetic Survey Datasheet, 2010c) noaa.gov/ADVISORS/AdvisorsIndex.shtml. State advisors,
is a recommended first step in evaluating suitable bench- representatives, or interests may provide statewide temporary
marks in the area and can be accessed online at: http://www. benchmarks established from geodetic leveling, or Federal
ngs.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/datasheet.prl. This web site allows a or Cooperative Base Network upgrade information that may
not be bluebooked [a term describing a formal submittal are collected continuously. At a minimum, each CORS sends
process of benchmarks into the NGS Integrated Database data to the NGS daily. As of October 2011, the CORS network
(IDB) maintained by the NGS], and published on the web as contained more than 1,850 stations operated by 200 different
a NGS datasheet. As mentioned in the "Datum Establishment organizations (W. Henning, National Geodetic Survey, writ-
in the U.S. Geological Survey" section, the USGS originally ten commun., 2011). CORS provide GNSS data that improve
established third-order benchmarks to aid in the development the precision of three-dimensional positioning relative to the
of topographic maps. Many of these marks are not published NSRS. Data from the CORS network are distributed by the
on the web; however, inquiries can be made at http://ask.usgs. NGS and can be viewed at the following URL http://www.
gov to receive monumented and non-monumented benchmark ngs.noaa.gov/CORS/. For planning purposes, it is important
information in the area of interest. Additional benchmark to map the distribution of CORS for static, RTN, and some
information may be recovered by other Federal, State, and single-base RTK applications. Generally, the greater the
local municipalities, such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engi- density and proximity of CORS to the area of a campaign, the
neers (USACE), Department of Transportation (DOT), and more desirable. Essentially, CORS are information sources
local municipal public works departments. All of these sources that a GNSS receiver uses to differentially correct its position
collectively can provide the largest benefit in locating bench- [the difference in three-dimensional coordinates (x, y, and z) at
marks for planning a GNSS survey. the GNSS receiver is computed from the difference in obser-
An evaluation of accuracy and reliability of all compiled vations at CORS]. This computation is done after observations
benchmarks for the area of interest should be made. Data- are performed for post-processed methods, or in real-time
sheets from the NGS website described above may be selected as part of network modeling among a RTN. The closer the
based on the accuracy standard desired to support the GNSS proximity of CORS to the receiver, the shorter the baseline
campaign. There are many data types that are offered from the distance, which generally decreases the amount of occupation
NGS that allow one to research benchmarks. These data types time necessary to ensure quality positioning. When processing
include vertical control order 1 and 2, GPS observations, tidal GNSS positions, space and terrestrial weather disturbances are
benchmarks, Height Modernization stations, and other stations more prominent concerns in areas void of CORS as opposed to
associated with the Federal and Cooperative Base network areas that have a suitable density. Ideally, weather conditions
and Airport Control stations. Accuracies of these various data would be homogenous within the area of the campaign, but
types, including an expression of standard error, are offered disturbances that occur without suitable CORS would require
by the NGS. When evaluating accuracies of local benchmarks longer observation times opposed to areas that are dense with
published by the NGS, it is important to note the precision CORS. Additionally, post-processed methods employ GNSS
of the vertical elevation as described after the decimal place, software that requires three or more baselines to process solu-
independent of benchmark or data type. Regarding accuracy, tions; therefore, the greater the number of CORS, the greater
an elevation of 634.38 ft is considered more accurate than one the baseline availability to provide quality positioning. From a
expressed as 634.4 ft, or 634 ft. This is true for those marks mission planning perspective, an area void of CORS stations,
published by the NGS; however, as mentioned earlier, there such as northwestern Kansas (fig. 12), requires longer obser-
are other agencies and private entities that establish bench- vation times for longer baselines than areas with an increased
marks that are not published, and should be scrutinized for density of CORS and resulting shorter baseline distances, such
acceptable accuracy. Generally, the NGS database serves as as central Missouri (fig. 12). Note that the CORS network is
a clearinghouse for most of the benchmarks that have been continually expanding as independently-owned CORS are
established. In addition to accuracy, benchmark datasheets contributed by other public and private organizations. The
usually provide a date of the last recovery and the condition increase in Real-Time Networks, discussed later in the "Real-
of the benchmark on that date, both of which are useful before Time GNSS" section, has also been a large contributor to the
heading to the field. Finally, reconnaissance of benchmarks availability of CORS stations.
should be part of mission planning that ensures recovery as
well as suitability for satellite observations by identifying
overhead or surrounding obstructions. Appendix 1 provides Ionosphere and Troposphere
a good template for benchmark recovery and establishment
The ionosphere and troposphere are regions of the atmo-
documentation.
sphere that can potentially compromise the quality of GNSS
positioning by delaying GNSS signals and corrupting radio
CORS Assessment communication. The ionosphere ranges from 30 to 600 miles
above the Earth’s surface and contains electrically charged
For GNSS campaigns involving post-processing or use of particles. The ionosphere has a substantial affect on radio
a RTN, GNSS users should examine the density of Continu- waves largely because of the total electron content (TEC), or
ously Operating Reference Stations (CORS) in the area of a total number of electrons present along a path between the
campaign. CORS consist of a permanently installed GNSS satellite and GNSS receiver (Henning, 2010). The TEC varies
receiver and receiver antenna where satellite positioning data according to solar and geomagnetic conditions at the time of
the day, geographic location, and season (Henning, 2010).

Strong magnetic fields, known as sun spots, are common indi-
cators of solar activity and to some degree, can be predicted in
11 year cycles (Henning, 2010). The official prediction peak of
the next sun spot intensity (named solar cycle 24) will occur
around the year 2014 (fig. 13) and is estimated to be below
average in intensity (National Weather Service, 2009). During
this peak, GNSS users can expect loss of satellite communica-
tions, loss of wireless connections and radio blackouts, and the
inability for GNSS receivers to initialize (Henning, 2010).
The Space Weather Prediction Center (SWPC), operated
by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s
(NOAA’s) National Weather Service (NWS), categorizes and
Modified from the National Geodetic Survey (NGS)–CORS
http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/CORS reports three types of ionospheric disturbances with associated
CORS webmaster update June 17, 2010 weather scales: Geomagnetic storms, Solar Radiation storms,
Accessed on September 14, 2010
and radio blackouts. Each of these are well documented and
EXPLANATION can be accessed on-line at: http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/. For
Continually Operating Reference Station mission planning purposes, a report of “Solar and Geophysi-
cal Activity and the Geophysical Alert Message” are space
Density weather forecasting products that provide information about
Figure 12.
Figure 12. Density andand proximity
proximity of Continually
of Continually Operating
Operating Reference
Reference Station (CORS) managed by the National Geodetic solar terrestrial conditions (National Weather Service, 2005).
Station (CORS) managed by the National Geodetic Survey (NGS) in
Survey
the (NGS) in the Midwest.
Midwest. These products and additional space weather data can be
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration–National Weather Service

Space Weather Prediction Center, Solar Cycle Progression, prediction update
NOTE: Jan-00 = January 2000 released April 9, 2012. National Weather Service, 2012
Figure 13. Progression and forecast of ionospheric disturbance because of strong magnetic fields
associated with sun spots.
Figure 13. Progression and forecast of ionospheric disturbance because of strong magnetic fields associated with sun spots.
located at the aforementioned web site and may be dissemi- temperature, and atmospheric pressure differences (Henning,
nated by email subscription. In addition to space weather, the 2010). Homogeneous climatic conditions are particularly
U.S. Coast Guard sends out a Notice Advisory to NAVSTAR important for single-base RTK surveys that do not have inher-
Users (NANU), a message disseminated by email that pro- ent mechanisms to interpolate conditions to the rover’s site,
vides the general health and forecasted outage for individual such as a RTN.
satellites. Satellite outages are issued approximately 3 days GNSS signals that travel close to the horizon have the
before a change in the operation of a GPS satellite, such as a greatest distance of travel through the ionosphere and tro-
change in orbit or scheduled on-board equipment maintenance posphere, which increase the atmospheric error previously
(U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2010). described. To mitigate atmospheric error, an elevation mask
The troposphere is another region of the atmosphere should be set with each GNSS receiver to exclude signals near
(extending approximately 30 miles from the Earth’s surface) the horizon (fig. 14). An elevation mask of 10 to 15 degrees is
containing water vapor that produces our local weather. GNSS desirable to mitigate these effects.
signal delays are more complex as a result of variable wet and
dry conditions in the lower part of the troposphere. Most of
the water vapor is contained within the lower 10 percent of the Dilution of Precision
troposphere and is most difficult to model (ranging from 10 to
20 percent error) (Henning, 2010). Above 10 miles, the air is The Position Dilution of Precision (PDOP) represents
too cold and thin to contain much moisture, and thus repre- the geometry of the GNSS satellite constellation and its effect
sents the remaining dry part of the troposphere that can be on precision. Satellite constellation geometry is the basis for
accurately modeled within 1 percent error (Henning, 2010). a method, known as trilateration, which provides dimensions
For mission planning purposes, it is important to main- of position for the GNSS receiver. Regarding trilateration, the
tain spatial weather consistency during any form of GNSS determination of point locations by distance measurements
campaign, that is, avoid collecting observations where the using geometry is much more favorable toward a well-dis-
base and rover are in different climatic conditions. Differ- persed satellite constellation over the field of view, as opposed
ent climatic conditions include storm fronts, precipitation, to a less-dispersed satellite constellation that biases the field
Visible sky with 10–15 degree

elevation mask
Satellite
Satellite
Satellite Satellite
Satellite
Satellite
Distance V
Satellite
Satellite
Distance H
GNSS receiver
Ionosphere Troposphere Earth
EXPLANATION
Satellite signal blocked by elevation mask

Satellite signal path below the mask boundary,
subject to greater signal noise
Elevation mask boundary
Satellite signal path
[
Elevation mask angle = arc tangent Distance V
Distance H ]
Figure 14. Elevation mask angle in relation to Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) signals traveling through the ionosphere
and troposphere.
Figure 14. Elevation mask angle in relation to Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) signals traveling through the ionosphere
and troposphere.
of view; the satellites in the field of view of a GNSS receiver variations of PDOP and their relation to quality are illustrated
are positionally related to one another to provide a level of in figure 15. The vertical component of the GNSS position is
precision in each dimension of the receiver measurement. The the most likely component to be lacking in quality if the PDOP
configuration of these satellites affects horizontal and verti- values are high (Skeen, 2005).
cal uncertainties, and represents a unitless positioning value, A third variation, known as the Time Dilution of Preci-
known as PDOP, simplified and expressed as the ratio of the sion (TDOP), represents how the satellite geometry is affect-
positioning accuracy to the measurement accuracy (Henning, ing the ability of the GNSS receiver to determine time. The
2010). A lower PDOP represents a well dispersed satellite association of time can be equated to a measure of the overall
constellation, which indicates a favorable ratio of positional uncertainty in a GNSS solution, known as the Geometric
accuracy to measurement accuracy. Conversely, geometry Dilution of Precision (GDOP). GDOP is defined in a similar
of the satellite constellation that is less dispersed produces manner as PDOP, with the inclusion of time, and the relation
a higher PDOP value. Additional dimensions of dilution of between these two is defined as GDOP2=PDOP2+TDOP2.
precision include horizontal, vertical, and time. The Horizontal General experience in GNSS positioning may broadly classify
Dilution of Precision (HDOP) represents horizontal accuracy a PDOP value less than or equal to 3 as generally sufficient,
in two dimensions, and the Vertical Dilution of Precision a value greater than 3 but less than or equal to 5 as marginal,
(VDOP) represents the vertical accuracy in one dimension and values greater than or equal to 5 as poor. GNSS receivers
(height). The relation between these variations and PDOP is may be set to mask and cutoff PDOP values of positioning,
expressed as: PDOP2=HDOP2+VDOP2 (Henning, 2010). The such that the receiver stops computing position fixes for a
Satellite
Satellite
Satellite
Satellite
GNSS
receiver
Satellite
Satellite
Satellite
Poor vertical dilution of precision (VDOP) Satellite
Satellite
Satellite Satellite
Satellite
Satellite Satellite
Satellite
Satellite
Satellite
GNSS receiver
GNSS
receiver Poor horizontal dilution of precision (HDOP)
Satellite EXPLANATION
Satellite Satellite signal path
Good position dilution of precision (PDOP) GNSS Global Navigation Satellite System
Figure 15. Horizontal and vertical relation to quality dilution of precision.

satellite orientation that yields a PDOP greater than the mask path, but the most common are large buildings or structures,
value (Skeen, 2005). As discussed in the previous section, an bridge superstructures, signboards, chain-link fences, and even
appropriate elevation mask needs to be set to remove GNSS mountains and water bodies. These objects reflect the radio
signals encountering lengthy travel through the ionosphere and waves, which distorts the process of trilateration by introduc-
troposphere; however, too much exclusion, such as a mask that ing a travel time that is too long or too short (fig. 16).
is greater than 15 degrees, can introduce undesirable satellite Reflected signals that occur near the receiver are more
geometry and adversely affect PDOP. Adding a supplemental difficult to distinguish as opposed to those signals that have
fixed-height range pole to increase the height of the receiver been reflected by objects further away because of the fact
may improve satellite availability and overall PDOP; however, that the signal strength has not diminished as much as those
the user needs to ensure that the extended height does not reflected from objects further away. Most receivers that have
compromise the stability of the receiver. been recently manufactured have algorithms with various
degrees of immunity to secondary-path interference (Weill,
Multipath 2003); however, there are several actions a user can take or
practices a user can follow to combat multipath. First, the
Multipath is another error source in GNSS surveying GNSS user should ensure a hemisphere of clear sky to provide
caused by surrounding objects that introduce a reflected signal, the most effective possibility of minimizing multipath errors.
and thus a longer apparent distance of a GNSS signal to a Second, assurances should be made to make use of receiv-
receiver, rather than a distance representing a direct line of ers that have internal ground planes to recognize flawed
sight. Multipath can be caused by any objects along the signal signals based on the angle of GNSS signals received. For
Satellite
Satellite
Satellite
Apartment
complex Water
tower
Satellite
Residential
home
Satellite
Billboard or
GNSS receiver signboard Power
Chain link transmission lines
fence and towers
TROPOSPHERE
EXPLANATION
Satellite signal path

Satellite
GNSS Global Navigation Satellite System
Figure 16. Multipath development from illustrated objects.

Figure 16. Multipath development from illustrated objects.
Real-Time GNSS 23
those receivers that are collecting static data for many hours, Kelly, 2007). Both approaches involve real-time corrections
secondary-path signals can be isolated by observing cyclic that generate centimeter-level accuracy.
patterns in signal-to-noise ratios (SNR) (Weill, 2003). These
static occupations use sophisticated software to model these
cyclical patterns correctly during post processing (Henning, Single-Base RTK
2010). For real-time GNSS surveying, the typical occupation
A RTK survey continues to be the most used form of
time occurs in seconds or minutes, which does not afford the
GNSS surveying. The real-time aspect to acquiring centime-
opportunity to adequately model any present multipath condi-
ter-level positioning provides efficiency and reduces costs.
tion (Henning, 2010). Redundant real-time observations with
Single-base RTK surveys have been used to provide position-
different satellite geometry can help mitigate multipath error
ing for a variety of surveys, such as topographic, boundary,
(Henning, 2010).
geodetic, engineering, and hydrographic. Single-base RTK
surveys have also been used to monitor geotechnical and
Summary of Error Source and Mitigation structural movement.
Assembling and powering up GNSS equipment are not

the sole prerequisites to begin a campaign. Surveys support- Approach
ing standardized data collection or interpretive investigations
The single-base RTK surveying approach is the most
should be thought of in terms of accuracy, cost, and efficiency,
commonly used approach within the USGS because this
all of which are interconnected and ensured by mission plan-
approach has many variations suited to many applications. The
ning when scoping and budgeting such an effort. Table 4
most common variation of the single-base RTK approach con-
provides error sources, general planning, and mitigation neces-
sist of a base station composed of a dual-frequency receiver
sary to ensure a quality campaign. To further mitigate error
mounted on a fixed-height tripod directly over a known
sources and enhance GNSS positioning, redundancy should be
benchmark. The base station includes a broadcast radio and
exercised when possible. Redundancy may include multiple
long whip antenna, which is used to broadcast data corrections
rover observations at benchmarks and objective points during
from the base receiver to a rover receiver. The rover receiver
a real-time GNSS campaign, or lengthy autonomous static
is used in a kinematic fashion, receiving data corrections
observations separated by a length of time to ensure a change
from the base in “real-time” to derive elevation of an objec-
in atmospheric conditions and satellite geometry.
tive point. Before those corrections can be received, the rover
receiver goes through an initialization process that downloads
satellite almanac data, ephemeris data, time delay transmission
Real-Time GNSS from each satellite used to calculate distances to determine the
receiver’s position, and current date and time of each satellite.
Traditional real-time positioning using GNSS is a widely The almanac is composed of the general health and approxi-
accepted method of establishing a three-dimensional posi- mate positions of all the satellites in orbit. Satellite ephemeris
tion that is perpetuated by a baseline vector from the modeled data contains the precise position of the satellites.
antenna phase center (APC) of a single fixed-base receiver to This single-base approach typically ensures centimeter-
the modeled APC of a rover receiver (Henning, 2010). Current level positional accuracy for distances ranging to as much as
approaches use a real-time network of many reference stations 5 miles (or more depending on channel interference), but is
that transmit corrections to the rover, enabling the computation largely dependent upon broadcast radio power and uninter-
of precise single- or multiple-baseline solutions (Jones and rupted radio signal. A weak battery can limit communication
Table 4. Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) error source summary and mitigation.
[CORS, Continually Operating Reference Station; PDOP, Position Dilution of Precision]
Error source Planning Mitigation

Inefficiency Logistics map Evaluate anticipated observations based on land-use topography, acceptable benchmarks,
density and proximity of CORS, and satellite availability.
Ionosphere Space weather forecast Evaluate ionospheric disturbances; elevation mask adjustment.
Troposphere Terrestrial weather forecast Ensure homogeneous atmospheric conditions within area of campaign, avoid and document
storm fronts, precipitation, temperature, and pressure differences.
Multipath Obstruction diagram Avoidance of reflective objects such as large buildings, signboards, chain-link fences, water
towers, and power and transmission lines; elevation mask adjustment.
PDOP Planning software Evaluate PDOP and satellite availability based on GNSS almanac for any given position and
obstruction condition.
range (Henning, 2010); therefore, it is important to ensure that to difference observed elevations at the known benchmark
the external battery used to power the broadcast radio supplies and objective point (fig. 17). Accuracy of the autonomously
a minimum of 12 volts. The approach outlined above begins derived elevations are of no concern because the elevation
with a recovered benchmark, definition of a coordinate system (orthometric height) difference obtained between the known
and units, and x, y, and z coordinates of the recovered bench- benchmark and objective point can be applied to the known
mark in that system. The base station receiver resides plumb elevation of the benchmark. The accuracy of horizontal posi-
over the known benchmark as the rover receiver is navigated tioning acquired while using this method is often suitable for
to the objective point(s). Radio communication is important surveys only concerned with elevation. This method essen-
during single-base RTK work and should be evaluated logisti- tially relies on the difference in ellipsoid heights between
cally, as described earlier, during mission planning. Good the stations, as well as a hybrid geoid model used in the data
survey practice is to ensure a direct line of radio communica- collector software to achieve the elevation of the unknown
tion without obstructions. point(s). A redundant observation staggered by several
Another approach employs the single-base RTK system hours should always be performed for important points. It is
as a differential level. The base receiver location is estab- important to ensure the correct benchmark coordinates are
lished as an autonomous (unknown stand-alone) position at applied to the differencing in this approach. Autonomously
a location that is approximately half way between the known derived elevation differences possess certainty, but known
benchmark (thought of as the backsight) and the objective coordinates, whether inaccurate or incorrectly entered, can
point (thought of as the foresight) (fig. 17). The half way compromise the entire approach.
distance is beneficial in equally reducing (thereby assur- The “differential level” approach using RTK has four
ing) radio communication and baseline lengths to provide a distinct advantages:
more certain position. An effort should be made to establish 1. Expedites the process of perpetuating elevation.
this position at an elevation higher than the benchmark and
objective point to ensure radio communication. A monu- 2. Does not obligate a base receiver over a known
mented or non-monumented benchmark should be estab- benchmark that may not have an open sky for satel-
lished at the autonomous location, and the base receiver lite observations.
residing over the mark should acknowledge an autonomous
position, as entered in the data collector. The data collector 3. Provides an autonomous site selection void of
will display a mapping quality solution that typically has an obstruction for sufficient satellite observation.
expected positional accuracy of 3 to 10 meters (T. Bryant,
Seiler Instrument, written commun., 2010.). For a simple 4. Provides an autonomous site selection between
transfer of elevation, there is no need to obligate the base known and objective points that reduce the baseline
receiver for a fixed amount of time to post-process a GNSS lengths (reducing the distance-weighted error inher-
solution. The base will retain an autonomous, yet inac- ent to the equipment manufacturer using RT meth-
curate, x, y, and z position, and the rover unit can be used ods) and assures better radio communication.
Autonomous position
Northing = 12468317.9 feet
Easting = 1363560.4 feet
Autonomous derived position Elevation = 779.53 feet
at known benchmark
Easting = 1353710.4 feet Autonomous
Elevation = 744.36 feet base station
Known
benchmark
Elevation = 751.28
Objective point
“True” elevation (in feet) = 751.28 - (744.36-732.89) = 739.81
Autonomous derived position

at objective point

Easting = 1356140.4 feet
Elevation = 732.89 feet
Figure Example
17. Example
Figure 17. approach
approach using
using single-base
single-base Real-Time
Real-Time Kinematic
Kinematic (RTK)(RTK) as a level.
as a level.
Real-Time GNSS 25
This method may be considered to perpetuate vertical users attempt to maximize the baseline limits of the single-
elevation; however, if horizontal coordinates are available base RTK survey, assurances of radio communication can be
at the known benchmark, a similar process of differencing enhanced by an extended range pole antenna at the rover unit
autonomously derived horizontal positions between known or additional broadcast radios that can be set up as repeat-
benchmarks and objective points can be applied to yield hori- ers. To use broadcast radios as repeaters, base radios must
zontal coordinates at the objective point. be configured as specified by the manufacturer so that both
Another derivation of the “RTK as a level” approach radios are on the same frequency. Configurations of the base
is to simultaneously collect data at the base receiver while radios can be done on the front panel of some radios or by the
rover observations are performed. Provided mission planning use of software through a computer in other radios. It should
assurances and unobstructed sky, data at the base receiver can be understood that longer single-base RTK baselines have a
be post-processed to produce coordinate values and provide part per million (ppm) distance-weighted error that is coupled
another check during the survey to assure reproducibility. The with a fixed error in the equipment. Typical single-base RTK
disadvantage is the potential time constraint required to fulfill equipment vertical accuracies assuming a minimum of 5 satel-
this approach. Static post-processing of GNSS data usually lites and PDOP less than 4 are generally 2 cm + 1 ppm at the
requires longer periods of data collection because sufficient 68-percent confidence level. For example, a RTK observation
data are required to resolve long baselines that exist between using at least 5 satellites and PDOP less than 4 was performed
CORS and the survey base station; however, the growing with a 5-kilometer (km) baseline. Regarding manufacturer
number of CORS stations coupled with improved processing specifications alone, the vertical accuracy may be expected to
algorithms has made it possible to get sufficient coordinate be:
estimates with as little as 15 minutes of static data (http://www.
ngs.noaa.gov/OPUSI/Plots/Gmap/OPUSRS_sigmap.shtml).  
1
In a purely autonomous fashion, any single-base RTK (2)
2 cm + 500, 000 cm   = 2.5 cm
 1, 000, 000 
observation made from an autonomous base station can be  
differenced after the base receiver’s position has been post-
processed; however, it is recommended that observations on For single-base RTK surveys, a fixed solution represents
known benchmarks occur within the effort to provide quality centimeter-level relative positioning and is generally obtained
checks. The user may choose to post-process a solution at through differencing techniques (Henning, 2010). If the rover
the base station or force a coordinate position by utilizing at takes extended time to display a fixed position (beyond typical
least 3, but preferably 4, benchmarks (if available) that sur- times observed for fixed positions), there could be underlying
round the area of interest. After successful initializations and incomplete signal tracking, which would degrade accuracy
subsequent single-base RTK observations have been made at sufficient for most survey single-base RTK applications. As a
each of the three benchmarks, a forced coordinate position or result, it is important to ensure the communication link is con-
calibration can be made by keying in the proper coordinates tinuous, and the GNSS solution should become fixed in a ‘nor-
from each point. Forced coordinate positions will propagate mal’ amount of time and should remain fixed for the duration
the correct coordinates to the base station, which can be of the data collection at the objective point (Henning, 2010).
accomplished in the data collector and is often referred to as Redundant observations should be a part of any single-
a “site calibration.” Note that the quality of the propagated base RTK campaign. Observation redundancies with a stag-
position is only as good as the surrounding benchmarks. Site gered time less than an hour may be used to conduct a blunder
calibrations, also known as localizations, may continue further check; however, for important points, staggered times of 3 to
such that rover observations performed after a site calibration 4 hours between observations can provide a geometric change
are now “localized” to the selected benchmarks. A localization in the satellite constellation and atmospheric variability,
will be discussed in greater detail later in this section. thereby eliminating another source of bias. There are a variety
of RTK survey types with different observation time require-
Quality Assurance ments available within the data collector. Quality RTK obser-
vations require more observation time opposed to those that do
Aside from equipment and mission planning assurances not, such as simple topographic survey observations. Obser-
discussed earlier, single-base RTK surveys require some qual- vations options such as an “observed control point” typically
ity-assurance practices, including continuous broadcast radio ensure collection of 180 epochs of data (usually 1-second data
communication, observation redundancy, and quality checks collection interval for 3 minutes). For quality GNSS surveys,
on benchmarks (there are circumstances when benchmarks the following blunder checks (or their observation equivalent)
with trusted accuracy do not exist and solutions may be post- should be ensured during the single-base RTK survey.
processed at the base station; however, it is recommended that Multipath & General Blunder Check.—The user should
a benchmark be used wherever possible to help validate the walk away from the objective point a distance no less than
uncertainty of the effort). Intermittent or erratic radio commu- 100 feet and approach the objective point from a different path
nication leads to a degradation of positional accuracy possibly for a second observation. This procedure provides the potential
because of the latency of data reception (Henning, 2010). As of a new multipath condition (whether multipath exists or not).
Height Blunder Check.—GNSS signals L1 and L2 have baselines (Rizos, 2003). With a data modem or cellular
wavelengths that are 19.03 cm (0.62 ft) and 24.42 cm (0.80 ft) phone link from the rover to the network of receivers, and
in length (Kowoma.de, 2009). The user should physically the network’s connection to the internet, precise positions
adjust the rover range pole height by at least 0.80 ft and input can be logged consecutively, locally on the rover and to a
the new height into the collector. This adjustment provides geographic information systems (GIS) server in real time
an independent observation outside of the largest signal (Jones and Kelly, 2007). Essentially, these reference station
wavelength. receivers continuously stream data by way of the internet,
Reinitialization for Blunder Check.—The process of a local area network (LAN), or a radio link to a centralized
downloading satellite data should be reintroduced to provide server. The server functions to monitor and model iono-
some independence for the next observation. The user can spheric, tropospheric, and satellite orbit and clock error, as
simply invert the receiver on the rover pole until initialization well as other quality-assurance checks on raw data, storage
has been lost, then position the pole in the upright position to of RINEX information, estimation of systematic error, and
regain initialization. Another option is to increase the elevation calculation and conversion of correction data to the end
mask to lose initialization, then lower the mask to regain and user in Radio Technical Commission for Maritime Services
measure. (RTCM), improved Compact Measurement Record (CMR+),
Collectively, the GNSS user observes 180 epochs or or proprietary binary formats. More than 107 RTNs exist in
3 minutes of data, walks away from the objective point a the United States and many are continuing in the planning
minimum of 100 feet, inverts the rover receiver (or adjusts the stages (W. Henning, National Geodetic Survey, written com-
elevation mask) to lose initialization, changes the rover rod mun., 2011). RTNs provide benefit to many forms of infra-
height at least 0.80 feet and corrects the rover height entered structure and are used actively by surveyors, machine control
in the data collector appropriately, walks a different approach applications, construction, and precision agriculture. Table 5,
path back to the objective point, then positions the rover derived from Henning (2009), identifies general benefits
receiver in an upright position over the objective point for the and drawbacks to the RTN. There are many interpolation
second observation. Both observations are averaged to pro- methodologies within a RTN that have differing communica-
duce the final result. This process is hereinafter referred to as a tions (either one-way or two-way) used to send position and
RT blunder check and should be recorded in the field notes to correction data between the server and the rover unit (Hen-
document that these redundant assurances are met. ning, 2009). Regardless of the methodology used, the rover
For single-base RTK surveys in which a solution from position is always the result of a differential baseline from
the base receiver will be processed at a later date, or the base a reference station (physical or virtual) whose coordinate
receiver resides over a known benchmark, it is recommended is held fixed (Henning, 2009). The network itself maintains
that the antenna height be measured before and after data log- positional integrity through the use of RTN software and
ging. Inaccurate antenna heights are the most common error continual referencing to the NSRS; however, similar to the
source with this work, so care must be exercised when the single-base RTK approach, the network provides solutions
antenna height measurement is made. Measurements before that can be constrained to local benchmarks to provide a
and after data logging ensures another quality check regarding localized adjustment that will optimize the precision of
potential for systematic error. orthometric heights (fig. 18). As a stated drawback in table 5,
Data collectors provide a precision, or repeatability of the local control (benchmarks) may not match the RTN solution.
solution as compared to the solution at the base station (usu- The difference between quality benchmarks and the network
ally indicated at the bottom of the data collector during single- solution is likely minimal, but the user needs to consider and
base RTK observations). These values can reflect precision at ensure what is held as “truth” for the GNSS campaign. The
a 68-percent confidence level or “1 sigma.” Values are often use of a benchmark in this regard provides:
displayed as horizontal, vertical (orthometric), and root-mean- 1. A mechanism to evaluate the accuracy of the cam-
squared (RMS) values resulting from the baseline solution paign (by differencing).
(Henning, 2010). These values should be doubled to achieve
the 95-percent confidence level or “2 sigma” confidence level. 2. A localization to provide consistency among legacy
Check your GNSS manufacturer’s settings to identify preci- geodetic work.
sion default settings. A blunder check and other quality assur-
ance steps are further demonstrated in appendix 3.
Approach
Networks For quality GNSS work involving the establishment of
vertical datum, the approach to real-time positioning in a RTN
A real-time network (RTN) is a real-time positioning must include RT blunder checks, as described in the "Qual-
technique capable of operating over inter-receiver distances ity Assurance" section, on all local benchmarks and objec-
to as much as many miles with performance equivalent to a tive points. Exceptions to this statement are for topographic
current single-base RTK system operating over much shorter surveys or other efforts where the establishment of a quality
Real-Time GNSS 27
Table 5. User benefits and drawbacks to Real-Time Network (RTN) Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS).
[km, kilometer; mi, mile; NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; ITRF, International Terrestrial Reference Frame; NSRS, National Spatial Reference System;
OPUS, Online Position Users Service; NGS, National Geodetic Survey; TEQC, Toolkit for GPS/GLONASS/Galileo/SBAS Data; UNAVCO, University NAV-
STAR Consortium]
Benefits
No user base station required No security issues with unattended base station.
No control recovery necessary to establish base station positions.
Equipment requirements reduced and productivity increased.
Reduction of atmospheric error Ionospheric, tropospheric, and orbital error interpolated to the rover location allowing posi-
tioning at extended ranges over 10 km (6.2 mi) from a reference station.
Transparent datum readjustments Adjustments to NAD 83 or ITRF are done at the network level and broadcast to users.
No post campaign work done by the user.
Network quality assurance Network can be quality checked and monitored in relation to the NSRS using utilities such
as OPUS from NGS and TEQC from UNAVCO.
Drawbacks
Limited wireless data access Should bring a base station for assurance.
Outside network accuracy degradation Could be worse than single base accuracy because of the extended range from the nearest
reference station.
Network solution may not fit local control Calibration to local control may be necessary.
Network datum May not be the users required datum.
datum is not necessary. The user establishes a survey job and more rigorously defined NAD 83 (CORS96) in which CORS,
logs into the RTN system by cellular phone, compact wireless OPUS, and many statewide RTN coordinates are distributed.
routers, or other internet communication. Areas void of cellu- The NAD 83 (2011), epoch 2010.0 will be considered the
lar or wireless access may require an RTK bridge to propagate most recent adjustment beginning January 1, 2012 (National
the data stream or simply require the use of a traditional base Geodetic Survey, 2012c).
station to provide corrections to a rover. Depending upon the NSRS Alignment.—How was the network adjusted to
interpolation methodology within the network, communica- CORS sites and what is the range of positional difference
tion may occur from the rover to a virtual base station (as an between reference station coordinates and those coordinates
addition to the reference receiver network), from a rover to a after adoption as a NGS CORS site? An example is provided
reference (master) receiver (as part of the reference receiver in table 6.
network), or in a reverse manner from the rover, to the server, Localization.—Was a project localization to benchmarks
then back to the rover (Henning, 2009). performed? If so, what benchmarks were held and what are the
One of the more common interpolation methodologies source, quality, and reliability of these as constrained points?
involves the network creation of a virtual (non-physical) base What were the best fit residuals on these benchmarks?
station near the rover. The rover receives interpolated cor- Equipment.—What hardware (especially receiver antenna
rection data and position for this virtual station, and correc- model), firmware, and software were used? What versions of
tions are computed to a new virtual base station once the user the firmware were used in the data collector?
moves into a new area within the RTN (fig. 19). In most cases, Guidelines and Standards.—What quality-assurance
positioning approaches described for single-base RTK can measures were adhered to?
be applied within the network without the need of the base Field Conditions.—What was the number of satellites
station. observed, PDOP, local weather, space weather, RMS of the
Coordinates are typically the only output during position- solution(s), horizontal and vertical precisions at 95-percent
ing from RTNs. As a result, recording the following suggested confidence?
metadata is useful for the user (from Henning, 2009): Multipath Conditions.—Potential issues should be docu-
Datum.—What are the datum, adjustment, and epoch mented in a visibility diagram, including interference condi-
used by the RTN? A comparison of positioning between the tions such as power lines.
RTN and local benchmarks likely may vary because of a dif- Communication.—Document resulting intermittent com-
ference in a reference frame adjustment. As described earlier, munications or interference, including vibration near transpor-
the NAD 83 (NSRS2007) is an approximation of NAD 83 tation infrastructure such as railways or bridges, high tension
(CORS96). This realization can never be equivalent to the wires nearby, or battery failure.
Real-Time Network (RTN) server

Auxillary Auxillary
reference reference
station station
Benchmark
Benchmark
Benchmark
Benchmark
Auxillary
reference
station
EXPLANATION
Boundary of the reference network used to compute the rover position Auxillary
reference
Transmission of raw observation data from the reference stations to the station
network processing facility
Formation and transmission of correction network messages
Rover observations on benchmarks
Figure 18. Real-Time Network positioning with a 4-point localization (site calibration) to known benchmarks.
Figure 18. Real-Time Network positioning with a four-point localization (site calibration) to known benchmarks.
Quality Assurance Static GNSS

Although a RTN contains quality checks and monitoring Static GNSS surveying refers to collecting data by setting
of the NSRS as well as atmospheric error modeling, qual- up a GNSS receiver and receiver antenna over a single point,
ity positioning requires many additional considerations. As and allowing measurements to be collected from positioning
discussed earlier with single-base RTK positioning, the user satellites for a time period. GNSS data collected during static
should evaluate the precision of the position as reflected in the surveys must be post processed against data collected from
data collector. Empirical data offered by Henning (2009) states nearby control stations to correct atmospheric interference
typical RTN precisions at the 95-percent confidence level are: errors and produce survey-grade solutions. Static surveying
techniques are used when high accuracy is required, such
horizontal 2–3 cm, vertical (ellipsoid) 3–5 cm, and orthomet-
as establishing new control or reference marks. The most
ric heights 5–7 cm (using the current hybrid geoid model). The
accurate results using GNSS technology are produced by
following quality assurances for RTNs are somewhat synony- static surveys. Static surveys often require more planning than
mous with a single-base RTK approach and are identified in other types of GNSS surveying. It is important to take note
table 7 (derived from Henning, 2009). of antenna height above the survey mark, the type of receiver
Static GNSS 29
Real-Time Network (RTN) server Auxillary

Auxillary
reference reference
station station
Virtual
base
station
Virtual
base
station
Auxillary
reference
station
EXPLANATION
Auxillary
Boundary of the reference network used to compute the rover position
reference
Transmission of raw observation data from the reference stations to the station
network processing facility
Formation and transmission of correction network messages
Baseline used to compute position of the rover using the virtual base station
Figure 19. Real-Time Network positioning using the interpolation methodology of a virtual base station.
Figure 19. Real-Time Network positioning using the interpolation methodology of a virtual base station.
and receiver antenna being used, the start and stop time of OPUS to process single-base GNSS data since 2002 (National
each recording session, the recording interval, the descrip- Geodetic Survey, 2010c). The online service allows surveyors
tion and location of the mark being surveyed, and the name of to collect static GNSS data at a known or unknown location,
the surveyor. Having a standard form for surveyors to fill out submit the data to NGS through an online interface, and receive
during static data collection is a sufficient way to ensure all quality processed positional coordinates through email minutes
the necessary information is collected (see appendix 2 for a later. OPUS processes GNSS data using CORS, which are
suggested form). There are two primary ways to process static maintained by NGS and a wide variety of cooperating organiza-
data: through OPUS, or manually using baseline processing tions. The user submits a static GNSS data set collected at a 1,
and network adjustment software. Both processing approaches 2, 3, 5, 10, 15, or 30 second interval spanning from 15 minutes
have a direct correlation to the field collection method, time, to 48 hours (midnight can only be recorded once). The user
and accuracy of the computed coordinates. must also define the correct receiver antenna type that was used
to collect the data, the receiver antenna height relative to the
NGS defined antenna reference point (ARP), and a valid email
Single Base: Online Positioning User Service
address. OPUS accepts many file types that are automatically
(OPUS) converted into RINEX (typically it is not necessary to convert
OPUS is a simplified quality-assured service used to your data file from its original format). If the specific file type
process static GNSS data, and is well supported by the NGS cannot be converted by OPUS, all manufacturer software pack-
(www.ngs.noaa.gov/OPUS/about.html/). The NGS has provided ages are capable of converting their files into RINEX format.
Table 6. Example of Real-Time Network (RTN) reference station positioning change in Missouri after adoption into the National Geodetic Survey (NGS) Continually Operating
Reference Station (CORS) network.
[MoDOT, Missouri Department of Transportation; m, meter; s, second]
NGS CORS position Current MoDOT position Change

Location Height Height Latitude Longitude Height
Latitude Longitude Latitude Longitude
(m) (m) (s) (s) (m)
MOAL_Albany 40 15 20.75427 94 17 58.90487 254.866 40 15 20.75411 94 17 58.90481 254.885 0.0002 0.0001 -0.0190
MOCE_Chilicothe 39 46 09.03952 93 32 20.88533 183.997 39 46 09.03943 93 32 20.88519 184.021 0.0001 0.0001 -0.0240
MOCD_Camdenton 38 02 09.39168 92 46 23.11515 267.021 38 02 09.39179 92 46 23.11521 267.027 -0.0001 -0.0001 -0.0060
MOCH_Charleston 36 55 05.22475 89 19 07.58750 71.327 36 55 05.22494 89 19 07.58724 71.341 -0.0002 0.0003 -0.0140
MOHL_Hannibal 39 41 43.57203 91 24 05.00590 169.999 39 41 43.57208 91 24 05.00573 170.016 -0.0001 0.0002 -0.0170
MOMK_Mokane 38 41 08.66048 91 53 16.15264 170.868 38 41 08.66044 91 53 16.15242 170.886 0.0000 0.0002 -0.0180
MOMV_Maryville 40 21 29.38595 94 50 48.02244 278.928 40 21 29.38579 94 50 48.02238 278.952 0.0002 0.0001 -0.0240
MOPA_Patton 37 31 07.60167 90 00 44.07380 186.105 37 31 07.60168 90 00 44.07335 186.115 -0.0000 0.0005 -0.0100
MOWB_Warrensburg 38 48 52.19288 93 44 28.61907 202.781 38 48 52.19305 93 44 28.61923 202.810 -0.0002 -0.0002 -0.0290
MOBP_Blue Springs 39 00 32.80168 94 17 26.15559 247.647 39 00 32.80172 94 17 26.15560 247.681 -0.0000 -0.0000 -0.0340
MOSV_Savannah 39 57 15.14775 94 50 51.31806 320.918 39 57 15.14760 94 50 51.31783 320.949 0.0001 0.0002 -0.0310
MOTH_Thayer 36 33 38.80508 91 33 11.75773 194.528 36 33 38.80510 91 33 11.75735 194.522 -0.0000 0.0004 0.0060
MOWA_Wasola 36 47 31.02968 92 34 49.74030 359.351 36 47 31.02943 94 34 49.74000 359.347 0.0002 0.0003 0.0040
MOBU_Buffalo 37 39 35.05486 93 06 10.47544 306.576 37 39 35.05478 93 06 10.47531 306.599 0.0001 0.0001 -0.0230
MOCL_Clinton 38 23 19.74363 93 45 21.33626 208.083 38 23 19.74359 93 45 21.33628 208.120 0.0000 -0.0000 -0.0370
MODX_Dexter 36 48 24.82031 89 58 42.95945 89.055 36 48 24.82026 89 58 42.95900 89.074 0.0000 0.0004 -0.0190
MOED_Edina 40 11 11.65645 92 10 30.28845 194.635 40 11 11.65658 92 10 30.28851 194.673 -0.0001 -0.0001 -0.0380
MOHA_Harrisonville 38 36 33.08859 94 19 12.88460 242.611 38 36 33.08864 94 19 12.88462 242.652 -0.0000 -0.0000 -0.0410
MOMA_Manes 37 22 34.70262 92 24 28.44110 373.789 37 22 34.70253 92 24 28.44081 373.799 0.0001 0.0003 -0.0100
MOMG_Mountain Grove 37 07 51.66958 92 18 39.95187 420.866 37 07 51.66934 92 18 39.95149 420.877 0.0002 0.0004 -0.0110
MOMO_Monett 36 55 00.48625 93 58 59.01644 381.756 36 55 00.48615 93 58 59.01626 381.769 0.0001 0.0002 -0.0130
MONC_New Cambria 39 45 31.12304 92 44 33.97236 220.903 39 45 31.12313 92 44 33.97234 220.935 -0.0001 0.0000 -0.0320
MONE_Nevada 37 51 56.71994 94 20 58.36961 222.360 37 51 56.71989 94 20 58.36968 222.388 0.0001 -0.0001 -0.0280
MOOF_O’Fallon 38 45 14.06197 90 41 44.78111 120.001 38 45 14.06194 90 41 44.78094 120.021 0.0000 0.0002 -0.0200
MOSE_Seymour 37 09 20.77954 92 45 14.32616 472.965 37 09 20.77936 92 45 14.32597 472.975 0.0002 0.0002 -0.0100
MOSB_Shelbina 39 41 54.74930 92 03 09.79903 204.313 39 41 54.74930 92 03 09.79898 204.343 0.0000 0.0000 -0.0300
MOVB_Van Buren 36 57 36.45577 91 03 37.81109 136.821 36 57 36.45578 91 03 37.81061 136.835 -0.0000 0.0005 -0.0140
MOWW_Warsaw 38 15 12.09657 93 21 42.33168 192.844 38 15 12.09653 93 21 42.33165 192.873 0.0000 0.0000 -0.0290
Static GNSS 31
Table 7. Real-time Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) quality assurances for single-base Real-Time Kinematic (RTK) and a
Real-Time Network (RTN).
[ARP, antenna reference point; NA, not applicable; PDOP, Position Dilution of Precision; NOAA, National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration; SWPC, Space-
Weather Prediction Center; OPUS, Online Position Users Service; IP, internet protocol; RTCM, Radio Technical Commission for Maritime Services; CMR+,
Compact Measurement Record; km, kilometer]
Single-base
Assurances RTN
RTK
Check equipment, data collector parameters, and site information
Measure the height of the ARP on the rover pole before every campaign. X X
Ensure project parameters are correctly entered into the data collector. X X
Ensure correct project localization and benchmarks are entered into the data collector. X X
Ensure circular level vial calibration before every campaign. X X
Test wireless data communications for internet connectivity at the project site. NA X
Ensure GNSS equipment and communication devices are fully charged with backup. X X
Ensure preloading of the current geoid hybrid model for orthometric heights. X X
Conditions
Mission planning to evaluate PDOP and number of satellites. X X
Ensure uniform weather conditions between fixed station(s) and rover. X X
Perform a daily check on NOAA’s SWPC for atmospheric disturbances. X X
Awareness and avoidance of multipath conditions. X X
Awareness and avoidance of electrical interference from high-tension transmission lines (more probable with high X X
wattage) or broadcast antennas.
Coordinates
Assurance of datum, adjustment, and epoch needed for the coodinate data produced. X X
Assurance of datum, adjustment, and epoch provided by the RTN. NA X
An understanding that data collection occurs on the ground, requiring the application of scale and height factors for X X
a datum surface or projection grid.
Communication
Assurance of cellular availability or wireless for data modems or internet capable services. OPUS solutions from static NA X
surveys may be processed as reference station substitutes in areas void of cellular or wireless availability.
Connection assurance using an IP address, selection of a data stream corrector format such as RTCM or CMR+ from NA X
a source table, and enter using a login identification and password.
Assurance of quality positional data by ensuring a fixed solution in a “normal” amount of time (seen by the user in past X X
campaigns to produce reliable ambiguity resolution).
Save communication configuration information for hardware, firmware, user names, passwords, serial numbers, and NA X
wireless connections.
Constraining to benchmarks
For optimal optimal orthometric heights and precision, a localization should be conducted to trusted benchmarks X X
within the project area. Although a localization to 4 trusted benchmarks surrounding the area of interest is ideal,
2 trusted benchmarks may be used to provide good results.
A selection of 4 benchmarks should form a rectangle on the outside of the project area; however, if 2 benchmarks are X X
used, both need to be within the vicinity of the project area (as centralized as possible). Assuming 2 trustworthy
benchmarks, the selection of 2 marks opposed to 4 can often be more practical as the potential for outliers is de-
creased and finding 2 benchmarks near a project site opposed to 4 is much more probable.
Ensure positioning is within the calibration envelope of benchmarks used. If only 2 marks are used, judgment needs to X X
be exercised to not extend baselines too far. Ideally, the 2 marks should straddle the area of interest. A rule of thumb
for general localizations is 10 km (T. Bryant, Seiler Instrument, oral commun., 2010). This rule of thumb stems from
an understanding of a calibration scale factor opposed to the projection scale factor. The calibration scale factor re-
mains fixed as the distance away from the calibration origin increases whereas the projection scale factor is variable,
thus the reasoning regarding a baseline limitation outside of the calibration origin (Carter, 2009).
Collection
Set an elevation mask between 10 and 15 degrees. X X
Ensure quality assurance guidance provided for single-base RTK. X X
Confidence
Blunder checks including redundancy. X X
Robust cellular or wireless internet connectivity. Coordinate accuracy will depreciate for data transferred to the rover NA X
with a latency above 2 seconds or possibly if communication is intermittent.
Checks on known benchmarks before and after a campaign. X X
Traditional OPUS-Static (OPUS-S) processes the user’s difference ionospheric delays at the chosen CORS (Schwarz
file against three CORS using the Program for the Adjustment and others, 2009). Ionospheric delays are interpolated to the
of GPS Ephemerides (PAGES) software. PAGES is a NGS GNSS receiver position before a least squares adjustment is
program that performs vector reduction to process GNSS base- used to solve for the positional coordinates.
lines. PAGES processes the GNSS file using individual CORS The first two steps in OPUS-RS are similar to OPUS-S;
and determines a position. The final coordinates reported are initial quality checks are performed on the GNSS data file and
an average of the three CORS independent single-baseline orbit files are retrieved. In the third step, OPUS-RS estimates
solutions. Peak-to-peak errors are reported with the final solu- the location of the GNSS receiver and determines the distance
tion. Peak-to-peak errors represent the difference between the to each candidate CORS. A list that is sorted by distance is
maximum and the minimum value of the coordinates obtained created, from which OPUS-RS attempts to retrieve the RINEX
from the three baseline solutions. In addition, the final report files for the time span of the GNSS data file. If a RINEX file
describes the percent of observations recorded in the data is retrieved, it is evaluated for inclusion in the overall adjust-
file that were used in processing, percentage of ambiguities ment. This search continues down the list of candidate CORS
fixed, and the overall RMS. The percent of observations used until 9 reference stations have been located, the next reference
indicates how many of the recorded observations were of suf- station is greater than 250 km from the GNSS receiver, or
ficient quality to include in the analysis. This number will be 50 candidates have been examined.
lower if the sky view at the benchmark was not clear, mul- OPUS-RS requires a minimum of three CORS stations
tipath errors were recorded in a number of the observations, within 250 km of the GNSS receiver to continue the analysis.
there was movement of the tripod, or there were other error In addition, the position of the GNSS receiver cannot be more
sources that might make the observations poor. than 50 km outside the polygon created by the selected CORS.
Detailed discussions regarding ambiguities are left to The geometry of CORS and the distance to each CORS in
other references. It is important to understand that OPUS-S relation to the GNSS receiver has a substantial impact on the
attempts to fix phase ambiguities to their integer value (fix quality of the final positional coordinates. OPUS-S and OPUS-
integers), identifies the percentage of ambiguities that OPUS-S RS require data collection using a dual-frequency receiver.
“thinks” it fixed correctly, and reports that as a percentage of
all ambiguities (M. Schenewerk, National Geodetic Survey,
written commun., 2011). The overall RMS represents the pre- Quality Assurance
cision of a solution and it is calculated as the square root of the Whether using OPUS-S or OPUS-RS, the user must con-
average mean squared error from the final coordinate to each sider solution quality requirements of the project. Typically,
of the single baseline coordinates. Because all processing of OPUS-S can resolve centimeter-level positions as indicated
the GNSS data is performed through the OPUS website using primarily by the peak-to-peak differences. The percent of
CORS as control points, the user can benefit from time savings observations used and ambiguities fixed, coupled with overall
in a number of areas: RMS, should be evaluated to assess the solution quality. Qual-
• No field trips for reconnaissance and “ground truthing” ity solutions from OPUS-S should have (National Geodetic
benchmarks. Survey, 2011a):
• Less than 5 cm peak-to-peak errors.
• No time spent in the office designing a network survey.
• Greater than 90 percent observations used.
• No additional survey data collected on benchmarks.
• Greater than 50 percent fixed ambiguities.
• No data processing using proprietary software.
Traditional OPUS-S required a minimum of 2 hours of • RMS less than 3 cm.
static data to ensure most effective results. NGS has expanded None of these quality checks are associated with system-
OPUS capabilities to include sessions as short as 15 minutes atic errors, such as the incorrect receiver antenna type or the
by developing OPUS Rapid Static, or OPUS-RS, which will wrong receiver antenna height being entered. The solution
process data sets from 15 minutes to 2 hours (National Geo- report created in OPUS-RS looks similar to the OPUS-S solu-
detic Survey, 2010b). tion report; however, the OPUS-RS report (fig. 20) has a few
OPUS-RS solutions are computed differently than different quality checks that the user needs to evaluate. Instead
described above for OPUS-S. OPUS-RS takes six steps to of a peak to peak error associated with each coordinate dimen-
resolve coordinates for a user’s data file, and the primary sion, an uncertainty is calculated from the single baseline
processing is completed using Rapid Static GPS (RSGPS) estimates from 3 to 9 CORS individually, and the final coordi-
software (Schwarz and others, 2009). Before running RSGPS, nate is computed from a least squares adjustment utilizing all
improved positional coordinates are determined for the loca- CORS simultaneously. This uncertainty represents the square
tion of the GNSS receiver by incorporating the nearest CORS. root of the differences between the single baseline estimates
Once this is accomplished, RSGPS is run to determine integer using CORS individually, and the final coordinate using least
ambiguities, tropospheric refraction parameters, and double squares and all CORS. OPUS-RS produces a warning if the
Static GNSS 33
User identification email Submission and processing date
User’s Receiver INdependent EXchange (RINEX) formatted Time associated with submission and processing date
Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) data file
Start date and time associated with GNSS data file

End date and time associated with GNSS data file
Observations recorded in the GNSS data file that were used for processing
The height associated with A unitless measure of

the antenna reference point scatter in the data misfits
Reported as an evaluation of
network CORS and user’s data (rover)
and CORS. Both quality indicator
values based on a ratio (W-ratio),
expressed as a measure of certainty
that correct values for all integer
The reference frame depicting the North American Datum 1983 (NAD83) adjustment, and epoch
ambiguities have been found
Estimated
Latitude uncertainty
West longitude [m, meters]
Ellipsoid
height
North Americn Vertical Datum 1988
Orthometric
height Orthometric conversion using the
geoid hybrid model GEOID 09
Horizontal positional coordinates expressed as Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) and State Plane
Continually Operating Reference Stations (CORS)
Nearest published benchmark as found in the National Geodetic Survey Integrated Database (NGS IDB)
Figure 20. Modified output of a position generated from the Online Position User Service–Rapid Static (OPUS–RS).
Figure 20. Modified output of a position generated from the Online Position User Service–Rapid Static (OPUS–RS).
spread of the single baseline estimates are greater than 5 cm standard OPUS report and contains several pieces of informa-
when comparing horizontal coordinates, or greater than 10 cm tion, including the final position in state plane coordinates
when comparing vertical coordinates. OPUS-RS also provides in U.S. survey foot and meters, the position of each CORS
the normalized RMS for the final adjustment, which is a unit- used in the processing, and the position as determined from
less measure of the scatter in the data misfits (National Geo- each CORS (Schenewerk, 2011). This additional information
detic Survey, 2010b). The final quality-control value that is can be useful when looking at reducing peak-to-peak errors
provided on an OPUS-RS solution is a quality indicator that is by incorporating or eliminating particular CORS. The XML
based on a ratio (W-ratio) expressed as a measure of certainty report bounds each value by “tags” that uniquely identify it
that correct values for all integer ambiguities have been found (<TAG>value</TAG>) and can easily be read electronically.
(Schwarz, 2009). The quality indicator (W-ratio) depicted Another upgrade NGS has made to OPUS allows ellipsoid
in the solution represents adjustments related to the network heights to be analyzed outside the conterminous United States
and rover. A general rule of thumb dictates that an indicator (CONUS); however, OPUS currently does not have the func-
that is above 3 represents favorable geodetic quality solutions tionality to determine orthometric heights outside of CONUS
in which correct ambiguities are located, and those below 1 because these geoid models have not been well developed or
should be used with caution (Martin, 2007). In summary, a maintained by NGS.
quality OPUS-RS solution should have a low uncertainty for Beyond standard positional processing, NGS has devel-
each coordinate, a normalized RMS of 1 or less, and a qual- oped additional tools for OPUS including the database or
ity indicator greater than 1. Predicted solution qualities from OPUS-DB. Originally, OPUS solutions were processed and
15-minute and 1-hour sessions across the country are provided sent by email to the user, but were not stored by NGS for
at the following URL (http://geodesy.noaa.gov/OPUSI/Plots/ future inquiry or reference. With the creation of OPUS-DB,
Gmap/OPUSRS_sigmap.shtml) and might be a useful tool the user who is processing 4 or more hours of data through
when planning a survey. OPUS-S now has the choice to store the solution to the NGS
To improve positional quality, a surveyor should collect database. The database used by OPUS-DB is different than the
longer observations (Eckl and others, 2001), observe at sev- NGS Integrated Database (IDB) used to query high accuracy
eral different satellite geometries and average OPUS solutions reference marks because limited quality standards are set for
from all observations, and wait to submit the data until rapid publishing in OPUS-DB, and strict quality and processing
or precise orbits are available. Precise orbits are the evalu- standards must be met to publish a benchmark in NGS IDB.
ation of a complete Sunday through Saturday orbit and are If the user chooses to store the results in OPUS-DB, standard
available 10 to 14 days after the end of the GPS week. Before identification information must be registered. When publish-
release of the precise orbit, satellite positions are described ing a solution in OPUS-DB, the user can either describe a new
using the rapid orbit, which is available every 17 hours; the mark or select a recovered mark using the NGS PID number.
ultra-rapid orbit, available every 6 hours; or the broadcast When describing a new benchmark, details such as name,
orbits, which are the predicted satellite locations. Precise and stamping, type, depth, setting, location description, and photos
rapid orbits are similar in quality such that users are typically are required. Additional information on benchmark stabil-
not able to detect any differences (M. Schenewerk, National ity, magnetic properties, application, and equipment used are
Geodetic Survey, written commun., 2011). For greater posi- optional. When entering a new benchmark into the OPUS-DB,
tional quality, CORS data can be downloaded by the user the surveyor should consider the longevity of the location
and post processed manually using software that performs and the stability. A benchmark susceptible to movement or
baseline processing and network adjustment. OPUS solutions tampering for a shorter period of time would likely not be
can also be checked and verified by including benchmarks. useful information to store in the database; however, storing
The verification of an OPUS solution can be done by collect- benchmark information in the database is useful not only to
ing static data on a confident benchmark while other GNSS the surveyor and others looking for benchmarks in the area,
receivers are collecting static data. Static data collected on the but also to the NGS who can use the information collected at
benchmark can be processed through OPUS and compared to the mark to enhance future geoid models.
the known coordinates to verify that OPUS-derived ortho- A second tool in OPUS that was beta released in the year
metric heights were accurate when compared to benchmark 2011 is OPUS-Projects (National Geodetic Survey, 2011a),
elevations during the survey. which allows users to process OPUS solutions as a network
that can be adjusted using CORS, PAGES, and ADJUST. In
short, OPUS-Projects automates “bluebooking” [bluebooking
Additions and Advancements is the processing and evaluation of GNSS survey data for pub-
The NGS has made additions to the OPUS processing, lication in the IDB, and produces files needed to publish high
which include extended and Extensible Markup Language accuracy benchmarks in the NGS IDB (Schenewerk, 2011)].
(XML) reports, and analysis of global positioning data OPUS-Projects can provide better accuracy than OPUS-S
outside the United States (with the exception of calculated and ensure that local networks are adjusted to minimize local
orthometric heights) (National Geodetic Survey, 2011a). An errors (Armstrong, 2010). With an accessible and intuitive
extended OPUS report is five pages instead of the single page online user interface, OPUS-Projects provides benefit to those
Static GNSS 35
who do not process static networks on a regular basis; how- Networks might be used for many applications, including
ever, training by NGS is required for project managers. OPUS- perpetuating datum to temporary locations, or to establish or
Projects allows the user to decide what autonomous observa- interconnect groundwater wells, elevations at gaging stations,
tions and coordinates are used as control, and what baselines control for land subsidence and erosion studies, or project
to process in the network adjustment (network adjustments are areas that require benchmark establishment for RT surveys.
described in detail in the next section). OPUS-Projects will Manual processing of static GNSS data can be done using
have user-specified quality checks and will highlight OPUS benchmarks or CORS. Manual processing of static GNSS
solutions that do not meet these checks. data with CORS may be done to improve accuracy for OPUS
Other future updates to OPUS include expanding solutions or to reduce local errors between objective points.
capabilities from GPS-only data collection and processing Manual processing with benchmarks may be done because few
to include all GNSS data (OPUS-GNSS). The inclusion of or distant active monuments are available, or just to improve
GNSS data processing will require replacement of the CORS local positioning. The manual processing of GNSS data occurs
GPS receiver antennas with GNSS receiver antennas as well by way of a network, in which existing benchmarks are occu-
as updating processing software, ensuring that ephemeris data pied by GNSS receivers collecting static data along the net-
are available in a timely fashion, and updating antenna model work exterior, whereas static data collection (objective points)
information. OPUS-GNSS is a primary focus for NGS (Rick occurs simultaneously within the network interior. Essentially,
Foote, NGS, oral commun., 2011). Two final future updates all observed benchmarks and objective points are integrated
within OPUS are referred to as OPUS-Net (Schenewerk, 2011) into a network of baselines that are processed together and
and OPUS Leveling Online Computing Service (LOCUS). adjusted to fit with the benchmark or control positions. This
OPUS-Net will provide a network approach using a weighted type of static surveying is discussed in terms of static and “fast
least squares adjustment of nearby and distant CORS, and 10 static” surveying. The term “fast static” was historically used
nearest reference stations by the International GNSS Service in practice to describe how higher grade dual-frequency anten-
(IGS) (Weston and Ray, 2011). nas could be used to collect data for shorter periods of time
The use of OPUS has expanded greatly in the past several (minutes compared to hours) to produce quality static survey
years. As a result, the NGS has worked to improve the useful- results. The term is used less often in practice and is incorpo-
ness of OPUS while ensuring quality in resolved positions. The rated into the term “static” surveying because the methods are
use of OPUS permits a time savings to users because data col- the same for shorter durations of time.
lection only occurs at objective points. In addition, users have Network surveying provides the greatest accuracy by
the ability to store and retrieve their processed observations, using multiple benchmark control. OPUS-S uses active monu-
as well as search and retrieve benchmarks surveyed by oth- ments (CORS), but they are often tens of miles away, which
ers. With OPUS-Projects, users are able to complete network reduces the accuracy of the solution because of long base lines
adjustments based on CORS, benchmarks, and OPUS-pro- (Skeen, 2005). In addition, OPUS-S processes each baseline
cessed positions within the OPUS interface. Overall, OPUS is a individually, whereas network surveys use all benchmarks
tool that many USGS GNSS surveyors should become familiar and objective points tied together by several baselines, which
with because of its applicability and quality positioning. are analyzed together to correct the entire network. Network
surveying is often used to establish new benchmarks within
study areas where RT surveying is preferred but no high-order
Network Surveying and Processing benchmarks exist, or objective points are spread through a
large area where radio communication and baseline errors
Historically, global positioning used networks of fixed would make RT methods difficult.
receivers continuously collecting data to augment static data
collection at an objective point. With the development of
RT corrections, this method is not as popular as it once was; Network Control
however, regarding approach, post-processed network sur-
veys continue to provide the least amount of uncertainty in a To ensure high-quality elevations, benchmarks of desirable
campaign. Networks may be either simple or complex and are quality should be included and processed within the network.
often used where: Elevation at CORS stations and other GNSS-derived positions
are based on ellipsoid heights. Models of the Earth’s grav-
• Trusted benchmarks are separated by large distances ity (by way of a hybrid geoid model) are used to relate these
from the project area. ellipsoid heights to orthometric heights, and only a few active
• Geometric relation between CORS and the project area monuments have published orthometric heights at the time of
is lacking. this writing. Elevation that is generally considered as “truth”
is known at thousands of benchmarks across the country from
• Combined CORS and benchmarks are used to establish differential leveling surveys. Benchmarks should always be
and check new benchmarks. included when high-quality orthometric heights are desired.
Developing a network survey that includes benchmarks CORS, making the realization more accurate (table 8). The
can be challenging because many benchmarks have not been datum and its realization are important when developing a net-
visited in years. Benchmarks are referred to as passive monu- work survey because all benchmarks used as primary control
ments because they are not active (that is continuously collect- in a static survey should be in the same datum and realization.
ing data) like active stations such as CORS. All benchmarks As discussed earlier during mission planning, it is most
were established with current coordinates at some time in effective to set time aside for benchmark recovery before final
the past, but because of crustal movement and geomorphic survey design and the actual campaign date because many
change, the published coordinates may no longer be accurate. benchmarks listed in the NGS database may not be recover-
Regardless, these benchmarks are still the foundation of eleva- able or may not be conducive to GNSS data collection. Most
tion surveys and should be checked for accuracy when being network adjustment programs and reference material specify
used. NGS does provide epoch dates on any benchmark that the minimum number of control points to include in a net-
is inside a horizontal crustal movement region, and therefore work as 3 horizontal controls and 3 to 4 vertical controls.
likely to move through time. Horizontal and vertical controls can be different benchmarks,
Another important difference to note between CORS and or one benchmark with high-quality vertical and horizontal
benchmarks is the horizontal datum. A datum can be defined control. Quality horizontal coordinates could be established
mathematically by eight unique parameters (used to define on vertical benchmarks by first processing the data collected
the center, orientation, and reference ellipsoid) and realized through OPUS before inclusion in a network survey (Zilkoski
in practice by the coordinates of a select set of points on the and others, 1997). If additional benchmarks are included in
Earth. These parameters are referred to as a geodetic reference the network, it is beneficial to allow them to be adjusted (as
system, and its realization referred to as a geodetic reference opposed to holding them fixed or using them as control in the
frame (Lapine, 2010). The system is unique and exact whereas adjustment) so that a comparison can be made between the
the frame is only as accurate as the data used to realize known elevation of these additional benchmarks and adjusted
coordinates of the selected points on the Earth. As discussed elevations from the processed network. Essentially these
earlier, NAD 83 is the current North American horizontal additional benchmarks can serve as a verification of the final
datum. The definition of NAD 83 is a set of eight parameters, quality.
but the reference frame was originally realized by a network Benchmark accuracy may be confusing because different
of approximately 250,000 benchmarks and a sparsely-spaced types of benchmarks are described differently; some use pro-
network of TRANSIT (GPS system) satellite positions across portional accuracy and others use relative accuracy. Propor-
North America in 1986 (Lapine, 2010). This first realization tional accuracy relates accuracy as a function of distance, and
was named NAD 83 (1986) in recognition of the epoch date relative accuracy describes either a radius or linear value at
for the national adjustment. NAD 83 went through a series of a 95-percent confidence interval from a least squares adjust-
readjustments using GPS surveying technology along with ment representing how the survey point fits within the control
Table 8. NAD 83 realizations, marks used in each realization, and comments about each adjustment.
[Modified from W. Henning, 2010 and D. Doyle, National Geodetic Survey, written commun., 2011. NAD 83, North American Datum of 1983; HARN, High
Accuracy Reference Network; GPS, Global Positioning System; CORS, Continually Operating Reference Station; FBN, Federal Based Network; CBN,
Cooperative Based Network; NSRS, National Spatial Reference System; NGS, National Geodetic Survey; GNSS, Global Navigation Satellite System; IGS,
International GNSS Service]
NAD 83 realization Marks used in the realization Comments

NAD 83 (1986) Triangulation and trilateration data Original adjusment; horizontal only.
NAD 83 (HARN) State-by-state GPS-derived data Pre-CORS, but added ellipsoid heights.
NAD 83 (FBN-CBN) State-by-state GPS-derived data Removed ellipsoid height distortions and alignment to
the CORS network.
NAD 83 (CORS96) epoch 2002 CORS Nationwide adjustment, did not include benchmarks,
reflects active monumentation velocities rather than a
snapshot in time.
NAD 83 (NSRS2007) epoch 2007 GPS campaign data on 70,000 benchmarks No classically derived data included. CORS constrained
between 1995–2005 and CORS to their estimated values for January 1, 2007,
accounting for vertical motion of CORS through time.
No vertical motion model for the benchmarks was
included.
NAD 83 (2011) epoch 2010.0 All NGS-archived GNSS data based CORS A reanalysis of CORS data, in conjunction with the IGS.
along with GNSS-observed or -derived Known as the Multi-Year CORS solution (MYCS).
benchmarks and all benchmarks con-
nected to the NGS CORS
Static GNSS 37
network. With the 2007 readjustment of NAD 83 (NSRS accuracy of the vertical relation between benchmarks that are
2007), NGS has started reporting relative accuracies on bench- 4.8 km apart and described as first-order class II, is 1.5 mm or:
marks that previously only represented proportional accuracy.
Most accuracy standards are given in orders, but orders differ 0.7 mm 4.8 (3)
depending on the survey performed, whether leveling (table 9)
or GPS (table 10). Accuracy standards regarding GNSS-derived benchmarks
are determined by baseline length and the quality of the mini-
Table 9. Accuracy standard for leveled, triangulated, and mally constrained least squares adjustment (table 10).
traversed benchmarks (National Geodetic Survey, 2001a).
[Horizontal standard, refers to the maximum closure error; vertical standard,
relative accuracy between directly connected benchmarks; NA, not applicable;
Planning
mm, millimeters; √, square root; K, the distance in kilometers between bench-
marks]
Once recovered, useable, and trusted benchmarks that
surround objective points are located, planning of the data
collection effort and network can begin. First, as discussed
Order Horizontal standard Vertical standard
in mission planning, a map of all objective points and bench-
First 1 part in 100,000 NA
marks (control) should be drafted; then, baselines to be
First Class I NA 0.5 mm√K observed can be sketched out (fig. 21) and repeat baselines
First Class II NA 0.7 mm√K can be coordinated with appropriate time offsets, generally
Second Class I 1:50,000 1.0 mm√K 24 hours plus several hours so that different atmospheric
Second Class II 1:20,000 1.3 mm√K conditions and a different satellite geometry are observed
(Zilkoski and others, 1997, 2008).
Third Class I 1:10,000 2.0 mm√K
When planning a large survey with many benchmarks
Third Class II 1:5,000 NA and objective points, the survey can be broken up into smaller
areas, as long as those areas allow stations and baselines to
Table 10. Accuracy standard for Global Positioning System (GPS)- interconnect the overall network. Figure 21 illustrates a large
derived benchmarks (National Geodetic Survey, 2001a). network, which is surveyed in three smaller areas (sessions
[Horizontal standard, refers to the minimum geometric accuracy standard A–C). Baselines processed within each area are drawn.
based on the distance between benchmarks (or baselines) at the 95-percent Depending on the number of receivers and the quality of
confidence level; ellipsoid standard, the maximum height difference the survey or occupation time on each objective point and
accuracy calculated from an minimally constrained, correctly weighted, least benchmark, this survey could be accomplished in one day. A
squares adjustment; cm, centimeter; NA, not applicable]
re-observation could be accomplished the next day as a qual-
ity check during different atmospheric conditions and satel-
Order Horizontal standard Ellipsoid standard lite geometry. Marks in the small area (session A) would be
AA 0.3 cm + 1:100,000,000 NA re-observed in reverse order so the marks that were surveyed
A 0.5 cm + 1:10,000,000 NA in the evening during the first observation are now surveyed
B 0.8 cm + 1:1,000,000 NA in the morning during the second observation. When plan-
First 1 cm + 1:100,000 NA ning a network survey, the quality of the final adjustment is
strongly affected by the distance from the benchmarks held
First Class I NA 0.5
fixed to those interior objective points, the number and quality
First Class II NA 0.7 of the benchmarks, the length of time each objective point is
Second Class I 2.0 cm + 1:50,000 1 observed, the number and time offset of re-observations, and
Second Class II 3.0 cm + 1:20,000 1.3 the geometry of the benchmarks in relation to the objective
Third 5.0 cm + 1:10,000 NA points; therefore, all these aspects should be considered and
evaluated when designing a network. Essentials of a quality
Third Class I NA 2
static network survey design for obtaining high-quality ellip-
Third Class II NA 3 soid and orthometric heights are described by Zilkoski and
Fourth Class I NA 6 others (1997, 2008). During this planning period, travel time
should be factored into the campaign schedule so that there is
The accuracy of the relation of a benchmark described sufficient time between sessions for each surveyor to move to
as first order to that of the control from which it was surveyed a new location, locate the benchmark, and properly setup the
is 1 part for every 100,000 (table 9). In other words, if the GNSS receiver and receiver antenna.
benchmark is 13,000 meters from the control point, the accu- Previously, it was recommended that similar GNSS
racy of that benchmark in relation to the control is 0.13 meters receiver antennas (manufacturer and model) be used dur-
or 13,000/100,000. Likewise, the vertical order describes the ing a static surveying campaign to ensure consistency to
vertical relation between benchmarks as determined by the the antenna phase center and prevent any variations dur-
distance between benchmarks in kilometers. Therefore, the ing processing. The antenna phase center is the position
Session A
Control 1 (C1)
Control 2 (C2)
Control 4 (C4)
Control 3 (C3)
100 KILOMETER
EXPLANATION
Baseline session A
Observation schedule Baseline session B
Session Control stations Baseline session C
A C1, C2 Observable objective point
B C1, C2, C4 Horizontal control only
C C1, C4, C3 Vertical control only
Continually Operating Reference Station (CORS)
Figure 21. Simple network design with resurveys and baselines.
Figure 21. Simple network design with resurveys and baselines.

Static GNSS 39
Session B
Control 1 (C1)
Control 2 (C2)
Control 4 (C4)
Control 3 (C3)
100 KILOMETER
EXPLANATION
Baseline session A
Baseline session B
Observation schedule
Baseline session C
Session Control stations
Observable objective point
A C1, C2
Horizontal control only
B C1, C2, C4
Vertical control only
C C1, C4, C3
Figure 21. Simple network design with resurveys and baselines.—Continued

Session C
Control 1 (C1)
Control 2 (C2)
Control 4 (C4)
Control 3 (C3)
100 KILOMETER
EXPLANATION
Baseline session A
Baseline session B
Observation schedule
Baseline session C
Session Control stations
Observable objective point
A C1, C2
Horizontal control only
B C1, C2, C4
Vertical control only
C C1, C4, C3

Static GNSS 41
of the precise point being measured when measurements Processing and Adjustment
between satellites and the receiver antenna are being made
(Mader, 1999). The phase center is neither a physical point Manual processing for static surveys, compared to OPUS
nor a stable point. Most of the variation in the phase center processing or no post processing, permits the user to con-
depends on the satellite elevation, changing with direction of trol many factors that affect the quality of the results. These
the satellite signal. This is important to understand, because factors include ephemeris used, time span of collected data,
antenna offsets are needed to correct GNSS measurements number and location of satellites used (modified by elimina-
to physical monuments. It has been indicated that phase tion of poor satellites from an observation or adjustment of an
center offsets and variations are important to model and do elevation mask), and selection and quality of baselines that are
affect the quality of the final coordinates, especially vertical processed. A detailed review of each observation session can
coordinates (Mader, 1999). Antenna phase center offsets are determine if additional observations are necessary. Processing
important when manually processing GNSS data because network survey data typically follows these general steps:
some GNSS receiver antennas do not have well-defined 1. A loop closure analysis.
antenna phase offsets, and not all software has pre-set phase
center offset information for all antennas. Therefore, if 2. Unconstrained network adjustment of all base lines.
several receiver antenna types are used in a survey, the phase
3. Analysis of all baselines and repeat baselines in the
center offsets must be entered manually into the processing
unconstrained adjustment.
software or selected from a list of predefined receiver anten-
nas. When discussing, applying, and learning about phase 4. Correction or elimination of baselines with poor
center offsets, note that phase centers are currently measured results or poor fit with other baselines.
and described as absolute values or vectors from the antenna
reference point to the L1 and L2 average phase center (Mader, 5. Fully constrained adjustment on remaining baselines.
2010). Previously, phase centers were measured in relative Unconstrained and fully constrained network adjustments
terms as a comparison to a standard antenna. This measure- are least squares adjustments. Simply put, a least squares
ment method is no longer the method that is used, so a sur- adjustment incorporates the exact baseline parameters or the
veyor must be sure that the offsets being applied are absolute position of each objective point and benchmark (that holds
(in relation to the antenna reference point) and not relative the control positions fixed) in the network, and computation-
(in relation to a standard antenna). Phase center variations ally results in the least amount of error. The usefulness of the
describe how the average phase center varies depending on method rests in part upon the mathematical demonstration that
satellite angle above the horizon. Many static post-process- if the errors in the measurements of any quantity follow a few
ing programs have phase center information associated with reasonable laws, the most probable value of the quantity is the
each selectable receiver antenna type to ensure the phase one for which the sum of the squares of the residual errors (or
center offset is accounted for. In addition, if the program corrections) is a minimum. If the observations are of unequal
being used does not have information pre-programmed on weight, then the most probable value is the one for which the
the specific receiver antenna, the surveyor can usually find sum of the squares of the weighted residuals is a minimum
the phase center offset information on the NGS website (National Geodetic Survey, 2001b). The weighting used in a
(Mader, 2010) and work with technical support for NGS or least squares adjustment varies between different adjustment
the post-processing program to add the antenna and phase software and can be controlled by the user in some software
center offset information. packages. The most common weighting method in a least
Once a network survey has been designed, includ- squares adjustment is to use the reciprocal of the variance of
ing several repeat baselines and multiple observations on the quantity to multiply and increase or decrease the effect of
objective points at different satellite geometries, the survey that quantity on the results of an adjustment (National Geo-
chief must organize surveying personnel and provide them detic Survey, 2001b). In other words, baselines with lower
with information on the planned campaign. The survey chief solution variance will have more effect in the adjustment than
should ensure the surveying team has maps of the campaign baselines with greater solution variance. Full understanding of
area, the survey itinerary, and a list of contacts for other sur- the least squares adjustment is not necessary to adjust a GNSS
veyors, those in the field and in the office. The team should network; however, the user does need to have knowledge of
also go through mission planning considerations, as men- the software and quality checks and tests that are performed so
tioned earlier in the "Mission Planning and Errors" section, an evaluation of the adjusted coordinates can be made.
to verify which survey times have sufficient satellite cover- The first step in a network adjustment is to bring the
age with low PDOP, review CORS data that they plan to use survey data into the processing software. When entering data
to verify that the station is currently functioning properly, into a processing software package, care must be taken to
and contact landowners or other local contacts that need to verify each data set has the correct receiver antenna (L1 and L2
be informed of the work. offsets), correct receiver antenna height, and the correct data
collection time span. If CORS data are entered as part of the been shifted from published positions. In addition to coding
network, the metadata for each site should be reviewed and the benchmarks as control positions, a geoid model must also
checked to make sure the receiver antenna type entered is cor- be selected. Once all these steps have been performed, a fully
rect (note that superseded receiver antenna types are published constrained adjustment can be run and the final results (includ-
in the metadata and are common at many CORS stations). In ing all statistical tests and checks) should be reviewed once
addition, an ephemeris file will need to be loaded for each sur- again. Statistical tests run by each software are typically well
vey day in the network and all benchmarks need to have known described in the software manual and should be well under-
coordinates entered regardless of whether or not the benchmark stood so that the results of the adjustment have meaning. A
will be held as a control (fixed point). Most software manu- common way to evaluate the final quality of the fully adjusted
als will have a full section devoted to network adjustment that network is to use benchmarks that were not used as control
should be read before performing an adjustment. After entering as described above, evaluate the 95-percent confidence limits
all survey data into the adjustment project, the baselines are given for each position as provided by the software, and evalu-
selected and processed. The processed baselines are then run ate PPM (parts per million) error in the baselines. PPM error
through a loop closure test. The loop closure test is a process is a calculation of the error based on the length of the baseline;
for determining the amount of error in a set of observations longer baselines inevitably have more error than short base-
within a network (Trimble Business Center, 2011). The results lines. The positions for the fully constrained adjustment are
of the loop closure test are then evaluated to determine whether the final positions determined for each objective point. Net-
errors in the loop closure could be reduced by identifying and work processing steps are further demonstrated in appendix 4.
removing inconsistent baselines (those that are not fitting well
in the network) or duplicate baselines that conflicted with one
another. Any poor baseline can either be eliminated or the data Post-Processed Kinematic Surveying
at each observation can be evaluated to reduce the noise or
Post-processed kinematic surveying is another method of
error. Observation times may be eliminated from the beginning
post processing global positioning data. Post-processed kine-
or intermittently throughout if segments of the file represent
matic surveying was originally used when a radio link from
poor satellite data during the observation.
the base station to the rover was not available. This surveying
Once all loops have closed within acceptable standards,
method requires the base station to be set up stationary, at a
a minimally constrained adjustment can be performed. A net-
known or unknown location, while the rover unit is used to
work adjustment that uses the minimum number of constraints
collect autonomous GNSS observations on objective points
required to define the coordinate system is representative of a
and benchmarks. The base data and the rover data are then
minimally constrained adjustment. This step is performed to
post processed in the office to increase the accuracy of the
measure the internal consistency among observations (Trimble
rover positions based on the data collected at the base station.
Business Center, 2011). Before performing the minimally con-
This method is not typically used because RT approaches are
strained adjustment, one control benchmark must be coded in
progressively more available, and accuracy checks and evalu-
the software as a fixed position so the entered coordinates for
ations are able to be done in real time; however, this method is
that benchmark will not change within the dataset during the
still facilitated in many post processing software packages and
adjustment. The minimally constrained adjustment may iden-
handheld data collection devices. This method may be useful
tify any data outliers that do not fit within the overall network.
when radio or cellular communication is a problem, but the
In addition, the adjustment can be evaluated by observing how
objective points are within a reasonable distance of the base
far benchmarks with known coordinates (but not held fixed in
station so PPM errors are not induced. Unfortunately, real-time
the adjustment) were shifted from the known position.
accuracy checks are limited to the evaluation of satellite data
The final step after the minimally constrained adjustment
at the rover only; therefore, there would be no indication of the
has been completed and all accuracy tests and checks have
quality of data being collected at the base station or the quality
been accepted, is to perform a fully constrained adjustment.
of the final solution until the data was post processed.
A fully constrained adjustment involves the adjustment of all
points in the network that are part of a larger control network
held fixed to their published coordinate values. Essentially a
fully constrained adjustment may be used to combine smaller GNSS Quality
and larger networks as well as older and newer networks
(Trimble Business Center, 2011). To perform the fully con- The concept of accuracy for any GNSS campaign can be
strained adjustment, several benchmarks should be coded complex. There are several components tied to GNSS surveys
as fixed or control positions in addition to the benchmark that reflect some degree of quality. Aside from most effective
already held fixed in the minimally constrained adjustment. surveying practices including occupation time, redundancy,
If additional benchmarks have been included in the network and the use of high-accuracy active and passive stations
that are not coded as fixed or control positions, they may be (benchmarks), there are underlying components, such as the
used after the adjustment to evaluate the final network solution quality of the ellipsoid, the hybrid geoid model, and the instru-
by reviewing how far the positions of each benchmark have mentation used.
GNSS Quality 43
The establishment of vertical control using GNSS tech- It is difficult to ascertain a numerical representation of
niques should utilize trusted benchmarks. The definition of accuracy for GNSS approaches in establishing vertical datum.
a trusted benchmark should be a mark that has the assurance There are, however, different assurances and approaches that
of quality and stability, and represents a current datum and may be categorized to represent a level of survey-grade GNSS
adjustment. A localization to benchmarks provides a reference quality toward data collection. These have been categorized as
against “the truth.” These trusted benchmarks on the ground Level I, Level II, Level III, and Level IV, and are summarized
have been used to develop the hybrid geoid model, which in table 11. Note that each level of quality assumes most effec-
in turn is used to convert ellipsoid heights, derived from tive field practices, such as:
GNSS positioning, to orthometric heights. It is not recom- • Bubble check and calibration of base fixed-height
mended that the definition of “the truth” represent orthometric tripod or rover bipod.
heights derived solely by active stations using the current
hybrid geoid model; however, there are geographic areas • Base fixed-height or dual-clamped tripod stabilized by
without sufficient availability of heights derived by leveling, chains or sandbags.
thus requiring GNSS derived heights. Generally, the NGS
encourages all active stations be aligned with the NSRS that • Mission planning, including base or rover multipath
represents a current and consistent datum and adjustment, for avoidance for each observation session.
example NAD 83 (2011), epoch 2010.0. Alignment and con- • Height of base Antenna Reference Point (ARP) mea-
sistency of active stations permits a quality standard that can sured before and after observation session.
be used from one locality to another without discrepancy. The
NGS recognizes quality horizontal positioning that is derived Additionally, it is the responsibility of the GNSS user to
by active stations alone, but expresses concerns regard- ensure benchmarks in the project area are sufficiently checked
ing vertical positioning as the quality of the hybrid geoid during a campaign, and those checks need to be spatially
model may vary from one project area to the next (D. Doyle, representative of all data collection as much as possible. In
National Geodetic Survey, oral commun., 2011). Benchmarks this regard, the benchmark continues to remain the optimal
are used to provide assurance as a quality check, such that the representation of truth.
accuracy of a survey may be derived as the residual between GNSS-derived benchmarks are common in many parts
the benchmark and the GNSS solution. Without the consid- of the country. As a result, it is important to note a distinc-
eration of a benchmark, and all other assurances being equal, tion between these derived benchmarks (height modernization
one has to assume an accurate and consistent hybrid geoid marks) and benchmarks derived by leveling (such as first-, sec-
model to provide accurate heights. Geoid models, as dis- ond-, and third-order). The quality categories in table 11 identify
cussed in the "Geodesy Background" section, are developed benchmarks derived by leveling (for example, second- and
from a combination of gravity data, ellipsoid heights, and third-order) as recommendations for the origination of geodetic
leveled heights. These models are more problematic in areas work; however, there may be circumstances where benchmarks
susceptible to disturbance, subsidence, tectonic movement, derived from leveling do not exist or, if they do exist, cannot be
uplift, and seasonal variations, and are therefore updated trusted, and those marks explicitly derived by GNSS are avail-
periodically to reflect these changes. The use of active sta- able. It is incumbent upon the surveyor to use the highest quality
tions to derive an orthometric height, without a localization to benchmarks available. There is an evaluation method difference
trusted benchmarks, puts the reliability on the geoid model, between GNSS-derived benchmarks and leveled benchmarks;
a model that may have limitations based on the above-men- the uncertainty of GNSS-derived benchmarks is evaluated in an
tioned areas. At the time of this writing, the NGS is continu- absolute sense, whereas the leveled benchmarks are evaluated in
ing to utilize all disseminated ellipsoid heights on existing a relative sense. Regardless, the surveyor should be aware of the
benchmarks to improve the accuracy of the geoid (National published elevation and its decimal expression. At a minimum,
Geodetic Survey, 2001c). One method the NGS is utilizing to benchmarks used for geodetic work to establish datum should
facilitate these ellipsoid heights derived on existing bench- be expressed to the centimeter level.
marks is by using data submitted through OPUS-DB.
For network surveys, trusted benchmarks of quality Level I Survey
vertical order are needed to provide a framework in which to
constrain and yield objective points. Considering the purpose The Level I survey is regarded as the highest quality
and scope of this manual, horizontal positioning is of marginal survey that may be engaged by USGS staff [a higher standard
concern. Active stations are utilized during a network survey published by the NGS “Guidelines for Establishing GPS-
and a horizontal position may be derived using observations Derived Orthometric Heights—NOAA Technical Memoran-
at vertical benchmarks or objective points within the network. dum NOS NGS 59” is available by the NGS for those who
This may be an adequate means of obtaining a horizontal com- almost always wish to achieve local accuracies of 2 cm to
ponent necessary (but not primary) to the purpose and scope of 5 cm (Zilkoski and others, 2008)]. The Level I survey also
this manual. Once again, the benchmark is held in high regard can be categorized as a network survey or a single-base static
to ensure a quality network survey. survey (table 11).
Table 11. Level-quality descriptions for Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) positioning in the U.S. Geological Survey.
[≤, less than or equal to; km, kilometer; +, approach excessive; %, percent; OPUS-S, Online Position Users Service-Static; RMS, Root Mean Square; m, meter; OPUS-RS, Online Position Users Service-Rapid
Static; -, approach insufficient; RTK, Real-Time Kinematic; RT, real time; PDOP, Position Dilution of Precision; ≥, greater than or equal to]
Network surveys Level I Level II Level III Level IV

Baseline length; vertical order 2 benchmarks ≤ 40 km of each other ≤ 60 km of each other + +
Baseline length; objective points ≤ 15 km of benchmarks and each other ≤ 25 km of benchmarks and each other + +
Occupation time; vertical order 2 benchmarks 4 hour minimum 4 hour minimum + +
Occupation time; objective points 1 hour minimum 1 hour minimum + +
Number of controls: vertical order 2 benchmarks 4 4 + +
Number of checks on benchmarks Any available Any available + +
Baseline redundancy: objective points 50% 50% + +
Single-base OPUS-S surveys*

Occupations 2 1 1 +
Duration 4 hour minimum 4 hour minimum 2 to 4 hour +
Observations used ≥ 80% ≥ 80% ≥ 60% +
Ambiguities fixed ≥ 80% ≥ 80% ≥ 60% +
Solution RMS error ≤ 0.03 m ≤ 0.03 m ≤ 0.05 m +
Vertical peak-to-peak ≤ 0.06 m ≤ 0.08 m ≤ 0.10 m +
Assurance check Average within 0.05 m of each solution + + +
Single-base OPUS-RS surveys*

Occupations - 1 1 +
Duration - 1 to 2 hour 15 min to 2 hour +
Solution RMS error - Normalized between 0.1 and 1 Normalized between 0.1 and 1 +
Orthometric height estimated uncertainty - ≤ 0.08 m ≤ 0.10 m +
Real-time positioning**
Base station occupations for single-base RTK - 1 1 1
RT blunder check - Yes, within 0.03 m Yes, within 0.03 m No
PDOP - ≤3 ≤4 ≤6
Collection interval - 1-second interval for 3 minutes 1-second interval for 3 minutes Any
(180 epochs) (180 epochs)
Satellites - ≥7 ≥6 ≥5
Baseline distance - ≤ 9 km ≤9 km ≤ 9 km
Vertical precision (2 sigma) - 0.05 m 0.07 m +
Objective point assurance checks - Average within 0.05 m of each solution Average within 0.05 m of each solution +
for 10% of observations for 10% of observations
Benchmark checks or localization - Yes, vertical order 2 within 0.05 m Yes, vertical order 3 within 0.05 m +
*
Derived from National Geodetic Survey (NGS)-OPUS, 2010.
**
Derived from Henning, 2010.
GNSS Quality 45
The Level I network survey is a derivation from Zilkoski data. For NDEP purposes, it is identified that the independent
and others (2008), which requires a quantity of four bench- source or ground-control point should maintain an accuracy at
marks of second-order vertical accuracy or better within a least 3 times greater than the digital data set being evaluated
40-km spacing of each other. Objective points within the at the 95-percent confidence level (National Digital Elevation
network must reside within a 15-km spacing of the previously Program, 2004). As an example, for products depicting 1-foot
described benchmarks and each other. Occupation time must be contour intervals, the vertical accuracy of the data set should be
a minimum of 4 hours for all held benchmarks and no less than no greater than 18.2 cm according to the National Standard for
1 hour for all interior objective points. For the Level I network, Spatial Data Accuracy (NSSDA) (National Digital Elevation
50 percent of the objective points need to be double occupied, Program, 2004). Given a target accuracy of 6.1 cm (18.2 cm /3
and it is recommended that any additional benchmarks (if = 6.1 cm), it is incumbent upon the GNSS user to select an
available) exceeding the required four that are held fixed be approach that satisfies this requirement. A Level I quality
included in the network as a quality check at a minimum occu- category would likely be optimal in this case and would require
pation time of 1 hour. Observations on benchmarks initially baseline redundancy as part of the network approach, a subse-
held fixed do not require re-observation. The length of the cam- quent observation as part of a single-base OPUS-S approach,
paign will likely ensure enough variation in atmospheric condi- and trusted monumentation for either approach within this
tions and satellite geometry for objective point re-observations category to further validate and ensure this 6.1-cm uncertainty
suitable for USGS science and data collection; however, among established ground control.
although not required, it is suggested that all benchmarks (held
fixed) and 50 percent of the objective points be re-observed at a
time offset, generally greater than 24 hours. Processing results
Level II Survey
from both of these sessions may be averaged. A Level II survey may consist of a static network survey,
The Level I single-base static survey essentially adopts a single-base static survey, or a real-time (RT) survey includ-
guidelines provided by NGS OPUS. Although there are other ing a single-base or network approach (table 11). The network
software utilities that provide more autonomy for post process- survey for Level II requires a quantity of four benchmarks of
ing solutions, such as manual editing and deletion of outliers, second-order vertical accuracy or better within a 60 km spacing
OPUS is a well maintained and widely accepted utility from of each other. Objective points within the network must reside
the NGS that provides sufficient functionality for use within within a 25-km spacing of the previously described benchmarks
the USGS. For single-base static surveys using OPUS, Level I and each other. Occupation time must be a minimum of 4 hours
criteria require two occupations: the observation of consecu- for all held benchmarks and no less than 1 hour for all interior
tive days, performed at different times of the day, to ensure objective points. For the Level II network, 50 percent of the
variability of atmospheric conditions (for example morning objective points need to be double occupied and it is recom-
session day one, afternoon session day two). Processing for mended that any additional benchmarks (if available) exceeding
these single-base surveys is facilitated by OPUS-S, which uti- the required four that are held fixed, be included in the network
lizes NGS PAGES software to process dual-frequency obser- as a check at a minimum occupation time of 1 hour.
vation files. Observation times should be no less than 4 hours, Single-base static surveys, as part of a Level II survey, are
at least 80 percent of the total observations in the data file derived from National Geodetic Survey OPUS and require obser-
should be used, at least 80 percent of ambiguities should be vations times to be no less than 4 hours, at least 80 percent of the
fixed (resolved) in the solution, the vertical peak-to-peak error total observations in the data file should be used, at least 80 per-
should not exceed 0.06 m, and the root mean squared (RMS) cent of ambiguities in the solution should be fixed, the vertical
error of the solution should not exceed 0.03 m. Additionally, peak-to-peak error should not exceed 0.08 m, and the root mean
the average of both OPUS solutions must be within 0.05 m of squared (RMS) error of the solution should not exceed 0.03 m.
either solution used to average. A single-base rapid static approach may also be consid-
GNSS ground-control points are often established to ered Level II quality. As a result of the increasing amount of
evaluate the accuracy of airborne Light Detection And Ranging CORS, OPUS-RS provides acceptable solution qualities suffi-
(LiDAR) data used. The USGS draft LiDAR version 13 speci- cient to satisfy the constraints of a Level II survey. All OPUS-
fications (U.S. Geological Survey, 2010) refer to the National RS solutions must ensure duration times no less than 1 hour,
Digital Elevation Program (NDEP) guidelines for digital a normalized RMS value between 0.1 and 1, and an estimated
elevation data, part 1, as the source for determining elevation uncertainty of the orthometric height no greater than 0.08 m.
accuracy. The NDEP guidelines recommend a minimum of The quality requirements of a Level II survey also
20 ground-control points for major vegetation types that are include a RT approach using benchmarks and RT blunder
dependent upon the area being collected such as open terrain, checks described earlier in the "Single-base RTK" section. The
tall weeds and crops, brush lands and low trees, forested areas Level II RT approach is derived from Henning (2010), which
fully covered by trees, and urban areas (National Digital Eleva- requires rover redundancy, in which observation lengths shall
tion Program, 2004). LiDAR guidelines and base specifications be no less than 180 epochs (1-second data collection interval
established by the U.S. Geological Survey National Geospa- for 3 minutes). The RT baseline lengths should not exceed
tial Program reference NDEP guidelines for digital elevation 9 km (with the exception of RTNs that have an interpolation
methodology involving a virtual base station, which essen- project areas for separate locations, it is recommended that a com-
tially provide a “virtual” base station near each observation), mon tie exist from one area to the next.
PDOP should not exceed 3, and observable satellites should be Only 2 benchmarks are required for a localization (1 to
greater than or equal to 7. The difference between redundant localize and 1 to check), so other marks used in the initial
observations during a RT blunder check should not exceed localization may be ignored, particularly marks determined to
0.03 m, and vertical precision from the base station (or RTN be outliers. From this information, the user can select which
virtual reference station) to the rover (usually identified at the benchmark to use for localization and which benchmark to use
bottom of the screen on the data collector) for each observa- when performing a check (fig. 22).
tion should be within 0.05 m at 2 sigma. A localization of If the user does not wish to perform a localization, qual-
2 trusted benchmarks of second-order vertical accuracy or ity checks on benchmarks should be performed throughout
better should be performed where 1 benchmark is used to the survey to spatially represent the project area as much as
move the hybrid geoid model up or down to align the vertical possible. Whether a user is performing a localization or just
datum (also known as 2-point site calibration), and the other is checking benchmarks, a quality check on a benchmark needs
used as a quality check (Henning, 2010). To reduce the effects to be performed at the beginning and end of a Level II cam-
of multipath through averaging, a final observation should be paign. Campaigns involving the establishment of 10 or more
performed on the beginning benchmark. objective points must ensure reoccupation of 10 percent of
For trusted benchmarks available within a project area not to those objective points before performing a quality check at the
exceed 10 km, an evaluation of benchmarks may be performed by end of the campaign. Quality checks on benchmarks and reoc-
entering those benchmarks into the data collector, conducting RT cupied objective points should not vary more than 0.05 m.
observations over those benchmarks, then performing a localiza- As an example, a single-base RTK approach is undertaken
tion (site calibration) for all of the benchmarks to evaluate how within a project area that does not exceed 10-km baselines. The
well they fit. It is the responsibility of the GNSS user to recognize user occupies the base receiver at an autonomous location and
limitations of localizations and exceeding baseline lengths to enters four trusted benchmarks (second-order vertical accuracy
benchmarks that are used as a quality check away from objective or better) recovered in the project area, into the data collector.
points. As previously discussed within RTN quality assurance, a The user then operates the rover to conduct redundant observa-
calibration scale factor remains fixed and unchanging, whereas tions (as part of a RT blunder check) at a 1-second interval for
the projection scale factor maintains a rate of change as the 3 minutes over each benchmark as part of a localization. The
distance increases. For this reason, a 10-km baseline should exist, user then evaluates benchmark residuals and selects 1 mark
and for project areas that extend beyond this distance, a subdivi- to localize, and at least 1 mark to check (while turning off or
sion might be necessary to “split” localizations. When splitting deleting outliers). It is important to note that a minimum of
Vertical residuals produced by a least squares fit of known

benchmarks to Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS)
observations at those known benchmarks
User may turn off or delete outliers when

assessing vertical residuals before a
localization is initiated
Figure 22. Example results as displayed

in the data collector of a localization
with Global Navigation Satellite System
(GNSS).
GNSS Quality 47
four benchmarks should be entered into the data collector to base station to the rover (usually identified at the bottom of the
ensure computation and display of vertical residuals within the screen on the data collector) for each observation is within 0.05
site calibration utility. If there are less than four benchmarks m at 2 sigma. These redundant observations are performed over
available in a particular project area, residuals can be assessed one benchmark selected as a quality check or localization in the
manually outside of the site calibration utility. While adminis- beginning of the campaign, such that the elevation of the first
tering RT blunder checks, the user ensures that values represent- observation is within 0.03 m of the second observation and the
ing vertical precision from the base station to the rover (usually average of both are within 0.05 m of the benchmark elevation.
identified at the bottom of the screen on the data collector) for The user then observes all objective points in the subdivision
each observation are within 0.05 m at 2 sigma. These redundant while adhering to RT blunder checks within 0.03 m as described
observations are performed over one benchmark selected as a above. At the end of the campaign, the user reoccupies 10
quality check or localization in the beginning of the campaign, percent of the objective points (for campaigns that establish
such that the elevation of the first observation is within 0.03 m 10 or more objective points) and conducts a check on another
of the second observation and the average is within 0.05 m benchmark in the same manner as the check in the beginning
of the stated benchmark elevation. [Note that when using an of the campaign. Finally, the user returns to the benchmark ini-
autonomous base location, the observed elevation will be tially observed for the final observation and conducts a quality
equivalent to the known elevation for the beginning benchmark “closing” check in the same manner as the first two benchmark
check. The ending quality check will ensure continuity among observations. Reoccupation of objective points and benchmark
both benchmarks so that any error may be distributed equally checks must be within 0.05 m from the initial objective point
among beginning and ending benchmarks. The distribution and benchmark elevation. The user repeats the same procedures
of error among beginning and ending benchmarks, includ- for the second and third subdivisions of the 30-km project area.
ing all bounded objective points, is difficult to assign using an Summarized observations provided in table 12 for this example
autonomous RT approach. An attempt to proportion error to validate the assurance of Level II criteria.
each observation and benchmark based on observation quality
parameters would be subjective (outside of the ensured qual-
ity assurance needed for a Level II or Level III RT approach); Level III Survey
therefore, it is most effective to distribute error equally among
The Level III survey includes single-base static and
all benchmarks and bounded objective point observations].
rapid-static surveys, and a modified RT approach (table 11).
The user then observes all objective points in the project area
The quality of a network survey exceeds the requirements of a
while adhering to RT blunder checks within 0.03 m as described
Level III survey. For a Level III survey, the single-base static
above. At the end of the campaign, the user reoccupies 10 per-
approach is depreciated from a Level II survey, such that the
cent of the objective points (for campaigns that establish 10
OPUS-S solution still requires observation times between 2
or more objective points) and conducts a quality check on
to 4 hours, but only 60 percent of the total observations in the
another benchmark in the same manner as the quality check at
data file must be used, 60 percent of ambiguities in the solu-
the beginning of the campaign. Finally, the user returns to the
tion should be fixed, the vertical peak-to-peak error should not
benchmark initially observed for the final observation and con-
exceed 0.1 m, and the root mean squared (RMS) error of the
ducts a quality “closing” check in the same manner as the first
solution should not exceed 0.05 m.
two benchmark observations. This final “closing” check should
A single-base rapid static approach may satisfy the con-
reside within 0.05 m of the stated benchmark elevation.
straints of a Level III quality. All OPUS-RS solutions may have
As another example, a RTN approach is undertaken
observation times between 15 minutes to 2 hours, normalized
within a 30-km wide project area. The user evaluates the
RMS values between 0.1 and 1, and yield an estimated uncer-
30-km area by locating usable benchmarks of second-order
tainty of the orthometric height no greater than 0.1 m.
vertical accuracy or better, and appropriately subdivides the
The RT approach for a Level III survey maintains the
30-km area to ensure localization to 1 benchmark and a quality
same requirements as the Level II survey with some excep-
check to another benchmark in each subdivision. As previ-
tions, as outlined in table 11.
ously discussed, as a general rule, the subdivisions should not
exceed 10 km in length. The user recovers and enters six trusted
benchmarks (second order or better recovered in the project Level IV Survey
area) into the data collector. The user then operates the rover to
conduct redundant observations (as part of a RT blunder check) Post-processed GNSS solutions, such as network surveys
at a 1-second interval for 3 minutes over a trusted benchmark or single-base static surveys, represent qualities that exceed
as part of a localization in the first subdivision. If more than a Level IV survey. A Level IV survey represents real-time
2 trusted benchmarks are recovered, the user then evaluates approaches that do not meet criteria for the Levels I-III
benchmark residuals and selects 1 mark to localize, and at least surveys mentioned above; however, a Level IV survey is
1 mark to check (while turning off or deleting outliers) in the generally reserved for RT surveys that require fixed solutions
first subdivision. While administering RT blunder checks, the without localizations, redundancies, checks, or guidelines
user ensures values representing vertical precision from the regarding baseline length, satellite availability, data collection
Table 12. An example of summarized observations and quality criteria upheld for a Level II real-time (RT) survey using a Real-Time Network (RTN).
[m, meter; PDOP, Position Dilution of Precision; UTM, Universal Transverse Mercator coordinate system; Zone 15, UTM Grid designated every six degrees of longitude; BMXXXX, benchmark identifier; NA,
not applicable; %, percent]
Difference between final

Vertical
elevation and bench- Localization or
Rover Vertical Average Northing; Easting; GNSS RT order II
Final mark elevation and benchmark or
receiver precision 2 number UTM, UTM, observation blunder or better
Mark PDOP elevation 10 percent reoccupied double
height sigma of Zone 15, Zone 15, elevation check benchmark
(m) objective point occupy check
(m) (m) satellites m m (m) (m) elevation
elevations (m)
(m)
(m)
Benchmark-BM1187 1.7 0.01 14 1.1 4086421.351 301335.594 97.889 -0.011 97.895 97.925 97.895 - 97.925 = -0.030
Benchmark-BM1187-check 1.4 0.02 15 4086421.353 301335.597 97.900
Objective point1 1.4 0.016 13 1.2 4083702.346 298559.472 95.840 -0.001 95.841 NA NA NA
Objective point1-check 1.7 0.01 14 4083702.344 298559.470 95.841
Objective point2 1.7 0.024 16 1.5 4080400.402 303415.513 90.256 0.003 90.255 NA NA NA
Table 12. An example of summarized observations and quality criteria upheld for a Level II real-time (RT) survey using a Real-Time Network (RTN).—Continued
[m, meter; PDOP, Position Dilution of Precision; UTM, Universal Transverse Mercator coordinate system; Zone 15, UTM Grid designated every six degrees of longitude; BMXXXX, benchmark identifier; NA,
not applicable; %, percent]
Difference between final

Vertical
elevation and bench- Localization or
Rover Vertical Average Northing; Easting; GNSS RT order II
Final mark elevation and benchmark or
receiver precision 2 number UTM, UTM, observation blunder or better
Mark PDOP elevation 10 percent reoccupied double
height sigma of Zone 15, Zone 15, elevation check benchmark
(m) objective point occupy check
(m) (m) satellites m m (m) (m) elevation
elevations (m)
(m)
(m)
Objective point1-10% 1.7 0.008 17 1.2 4083702.342 298559.474 95.857 0.022 95.846 95.841 - 95.846 = -0.005
Reoccupy
Objective point1-10% 1.4 0.009 18 4083702.340 298559.472 95.835
Reoccupy check
Objective point6-10% 1.4 0.006 18 1.4 4083587.763 305280.621 98.345 -0.016 98.353 98.375 - 98.353 = 0.022
Reoccupy
Objective point6-10% 1.7 0.007 17 4083587.760 305280.616 98.361
GNSS Quality 49
Reoccupy check
Benchmark-BM1186 1.7 0.013 16 1.4 4065570.643 288987.605 97.570 0.002 97.569 97.537 97.569 - 97.537 = 0.032
Benchmark-BM1187 1.4 0.018 16 1.1 4086421.352 301335.593 97.920 0.017 97.912 97.925 97.912 - 97.925 = -0.013
interval, and observation time. At a minimum, one should try range 0.1 to 1 is a sufficient indicator of noise or uncertainty in
to ensure a PDOP value less than or equal to 6. A summary of the processed coordinate. OPUS-S and OPUS-RS observations
all level-quality surveys is tabulated in table 11. that are processed over a trusted benchmark provide a suf-
ficient comparison between the processed OPUS solution and
the known benchmark elevation. A comparison of processed
Level Quality Alternatives with Real-Time OPUS solutions to trusted benchmarks ensures continuity among
Positioning historic data collection derived from benchmarks, and provides
another sense of solution accuracy; therefore, observations over
The NGS has reduced the effort toward establishing tradi- benchmarks are recommended during single-base static cam-
tional passive benchmarks. With the movement toward active paigns utilizing OPUS.
stations for geodetic control, benchmarks by other entities are Network surveys are based on constrained benchmarks,
not being established at the rate they once were. In addition, which are evaluated in terms of residuals in the processing
a substantial percentage of existing benchmarks are disturbed report of the overall solution. In these surveys, the benchmark
by anthropogenic effects or geophysical effects (deformation, is paramount and weight should be applied accordingly based
subsidence, crustal motion). As a result, it may be difficult on reliability. Additional benchmarks occupied within the
to find a benchmark, particularly one of acceptable verti- network (beyond the requirements described in Level I and
cal quality. The quality described in the preceding section is Level II surveys) are good practice to ensure quality checks.
established such that at a minimum, a Level III survey can be The acceptable uncertainty for the survey data used as the
performed for data collection or project needs. In the absence basis for the science should be evaluated before a particular
of benchmarks with second-order vertical accuracy or better level quality of survey is selected. A GNSS survey is only one
for a Level II survey, the user can substitute Level I OPUS- component of error introduced into the final product. The end
derived control, which can be localized and checked as part user of the data must evaluate different components of uncer-
of a RT campaign; however, OPUS-derived control for a RT tainty, and the potential for these components to be additive
campaign will depreciate the quality of a Level II survey to a and compound throughout the process to the final product. A
Level III survey. As discussed earlier, a localization to trusted GNSS user needs to ensure that the approach being used does
benchmarks established on the ground provides the most not violate the degree of uncertainty one is trying to achieve
optimal representation of the ground surface, as opposed to the or maintain in the process. An example would be the survey of
current hybrid geoid model and its associated uncertainties. high-water marks used as the basis for peak flow computations.
Additionally, if only third-order benchmarks exist, a Level III The foundation of an indirect determination of peak discharge
survey is the highest quality that can be attained. is based on the quality of high-water marks and the general set-
High-water mark surveys using GNSS may employ ting of natural or artificial control features that distinguish the
or combine several different quality surveys. For instance, effectiveness of the approach. Considering the distinction of
project control may be set using a RT approach for a Level II coastal storm surge and upland river high-water marks pro-
or Level III survey. This control may be considered the vided (table 13; L. Bohmann, U.S. Geological Survey, written
foundation established for use of a total station used to survey commun., 2011), the use of a RT approach to directly survey
high-water marks or additional topography canopied by trees; high-water marks should be undertaken with caution because
however, open topography that is part of the high-water mark good or excellent marks may represent uncertainties (0.02 to
survey may be surveyed with a Level IV quality approach, 0.1 ft; table 13) below those inherent in a RT approach. For this
without previously described assurances. example, the user should recognize error that stems from the
complexity of the general setting and computational procedure,
but be aware of the additive or worst case amount of uncer-
Uncertainty Analysis
tainty that can be derived overall in the process.
Surveys involving trusted benchmarks allow a simple com-
Table 13. Uncertainty of high-water marks for coastal storm
parison between GNSS observations and monumented elevations
surge and upland rivers.
as a method of evaluating uncertainty. GNSS surveys involving
active stations are more complex because many different param- [HWM, high-water mark; ft, feet; >, greater than]
eters are evaluated as a function of “truth.” OPUS-S solutions
provide a peak-to-peak assessment, which (as described earlier Coastal storm surge Upland rivers
HWM
in the "Single Base: Online Positioning User Service (OPUS)" classification
HWM uncertainty HWM uncertainty
section) is the difference between the maximum and minimum (ft) (ft)
value of a coordinate obtained from the three baseline solutions Excellent 0.05 0.02
from active stations. This peak-to-peak value is often considered Good 0.1 0.05
an acceptable method of assessing uncertainty. For OPUS-RS Fair 0.2 0.1
solutions, uncertainty may be assessed by quality indicators,
Poor 0.4 0.2
standard deviation of the processed coordinate, and a normal-
ized RMS. Generally, a normalized RMS value outside of the Very poor > 0.40 > 0.20
Metadata 51
A similar USGS Water-Mission Area example may be i is an integer from 1 to n, and

applied when relating altitude among a groundwater well n is the number points being checked.
field with a RT approach. The user needs to have an aware-
ness of the uncertainty of the potentiometric surface as well (4)
A =1.960*RMSE z z
as an anticipated expression of the accuracy of altitude in
the Ground-Water Site-Inventory System (GWSI) database where
(U.S. Geological Survey, 2004). Well data from small alluvial- Az is the fundamental vertical accuracy
based well fields without relief, and data used to assess ground- calculated at the 95-percent confidence
water and surface water interactions might require more precise level.
methods of establishing altitude from one well to another. For example, a Level II survey utilizing six trusted
For these circumstances, the user needs to make sure that the benchmarks will use equation 3 to sum the squared residu-
uncertainty of the approach does not compromise the altitude als resulting from observed and known benchmark verti-
accuracy achieved to evaluate the potentiometric surface. cal coordinates, divide by the number (six) of these trusted
Criteria established for the Level I, II, and III classifica- benchmarks used, and apply the square root to yield an
tions are set forth to ensure a scale of quality in the approach. accuracy at the 68-percent confidence level (or 1 sigma). To
On occasion, some of the criteria set forth in each of the further express the accuracy at the 95-percent confidence level
classifications may not be achieved for the anticipated level (or 2 sigma), the resulting accuracy is multiplied by 1.960 as
of quality. It is incumbent upon the user to exercise judgment identified in equation 4.
in these cases by evaluating all criteria throughout the entire
campaign. For example, during a Level II RT survey, 0.03-m
assurance as part of the blunder check for three objective
points were not met. If there were only 3 objective points in Metadata
the survey, the blunder check assurance might be an issue and
a potential downgrade to a Level III; however, if there were A concern with any type of GNSS survey is the storage
30 objective points in the survey, the issue may be trivial. of attributes behind the data collected during a campaign. It is
Continuing with this example, other assurances should be important, and therefore recommended, that a sufficient record
evaluated such as a 0.05-m benchmark check, satellite avail- be documented to maintain the geodetic trail back to the datum
ability, PDOP, and vertical precision (2 sigma). The GNSS (Henning, 2010). Benchmark recovery or establishment is
user should have a sufficient understanding of these criteria often the foundation of a GNSS campaign and there are many
and the perspective of their application to form a judgment attributes that need to be recorded (appendix 1).
regarding the final classification of survey held. For benchmark recovery, appendix 1 documents the fol-
As previously discussed, the expression of numerical lowing information necessary to record and archive:
accuracy representing a GNSS survey is a culmination of • Name, date, state, county, latitude, longitude, datum,
many components. For cooperative agencies or public interests and elevation.
that desire a numerical accuracy of the GNSS survey, NSSDA,
published by the Federal Geographic Data Committee (1998), • USGS topographic 1:24,000 quadrangle map on which
is an accepted mathematical standard. The NSSDA method the benchmark resides.
computes the vertical root mean square error (RMSE) of
survey data (objective points) using a high-accuracy indepen- • Benchmark station designation: a designation that typi-
dent dataset (the “trusted” benchmarks). Assuming the errors cally does not match exactly with the stamping of most
are distributed normally, vertical accuracy at the 95-percent marks, and that may represent one or a combination of
confidence level is computed from the RMSE (Wilson and characteristics, such as the project, location, or date.
Richards, 2006). The NSSDA vertical accuracy (Federal • Station Permanent Identifier (PID): a station identifier
Geographic Data Committee, 1998) is computed using the fol- that typically matches what is stamped on the bench-
lowing equation: mark and consists of 2 upper case letters followed by
n
4 numbers (For NGS benchmarks only).
∑( )
2
Z data -Z check
(3) • Benchmark accuracy: each benchmark will have an
i i
RMSEz = i=1
accuracy designation. Vertical order benchmarks are
n usually noted by order 1, 2, or 3, and are further dis-
where cussed in a document by the Federal Geodetic Control
RMSEz is the vertical root mean square error, Committee (FGCC) titled “Geometric and Geodetic
zdata is the vertical coordinate of the ith check point Accuracy Standards and Specifications for Using GPS
i
in the dataset, Relative Positioning Techniques” (Hull, 1989). The
zcheck
is the vertical coordinate of the ith check point benchmark may have some other localized accuracy
i
in the quality assurance dataset, identified through a specific project.
• Recovery condition: the recovered condition; good • Visibility-obstruction diagram as described for recov-
condition, not located or disturbed. ered benchmarks.
Along with benchmark recovery and establishment, a
• Monumented or non-monumented information: mate-
form is needed to document GNSS observations. Appendix 2
rial of the benchmark, shape, description, and relief.
illustrates all necessary information to be documented for
An etching or photograph of the benchmark is recom-
static data collection. This form may be used with the base
mended for documentation.
station for single-base RTK solutions that are post processed;
• Location information; GNSS observation suitability, however, this form is not intended to document data collected
land location in which benchmark resides, and any by the rover during RT methods, so these data should be kept
information pertaining to access or property owner. in a field notebook. Appendix 2 provides the user a script to
ensure a well-documented static observation with definitions
• “To reach” narrative: description of a “leg-by-leg” dis- for the following entries listed below:
tance and direction from major roadway intersection. • Name, date, station designation, and station permanent
This description should be detailed enough that the identifier (PID) as previously defined for appendix 1.
mark can be located without any other aids.
• Interval of time in days and fractions of a day: cor-
• Benchmark description and measurements: site sketch responds to a Julian date recorded in the receiver and
that provides some detail as to location supported by used when processing.
three measurements to permanent nearby objects. This
box is used to address additional detail necessary to • Observation session times: time provided in Coordi-
recover the benchmark. nated Universal Time (UTC) recorded in the receiver
and used for processing.
• Reference measurements from station: distance and
direction from three objects illustrated in adjacent • Collection interval and elevation mask: the collection
sketch. interval is the interval in which the data are col-
lected. As previously discussed for OPUS processing,
• A visibility-obstruction diagram used to describe any intervals of 1, 2, 3, 5, 10, 15, and 30 are accepted. The
potential interference above a 10 degree plane. elevation mask value is typically 10–15 degrees.
For benchmark establishment, the form in appendix 1
• Datum, adjustment, and epoch: most commonly
may be used to document the following information necessary
NAD 83 (CORS96), epoch 2002.0; however, a more
to record and archive:
common adjustment NAD 83 (NSRS 2007), epoch
• Name, date, state, county, latitude, longitude, datum, 2007.0 is available along with a new multi-year CORS
and elevation (to be derived). adjustment NAD 83 (2011), epoch 2010 released
the first day of January 2012. Other historic adjust-
• USGS topographic 1:24,000 quadrangle map on which ments include NAD 83 (1986), NAD 83 (HARN), and
the established mark resides. NAD 83 (FBN-CBN).
• Established benchmark station designation: a designa- • Other stations observed during session: this includes all
tion may represent one or a combination of characteris- active and passive (benchmark) stations while conduct-
tics such as the project, location, or date. ing an observation. This information is necessary for
• Established quality: Level I, II, III, or IV. network surveys.
• Monumented or non-monumented information: con- • Receiver and receiver antenna brand and model, and
structed and installed material of benchmark, shape, radio interference: this block identifies the receiver
relief, and annotated description. used and the available serial number. The serial
number is commonly used to distinguish observation
• Location information: as described for recovered sessions when post processing. The antenna brand
benchmarks. and model is also necessary to ensure the appropri-
ate antenna calibration model for processing. Modern
• “To reach” narrative: as described for recovered bench- receivers generally are a combination thereof, includ-
marks. ing a receiver and built-in antenna. The presence of
a radio interference source should be documented
• Benchmark description and measurements: as
for avoidance and tracing problematic solutions. For
described for recovered benchmarks.
dual-frequency receivers, the signal strength or power
• Reference measurements from station: as described for of the L2 signal is much lower than the L1 signal. It is
recovered benchmarks. not uncommon for the L2 signal to suffer interference.
Metadata 53
High wattage transmission lines and broadcast anten- solution(s) (normalized RMS for OPUS-RS solu-
nas are common suspects. tions), vertical peak-to-peak, observation redundancy
residuals (if applicable).
• The Antenna Reference Point (ARP) height: this block
illustrates the correct way to determine an ARP and • Multipath conditions: potential issues documented in
requires a measurement before and after the observa- a visibility diagram, Including interference condi-
tion. tions such as power lines.
• Weather observations: this block requires any dis- • Archival of RINEX files, OPUS-S/RS solution
tinguishing weather features or anomalies that may reports, and scanned forms (appendixes 1 and 2).
impact an observation session. Generally, temperature, Single-base RTK and RTN surveys (derived from Hen-
wind, precipitation, or storms are indicated. Any type ning, 2009 and 2010)
of weather front should be documented here.
• Mission planning documentation
• Coordinate system: the system used during the sur-
vey, most commonly Universal Transverse Mercator • NSRS Alignment (RTN surveys exclusively); how
(UTM) and State Plane. was the network adjusted to CORS sites and what
is the range of the positional difference between
• Notes: this block is used to describe any other detail reference station coordinates and those coordinates
related to the observation. This may include plan- after adoption as a NGS CORS site? An example is
ning information or quality assurance surrounding provided in table 6.
the observation session. It may include information
pertaining to processing or the intention thereof. • Localization: was there project localization to bench-
marks? If so, which benchmarks were held and what
Appendixes 1 and 2 provide background information were the source, quality, and reliability of these as
regarding the campaign, but do not ensure all of the meta- constrained points? What were the best fit residuals
data necessary to provide a historical description. As part of on these benchmarks? If the project area was large
mission planning, a field book should be kept that adequately (greater than 10 km), was the area subdivided to
describes the “footprints” of the campaign. The following are ensure a quality localization?
additional considerations that should be documented, based on
a GNSS approach: • Benchmark checks: which benchmarks were
Static Network Surveys checked? Did the benchmarks reveal an adequate
• Mission planning documentation. spatial representation of the established objective
points? What were the residuals?
• Sketch of the network, including benchmarks con-
strained, dispersion of objective points, spacing of • Field conditions: what was the number of satel-
the network, and baseline lengths. lites observed, PDOP, local weather, RMS of the
solution(s), and observation redundancy residuals
• Field conditions: number of satellites observed, (10 percent objective points if applicable).
PDOP, local weather, RMS of the solution(s), bench-
mark residuals as a check, objective point residuals • Multipath conditions: potential issues documented in
(50 percent double occupied). a visibility diagram, including interference condi-
tions such as power lines.
• Multipath conditions: potential issues documented in
a visibility diagram. Interference conditions such as • Communication: document resulting intermittent
power lines. communications or interference, such as nearby high
wattage transmission lines, broadcast antennas, or
• Processing notes (usually defined in a project within battery failure.
a software program) that include the software and
benchmarks used. • Archival of the overall project file, raw data files,
and scanned forms (appendixes 1 and 2).
• Archival of the overall project file, raw data files,
and scanned or electronic forms (appendixes 1 and
2).
Database Storage
Single-Base Static Surveys—OPUS-S and OPUS-RS There are several outlets available to USGS surveyors
• Mission planning documentation for publishing benchmarks that are established using GNSS
surveying methods. These outlets include the standard method
• Field conditions: baseline lengths, number of satel- of benchmark publishing in the IDB through bluebook-
lites observed, PDOP, local weather, RMS of the ing (National Geodetic Survey 1994a, 1994b, and 2003),
publishing in OPUS-DB (as described earlier under advance- elevation difference is relevant to the scientific questions being
ments in single-base OPUS), or publishing in a USGS data- addressed, consideration of other sources of error, aside from
base. For instance, the USGS database pertaining to the water the GNSS survey, will need to be evaluated as part of the final
mission area, GWSI, has been updated to include the addition product (elevation).
of “SGPS” representing survey-grade GPS in the list of lati-
tude and longitude methods, and Levels I-IV as options under
latitude and longitude accuracy codes. Level I-IV is select- Benchmarks
able once the surveying method is set to “SGPS.” At the time
The second step in planning a campaign is to locate all
of this writing, many USGS databases lack functionality for
available benchmarks. Information regarding quantity, order,
proper storage of appropriate GNSS metadata; therefore, users
and proximity of vertical benchmarks will contribute to a deci-
will likely continue to use in-office notes to document datum
sion process regarding campaign quality. Benchmark informa-
realization, mark description, location description, and other
tion can be located by:
relevant information to relocate and utilize the benchmark.
• Checking the NGS IDB
• Checking OPUS-DB
GNSS Campaign
• Checking databases of other Federal, State, or local
A survey campaign involving GNSS includes consider- agencies
able planning and decisions that need to be made to ensure
Caution should be exercised when using non-NGS
the most optimal approach while also ensuring quality and
benchmarks because datum (realizations) are likely different.
timeliness. A comprehensive summary is documented below
Benchmarks used in any campaign need to be evaluated for
for review and assurance of the content thus far.
prior GNSS data collection, stability, order, and station recov-
ery notes. These attributes assure recovery and use in the field.
Objectives The location of the benchmarks should also be considered
when selecting those marks to recover and use in the cam-
To begin planning a GNSS campaign, the objective of the paign. Benchmarks should surround the project area if pos-
survey should be addressed first, which includes: sible. Evaluation of benchmark geometry can be accomplished
• Size of the survey area. by plotting a topographic map or using other software or web
utilities to provide a visual representation. The topographic
• Number of objective points. map (or online mapping utilities such as Google Earth, 2011)
may be used to illustrate areas with canopy, provide relief for
• Desired quality of the final elevations determined for optimal base station occupation and baseline development
each objective point. (radio communication) for objective points, and identify road-
If the survey area is large, a static or RTN survey will ways for logistics. After benchmarks and objective points have
likely be most feasible. If the number of objective points is been evaluated, and a survey approach determined, a decision
small, a static survey or high-quality RT survey could be per- tree (fig. 23) may be utilized to select the appropriate level
formed. If there are a large number of objective points, the sur- quality of survey to fulfill the objective of the campaign.
veying method will be decided by what quality is required and
how much field and processing time is feasible. The desired
quality of the final elevations will strongly affect the type of Decision Tree
survey that is feasible for the study. If elevations are used for
The decision tree should be used to assist in providing
topographic mapping only, then spending additional time locat-
the quality of survey that might be possible with the current
ing high-order benchmarks with redundant observations on
benchmarks available. GNSS users should incorporate the
every point is not practical; however, if a difference in eleva-
requirements of the survey, the decision tree, maps of the area,
tion of 0.08 m is significant to the survey, then additional time,
time for survey, personnel available, and equipment available
including quality checks, should be included in the survey.
to determine the final survey schedule.
Evaluation of the quality requirements for a campaign is
an important step before selecting the surveying approach. The
initial questions that should be answered concern the quality Reconnaissance
that the elevations should represent. Are the elevations going
to be recorded to the nearest centimeter or tens of centimeters? Once the survey method, candidate benchmark recovery,
What difference in elevation is relevant to the study? Does a and establishment locations have been determined, a recon-
small elevation difference change the science or does a larger naissance trip to the project area is necessary. All maps and
elevation difference change the science? After understand- benchmark information should be taken on the reconnais-
ing what quality of elevation needs to be recorded and what sance trip to aid in benchmark recovery (including benchmark
Existence and use of
a Real-Time Network
No
Yes
4 or more 2d order vertical accuracy or
better benchmarks within 60 kilometers
No
Yes
2 or more 3d order vertical accuracy or
better benchmarks or OPUS derived
control within the project area 2 or more 2d order vertical accuracy or
Network Single base
No No better benchmarks within 10 kilometers
Yes No survey static OPUS
of base receiver
Yes
1 or more 3d order vertical accuracy
2 or more 2d order vertical accuracy
or better benchmark or OPUS derived Yes
or better benchmarks within the No
control within the project area Level II, III, IV
project area
RTK
Yes No Yes No 4 or more 2d order vertical accuracy
or better benchmarks within 40 kilometers Yes 2 or more 3d order vertical vertical
Level II Level III Level IV Level I, II, III accuracy or better benchmarks within
RTN RTN RTN OPUS 10 kilometers of base receiver
No Yes
No
Yes
Level II network Level I network 1 or more 3d order vertical
survey survey accuracy or better benchmark
and OPUS derived control within Level III, IV
10 kilometers of base receiver RTK
No Yes
EXPLANATION
OPUS Level IV
RTN Real-Time Network Level I, II, III RTK
OPUS Online Position User Service (OPUS)
GNSS Campaign 55
RTK Real-Time Kinematic
Figure 23. Decision tree for a level quality Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) survey approach.
Figure 23. Decision tree for a level quality Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) survey approach.
recovery and establishment forms in appendix 1). Access and Survey

logistics should be evaluated for benchmark recovery and
establishment locations during the reconnaissance trip. This During the campaign, the following practices should be
includes contacts with landowners regarding the type work followed:
being done and dates for the field effort. If several benchmarks
are not recovered or are recovered in poor condition, the • Take the time to make sufficient field notes.
previous steps of finding benchmarks, reviewing the maps of
• Follow the requirements for the level quality of survey-
benchmark locations, and working through the decision tree to
ing selected.
determine the quality of survey should be performed.
• Fill out all worksheets in the field (avoid waiting until
Field Preparedness you get back to the office).
With the survey method and benchmarks determined, • Document benchmarks, surroundings, and any impor-
the field schedule can be developed with knowledge of the tant aspect of the campaign with pictures.
number of GNSS receivers to be used and the staff available.
• Work systematically through troubleshooting because
The field schedule should document the overall length of time
no GNSS campaign goes smoothly, even with plan-
the effort will take and the dates accordingly. Additionally,
ning; however, working logically through the problem
the schedule should identify which benchmarks and objec-
and understanding the different sources of errors and
tive points are to be surveyed each day, quality checks to
flags the data collector is disseminating will provide
be implemented each day, and the uncertainty those checks
the most effective assurance during the campaign.
should meet. A detailed field schedule that includes individuals
responsible for surveying each benchmark and objective point • Download data daily (preferably in the evening) so no
might be necessary if the presence of a large crew is expected. data are lost if a piece of equipment is damaged.
In addition, time should be allotted for benchmark construc-
tion if necessary.
Once survey dates have been established, mission Data Download, Analysis, Storage, and
planning for the dates and the location should be completed
as described in the "Mission Planning and Error Sources" Documentation
section. Additional preparations include the development of
a contact list of the field crew and survey chief for campaign Upon completion of a survey campaign and return to
changes or problems that arise. An equipment checklist should the office, all equipment should be cleaned, organized, and
be established and reviewed before deploying to the field. All properly stowed. Data collected on the receivers and the data
equipment should be charged and calibration of equipment collectors should be downloaded from the devices or field
(such as bubble levels) should be completed. It is often neces- computer to the network (or at least backed up on a separate
sary to maintain a survey truck in which conventional and computer or hard drive). All data files should be reviewed
fixed-height tripods can be stored and hauled safely. The truck and cross-checked with field notebooks and other recorded
should include all benchmark setting equipment (if needed) metadata to ensure that all expected files have been down-
and backup equipment, such as cables, tripods, batteries, and loaded. If the data are in a form that can be evaluated (that
battery chargers. is, setup files that show the base station location information
Field preparation also involves an evaluation and upload entered, coordinate systems, checks recorded at all bench-
of the current geoid model, survey line files, background maps marks, rover pole heights, antenna types, RINEX file time
such as aerial photography, and control coordinates into the spans, and other details), they should be reviewed in each file
data collector. If projects are set up with these elements before when possible.
the field survey, it is less likely that incorrect coordinates After the GNSS campaign, the results should be evalu-
or other mistakes will be made. In addition, if there are file ated to determine if the desired survey quality has been met.
or point naming conventions that should be used during the Survey data, as well as all metadata, should be stored and
survey, these should be determined and provided to each crew documented according to guidelines provided in the "Meta-
member for reference in the field. data" section so that the information can be easily accessed in
If a campaign requires special equipment, such as rental the future. It may be necessary to provide a summary report
of additional GNSS equipment, a radio repeater, or a RTK that describes the “footprints” of the campaign in the field,
bridge, this equipment should be tested and the application metadata, and tables that represent redundancy residuals for
subsequently planned. Possible setup locations of the radio objective points and benchmarks. These data can be used col-
repeater or RTK Bridge can be mapped for crew members to lectively to provide a numerical representation of accuracy to
utilize during the survey. what is held as “truth” (for example benchmarks).
Future Direction of GNSS 57
Future Direction of GNSS modernization program, it is anticipated that the GLONASS-K

satellite series will be transmitting L1, L2, L3, and L5 signals
It is difficult to assess the future of global positioning at (Revnivykh, 2010).
the time of this writing. Many accepted approaches to GNSS Also at the time of this writing, the Galileo constellation
campaigns may be changed beyond the next decade. The maintains experimental satellites GIOVE-A and GIOVE-B.
modernization of GPS in the United States began because The constellation will reach a full constellation of 27 satellites
once GPS reached a fully operation status, new demands with 3 satellites in reserve (Federal Space Agency, 2011). The
were placed upon the system with the advance of technology. Galileo constellation anticipates broadcasting 10 different sig-
To date, many improvements have been made and many are nals including common signal broadcasts by other navigation
still forthcoming. In addition to the advance of new ground systems L1, L2, and L5 (Federal Space Agency, 2011).
stations as part of GPS modernization, additional satel- Another constellation anticipated to be a part of an active
lite signals, such as L2C, have been made available on the GNSS is the Chinese Compass constellation. The Compass
block IIR–M satellite series (U.S. Naval Observatory, 2010). is a new system anticipated to reach an FOC of 35 satel-
This additional civilian signal permits faster signal acqui- lites (Gibbons Media & Research, 2010). At the time of this
sition, enhanced reliability, and a greater operating range writing, the Chinese Compass constellation has received six
(U.S. Department of Commerce, 2010). As reported by the successful launches (Xinhau News Agency, 2010) and various
U.S. Naval Observatory (USNO) at the time of this writing, signals have been tracked to date.
another 11 satellites of the block II–F satellite series are to As GNSS constellations are under development or
be launched in the future. This is the series carrying the L5 modernization programs are initiated, manufacturers work
signal, a civilian-use signal developed primarily for aviation, with government agencies to ensure tracking by survey-grade
and anticipated to have improved strength greater than the receivers. It is presumptuous to forecast specifics that may
existing L1 and L2 signals. The first and second block II–F arise from three or more frequencies received from several
satellites were launched in May 2010 and July 2011, with the GNSS constellations at their FOC. According to Chen and oth-
third scheduled for 2012. Many manufacturers have receivers (2004), although the resolution of ambiguities and posi-
ers on the market compatible with the L5 signal, which will tioning performance is enhanced by the additional frequencies
generally permit better signal tracking, ambiguity resolution, available, the RTN will still dominate in reducing atmospheric
and interference prevention. The increased signal strength of effects for RT positioning. Other studies are examining the
the new L5 signal will provide inherent multipath resistance potential for precise point positioning (PPP), which is a
for receivers that are designed with receiver-based multipath technique that utilizes measurements at the user’s receiver,
mitigation algorithms for increased SNR (Weill, 2003). In as opposed to a reference or base station. With the expansion
addition to the anticipated launch of 11 additional block of satellite constellations, increased observations may have a
II satellites, a block III series of satellites is subsequently substantial effect on many of the greatest weaknesses of the
anticipated with many improvements; specifically, increased GNSS technology: convergence time, accuracy, and integrity
signal power and signal integrity at the Earth’s surface (Gisnath and Gao, 2009). With the expansion of the current
(Lazar, 2007). GNSS and further algorithm development, PPP technology
The block III series is also anticipated to share a common could emerge as a commensurate approach to RTK (Gisnath
civilian signal L1C with the Galileo system (Crews, 2008). and Gao, 2009).
As well as the block I and II series of satellites, the block III Another future aspect of GNSS and its application to ver-
series will progressively demonstrate a reduction in error asso- tical datum is the progression of the Gravity for the Redefini-
ciated with signals in space, such as satellite clocks, ephemeris tion of the American Vertical Datum (GRAV-D) project by the
data, and delays related to the ionosphere and troposphere NGS. The specific goal of the project is to model and monitor
(Crews, 2008). the Earth’s geoid (Smith, 2007). The effort entails a grav-
At the time of this writing, the GLONASS constellation ity survey of the entire United States and its holdings, which
maintains 22 operational satellites and another 4 satellites are will produce a gravity-based vertical datum within 2 cm for
in maintenance (Federal Space Agency, 2011). Future plans for much of the country (Smith, 2007). Gravity measurements are
the Russian-based constellation are to achieve and maintain its the foundation for development and modeling of the geoid.
Fully Operational Capability (FOC) of 24 healthy transmitting As discussed in the “Introduction” of this manual, the geoid
satellites. The current constellation transmits L1 and L2 signals. permits the conversion of GNSS-produced ellipsoid heights
The GLONASS constellation has also been undergoing mod- to orthometric heights. It is these orthometric heights that are
ernization with GLONASS-M and GLONASS-K satellites commonly referred to as “height above sea level.” Comple-
designed for stronger signal characteristics and a longer design tion of the anticipated effort is projected for the year 2021
life (Andrews Space & Technology, 2001). As part of the (National Geodetic Survey, 2011b).
Selected References Federal Space Agency, 2011, GLONASS constellation status:

Information-Analytical Centre, accessed February 21, 2011,
at http://www.glonass-ianc.rsa.ru/en/.
Andrews Space & Technology, 2001, GLONASS—Summary:
Andrews Space & Technology, accessed February 21, 2011, Gibbons Media & Research, 2010, China begins broadcasts on
at http://www.spaceandtech.com/spacedata/constellations/ latest compass GNSS GEO Satellite: Inside GNSS, Gibbons
glonass_consum.shtml. Media & Research, accessed February 21, 2011, at http://
www.insidegnss.com/node/2134.
Armstrong, M.L., 2010, OPUS Programs Suite Update pre-
sentation at the OGUG meeting, June 18, 2010, accessed Gisnath, S., and Gao, Y., 2009, “Innovation: Precise Point
March 17, 2011, at http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/ Positioning,” Algorithms & Methods: GPS World, 2011
GEOMETRONICS/ngs_advisor.shtml. Questex Media Group, accessed February 21, 2011, at
http://www.gpsworld.com/gnss-system/algorithms-methods/
Ashtech Precision Products, 2001, Ashtech solutions user’s
innovation-precise-point-positioning-7040?page_id=1.
guide: Santa Clara, Calif., Magellan Corporation, 170 p.
GlobalSecurity.org, 2010, accessed February 9, 2010, at http://
Brinker, R.C., and Minnick, R., 1995, The surveying hand-
www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/budget/fy1999/
book: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 924 p., accessed
dot-e/airforce/99gps.html.
June 30, 2011, at http://books.google.com.
Burkard, R.K., 1985, Geodesy for the layman (5th ed): Google, 2011, Google Earth—2011 Europa Technolo-
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 93p. gies: U.S. Department of State Geographer, accessed
August 9, 2011, at http://www.google.com/earth/index.html.
California Department of Transportation, 2006, Global
Positioning System (GPS) survey specifications: California Henning, W.E., 2007, Real time GPS Networks (RTN) and
Department of Transportation, Surveys Manual, 42 p. their implications with Geographic Information Sys-
tems (GIS), Strategic Integration of Surveying Services,
Carter, A., 2009, Understanding the Trimble Survey Control- FIG Working Week 2007, Hong Kong SAR, China,
ler Site Calibration Scale Factor, Trimble: EMEA Training 13–17 May 2007.
Manager, February 23–25, 2009.
Henning,W.E., 2009, User Guidelines for Real Time GNSS
Chen, X., Vollath, U., Landau, H., and Sauer, K., 2004, Will Networks: National Geodetic Survey, 68 p.
Galileo/Modernized GPS Obsolete Network RTK?: Trimble
Terrasat GmbH, Trimble White Paper, Trimble Naviga- Henning,W.E., 2010, User Guidelines for Single Base Real
tion Limited, accessed February 21, 2011, at http://www. Time GNSS Positioning: National Geodetic Survey, 151 p.
inavsoft.com/pdf/GALILEO-GPSL5-network-RTK.pdf.
Hull, W.V, 1989, Geometric geodetic accuracy standards and
Crews, M., 2008, Long-Term Future of GPS: San Diego, specifications for using GPS relative positioning techniques:
Calif., Institute of Navigation (ION), accessed Febru- Federal Geodetic Control Committee, ver. 5.0.
ary 21, 2011, at http://www.pnt.gov/public/2008/2008-01-
Jones, B.A., and Kelly, K.M., 2007, Real time GPS Networks
NTM/crews.pdf.
(RTN) and their implications with Geographic Information
Cunningham, W.L., and Schalk, C.W., comps., 2011, Ground- Systems (GIS), Strategic Integration of Surveying Ser-
water technical procedures of the U.S. Geological Survey: vices, FIG Working Week 2007, Hong Kong SAR, China,
U.S. Geological Survey Techniques and Methods, book 1, 13–17 May 2007.
chap. A1, 151 p.
Kennedy, E.J., 1990, Levels at streamflow gaging stations:
Eckl, M.C., Snay, R.A., Soler, T., Cline, M.W., and U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of Water-Resources
Mader, G.L., 2001, Accuracy of GPS-derived relativeposi- Investigations, book 3, chap. A19, 31 p., (Also available
tions as a function of interstation distance and observing- online at http://pubs.usgs.gov/twri/twri3-A19/pdf/twri_3-
session duration: Journal of Geodesy, v. 75, p. 633–640. A19_a.pdf.)
Federal Geographic Data Committee, 1998, Geospatial posi- Kenney, T.A., 2010, Levels at gaging stations: U.S. Geological
tioning accuracy standards, part 3—National standard for Survey Techniques and Methods, book 3, chap. A19, 60 p.
spatial data accuracy: Federal Geographic Data Committee,
U.S. Geological Survey, 28 p. (Also available at http://www. Kowoma.de, 2009, GPS-System—Transmitted signals,
fgdc.gov/standards/projects/FGDC-standards-projects/ accessed September 28, 2010, at http://www.kowoma.de/en/
accuracy/part3/chapter3.) gps/index.htm.
Selected References 59
Lapine, L.A., 2010, Another coordinate system this time with- National Geodetic Survey, 2010a, OPUS-RS: National Geo-
out survey marks: The American Surveyor, v. 7, no. 8, 4 p., detic Survey, accessed March 17, 2011, at http://www.ngs.
accessed March 1, 2011, at http://www.amerisurv.com/PDF/ noaa.gov/OPUSI/Plots/Gmap/OPUSRS_sigmap.shtml.
TheAmericanSurveyor_Lapine-AnotherCoordinateSystem_
Vol7No8.pdf. National Geodetic Survey, 2010b, Datasheet Retrieval Page,
accessed August 19, 2010, at http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/cgi-
Lazar, S., 2007, Modernization and the move to bin/datasheet.prl.
GPS III: The Aerospace Corporation, accessed Feb-
ruary 21, 2011, at http://www.hjgz.net/hhyq/zyq/ National Geodetic Survey, 2010c, CORS: Continuously Oper-
wenxian%5CModernization%20and%20the%20Move%20 ating Reference Station (CORS): National Geodetic Survey,
to%20GPS%20III.swf. accessed September 21, 2012, at http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/
CORS/.
Mader, G.L., 1999, GPS antenna calibration at the National
Geodetic Survey: Silver Springs, Md., National Geodetic National Geodetic Survey, 2010d, Online Position Users Ser-
Survey, accessed March 23, 2011, at http://www.ngs.noaa. vice (OPUS): National Geodetic Survey, accessed Septem-
gov/ANTCAL/images/summary.html. ber 28, 2010, at http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/OPUS/about.html.
Mader, G.L., 2010, GPS antenna calibration: National Geo- National Geodetic Survey, 2011a, OPUS: Online Positioning
detic Survey, accessed March 23, 2011, at http://www.ngs. User Service (OPUS): National Geodetic Survey, accessed
noaa.gov/ANTCAL/. February 8, 2011, at http://geodesy.noaa.gov/OPUS/.
Martin, D., 2007, Geodetic connections—OPUS rapid static:
National Geodetic Survey, 2011b, Gravity for the Redefinition
The American Surveyor, v. 4, no. 3, p. 44–48.
of the American Vertical Datum (GRAV-D): National Geo-
National Geodetic Survey, 1994a, Input formats and specifica- detic Survey, accessed February 21, 2011, at http://www.
tions of the National Geodetic Survey data base,Volume II, ngs.noaa.gov/GRAV-DAV-D/.
Vertical control data: Silver Springs, Md., National Geo-
detic Survey, 6 p. National Geodetic Survey, 2012, NGS Geodetic Advisors:
National Geodetic Survey, accessed June 12, 2012, at http://
National Geodetic Survey, 1994b, Input formats and specifica- www.ngs.noaa.gov/ADVISORS/AdvisorsIndex.shtml.
tions of the National Geodetic Survey Data Base: Volume
III, Gravity Control Data; National Geodetic Survey, Silver National Geodetic Survey, 2012b, OPUS-RS Map: National
Springs, Md., 56 p. Geodetic Survey, accessed June 12, 2012, at http://www.ngs.
noaa.gov/OPUSI/Plots/Gmap/OPUSRS_sigmap.shtml.
National Geodetic Survey, 2001a, Positioning accuracy stan-
dards presentation at the North Carolina Society of Sur- National Geodetic Survey, 2012c, National Adjustment of
veyors, Proceedings: New Bern, N.C., accessed March 23, 2011 (NA2011); NAD 83(2011) epoch 2010.00 coordinates
2011, at http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/PC_PROD/WorkShops/ on passive control, accessed August 14, 2012, at http://www.
PPT/Standards-NewBern.ppt. ngs.noaa.gov/web/surveys/NA2011/.
National Geodetic Survey, 2001b, Geodetic glossary: Sil- National Digital Elevation Program, 2004, Guidelines for
ver Springs, Md., National Geodetic Survey, accessed Digital Elevation Data: U.S. Department of the Interior,
March 23, 2011, at http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/CORS-Proxy/ U.S. Geological Survey, ver. 1.0.
Glossary/xml/NGS_Glossary.xml. [Last updated July 3,
2009.] National Security Council, 1996, Office of Science and Tech-
nology Policy—U.S. Global Positioning System Policy:
National Geodetic Survey, 2001c, What is the Geoid?: Silver
National Security Council accessed February 9, 2010, at
Springs, Md., National Geodetic Survey, accessed June 12,
http://clinton4.nara.gov/textonly/WH/EOP/OSTP/html/gps-
2012, at http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/GEOID/geoid_def.html.
factsheet.html.
[Last updated January 30, 2001.]
National Geodetic Survey, 2003, Input formats and specifica- National Weather Service, 2005, Geophysical alert message
tions of the National Geodetic Survey Data Base, Volume description: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra-
I, Horizontal Control Data: Silver Springs, Md., National tion, accessed August 30, 2010, at http://www.swpc.noaa.
Geodetic Survey, 6 p. gov/Data/info/WWVdoc.html#description.
National Geodetic Survey, 2010, FAQ: Frequently asked National Weather Service, 2009, Solar cycle progression:
questions about the National Geodetic Survey, accessed National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
April 20, 2010, at http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/faq. accessed August 31, 2010, at http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/
shtml#WhyVD29VD88. SolarCycle.
NavtechGPS, 2012, Galileo Equipment, accessed Smith, D., 2007, The GRAV-D Project, Gravity for the Redefi-
August 31, 2011, at https://www.navtechgps.com/Shop/ nition of the American Vertical Datum: NOAA/National
equipment/galileo_equipment/. Geodetic Survey, accessed February 21, 2011, at http://
www.ngs.noaa.gov/GRAV-D/pubs/GRAV-D_v2007_12_19.
Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), National pdf.
Security Council, 1996, Press Release—U.S. Global
Positioning System Policy, accessed February 9, 2010, at Snay, R., 2009, OPUS presentation, in Great Lakes Regional
http://clinton4.nara.gov/textonly/WH/EOP/OSTP/html/gps- Height Modernization Forum, Lansing, Mich., 2009,
factsheet.html. accessed February 9, 2011, at http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/
CORS/presentations.shtml.
OPUS-Projects Team, 2011, OPUS-Projects: National Geo-
detic Survey, accessed March 17, 2011, athttp://www.ngs. Soler, T., and Marshall, J., 2003, A note on frame transforma-
noaa.gov/OPUSI/OpusProjects.html. tions with applications to geodetic datums: Silver Spring,
Pacific Crest Corporation, 2009, Application note—Resolv- Md., National Geodetic Survey, N/NGS22, #8825. 21 p.
ing radio range issues: Pacific Crest Corporation, accessed
Stone, W., 2011, National Geodetic Survey Programs and Geo-
March 17, 2011, at http://paccrst.com/library/AppNote_
detic Tools, in conference of the California Land Surveyors
ResolvingRadioRangeIssuues90409.pdf.
Association and the Nevada Association of Land Surveyors,
Parker, D.A.S., 1994, A differential global positioning system Las Vegas, Nev., 2011, accessed February 9, 2011, at http://
for flight inspection of radio navigation aids: Parker Hanni- www.ngs.noaa.gov/web/science_edu/presentations_archive/
fin Corporation, Gulf Electronics, [Ref.: TP0029], accessed clsa-nals_2011_stone-ngs.pptx.
March 17, 2011, at http://webone.novatel.ca/assets/
Documents/Papers/File29.pdf. Trimble, 1992–2002, Convert to RINEX, 1992–2002, Dat2Rin
DLL, ver. 3.50, Copyright 1992–2002: Trimble Navigation.
Revnivykh, S., 2010, GLONASS status and progress: Civil
Global Positioning Service Interface Committee (CGSIC), Trimble, 2002, Trimble Geomatics Office User Guide:
accessed September 21, 2010, at http://www.navcen.uscg. Trimble, v. 1.6, 46741-20 ENG, chap.8.
gov/pdf/cgsicMeetings/50/%5B3%5DCGSIC_GLONASS_
Revnivykh_20_09_2010.pdf. Trimble, 2011, GPS Tutorial: Trimble Navigation Limited,
accessed February 7, 2011, at http://www.trimble.com/
Rizos, C., 200, Network RTK Research and Implementation— gps_tutorial/.
A Geodetic Perspective: Sydney, Australia, School of
Surveying and Spatial Information Systems, University of Trimble Business Center, 2011, ver. 2.50: Trimble Navigation
New South Wales, 7 p. Limited.
Roman, D.R., Wang, Y.M., Saleh, J., Xiaopeng, L., 2009, A U.S. Department of Commerce, 2010, GPS moderniza-
gravimetric geoid model for the United States—The devel- tion: NOAA and Office of Space Commerce, accessed
opment and evaluation of USGG2009: NOAA/National April 20, 2010, at http://www.space.commerce.gov/gps/
Geodetic Survey, accessed February 21, 2010, at http:// modernization.shtml.
www.wfps.org/files/AMUW09/Handouts/Friday%20-%20
Wang%20(Roman)(75).pdf. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, United States
Coast Guard, 2010, Navigation Center: accessed Sep-
Schenewerk, Mark, 2011, New Developments for OPUS pre- tember 7, 2010, at http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/index.
sentation, in Annual Rocky Mountain Surveyors Summit, php?pageName=nanuAbbreviations.
1st, Arvada, Colo., 2011, accessed March 23, 2011, at http://
www.ngs.noaa.gov/web/science_edu/presentations_archive/. U.S. Geological Survey, 1966, Topographic instructions of the
United States Geological Survey—Leveling: U.S. Geologi-
Schwarz, C.R., Snay, R.A., and Tomás, S., 2009, Accuracy cal Survey Topographical Instructions, book 2, chaps. 2E1–
assessment of the National Geodetic Survey’s OPUS-RS 2E5, 63 p.
utility: GPS Solutions, v. 13, no. 2, p. 119–132.
U.S. Geological Survey, 2004, User’s manual for the National
Skeen, J., 2005, TXDOT GPS User’s Manual: Texas Depart- Water Information System of the U.S. Geological Survey—
ment of Transportation, accessed February 9, 2010, at
Ground-water Site-Inventory System: U.S. Geological
https://www.e-education.psu.edu/files/geog488/downloads/
Survey Open-File Report 2004–1238, ver. 4.3.
gps.pdf.
Selected References 61
U.S. Geological Survey, 2010, U.S. Geological Survey Weston, N.D., Mader, G.L., and Soler, Tomás, 2007, OPUS-
National Geospatial Program Lidar Guidelines and Base Projects—A Web-based application to administer and
Specification, ver. 13, accessed August 14, 2012, at http:// process multi-day GPS campaign data: National Geodetic
lidar.cr.usgs.gov/USGSNGP%20Lidar%20Guidelines%20 Survey, accessed March 19, 2011, at http://www.ngs.noaa.
and%20Base%20Specification%20v13(ILMF).pdf. gov/CORS/Articles/NeilFIG2007.pdf.
U.S. Geological Survey, 2012, Start with Science, accessed Wilson, G.L., and Richards, J.M., 2006, Procedural documen-
June 12, 2012, at http://www.usgs.gov/start_with_science/. tation and accuracy assessment of bathymetric maps and
area/capacity tables for small reservoirs: U.S. Geological
U.S. Geological Survey, 2012, Ask USGS, accessed June 12, Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5208, 24 p.
2012, at http://ask.usgs.gov/.
Xinhau News Agency, 2010, BeiDou navigation system
U.S. Naval Observatory, 2010, Time services department:
covers Asia-Pacific region till 2012: accessed Febru-
Department of the Navy, accessed February 10, 2011, at
ary 21, 2011, at http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2010-03/03/
ftp://tycho.usno.navy.mil/pub/gps/gpsb2.txt.
content_13087844.htm.
Weill, L.R., 2003, Multipath mitigation—How good can it
Zilkoski, D.B., D’Onofrio, J.D., and Frakes, S.J., 1997, NOAA
get with new signals?: GPS World, Questex Media Group
Technical Memorandum NOS NGS–58—Guidelines for
LLC., accessed September 3, 2010, at http://www.gpsworld.
establishing GPS-derived elliposid heights (Standards: 2 cm
com/gps/multipath-mitigation-812?page_id=1.
and 5 cm), ver. 4.3: Silver Springs, Md., National Geodetic
Weston, N., and Ray, J., 2011, GPS positioning perfor- Survey, 11 p.
mance from algorithm advances in the network version of
OPUS: Geophysical Research Abstracts, v. 13, EGU2011- Zilkoski, D.B., Carlson, E.E., and Smith, C.L., 2008, NOAA
3901, 2011, EGU General Assembly 2011, accessed Technical Memorandum NOS NGS–59—Guidelines for
August 4, 2011, at http://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/ establishing GPS-derived orthometric heights: Silver
EGU2011/EGU2011-3901.pdf. Springs, Md., National Geodetic Survey, 15 p.
Glossary 63
Glossary
A antenna (receiver GNSS) Small antenna

accuracy The degree to which measure- elements contained within Global Navigation
ments derived from static or real-time (RT) Satellite System (GNSS) receivers that receive
positioning represent “truth.” Trusted monu- and sometimes amplify an L-Band signal.
ments, as compared with Global Navigation Antenna Reference Point (ARP) A point on
Satellite System (GNSS) positioning, are the exterior of the receiver antenna, usually
often used to evaluate accuracy during a the bottom of the receiver antenna mount, to
campaign. which the National Geodetic Survey refer-
active stations (active control or monumenta- ences the antenna phase center position.
tion) A Global Navigation Satellite System
(GNSS) receiver and receiver antenna in a B
fixed location that is continually operating baseline A computed three-dimensional
and collecting data. Continually Operating vector for a pair of stations for which simul-
Reference Stations (CORS) are active control taneous Global Navigation Satellite System
stations. (GNSS) data have been collected. Baselines
adjustment Processing of a value or data set are developed between a single-base Real-
to provide a more precise or accurate result Time Kinematic (RTK) base station and rover,
based on the inclusion of control data using or a Real-Time Network (RTN) reference sta-
the process of least squares. Adjustments are tion and rover. Baselines are also developed
used in network surveys involving static data between static data-collecting receivers within
collection. a network survey.
algorithm A procedure or set of pro- blunder A gross error that prevents the
grammed instructions for resolving a math- desired position uncertainty from being
ematical problem to achieve an end result. achieved. As opposed to systematic or
almanac A data file that contains the random errors, blunders are less discrete and
approximate positions for all satellites in orbit are commonly the result of incorrect receiver
and the health of each satellite. This data file antenna height or receiver antenna type
is transmitted every 12.5 minutes. entries, or collecting data during real-time
(RT) positioning before the solution becomes
ambiguity resolution Carrier phase measure-
initialized.
ments are made in relation to a wavelength
of the L1 or L2 carrier waves. When a receiver
C
first locks on the wavelength of these carrier
waves, the wavelength is a partial, and the carrier phase signal The carrier frequency
number of whole wavelengths that precede signal for timing measurements. The carrier
that partial wavelength are unknown. To frequency is high, and therefore wave cycles
correctly calculate the distance the receiver are smaller and can be more precisely defined
is from the satellite, these preceding wave- than pseudo random code cycles; however,
lengths must be known. The process used because the carrier frequency cycles are
to determine the value for the ambiguities is uniform, it is difficult to distinguish one cycle
known as “ambiguity resolution.” from another when assessing the number
antenna (radio GNSS) Radio antenna used of cycles needed for measurement timing.
to facilitate broadcasted differential correction Essentially, the pseudo random code is used
information from a Global Navigation Satel- to get a close estimate of travel time and
lite System (GNSS) base receiver to a rover the carrier signal is then used to refine the
receiver. measurement.
code phase signal The code frequency Dilution of Precision (DOP) An indicator
signal for timing measurements. The code of satellite geometry quality for a unique
frequency is lower than carrier frequency, and constellation. Poor satellite geometry leads to
wave cycles are larger and more difficult to poor Dilution of Precision (DOP), triangula-
align than carrier cycles. Although receiver tion, and location estimation. A low Dilution
designers have developed ways to ensure of Precision (DOP) value represents a better
signals are nearly identical in phase, cycle positional precision because of wide angu-
widths translate to substantial error. There- lar separation between the satellites used to
fore, pseudo random codes are used initially calculate a terrestrial position.
to get close estimates of travel time, which are dual-frequency Instrumentation that can
further refined using the carrier signal. make measurements on both L-Band frequen-
Compact Measurement Record (CMR+) A cies, for example, L1 and L2, either pseudo-
data format used to frame packets of informa- range or carrier phase measurements.
tion and message types for L1 and L2 carrier
phase and pseudo-range data, as well as refer- E
ence (base) station location and description elevation mask The minimum acceptable
messages.
angle above the horizon that will minimize
constellation A specific set of satellites used the greatest amount of noise because of
in calculating a position or all satellites vis- atmospheric delay and refraction or potential
ible to a Global Navigation Satellite System multipath conditions.
(GNSS) receiver at one time.
ellipsoid height The height above or below
control point A benchmark representing a mathematically-defined surface or ellipsoid
assigned coordinates by terrestrial or satellite [for example, Geographic Reference System
surveying techniques. 1980 (GRS 80) or World Geodetic System
control segment A monitoring station used 1984 (WGS 84)] that provides a representa-
in conjunction with other stations to observe tion of the Earth, flattened slightly at the
satellites and allow the calculation of precise poles, and bulging somewhat at the equator.
orbits and ephemeris data. The height coordinate determined by a Global
Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) observa-
D tion is related to the surface of the ellipsoid,
data collector Also known as a data logger typically WGS 84.
or data recorder. A ruggedized handheld por- ephemeris A data file providing a particular
table data-entry computer used to store real- satellite’s position and velocity at any instant
time (RT) positioning data. Data collectors
in time. Broadcast ephemeris represents a pre-
facilitate localizations, change in units and
diction of satellite position and velocity suit-
datum, satellite observations, elevation masks,
able for real-time (RT) positioning whereas
and coordinate geometry applications.
precise ephemeris are post-processed values
datum In geodetic terms, the datum is defined regarding satellite position and velocity suit-
by its reference surface, an origin, an orienta- able for static positioning.
tion, gravity, and a scale. The North Ameri-
can Datum 1983 (NAD 83) is defined by the epoch An instant in time. For real-time
Geodetic Reference System of 1980 (GRS (RT) positioning, measurements are made
80) ellipsoid at an origin near the center of the at a given interval or epoch rate. An epoch
mass of the Earth with axes oriented through may also represent a reference frame noted
the pose, equator, and at right angles, with a by a particular year. For example, North
scale unit based on the international meter. The American Datum 1983 (NAD 83) Con-
realization of this datum is through a refer- tinually Operating Reference Station 1996
ence, such as monumentation on the ground or (CORS96), epoch 2002.0, or more recently
Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) from the multi-year CORS data [NAD 83
satellites with the ground control segment. (2011) epoch 2010.00].
Glossary 65
error ellipse An error estimate that results lows: ITRF94, ITRF96, ITRF97, ITRF2000,
during an adjustment in a network survey. The ITRF2005, and ITRF2008.
error ellipse represents the geometric accu- International Terrestrial Reference System
racy and alignment of a point, and is normally (ITRS) The most precise, geocentric, and
plotted at the 95-percent confidence level. globally-defined coordinate system or datum
of the Earth. This system is managed by the
F International Earth Rotation and Reference
System Service (IERS) located in Frankfurt,
G Germany.
geodetic survey Surveys performed for the ionosphere A band of the atmosphere
establishment of control networks, which are extending from 30 to 600 miles above the
the basis for accurate positioning and naviga- earth that is ionized by solar radiation. This
tion. These surveys account for refraction, band of the atmosphere affects the behavior of
curvature of the earth, atmospheric conditions, radio waves.
and gravity, as opposed to “plane” surveys
that generally ignore these considerations. J
geoid The equipotential surface of the
earth that most closely approximates global K
mean seal level. Refined as a hybrid model
developed by gravimetric geoids (defined L
from gravity and terrain data) and separation L-Band The group of radio frequencies
distances between GNSS-derived ellipsoid extending from 390 MHz to 1560 MHz.
heights and leveled benchmarks. This model The carrier frequencies L1 and L2 are in the
is used to convert North American Datum L-Band.
1983 (NAD 83) ellipsoid heights to North
American Vertical Datum 1988 (NAVD 88) L1 frequency The 1575.42 MHz carrier
orthometric heights. frequency that contains the coarse/acquisition
(C/A)-Code available to the general public,
geoid height The separation distance the encrypted P-Code for military access only,
between the reference ellipsoid Geographic and the Navigation Message, which enables
Reference System 1980 (GRS 80) and the the determination of the time of transmission
hybrid geoid model, for example GEOID 09. and satellite position at this time.
The combination of the North American
L2 frequency The 1227.60 MHz carrier
Datum 1983 (NAD 83) ellipsoid height from
frequency that contains the encrypted P-Code
Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS)
for military access, and the Navigation Mes-
observations and this value enables a North sage, which enables the determination of
American Vertical Datum 1988 (NAVD 88) the time of transmission and satellite posi-
orthometric height to be produced. The geoid tion at this time. A combination of L1 and L2
height is positive away from the Earth center permits the correction of Ionospheric delay.
and negative towards it. Dual-frequency GNSS receivers intended for
Global Navigation Satellite System surveying applications can produce L2 mea-
(GNSS) A system of satellites providing surements using proprietary signal processing
autonomous geo-spatial positioning with techniques.
global coverage. L1C frequency A future civilian-use signal
to be broadcast on the same L1 frequency
H (1575.42 MHz) that will be available with a
future block III satellite launch. This signal
I is included as part of a modernization to the
International Terrestrial Reference Frame existing L1 signal to enable interoperabil-
(ITRF) Realizations of the ITRS for a par- ity between GPS and international satellite
ticular epoch in time, consisting of a set of navigation systems. Additionally, the signal
three-dimensional coordinates and velocities features a waveform designed to improve
for hundreds of geodetic stations around the mobile reception in cities and other challeng-
world. Examples of reference frames as fol- ing environments.
L2C frequency A modernized civilian-use multipath Interference caused by reflected

signal broadcast on the same L2 frequency Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS)
(1227.60 MHz) transmitted by all block signals arriving at the receiver, typically as a
IIR–M satellites and later designs. When result of nearby structures or other reflective
combined with the traditional L1 signal, L2C surfaces. The delayed signal causes a longer
enables ionospheric correction, faster signal distance to the satellite. Multipath may be
acquisition, enhanced reliability, and greater mitigated by proper antenna design, place-
operating range. L2C operates at a higher ment, and special filtering algorithms within
power level than the traditional L1 signal, GNSS receivers in static observations, but not
which promotes better tracking with sur- for shorter times involved in real-time (RT)
rounding obstruction. positioning. Reflective surfaces such as large
buildings or structures, signboards, chain-link
L5 frequency A civilian-use signal broadcast
fence, and even mountains and water bodies
from the block II–F satellite launch. This may be suspect causes of potential multipath.
1575.42 MHz carrier frequency signal is
better known as a “safety-of-life” signal with N
higher power and greater bandwidth devel-
oped for the aviation industry. NAD 83 The North American Datum of
1983. The official national horizontal datum
latency The age or time lapse in corrections for the United States depicted as a three-
used in real-time (RT) positioning. The longer dimensional datum with coordinates of points
the time lapse between the corrections, the expressed in latitude, longitude, and ellipsoid
less accurate they become at the rover. height. The NAD 83 origin is near the center
least squares adjustment An adjustment in of mass of the Earth.
which the sum of the squares of the differ- National Spatial Reference System
ences between given and changed positions (NSRS) The National Spatial Reference
are minimized. An adjustment that will tie all System is a consistent national coordinate
points together into a “best fit” network with system that specifies latitude, longitude,
the least amount of positional change. height, scale, gravity, and orientation
localization (site calibration) A vertical shift throughout the Nation, as well as how these
applied to match a single elevation or planar values change with time. The NSRS con-
surface. The user should assure trusted bench- sists of National Continuously Operating
marks are used to apply the vertical shift. Reference Stations (CORS), a network of
permanent benchmarks, and a set of accurate
M models describing geophysical processes
affecting spatial measurements.
minimally constrained adjustment (inner
adjustment) An adjustment in which NAVD 88 The North American Vertical
the number of independent constraints are Datum of 1988. Established in 1991 and
minimal, typically with just one position held referenced to the International Great Lakes
fixed. This is done to evaluate the quality of Datum of 1985, local mean sea level height at
baselines and detect other blunders in the net- Rimouski, Quebec, Canada.
work through residuals and adjusted observ- navigation message Message broadcast
ables without the distortion from several every 12.5 minutes modulated on the L1
constraining positions. and L2 Global Navigation Satellite System
monumented benchmarks Monumented (GNSS) signal containing the broadcast
benchmarks consist of a tablet with identify- ephemeris, satellite clock bias correction
ing information surrounding a stamped center parameters, constellation almanac informa-
point. These marks are located as a standard tion, and satellite health.
metal tablet, disk, cap, or steel rods used network survey Process by which individual
to describe the elevation. These tablets are static data-collecting receivers are occupied
commonly set in concrete, stone posts, firm over benchmarks (may be augmented by
rock outcroppings, masonry structures, and active control stations) and arranged in a net-
buildings. FENO markers are also considered work that encompasses a project area where
monumented benchmarks. objective points will be established.
Glossary 67
noise An interfering signal that tends to post-processed GNSS Implies that the base
mask the desired signal at the receiver. Causes and rover receivers had no communication
stem from space and atmospheric phenomena, link between them. Each receiver records
anthropogenic phenomena, or circuitry within satellite observations independently to allow
the receiver. processing of observables at a later time.
non-monumented benchmarks Non- Processing is facilitated by software.
monumented benchmarks may be considered precision The degree of repeatability that
semi-permanent monumentation that consists measurements of the same quantity display.
of chiseled squares; crosses or circles on A description of the quality of the data with
concrete or masonry structures; bolt heads respect to random errors. Precision is tradi-
in steel, concrete, or masonry structures; and tionally measured using standard deviation
metal pins or magnetic (mag) nails in concrete and may be thought of as the spread of the
or asphalt. Non-monumented benchmarks are positional error.
simply a mark with no identifying informa- pseudo-range A distance measurement
tion. based on the alignment of a satellite’s
time-tagged transmitted code and the local
O receiver’s generated reference code (for that
objective point The established point in a particular satellite) that has not been corrected
Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) for clock bias. A pseudo-range measurement
survey, and considered to be a foresight in ter- is a distance measurement biased by a time
restrial surveying. error.
Online Position User Service (OPUS) A soft-
ware service by the National Geodetic Survey Q
providing access to the NSRS to derive coor-
dinates from the CORS network. R
orthometric height The height of a point on Radio Technical Commission for Maritime
the Earth’s surface, measured as a distance Services (RTCM) Within a receiver, this
along a curved plumb line and normal to grav- standard message type is able to decode and
ity from the reference surface to that point. apply differential corrections to its raw data to
Heights above or below that datum can be generate an error corrected coordinate.
obtained through Global Navigation Satellite range The distance between two points,
System (GNSS) methods by using the cur- such as a satellite and Global Navigation
rent hybrid geoid model and North American Satellite System (GNSS) receiver, or a base
Datum 1983 (NAD 83) ellipsoid heights. station and rover receiver in regard to radio
communication.
P Real-Time Kinematic, single-base (RTK) A
passive stations ( benchmarks) Referred traditional relative positioning procedure
to as a traditional ground station, such as a whereby observables and corrections for each
benchmark. Passive stations are those that can L1 and L2 signal to each common satellite are
be occupied by survey equipment. transmitting in real time from a base station to
phase center The apparent center of signal the user’s rover receiver. The rover receiver
reception at an antenna in a Global Naviga- processes the data in real time. Centimeter-
tion Satellite System (GNSS) receiver. The level accuracy is achieved without any post
electrical phase center of an antenna is not processing.
constant, but is dependent upon the observa- realization A physical, usable manifestation
tion angle and azimuth to the satellite. The L1 of a particular datum. Realizations or align-
and L2 phase centers are at different loca- ments are usually performed on benchmarks
tions. with published coordinates, as located in the
position The three-dimensional coordinate National Geodetic Survey Integrated Database
of a point, usually given in the form of lati- (NGS IDB), or by locally set monuments;
tude, longitude, and ellipsoid height. An esti- however, active monumentation can also
mate of error is often given with a position. serve as the basis for a realization.
Real-Time Network A statewide network of T

continuously operating reference stations that trilateration A method of determining a rela-
are municipally, state, or privately owned. A tive terrestrial position using the geometry of
centralized server is used to facilitate quality-
three-dimensional spheres from satellite loca-
assurance checks, network modeling, estima-
tions and the terrestrial location. This math-
tion of systematic errors, and calculation of
ematical principal makes the calculation know-
corrected data that is submitted back to the
ing the location of at least three satellites above
end user at the rover position. The network
operates by use of cellular communication, the terrestrial location and the distance between
which excludes the requirement for a tradi- the terrestrial location and the satellites.
tional base station to be used in the field. troposphere The troposphere is an expanse
receiver A device to track L-band satel- of the atmosphere, extending approximately
lite signals, the distance of the satellites, and 30 miles from the Earth’s surface, that is
employ the mathematical principal of trilat- filled with water vapor and produces our
eration to yield location. local weather. The wet component of the
troposphere is the most difficult to model
reference station (base station) A ground
station at a known or autonomous location regarding Global Navigation Satellite System
used to derive differential corrections. The (GNSS) signal delays. Modeling within the
reference station receiver tracks all satellites troposphere estimates delays as a function of
in view, corrects pseudo-range errors, and satellite elevation angle, receiver height, and
then transmits the corrections with the carrier- weather components, such as temperature,
phase observables to the rover. pressure, and humidity.
repeater radio An additional GNSS radio
U
that is configured as a repeater to be used to
achieve lengthy baselines during RT position- UTC (Coordinated Universal Time) The
ing. atomic time standard basis of our everyday
time keeping. Using highly precise atomic
Root Mean Square (RMS) Mathematically,
clocks, time is kept in many locations around
it is the square root of the average of the sum
of the squared residuals from the computed the world, including the U.S. Naval Observa-
value. Regarding the solution, it is a measure tory. UTC is readily obtained from GNSS
of predictive power depicted as a spread of satellites.
the results. For RT positioning, RMS error is
usually expressed as x, y, and z (up), at the V
68 percent (or 1 sigma) confidence. These
values should be doubled to express at the W
95-percent (or 2 sigma) confidence level. World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS 84) A
rover A mobile GNSS receiver that receives global geodetic datum defined and maintained
corrections from a stationary base or refer- by the Department of Defense. Control seg-
ence station. Typically used in real-time (RT) ments and broadcast ephemeris are expressed
positioning to establish objective points. in this datum; as a result, Global Navigation
Satellite System (GNSS) positioning results
S are in this datum. WGS 84 positions differ
Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) The ratio of from NAD 83 by between 1 and 2 meters.
incoming signal strength to the amount of
interfering noise as measured in decibels on X
a logarithmic scale. GNSS measurements XML Known as EXtensible Markup
have sufficient reliability if the SNR is 30 or Language, and used to structure, store,
greater. and transport information. Software must
survey-grade GPS/GNSS High precision facilitate sending, receiving, or displaying
(centimeter level) positioning using dual- information.
frequency receivers containing both L-Band Y
signals L1 and L2. Z
Appendixes 1–4 69
Appendixes 1–4
Appendix 1. Benchmark Recovery and Establishment Form

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
NAME / PARTY
John Q. Surveyor U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
GLOBAL NAVIGATION SATELLITE SYSTEMS (GNSS)
DATE
January 1, 2011 VERTICAL BENCHMARK RECOVERY OR ESTABLISHMENT FORM
STATION DESIGNATION CHECK IF ESTABLISHING STATION PERMANENT IDENTIFIER (PID) USGS 1:24,000 QUADRANGLE DATUM LATITUDE
FOR RECOVERED MONUMENTED MARKS, N/A FOR ESTABLISHING MARKS
NAVD 88
NEW MARK Downing 40-29-15.9
L 86 LE0111 NGVD 29
OTHER ____________
STATE COUNTY RECOVERED ORDER ACCURACY 1 2 3 OTHER _________________ ELEVATION (FEET/METERS) CHECK IF LONGITUDE
ESTABLISHING
MO Schuyler ESTABLISHED QUALITY LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4 1098.64 NEW MARK 92-22-10.6
ORIGINAL DESCRIPTION CHECK ONE RECOVERY CONDITION CHECK ONE
MONUMENTED INFORMATION CHECK ONE
BENCHMARK
SYMMETRY
RECOVERED MARK RECOVERED IN GOOD CONDITION ALUMINUM DISK DESCRIPTION
ROUND
NOT RECOVERED OR NOT FOUND BRASS DISK SQUARE
ESTABLISHING NON-MONUMENTED MARK
POOR, DISTURBED OR DAMAGED STEEL ROD IN ROCK/CONCRETE/MASONRY ROD
U.S. Coast and
ESTABLISHING MONUMENTED MARK
SURFACE MARK KNOWN DESTROYED
Geodetic Survey
OTHER _____________________________ OTHER (U.S. and C.G.S)
LOCATION INFORMATION CHECK APPLICABLE FLUSH
L 86
BENCHMARK PROJECTING
SUITABLE FOR GNSS OBSERVATION
RELIEF RECESSED
9 INCH / CENTIMETER 1935
SITUATED ON PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY BURIED
LOCATED ON PRIVATE PROPERTY
Ralph Jones, 555-555-5555 NON-MONUMENTED INFORMATION CHECK ONE PHOTOGRAPH

CONTACT PERSON AND INFORMATION ________________________________________________________
CONCRETE/MASONRY CHISELING STEEL ROD IN GROUND

COMMENTS:
Landowner can be reached after 1800 hrs during the week BEDROCK CHISELING ASPHALT PINS/NAILS
and weekend. Landowner is aware of benchmark and has STEEL ETCHING CONCRETE PINS/NAILS
given permission for access. Gate used to access fenced perimeter BOLT IN CONCRETE/MASONRY
must be closed after entry and exit of property. Transporting vehicle OTHER _____________________________________
may be parked near Oak trees just inside the gate to the left. BOLT IN STEEL
TO REACH NARRATIVE LEG-BY-LEG DISTANCE AND DIRECTION FROM MAJOR ROAD INTERSECTION TO MARK
Beginning in the town of Downing, Missouri; turn southwest off of state Highway 136 onto 15th Street; travel 0.05
miles southwest on South 15th Street, then turn norhtwest on unnamed street (at one time street named West Missouri
Street). Travel 75 feet norhtwest on unnamed street. Tablet 20 feet to the northeast.
BENCHMARK DESCRIPTION AND MEASUREMENTS REFERENCE MEASUREMENTS FROM STATION

SITE SKETCH WITH AT LEAST 3 MEASUREMENTS TO PERMANENT NEARBY OBJECTS WITH DESCRIPTIONS
OBJECT AZIMUTH/BEARING DISTANCE (FEET/METERS)
Hw Centerline S. 15th Street 1200 75

y1 Centerline W. Missouri Street 2250 50
We 36
Co ll H Well house cover 3200 150
ve ou
r se
N
VISIBILITY-OBSTRUCTION DIAGRAM
Str 15th
N
15
0.
0
1
Ba m
330o 30o
ft
ee
ile
Ho Do nk
S.
75
us
Gate
50
ft wn of
e ft in
g
Ho Un
Be us na 300o 60o
n
Pr ch e Fo
rm med
Ba
o
Ow pe m
a
nk
er Str
ne rty rk W. ee Trees
’
ad y
r
‘A
Mi t
Ro unt
sso
ur 270o 90o
i
Co
Str
ee 80 o
t
70o
House 60o
240o 50o 120o
o
40
e
us
Modified from the National Geodetic Survey (1998)

30o
Ho
and the Missouri Department of Natural Resources

Division of Geology and Land Survey, 210o 20o 150o
Land Survey Program (2000) 10o
Appendixes 1–4 71

NAME / PARTY
John Q. Surveyor U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
DATE
January 1, 2011 VERTICAL BENCHMARK RECOVERY OR ESTABLISHMENT FORM
STATION DESIGNATION CHECK IF ESTABLISHING STATION PERMANENT IDENTIFIER (PID) USGS 1:24,000 QUADRANGLE DATUM LATITUDE
NAVD 88
OC1 NEW MARK
Downing NGVD 29 40-29-16.7
N/A
OTHER ____________
STATE COUNTY RECOVERED ORDER ACCURACY 1 2 3 OTHER _________________ ELEVATION (FEET/METERS) CHECK IF LONGITUDE
ESTABLISHING
MO Schuyler ESTABLISHED QUALITY LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4 NEW MARK 92-22-09.5
ORIGINAL DESCRIPTION CHECK ONE RECOVERY CONDITION CHECK ONE
MONUMENTED INFORMATION CHECK ONE
BENCHMARK
SYMMETRY
RECOVERED MARK RECOVERED IN GOOD CONDITION ALUMINUM DISK DESCRIPTION
ROUND
NOT RECOVERED OR NOT FOUND BRASS DISK SQUARE
ESTABLISHING NON-MONUMENTED MARK
POOR, DISTURBED OR DAMAGED STEEL ROD IN ROCK/CONCRETE/MASONRY ROD Centerpunched
ESTABLISHING MONUMENTED MARK
SURFACE MARK KNOWN DESTROYED OTHER _____________________________ OTHER
1/2” Rebar
driven 20” in
LOCATION INFORMATION CHECK APPLICABLE FLUSH ground
BENCHMARK PROJECTING
SUITABLE FOR GNSS OBSERVATION
RELIEF RECESSED
3 INCH / CENTIMETER
SITUATED ON PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY BURIED
LOCATED ON PRIVATE PROPERTY
Ralph Jones, 555-555-5555 NON-MONUMENTED INFORMATION CHECK ONE PHOTOGRAPH

CONTACT PERSON AND INFORMATION ________________________________________________________
CONCRETE/MASONRY CHISELING STEEL ROD IN GROUND

COMMENTS:
Landowner can be reached after 1800 hrs during the week BEDROCK CHISELING ASPHALT PINS/NAILS
and weekend. Landowner is aware of benchmark and has STEEL ETCHING CONCRETE PINS/NAILS
given permission for access. Gate used to access fenced perimeter BOLT IN CONCRETE/MASONRY
must be closed after entry and exit of property. Transporting vehicle OTHER _____________________________________
may be parked near Oak trees just inside the gate to the right. BOLT IN STEEL
TO REACH NARRATIVE LEG-BY-LEG DISTANCE AND DIRECTION FROM MAJOR ROAD INTERSECTION TO MARK
Beginning in the town of Downing, Missouri; turn southwest off of state Highway 136 onto 15th Street; travel 0.05
miles southwest on South 15th Street, then turn norhtwest on unnamed street (at one time street named West Missouri
Street). Travel 75 feet norhtwest on unnamed street. Rebar 170 feet to the northeast.
BENCHMARK DESCRIPTION AND MEASUREMENTS REFERENCE MEASUREMENTS FROM STATION

SITE SKETCH WITH AT LEAST 3 MEASUREMENTS TO PERMANENT NEARBY OBJECTS WITH DESCRIPTIONS
OBJECT AZIMUTH/BEARING DISTANCE (FEET/METERS)
Hw Centerline S. 15th Street 1200 40

y1 2250 170
We 36 Centerline W. Missouri Street
Co ll H Well house cover 2850 125
ve ou
r se N
125 ft VISIBILITY-OBSTRUCTION DIAGRAM
40
ft
0.
1 N
Ba m
ile
330o 30o
t
Do nk
f
Str 5th
0
Ho
17
us
Gate
wn of
t
e in
ee
1
g
S.
Ho
Be us Un 300o 60o
Pr nch e Fo
rm nam
Ow ope ma er ed
ne rty rk W.
’
Str
ad y
r
‘A
Mi
Ro unt
sso eet
ur 270o
iS 90o
Co
tre
et 80o
es Bank
Tre 70o
o
60
se
240o ou 50o 120o
H
e
40o
us

Ho
and the Missouri Department of Natural Resources 30o

Division of Geology and Land Survey, 210 o 20o 150o
Land Survey Program (2000) 10o
Appendix 2. Static Observation Form

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
STATIC (BASE STATION) OBSERVATION FORM
NAME / PARTY DATE STATION DESIGNATION CHECK IF ESTABLISHING STATION PERMANENT IDENTIFIER (PID)
John Q. Surveyor January 1, 2011 OC1 NEW MARK N/A

DATUM, ADJUSTMENT, AND EPOCH OTHER STATIONS OBSERVED DURING SESSION
COLLECTION INTERVAL = 1 Seconds IF KNOWN
NAD 83 (2011), EPOCH 2010 CORS: MOED, MOCN, MOSH

ELEVATION MASK = 12 Degree Passive: L15 , M134, L86, A85
INTERVAL OF TIME OBSERVATION SESSION TIMES
IN DAYS COORDINATED UNIVERSAL TIME (UTC) ADD TIMES FOR COORDINATED UNIVERSAL TIME (UTC) ANTENNA REFERENCE POINT HEIGHT
1 1305
START __________ 2230
STOP ___________ HAWAII STANDARD TIME (HST) 10 HOURS
7.22
___________ FEET / METERS START
Day JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC Day ALASKA DAYLIGHT TIME (AKDT) 08 HOURS
1 1 32 60 91 121 152 182 213 244 274 305 335 1
PACIFIC DAYLIGHT TIME (PDT) 07 HOURS 7.22
___________ FEET / METERS STOP
2 2 33 61 92 122 153 183 214 245 275 306 336 2
3 3 34 62 93 123 154 184 215 246 276 307 337 3 MOUNTAIN DAYLIGHT TIME (MDT) 06 HOURS
4 4 35 63 94 124 155 185 216 247 277 308 338 4 ANTENNA HEIGHT H = (A + B)
5 5 36 64 95 125 156 186 217 248 278 309 339 5 CENTRAL DAYLIGHT TIME (CDT) 05 HOURS
6 6 37 65 96 126 157 187 218 249 279 310 340 6 ANTENNA HEIGHT H = S2 - R2 - C
EASTERN DAYLIGHT TIME (EDT) 04 HOURS
7 7 38 66 97 127 158 188 219 250 280 311 341 7
8 8 39 67 98 128 159 189 220 251 281 312 342 8 RADIUS
9 9 40 68 99 129 160 190 221 252 282 313 343 9 RECEIVER BRAND AND MODEL R
10 10 41 69 100 130 161 191 222 253 283 314 344 10 C
11 11 42 70 101 131 162 192 223 254 284 315 345 11 Trimble R8 SERIAL
ARP
B
ARP
12 12 43 71 102 132 163 193 224 255 285 316 346 12
Model 3 4953411760
NUMBER ________________________
13 13 44 72 103 133 164 194 225 256 286 317 347 13
14 14 45 73 104 134 165 195 226 257 287 318 348 14 A
15 15 46 74 105 135 166 196 227 258 288 319 349 15 H
ANTENNA BRAND AND MODEL (If separate from receiver)
TRIPOD LENGTH
16 16 47 75 106 136 167 197 228 259 289 320 350 16
FIXED HEIGHT
ANTENNA HEIGHT
17 17 48 76 107 137 168 198 229 260 290 321 351 17
18 18 49 77 108 138 169 199 230 261 291 322 352 18 Trimble R8 SERIAL
19 19 50 78 109 139 170 200 231 262 292 323 353 19
Model 3 4953411760
NUMBER ________________________ S
20 20 51 79 110 140 171 201 232 263 293 324 354 20
21 21 52 80 111 141 172 202 233 264 294 325 355 21 CHECK YES OR NO
22 22 53 81 112 142 173 203 234 265 295 326 356 22
EIGHT
PLUMB BEFORE SESSION ? YES NO
23 23 54 82 113 143 174 204 235 266 296 327 357 23
PLUMB AFTER SESSION ? YES NO
24 24 55 83 114 144 175 205 236 267 297 328 358 24
SLANT H
25 25 56 84 115 145 176 206 237 268 298 329 359 25 GROUND PLANE USED ? YES NO
26 26 57 85 116 146 177 207 238 269 299 330 360 26
IF NO, PLEASE EXPLAIN
27 27 58 86 117 147 178 208 239 270 300 331 361 27
28 28 59 87 118 148 179 209 240 271 301 332 362 28
29 29 88 119 149 180 210 241 272 302 333 363 29
30 30 89 120 150 181 211 242 273 303 334 364 30
RADIO INTERFERENCE SOURCE NEARBY ? YES NO DATUM
31 31 90 151 212 243 304 365 31
Day JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC DAY
IF YES, PLEASE EXPLAIN
WEATHER OBSERVATIONS Large satellite antenna on local

DESCRIBE ANY SIGNIFICANT WEATHER CHANGES AND ASSOCIATED TIME,
THAT HAVE OCCURED DURING THE OBSERVATION PERIOD residence located 2100 azimuth and COORDINATES UTM
550 above the horizon. STATE PLANE
OTHER ____________
Cold and cloudy throughout the day.

Light snow beginning around 1600 UTC and ending around 1730 UTC. Temperature
remained constant at 32 degrees.
NOTES

and the Missouri Department of Natural Resources
Division of Geology and Land Survey,
Land Survey Program (2000)
Appendixes 1–4 73
Appendix 3. Real-Time GNSS Example Approaches

High-Water Mark Surveys—Flood Studies Procedurally for a Level II approach, a localization may
begin at the second-order benchmark at Brashear. The user
High-water mark surveys encountered most often using then observes the second-order mark at Hurdland and third-
GNSS are those performed for flood-related studies to deter- order mark at Gibbs. Vertical residuals produced from a
mine inundation extents. These studies combine surveyed least-squares fit of these known benchmarks to observations
high-water marks in the field along with various topographic performed at each benchmark produce the following results:
details, such as artificial and natural control features, river • Brashear 0.006 m
channels, roadways, floodplains, and any other detail neces-
sary to hydraulically model flood flows. As an example, a • Hurdland 0.010 m
flood study is performed along a 16-km reach of the Salt River • Gibbs 0.005 m
near Brashear, Missouri (fig. 3–1).
There are two trusted and recovered second-order In this case, Brashear and Gibbs have sufficient agree-
benchmarks at Hurdland and Brashear (fig. 3–1). There is one ment, but are second- and third-order marks. A Level II
third-order benchmark at Gibbs (fig. 3–1). Mission planning campaign requires second-order benchmarks to be local-
regarding space weather, PDOP, and satellite availability ized or checked, and Hurdland is only 0.004–0.005 m high
dictate general avoidance times of 1100–1130 and 1530–1730 from Brashear and Gibbs, so the user is reluctant to identify
during the week of the scheduled campaign. A RTN is avail- Hurdland as an outlier and omit. The user decides to local-
able in this example and the objective of the flood study leads ize to Brashear and Gibbs, and commences observations on
the survey chief to engage in a Level II campaign. The cam- all objective points. The use of a differential level or total
paign documents metadata, as described earlier in the “Meta- station instrument will be used to perpetuate elevation from
data” section of this manual, for a RTN in addition to utilizing these objective points to the high-water mark. Using a Level
recovery and establishment forms (appendix 1). As previously II approach, all observations are performed using RT blunder
described, the following assurances are maintained within the checks. Each redundant shot is ensured to be within 0.03 m,
campaign: and those that are not are held suspect and re-established at a
different location to achieve that uncertainty. The user keeps
• Benchmark evaluation, reconnaissance, field prepara- sufficient record of all field procedure (as described previ-
tion, and data storage. ously under “GNSS Campaign”), including PDOP, satellite
• Bubble check and calibration of base fixed-height availability, rover rod heights, and all redundancy differences.
tripod and rover bipod. After all objective points are established; the user re-occupies
two objective points (approximately 10 percent of 19) and is
• Base fixed-height or dual-clamped tripod stabilized by within 0.05 m of each, then occupies Hurdland and checks
chains or sandbags. within 0.05 m. Finally, the user re-occupies Brashear as a
“closing” check and ensures the observation is within 0.05 m
• Rover multipath avoidance for each observation session. of the stated benchmark elevation.
• Vertical precision less than 0.05 m (2 sigma) during In this example, if the user had checked on Hurdland and
observations. exceeded 0.05 m, it is at the discretion of the survey chief to
evaluate the entire campaign for an appropriate classification.
• RT blunder checks within 0.03 m. If Hurdland checked at 0.08 m (greater than 0.05 m), yet all
objective point redundancy was within 0.03 m, and all other
• 180 epochs of data per observation (1-second collec- criteria related to satellite availability, PDOP, observation
tion interval for 3 minutes). length, and multipath avoidance were maintained, then this
• PDOP assurances of three or less. campaign would be inclined to sustain a Level II classifica-
tion. Conversely, if many observations were performed with
• Satellite availability of seven or more. unfavorable PDOP, many redundant residuals were not within
0.03 m, there was no sufficient documentation to demonstrate
• Second-order benchmarks used to localize or check potential multipath conditions, and there were occurrences of
within 0.05 m. communication disruption because of power issues (includ-
The survey chief ensures that the RTN is aligned to ing delays acquiring a fixed solution), the classification would
the NSRS and discovers it is NAD 83 (CORS96) 2002.0. likely be downgraded to a Level III campaign.
92°28' 92°24' 92°20' 92°16'
X X
40°12'
X
X
X
X
X
X
40°08'
X
X
X
X X
X X
Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data 1:100,000, 1992 0 1 2 3 4 KILOMETERS
Universal Transverse Mercator projection
Zone 15 EXPLANATION
0 1 2 3 4 MILES
Second-order benchmark
Third-order benchmark
X High-water mark
Observable objective points
Figure 3–1. Background for a high-water mark survey along the Salt River near Brashear, Missouri.
Appendixes 1–4 75
Establishment of Datum at Streamgages The survey chief ensures that the RTN is aligned to
NSRS and discovers it is NAD 83 (NSRS2007) 2007.0. The
Using a method to establish vertical datum at a USGS GNSS user begins conducting observations at all second- and
streamgage often requires an evaluation of the gaging effort third-order benchmarks in the field (fig. 3–2). The GNSS
and importance to the cooperative water community. The user notes intermittent cellular communication for marks 7,
quality of approach used in establishing datum for a gage 8, and 9 in the field and employs a RTK bridge at a cellular
with forecasting, commerce, and regulation interests may be receptive location that is elevated and centralized to marks
different than an approach used to establish datum at a gage 7, 8, and 9 (fig. 3–2). A check (in lieu of a localization or site
with only recreational interests. Another decision made in calibration) of known elevations opposed to observed eleva-
this regard may include the amount of relief in the watershed, tions provided in table 3–1 indicates use of benchmarks 2–7,
and resulting gradient and surge inherent in the gaged water 10, and 13 because of the spatiality and confidence of these
surface. benchmarks as well as consistency among residuals.
Referring to figure 3–2, 14 streamgages need to be Using a Level II approach, all objective points are
tied to datum in a 2,100 square mile (mi2) area. These established using a RT blunder check. As with the previous
gages are operated and maintained in cooperation with the example, each redundant shot is ensured to be within 0.03 m,
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and are used to and those that are not are held suspect and re-established at a
support Mississippi River navigation and forecasting. Based different location to achieve that uncertainty. The user keeps a
on cooperative interest, navigation, and forecasting driving sufficient record of all field procedures as described previously
the overall objective, a Level II approach will satisfy the in the “GNSS Campaign” section. After all objective points
required quality. A RTN is available in this example and will are established, the user re-occupies two objective points
be used to perpetuate datum near or at each streamgage. In (approximately 10 percent of 14) along with benchmarks 2–7,
this example, 12 second-order benchmarks and 1 third-order 10, and 13, and is within 0.05 m of the initial observation of
benchmark were recovered; however, only 7 second-order the objective point and 0.05 m from the benchmark elevation.
benchmarks and 1 third-order benchmark were observable Similar to the previous example, if the user had exceeded
and accepted for this GNSS campaign. Mission planning 0.05 m when checking on benchmarks at the end of the
regarding space weather, PDOP, and satellite availability dic- campaign, it is at the discretion of the survey chief to evaluate
tate general avoidance times of 1000–1030 and 1730–1830 the entire campaign for an appropriate classification. A record
during the week of this scheduled campaign. The campaign of satellite availability, PDOP, observation length, multipath
documents metadata, as described earlier, for a RTN in addi- avoidance, communication issues, and suspect delays acquir-
tion to utilizing recovery and establishment forms (appen- ing a fixed solution are evaluated to sustain or downgrade
dix 1). As described in the previous example, the following the level quality. In this example, USACE and the National
assurances are maintained within this campaign: Weather Service (NWS) have inquiries regarding a numerical
• Benchmark evaluation, reconnaissance, field prepara- representation of vertical datum accuracy. The survey chief
tion, and data storage. provides to both interests an executive summary released
through an appropriate USGS information product (http://
• Bubble check and calibration of base fixed-height www.usgs.gov/usgs-manual/1100/1100-3.html) which includes
tripod and rover bipod. the following:
• Base fixed-height or dual-clamped tripod stabilized by • Level II quality requirements for a RT approach. If this
chains or sandbags. campaign was downgraded to a Level III effort, discus-
sion is needed to justify.
• Rover multipath avoidance for each observation ses-
sion. • Metadata.
• RT blunder check within 0.03 m. • A table that includes:
• Vertical precision less than 0.05 m (at 2 sigma) during • Residuals from comparing known to observed
observations. benchmarks for perpetuating datum (table 3–1).
• 180 epochs of data per observation (1-second collec- • Residuals from objective point establishment using
tion interval for 3 minutes). an RT blunder check.
• PDOP assurances of three or less. • End of campaign; residuals from comparing known
to observed benchmarks for benchmarks 2–7, 10,
• Satellite availability of seven or more. and 13.
• Second-order benchmarks used to localize or check • Residuals from 10 percent of re-occupied objective
within 0.05 m. points.
91°45' 91°30' 91°15' 91°

40°
12
11
10
39°45'
9
8
3
B
2
1
7
5
39°30'
13
0 5 10 KILOMETERS
Base from Google © 2011. Map data from © 2011 Europa Technologies, INEGI
0 5 10 MILES
EXPLANATION
2 Observable second-order benchmark U.S. Geological Survey streamgage
2
13 Observable third-order benchmark B Real-Time Kinematic (RTK) bridge
Observable benchmarks accepted for campaign
Figure
Figure 3–2.3–2. Background
Background for streamgage
for streamgage datum establishment.
datum establishment.
Appendixes 1–4 77
• An overall uncertainty for the campaign and discussion Altitude of the potentiometric surface needs to be
regarding the benchmarks held as “truth.” expressed to the nearest 0.5 ft (0.152 m). A RTN does not
exist in this example and the survey chief has concluded from
Table 3–1. Assessment of benchmarks for perpetuating datum to the use of the data that a Level III approach using single-
U.S. Geological Survey streamgages. base RTK will ensure the required quality needs will be met.
[m, meter]
Mission planning identifies a reduction in available satellites
and poor PDOP around 1000 and between 1600–1800 for
scheduled days of GNSS observation. No satellite outages or
Known Observed
Benchmark Order elevation elevation
Residual
Accept compromising space weather was predicted for the scheduled
(m) effort. For the Level III approach, the following assurances are
(m) (m)
maintained within the campaign:
1 2 224.017 223.935 0.082 No
2 2 229.807 229.745 0.042 Yes • Benchmark evaluation, reconnaissance, field prepara-
tion, and data storage.
3 2 232.987 232.937 0.040 Yes
4 2 182.871 182.923 -0.042 Yes • Bubble check and calibration of base fixed-height
5 2 152.392 152.433 -0.031 Yes tripod and rover bipod.
6 2 155.462 155.505 -0.033 Yes
• Base fixed-height or dual-clamped tripod stabilized by
7 2 143.639 143.586 0.043 Yes chains or sandbags.
8 2 181.234 181.169 0.065 No
• Rover multipath avoidance for each observation ses-
9 2 182.369 182.219 0.150 No
sion.
10 2 190.491 190.496 -0.005 Yes
11 2 189.271 189.128 0.143 No • Recovery, establishment, and observation forms used to
12 2 234.124 234.211 -0.087 No document existing or established benchmarks (appen-
dixes 1 and 2).
13 3 219.445 219.403 0.032 Yes
• Height of base Antenna Reference Point (ARP) mea-
Establishment of Datum at Groundwater Well sured before and after observation session.
Fields • RT blunder check within 0.03 m.
Before establishing a datum for groundwater wells, the • Vertical precision less than 0.07 m (at 2 sigma) during
project staff should refer to Cunningham and Schalk (2012) observations.
for the procedures to establish permanent measurement
points and other reference marks for wells and documenting • 180 epochs of data collected per observation (1 second
the location of wells. For the surveyor and project staff, it is collection interval for 3 minutes).
important to discuss what the accuracy requirements are for
the project, and communicate the expected accuracy, relative • Baseline lengths may not exceed 9 km.
to the cost of the GNSS survey (time per station). For some • PDOP may be less than or equal to four.
groundwater projects, the hydraulic gradient of a groundwater
well field generally dictates level quality concerns regarding • Satellites observed may be greater than or equal to six.
establishment of datum. The well field may be monitoring a
potentiometric surface with substantial relief, or a well field • Localizations or checks may occur for vertical order 3
may reside in an alluvial plain with minimal relief. For either or better benchmarks or a Level II OPUS-S substitute
circumstance, it is important to recognize the limitations of may be made for any benchmark (within 0.05 m).
GNSS surveys when relating altitude among groundwater Initial reconnaissance combined with terrain mapping
wells and to communicate with the project staff about these identifies three second-order vertical control benchmarks that
limitations. For smaller alluvial well fields that do not exhibit are observable (fig. 3–3). Similar to the Level II approach, a
relief, it is generally acceptable to establish a benchmark that Level III approach requires two benchmarks in which to local-
is central to the well field and perpetuate this altitude to each ize and check for each base station occupation. In this case,
groundwater well by differential leveling. For larger well single-base RTK is “used as level.” All base station locations
fields that monitor a larger gradient change, it may be accept- are autonomous, which provides a reduction in baseline length
able to select a GNSS approach to provide an independent and added flexibility in localizing and checking benchmarks,
geodetic tie to each groundwater well. and establishing objective points. In this campaign, extended
For example, a groundwater monitoring well field resides range poles equipped with whip antennas are used at the
within a 50-mi2 area (fig. 3–3). base and rover receivers for radio communication assurance.
90°43' 90°41' 90°39' 90°37' 90°35'
38°47'
7
1 9
10
6 R
2 3
21 3
38°45'
2
5
4 0 1 MILE
0 1 KILOMETER
Base from Google © 2011. Map data from © 2011 Europa Technologies, INEGI EXPLANATION
Baseline Observable objective points Base station location R Base station

repeater radio
1 Second-order
benchmark
1 Groundwater well Base station Online Position
Users Service (OPUS-S)
derived benchmark
Figure 3–3. Background for a groundwater well field survey.

Appendixes 1–4 79
Reconnaissance and terrain mapping identified length and 3. Base station occupation between benchmark 2 and
direction of potential baselines based on areas of relief indicat- well 5, which includes a localization to bench-
ing predictable radio communication. mark 2; the establishment of an objective point using
With the exception of well locations 1, 5, and 9, a refer- a RT blunder check at well 5; a check on bench-
ence mark at all other well locations were suitable for direct mark 3; and a closing check back on benchmark 2.
observations (fig. 3–3). For groundwater well locations 1, 5,
and 9, encroaching tree canopy and transmission lines compro- 4. Base station occupation between benchmark 3 and
mised a quality observation. As a result, observable objective well 9, which includes a localization to benchmark
points were established near the groundwater well so that dif- 3; the establishment of objective points using a RT
ferential leveling could be used to perpetuate altitude. Six base blunder check at well 9 and 10; a check on bench-
station occupations were required to perform RT observations mark 2; and a closing check back on benchmark 3.
(fig. 3–3). An additional repeater radio was required when con-
5. Process OPUS-S collection that occurred between
ducting observations for wells 6, 7, and 8. This repeater radio
wells 1 and 8.
was used to facilitate a localization to benchmark 2. Because
there was no second benchmark to check within the vicinity of 6. Base station occupation between well 1 and an
wells 6, 7, and 8, a Level II quality static OPUS-S solution was OPUS-S derived benchmark, which includes a
derived to provide this check (fig. 3–3). All redundant obser- localization to benchmark 1; the establishment of an
vations are part of a RT blunder check within the abbreviated objective point using a RT blunder check at well 1;
chronology of campaign observations listed below: a check on the OPUS-S derived benchmark, and a
1. Level II single-base static (OPUS-S) occupation closing check back on benchmark 1.
and data collection begins between wells 1 and 8.
7. Base station occupation between well 7 and an
Concurrently, RT campaign commences.
OPUS-S derived benchmark, which includes a local-
2. Base station occupation between benchmark 2 and ization by way of repeater radio to benchmark 2; the
well 2, which includes localization to benchmark 2; establishment of objective points using a RT blunder
the establishment of objective points using a RT check at wells 6, 7, and 8; a check on the OPUS-S
blunder check at wells 2, 3, and 4; a check on bench- derived benchmark; and a closing check back on
mark 1; and a closing check back on benchmark 2. benchmark 2.
Appendix 4. Static GNSS Example Approaches

Single-Base Static (OPUS)—Datum monumented, how elevation will be established at each bench-
mark, and when the surveying will occur must be decided.
Establishment for River Survey
A Level II single-base static (OPUS) approach is used to
determine elevation at each benchmark. Benchmarks created
Bathymetric and topographic surveys are planned from this approach satisfy the requirement required to perpetu-
along eight U.S. Army Corps of Engineers historic sediment ate elevation in a Level III RTK survey. Before the campaign,
transects for Lewis and Clark Lake, which is located on the mission planning is performed to evaluate optimal days for
Missouri River between Nebraska and South Dakota. A Level observations. Also, nearby CORS data are evaluated through
IV survey is all that is required for the topographic part of the the NGS CORS website to ensure all stations are functioning
survey, but a Level III survey is needed to establish objec- before the survey. Figure 4–2 illustrates a time series and data
tive points and water surface elevations necessary to process availability example for nearby CORS station “SDSF.” Data
bathymetry data. A RTN is not available; therefore, all RT indicate SDSF is stable and has reflected a full data set in the
surveys will be performed with single-base RTK. recent past (fig. 4–2), which implies this station should be
NGS benchmarks with second-order vertical accuracy, considered a quality CORS to use as part of the data collection
or better, elevation were recovered from the NGS IDB. These effort. All landowners and land managers are contacted for
are grouped into two sets of marks: those observed in the permission to establish benchmarks and conduct surveys. The
past using GPS, and those with no prior observations. As following assurances are maintained within the campaign:
figure 4–1 illustrates, many second-order vertical benchmarks
are recovered, but most of them were several miles from the • Benchmark evaluation, reconnaissance, field prepara-
reservoir and only three had been previously observed using tion, and data storage.
GPS. Also, only one GPS-observed mark (recovered in 1995) • Bubble check and calibration of base fixed-height
is located on the southwest side of the reservoir. The two other tripod and rover bipod.
GPS-observed benchmarks near the northeast side of the reser-
voir had been recovered since 1993. The second-order vertical • Base fixed-height or dual-clamped tripod stabilized by
benchmarks that were close to the edge of the water (and some chains or sandbags.
that were within the reservoir) had not been recovered since
the 1940’s, before the completion of the dam. Considering the • Recovery, establishment, and observation forms used to
fact that the benchmarks likely to be recovered and observed document existing or established benchmarks (appen-
using GPS were a distance from the reservoir, new bench- dixes 1 and 2).
marks were established closer to the reservoir for convenience. The field crew constructed 6 new benchmarks during the
NGS benchmarks that are located and observed near newly same day they tried to locate 3 NGS benchmarks that had pre-
established benchmarks will be used as quality checks in the viously been surveyed by GPS. One of the NGS benchmarks
campaign. located on the southwest side of the lake, NGS PID NM1382,
The location of objective points for each new set of Designation Santee Reset, is recovered in good condition and
benchmarks (two controlling benchmarks required for a Level utilized as a quality check during the static surveys by collect-
III RT survey) is selected based on proximity to boat ramps ing data on the benchmark at the same time GPS observations
and roads, topography, vegetation, permission, and location are performed on newly established benchmarks. Concurrent
in relation to the survey transects (fig. 4–1). Once the loca- observations provide a quality check of the Level II single-base
tion of the “to-be-established” benchmarks is determined, a static (OPUS) derived position against the published position.
decision regarding the type and construction of benchmark is Including the NGS benchmark Santee Reset, the field
made. As described in the manual, there are several options for crew has seven benchmarks to collect static data on. The
benchmark construction. Planned locations did not represent a equipment available includes only 5 fixed-height tripods, so
rock-dominated substrate; therefore the use of FENO markers only 5 GPS receivers will be collecting static data at any one
is appropriate. The newly established benchmarks are labeled time; therefore, the field crew begins by setting up on the
as follows: benchmarks on the northwest side of the lake are benchmarks located on the southwest side of the lake because
named 1053 and 1054, benchmarks on the southwest side of they are the closest to the point of deployment. The crew
the lake are named 1052 and 1059, and benchmarks in the observes benchmarks 1052 and 1059 from approximately
middle of the reservoir on the north side are named 1070 and 0600 to 1200 on day 1. After setting up receivers at 1052 and
1071 (fig. 4–1). 1059, the crew leaves the receivers unattended because of the
After determining where and how benchmarks will remote area and deploys two more receivers on benchmarks
be constructed, appropriate stamping for those that are 1053 and 1054 and initiates observations from 0700 to 1300
97˚52’ 97˚48’ 97˚44’ 97˚40’ 97˚36’ 97˚32’
42˚54’
1070
1071
1053
1054
42˚50’
1052
1059
42˚46’
Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data 1:100,000, 1992 0 3 6 KILOMETERS
Appendixes 1–4 81
Universal Transverse Mercator projection EXPLANATION
Zone 15
Bathymetry survey transects 0 3 6 MILES
National Geodetic Survey (NGS) Global Positioning System (GPS) observed benchmarks
1052 Objective points with identifier established using single-base static GPS
Benchmarks identified in the NGS database (vertical order II)
Figure Recovered
4–1.4–1.
Figure and established
Recovered benchmarks
and established for the topographic
benchmarks and bathymetric
for the topographic andsurvey at Lewis survey
bathymetric and Clark
atLake.
Lewis and Clark Lake.
GPS
Survey
http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/CORS/GoogleMap/CORS.shtml http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/CORS/GoogleMap/CORS.shtml
Data available from the station for the last 14 days.
Continuously Operating Reference Station (CORS)

SDSF.
Figure 4–2. Time series and data availability plots

downloaded from the National Geodetic Survey (NGS)
Movement in the northing, easting, and up position for the last 60 days. Continuously Operating Reference Station (CORS) website.
Figure 4–2. Time series and data availability plots downloaded from the National Geodetic Survey (NGS) Continuously Operating Reference Station
(CORS) website.
Appendixes 1–4 83
on the same day. After these two receivers are initialized and • Total observations used: 80 percent or more.
collecting data, the crew deploys the final tripod and receiver
on NGS benchmark Santee Reset, which collects data from • Ambiguities fixed: 80 percent or better.
0830 to 1500. The remaining benchmarks 1070 and 1071, • Overall RMS: < 0.03 m.
recently constructed for observations, are observed the fol-
lowing day from 0830 to 1430. These marks are located near • Vertical peak-to-peak error: < 0.08 m.
the north shore toward the central part of the Lewis and Clark With the exception of time requirements for benchmarks
Lake. While observations are being performed on benchmarks 1052 and 1053, results processed for all newly established
1070 and 1071, the field crew will process 1052, 1053, 1054, benchmarks met these requirements. An example of bench-
and 1059 through OPUS, so that the bathymetry and Level mark 1052 is indicated below and quality indicators are
III single-base RTK part of the field work can begin. Process- highlighted in red. Quality indicators for the remaining bench-
ing of these observations will use the ultra-rapid orbit, but marks are summarized in table 4–1.
a check and potential reprocessing against
the rapid or precise orbits will be performed Table 4–1. Benchmark quality indicators from Online Position Users Service
later if the criteria do not meet the require- (OPUS) results for datum establishment used for a river survey.
ments for a Level II quality.
Processing is completed by convert- [hrs, hours; RMS, Root Mean Squared error; m, meter]
ing observation files to a RINEX format.
Formatted observation files, the surveyor’s Overall Orthometric
Bench- Time Observations Fixed
email address, receiver antenna type, Percent Percent RMS height
mark (hrs) used ambiguities
(m) (m)
and vertical height from the established
or recovered benchmark to the ARP are 1052 5.2 14672/15444 95 47/48 98 0.017 0.028
entered into OPUS. For OPUS processing to 1053 5.3 13970/14253 98 41/41 100 0.011 0.026
meet a Level II single-base static survey, a 1054 5.6 14419/14565 99 45/45 100 0.011 0.026
minimum observation time of 4 hours must 1059 5.7 14613/15546 94 43/44 97 0.021 0.044
be ensured with the following processing
1070 6.0 16234/16911 96 36/44 82 0.019 0.063
results:
1071 6.3 16386/16893 97 46/46 100 0.016 0.073
Benchmark 1052:
FILE: 10520582.07O 000085308

NGS OPUS SOLUTION REPORT
========================
All computed coordinate accuracies are listed as peak-to-peak values.
For additional information: http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/OPUS/about.html#accuracy
USER: [email protected] DATE: March 28, 2007

RINEX FILE: 1052058o.07o TIME: 17:42:51 UTC
SOFTWARE: page5 0612.06 master28.pl START: 2007/03/27 12:14:00

EPHEMERIS: igu14162.eph [ultra-rapid] STOP: 2007/03/27 17:55:00
NAV FILE: brdc0860.07n OBS USED: 14672 / 15444 : 95%
ANT NAME: ASH701975.01AGP NONE # FIXED AMB: 47 / 48 : 98%
ARP HEIGHT: 2.0 OVERALL RMS: 0.017(m)
REF FRAME: NAD_83(CORS96)(EPOCH:2002.0000) ITRF00 (EPOCH:2007.1580)
X: -639505.121(m) 0.019(m) -639505.839(m) 0.019(m)

Y: -4640260.384(m) 0.018(m) -4640259.072(m) 0.018(m)
Z: 4314932.810(m) 0.023(m) 4314932.739(m) 0.023(m)
LAT: 42 50 33.24540 0.028(m) 42 50 33.27019 0.028(m)

E LON: 262 9 11.22636 0.020(m) 262 9 11.18715 0.020(m)
W LON: 97 50 48.77364 0.020(m) 97 50 48.81285 0.020(m)
EL HGT: 350.419(m) 0.013(m) 349.489(m) 0.013(m)
ORTHO HGT: 376.327(m) 0.028(m) [Geoid03 NAVD88]
Peak-to-peak indicator of solution uncertainty
UTM COORDINATES STATE PLANE COORDINATES

UTM (Zone 14) SPC (2600 NE )
Northing (Y) [meters] 4743977.316 336323.988
Easting (X) [meters] 594228.876 675984.698
Convergence [degrees] 0.78416221 1.42686494
Point Scale 0.99970923 0.99993160
Combined Factor 0.99965430 0.99987665
US NATIONAL GRID DESIGNATOR: 14TNN9422943977(NAD 83)
BASE STATIONS USED

PID DESIGNATION LATITUDE LONGITUDE DISTANCE(m)
AI1404 CLK1 CLARK 1 CORS ARP N445608.208 W0975738.437 232739.1
AI1569 NLGN NELIGH CORS ARP N421224.250 W0974743.043 70762.0
DF7469 SDSF EROS DATA CENTER CORS ARP N434401.727 W0963718.541 140321.9
NEAREST NGS PUBLISHED CONTROL POINT

NM1391 U 271 RESET N425028. W0975105. 402.1
This position and the above vector components were computed without any
knowledge by the National Geodetic Survey regarding the equipment or
field operating procedures used.
If results did not meet the requirements, the following points are being established by rover. The new static data
steps could be taken to potentially improve the solution: could be processed through OPUS to potentially obtain
• Manual selection of different CORS stations for re- better results, so that coordinates from the RTK survey,
processing in OPUS. based on the original solution (that did not meet the require-
ments), could simply be adjusted once a better solution was
• A later submission to OPUS for more precise ephem- achieved. In addition, if the original OPUS solution meets
eris and orbit files. Level II requirements (and assurance of vertical peak-to-
peak less than or equal to 0.06 m), subsequent static data
• Re-occupation for additional observation sessions and could be collected during the RTK survey and processed to
re-submission to OPUS. improve the results from a Level II to a Level I single-base
• Manual editing of the observation file for re-processing static survey (by averaging the two high-quality solutions
L1 frequency (only) data through software. and readjusting the coordinates collected). This same process
of collecting static data during a RTK survey is also useful
One way to collect additional data on a benchmark that for checking the stability of benchmarks that are used several
did not meet the required quality, without delaying Level III years after establishment.
single-base RTK fieldwork, is to preliminarily use coordi- The NGS benchmark Santee Reset is used to provide an
nates obtained from the OPUS results that did not meet the assessment or check regarding the quality of single-base static
Level II single-base static requirements. These coordinates (OPUS) solutions. Static data is collected on the NGS bench-
would be used to establish the base station over the deficient mark Santee Reset and processed through OPUS to provide
benchmark during the first day of RTK surveying; however, comparison. The OPUS results of the benchmark Santee Reset
the base receiver would collect static data while objective are provided below.
Appendixes 1–4 85
Benchmark Santee Reset:
FILE: SANT0861.07O 000105396
NGS OPUS SOLUTION REPORT

========================
USER: [email protected] DATE: March 30, 2007

RINEX FILE: sant086o.07o TIME: 23:50:52 UTC
SOFTWARE: page5 0612.06 master12.pl START: 2007/03/27 14:34:00

EPHEMERIS: igr14202.eph [rapid] STOP: 2007/03/27 21:10:00
NAV FILE: brdc0860.07n OBS USED: 15889 / 15943 : 100%
ANT NAME: ASH701975.01AGP NONE # FIXED AMB: 64 / 65 : 98%
ARP HEIGHT: 1.440 OVERALL RMS: 0.017(m)
REF FRAME: NAD_83(CORS96)(EPOCH:2002.0000) ITRF00 (EPOCH:2007.2349)
X: -640922.424(m) 0.008(m) -640923.143(m) 0.008(m)

Y: -4642786.970(m) 0.068(m) -4642785.658(m) 0.068(m)
Z: 4312223.940(m) 0.017(m) 4312223.869(m) 0.017(m)
LAT: 42 48 29.46824 0.041(m) 42 48 29.49301 0.041(m)

E LON: 262 8 24.61640 0.011(m) 262 8 24.57716 0.011(m)
W LON: 97 51 35.38360 0.011(m) 97 51 35.42284 0.011(m)
EL HGT: 486.746(m) 0.055(m) 485.816(m) 0.055(m)
ORTHO HGT: 512.603(m) 0.061(m) [Geoid03 NAVD88]
Peak-to-peak indicator of solution uncertainty
UTM COORDINATES STATE PLANE COORDINATES

UTM (Zone 14) SPC (2600 NE )
Northing (Y) [meters] 4740144.852 332479.638
Easting (X) [meters] 593222.518 675021.208
Convergence [degrees] 0.77485458 1.41828486
Point Scale 0.99970691 0.99991768
Combined Factor 0.99963061 0.99984136
US NATIONAL GRID DESIGNATOR: 14TNN9322340145(NAD 83)

BASE STATIONS USED
PID DESIGNATION LATITUDE LONGITUDE DISTANCE(m)
AI1404 CLK1 CLARK 1 CORS ARP N445608.208 W0975738.437 236520.0
AI1569 NLGN NELIGH CORS ARP N421224.250 W0974743.043 67026.0
DF7469 SDSF EROS DATA CENTER CORS ARP N434401.727 W0963718.541 143796.2
NEAREST NGS PUBLISHED CONTROL POINT
NM1382 SANTEE RESET N424829.468 W0975135.383 0.0
This position and the above vector components were computed without any
knowledge by the National Geodetic Survey regarding the equipment or
field operating procedures used.
8002 The Opus solution for your submitted RINEX file appears to be
8002 quite close to an NGS published control point. This suggests that
8002 you may have set your GPS receiver up over an NGS control point.
8002 Furthermore, our files indicate that this control point has not
8002 been recovered in the last five years.
8002 If you did indeed recover an NGS control point, we would
8002 appreciate receiving this information through our web based
8002 Mark Recovery Form at
8002 http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/products_services.shtml#MarkRecoveryForm
The ending note to the OPUS solution stating that this Static Network Surveying—Datum
OPUS solution appeared to be quite close to a NGS published
Establishment for River Survey
control point was a good indication that the position checked
favorably against the published coordinates. In addition, The following is an example of a network survey that was
this note provided the website to report the recovery of a done to establish benchmarks at a study site on the Missouri
benchmark. When the coordinates determined through this River in Nebraska to conduct topographic single-base RTK
OPUS solution were compared to the published coordinates surveys. This network depicts an actual USGS data collection
(indicated below in the benchmark datasheet), the OPUS effort that did not meet all requirements of a Level II survey;
solution differed from the published coordinates as -0.00022 however, the requirements not met are discussed and sugges-
degrees latitude, +0.00001 degrees longitude, +0.007 meters tions for meeting those requirements are made.
in ellipsoid height, and +0.012 meters in orthometric height The goal of this network was to establish coordinates at
(same geoids used in this comparison). Overall, these results two newly constructed benchmarks (1013 and 1014) at a study
indicated that OPUS-derived solutions on this day, and in this site where single-base RTK surveys were to be performed
area, are giving accurate results. (fig. 4–3).
National Geodetic Survey, Retrieval Date = APRIL 16, 2011

NM1382 ***********************************************************************
NM1382 FBN - This is a Federal Base Network Control Station.
NM1382 DESIGNATION - SANTEE RESET
NM1382 PID - NM1382
NM1382 STATE/COUNTY- NE/KNOX
NM1382 USGS QUAD - SANTEE (1978)
NM1382
NM1382 *CURRENT SURVEY CONTROL
NM1382 __________________LATITUDE__________LONGITUDE________________________
NM1382* NAD 83(2007)- 42 48 29.46846(N) 097 51 35.38359(W) ADJUSTED
NM1382 _________________ELEVATION________________________________________
NM1382* NAVD 88 - 512.591 (meters) 1681.73 (feet) ADJUSTED

NM1382 ___________________________________________________________________
NM1382 EPOCH DATE - 2002.00
NM1382 X - -640,922.423 (meters) COMP
NM1382 Y - -4,642,786.961 (meters) COMP
NM1382 Z - 4,312,223.940 (meters) COMP
NM1382 LAPLACE CORR- 1.55 (seconds) DEFLEC09
NM1382 _________________ELLIPSOID HEIGHT________________________________________
NM1382 ELLIP HEIGHT- 486.739 (meters) (02/10/07) ADJUSTED

NM1382 GEOID HEIGHT- -25.86 (meters) GEOID09
NM1382 DYNAMIC HT - 512.419 (meters) 1681.16 (feet) COMP
After all benchmarks had been established and coor- New benchmarks were required to be established as a
dinates were determined through OPUS processing, Level result of the proximity and quality of existing benchmarks.
III RTK surveying began, utilizing two benchmarks in each Benchmark construction and location were derived from
survey (either as a localization point and a check, or as a base topographic and geologic assessments, landowner permission,
station location and a check). This example indicates the and field reconnaissance. Once established, 2 new benchmarks
importance of conducting single-base static OPUS methods were surveyed utilizing 3 NGS benchmarks (PID AE 9294,
on benchmarks so that continuity is assured among the local referred to in the survey as OMA1; PID MK 0365, referred to
benchmark network and any historic data collection derived as TEK; and PID MJ 0984, referred to as MJ84). The loca-
from that network. In terms of a localization, this quality tion of the project area was along the Missouri River at the
check can be performed to verify that the method used is Nebraska-Iowa boarder, slightly north of Omaha, Nebraska
meeting the needs of the survey. (fig. 4–3). To fulfill a Level II quality survey, at least one more
Appendixes 1–4 87
96°30’ 96°20’ 96°10’ 96°00’
MINNESOTA
SOUTH DAKOTA
MK 0365 AE 9294
(TEK) (OMA1)
NEBRASKA Map IOWA
area
1014
1013
41º40’
KANSAS MISSOURI
MJ 0984
(MJ84)
41º30’
41º20’
Base from ESRI ArcGIS World Street Map base layer, 2011 0 4 8 16 KILOMETERS
Mercator Auxiliary Sphere projection
Horizontal coordinate information referenced to the
World Geodetic System of 1984 (WGS 84) 0 4 8 16 MILES
EXPLANATION
National Geodetic Survey (NGS) benchmarks (vertical order II)
1014 Objective points with identifier established using network
Figure 4–3. Objective points established at locations 1013 and 1014 using a static network survey that includes controlling
National Geodetic Survey (NGS) benchmarks.
Figure 4–3. Objective points established at locations 1013 and 1014 using a static network survey that includes controlling National Geodetic Survey
(NGS) benchmarks.
NGS benchmark should have been included in this network if statistical tests pass or fail. The desired accuracy for this net-
for elevation control, and in most effective practice, a fifth work survey was set to: Horizontal 0.02 m + 1 ppm and Verti-
benchmark should have been included to perform a qual- cal 0.04 m + 2 ppm. When data were brought into the process-
ity check. The network design of this survey was simple: ing software, the receiver antenna type was defined and the
observations occurred at each NGS control benchmark while receiver antenna height entered correctly (it is most effective
simultaneously conducting observations on the newly estab- to enter vertical height, but if a non-fixed height tripod is used,
lished benchmarks. The time span of each observation can be some software packages allow the user to define the antenna
seen in the top left block in the processing software (fig. 4–4). height as a slant height, as illustrated in appendix 2, and noted
The time of data collection at benchmark TEK did not meet as a menu item under “Height Type” in fig. 4–4).
the 4-hour observation requirement; however, the other two The next step in processing the static network was to
benchmarks exceeded or nearly met the requirements. The process all baselines. Ten baselines were processed in this
observation time at both newly established benchmarks Missouri River network. The second step offered in most
exceeded the 1-hour minimum requirement; however, no processing software is blunder detection, which is used
objective point or baseline was double occupied to meet the to detect whether or not a data set does not fit well with
re-observation requirements. The spacing of this network was the other data, possibly because the wrong name, receiver
adequate for a Level II network survey, which requires objec- antenna height, or receiver antenna type has been entered.
tive point and control benchmark spacing to be located within No blunders were detected within the Missouri River net-
25 km of each other. In addition, Level II spacing was satisfied work (fig. 4–5). If blunders were detected, an investigation
because the control benchmarks were within 60 km of each into the cause and correction of the problem site should have
other (fig. 4–3). been done according to guidance given for each process-
Mission planning was undertaken as observation days ing software. Next, processed baselines were reviewed for
were evaluated for satellite availability, and PDOP and nearby quality, including re-observed baselines, and baselines of
CORS data were evaluated for stability and data availability. poor quality were either evaluated to determine and correct
The field campaign involved the following assurances: the cause of the poor results or were not used in the network
• Benchmark evaluation, reconnaissance, field prepara- adjustment. The quality of 10 baselines processed in the Mis-
tion, and data storage. souri River network were described in terms of the change
in horizontal, vertical, and up position (delta x, y, z) of the
• Bubble check and calibration of base fixed-height developed baseline between 2 points, the error reflecting the
tripod and rover bipod. change in x, y, and z positions at 2 sigma (95-percent confi-
dence), and determination of the baseline length (fig. 4–6).
• Base fixed-height or dual-clamped tripod stabilized by At this point in a network adjustment, no observations were
chains or sandbags. held to a fixed position, and as a result, all observations (x, y,
and z positions) could be adjusted slightly.
• Recovery, establishment, and observation forms used to In the Missouri River network example, the poorest
document existing or established benchmarks (appen- quality baseline was MJ84 to TEK based on the 95-percent
dixes 1 and 2). error estimate (fig. 4–6). This baseline was de-selected, and
During data collection, GNSS receivers were set up on the network was evaluated to ensure connectivity among all
fixed-height tripods. Detailed notes were taken by the field objective points and benchmarks. Also, re-observed baselines
crew, including information required in appendixes 1 and 2. were reviewed at this time. If re-observed baselines indicated
To re-observe objective points (the newly established bench- similar results, leaving both in the network would not have
marks), the receivers collecting data could have been stopped been a problem; however, if they did not have similar results,
for a short time, the tripods repositioned over the benchmarks, the baseline reflecting the poorest quality (greatest 95-percent
and powered up again to continue collecting data as a new error estimate) should have been removed. From 10 initial
observation; although the time required to collect 2 short static baselines evaluated in this network, 6 baselines were selected
sessions at each objective point would be similar to collecting to be used for minimally and fully constrained adjustments.
1 longer static session, 2 short sessions would aid in detecting Note that some network processing guidance describes com-
errors when processing the network. pleting network adjustments using only independent baselines
Once the field data collection was completed, process- (or in simple terms only processing 2 sides of each triangle in
ing began by checking each data set. Data were converted to the network because the third side is dependent on the results
RINEX format for easy review in a text editor software (Note- of the first 2). Through practice it has been indicated that pro-
Pad, WordPad, or TextPad) or just loaded into a processing cessing a network using all baselines (opposed to independent
software. Before entering data files into a processing software, baselines) has a negligible effect on the final results, so the
a new project was created. Settings such as the coordinate time required to select the independent baseline may not be
system, measurement units, and other project details were needed; however, the surveyor should use judgment regard-
entered. In addition, most processing software will allow a ing baseline selection and guidance given for the processing
desired accuracy that will be used by the software to determine software used.
Appendixes 1–4 89
8:20 16:34 19:35
TEK OMA1
EXPLANATION
[NGS, National Geodetic Survey] 1013
Observation times for control and objective points 1014
Objective point 1013

Objective point 1014 EXPLANATION
NGS benchmark OMA1
Objective points established using network
NGS benchmark TEK
NGS benchmark MJ84 Recovered and trusted NGS benchmarks
08:20 Time
(vertical order II) MJ84
EXPLANATION
Site ID Objective or control points (NGS benchmarks) used in the network for developed baseline
Antenna Height Distance from the benchmark to the antenna reference point (ARP)
Height Type Vertical or slant height description from the benchmark to the ARP
Antenna Type Identification of the receiver antenna brand and model
Start Time Beginning time of the global positioning system (GPS) observation
End Time Ending time of the GPS observation
File Name Naming convention of the observation file
Obs. Type: Observation type; static or kinematic observation
Figure 4–4. Adjustment software depicting Global Navigation Satellite System receiver data file information and location; including
antenna
Figure 4–4. type and height,
Adjustment and observation
software times.
depicting Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) receiver data file information and location; including
antenna type and height, and observation times.
Ten baselines used to process for the adjustment
Initial processing recovers no blunders
Software program used for the adjustment
five benchmarks included for the adjustment

six baselines included for the adjustment
Initial constraining benchmark (control) OMA1

used for the adjustment
OMA1
Tests conducted at a confidence level of 95% or 2 sigma

Equations used in the adjustment
Number of unknown values to be resolved during adjustment
Number of values (n-1) that are free to vary in the final calculation
Chi-squared test is a statistical hypothesis test used to

test the difference between observed and expected
occurrences or conditions. In this case the test is used
to determine the hypothesis that the variance of unit
weight is statistically equivalent to one, which indicates
uncertainty estimates are similar to the change experienced
after the adjustment. For this adjustment, the Chi-square test
has failed to support the statistical hypothesis.
The lower and upper limit of the Chi-square test.
The Chi-square resultant indicates a rejection

of the hypothesis that the uncertainty estimates
Statistical measures that indicate the degree in which uncertainties are similar to the change experienced after the
assigned to the observations agree with the adjusted observations. adjustment.
Uncertainties less than one in this case indicate uncertainty estimates
are much higher than the change experienced after the adjustment.
If the change after the adjustment is much different than the uncertainty
estimates of the observation, then a problem with the network may exist.
A statistical hypothesis test used to determine whether or not a residual from an observation
would represent a blunder. A critical value is computed and used to determine the boundary
between the normalized residual and the expected limit for the residual. This value is used to
identify whether the normalized residual is less than the expected limit for the residual
(a passing of the Tau test) or is greater than the expected limit (a failing of the Tau test).
Figure 4–5.
Figure Networkadjustment
4–5. Network adjustmentoutput
outputrepresenting
representinginitial
initialprocessing
processingsteps
stepsand
anda aminimally
minimallyconstrained
constrainedadjustment
adjustmentofofthe
the Missouri
River network.
Missouri River network.
Appendixes 1–4 91
08:20 16:34 17:55 19:35 21:08

TEK OMA1
EXPLANATION
1013
[NGS, National Geodetic Survey]
1014
Observation times for control and objective points EXPLANATION
Objective point 1013 Vertical error as illustrated for the
Objective point 1014 developed baseline
NGS benchmark OMA1 Horizontal error as illustrated for the
NGS benchmark TEK developed baseline
NGS benchmark MJ84 Objective points established using network
08:20 Time Recovered and trusted National Geodetic Survey MJ84
(NGS) benchmarks (vertical order II)
Change in the horizontalOMA1

position for the developed baseline
- 1014
EXPLANATION
From - To Objective or control points (NGS benchmarks) used in the network for developed baseline
OMA1 - 1014 Grey color denotes deselected baseline
Observed Date and time of observation
Delta x Change in the horizontal position, in meters, for the developed baseline
Delta y Change in the vertical position, in meters, for the developed baseline
Delta z Change in the height or “up” position, in meters, for the developed baseline
95% Err. 95 percent error; error, in meters, (at 2 sigma or 95 percent confidence) representing
the developed baseline as a “best fit” for the network
Length Baseline length, in meters
Figure 4–6.4–6.Adjustment
Figure Adjustmentsoftware
software package depictingprocessed
package depicting processedand
anddeselected
deselected baselines
baselines in the
in the Missouri
Missouri River
River network.
network.
After all baselines were evaluated (and reprocessed if were adjusted with small standard residuals (fig. 4–8). The
changes were made), the coordinates for all known bench- standard residual is a small correction that is applied to the
marks in the network should be entered regardless of whether observation to obtain the best fit of all observations.
or not the benchmark will be used as control when processing Processing results from network adjustments involves
or as a quality check. The NGS datasheets for three bench- statistical tests that provide an indication of the quality of the
marks included in the Missouri River network were down- network solution.
loaded from the NGS website and coordinates were entered A successful least squares adjustment is one where
into the software program. For the minimally constrained observations are changed as little as possible, and the amount
adjustment, only one benchmark was held as a fixed control of change to any one observation is within expected levels
[note selection OMA1 held as a fixed position as indicated by or about the same magnitude as the uncertainty in the obser-
“Hor/Ver” in the “Fixed” column (fig. 4–7)]. vations (Ashtech Precision Products, 2001). The relation
The results from the minimally constrained adjustment between uncertainties assigned with observations and the
indicated that the first step this software took in adjusting magnitude of change in the adjustment is monitored by the
a network was to check network connectivity (fig. 4–5). variance of unit weight and the standard error of unit weight.
The connectivity test passed, identifying 5 benchmarks and The standard error of unit weight is the square root of the vari-
6 baselines to be included in the adjustment. If the test did not ance of unit weight. Both of these statistical measures indicate
pass, the user would have to re-evaluate which baselines were the degree in which uncertainties assigned to the observations
selected, and potentially re-adjust to ensure all benchmarks agree with the adjusted observations.
were connected among baselines chosen. The results from the If the uncertainty estimate assigned with the observa-
minimally constrained adjustment indicated that all baselines tion is similar to the change of each observation during the
8:20 16:34 19:35
TEK OMA1
EXPLANATION
1013
EXPLANATION
developed baseline
NGS benchmark OMA1
Horizontal error as illustrated for the
NGS benchmark TEK developed baseline
08:20 Time MJ84
Recovered and trusted NGS benchmarks
(vertical order II)
EXPLANATION
Site ID Control points (NGS benchmarks) used in the network
Latitude Horizontal position of the control point (NGS benchmark)
Longitude Vertical position of the control point (NGS benchmark)
95% Err. 95 percent error; error, in meters, (at 2 sigma or 95 percent confidence)
representing the developed baseline as a “best fit” for the network
Ortho. Ht. Orthometric height; elevation of the control point (NGS benchmark)
Type Represented position of the benchmark: horizontal, vertical or both
Fixed Identification of constrained control point (NGS benchmark)
Figure 4–7. Adjustment software depicting coordinates entered for National Geodetic Survey (NGS) benchmarks and one benchmark
(OMA 1) held as fixed (horizontally and vertically) for the minimally constrained adjustment.
Figure 4–7. Adjustment software depicting coordinates entered for National Geodetic Survey (NGS) benchmarks and one benchmark (OMA 1)
held as fixed (horizontally and vertically) for the minimally constrained adjustment.
08:20 16:34 17:55 19:35 21:08
TEK OMA1
EXPLANATION 1013
EXPLANATION 1014
Observation times for control and objective points
developed baseline
Horizontal error as illustrated for the
NGS benchmark OMA1 developed baseline
NGS benchmark TEK
NGS benchmark MJ84 global positioning system (GPS)
08:20 Time Recovered and trusted National Geodetic Survey (NGS) MJ84
benchmarks (vertical order II)
Change in the horizontalOMA1

position for the developed baseline
- 1014
LENGTH:
EXPLANATION
From -To Objective or control points (NGS benchmarks) used in the network for developed baseline
Observed Date and time of observation
Tau Test Determines if a standard residual is unexpectantly large. “Fail” appears if the test did not pass. Blank represents the test passing
Delta X Change in the horizontal position, in meters, for the developed baseline
Delta Y Change in the vertical position, in meters, for the developed baseline
Delta Z
Appendixes 1–4 93
Change in the height or “up” position, in meters, for the developed baseline
Std. Res. Standard residual; differences between the delta x, y, and z components and length of the observed baseline and adjusted baseline
Length Baseline length, in meters
Figure 4–8. Adjustment software package depicting results of the minimally constrained network adjustment.
Figure 4–8. Adjustment software package depicting results of the minimally constrained network adjustment.
adjustment, then the variance of unit weight will be approxi- and additional observations are needed; however, if a large
mately one. This essentially indicates how well the data fit standard residual is independent of the adjustment, then an
the adjusted network. If the uncertainty estimates are much assessment of other contributors, such as long baselines (that
higher than the change experienced after the adjustment, then contribute to the residual), may be deemed inconsequential
the values will be less than 1, and if the uncertainty estimates and stand as correct, and the calculated position held as true.
are too low as compared to the change after the adjustment, Most software programs provide a statistical test, such as
then the values will be greater than 1. If the change after the the Tau test, to determine if a standard residual is unexpectedly
adjustment is quite different than the uncertainty estimates of large. The observations in the Missouri River network passed
the observation, then a problem with the network may exist, the Tau test (fig. 4–8). If an observation had large standard
or uncertainty estimates may not be realistic. Because there residuals and did not pass the Tau test, the observation should
are many factors affecting the uncertainty in each observation, be examined for errors and corrected (receiver antenna height
uncertainty estimates are not easy to determine. Uncertainty and type, removal of individual satellites, and the time span of
estimates can be derived from past experience of resultant the observation to be adjusted); however, after verification that
accuracies in network adjustments as well as the base error of the receiver antenna type and height were entered correctly,
the equipment manufacture plus an allowable part-per-million and assurance that errors resulting from all other steps of the
(Brinker and Minnick, 1995). Many statistics completed in adjustment were acceptable, then the position may be accept-
a least squares adjustment utilize uncertainty estimates, and able. The Tau test provides an indicator for blunders, and it
most adjustment programs use the variance and standard error should be understood that a blunder in one observation usually
of unit weight to adjust all other statistics; however, most pro- affects residuals in other observations. That is why it is impor-
cessing software, including Ashtech Solutions, automatically tant to examine all observations closely— because an indi-
compensates for unrealistic error estimates, so that problems cated Tau test failure among one pair (“From-To”, fig. 4–8)
that potentially arise from over- or under-estimated uncertainty of observations does not necessarily preclude blunders from
are often non-existent. The Chi-squared test is a statistical occurring in other observations.
hypothesis test used to test the difference between observed Once all blunders or low quality vectors have been
and expected occurrences or outcomes. The test is used by removed from the minimally constrained adjustment, the fit
Ashtech Solutions software to determine the hypothesis that of control points can be examined. Two NGS benchmarks
the variance of unit weight is statistically equivalent to one, not held fixed (TEK and MJ84) in the minimally constrained
which indicates uncertainty estimates are similar to the change adjustment were shifted slightly from their observed posi-
experienced after the adjustment. tions to fit the minimally constrained network. Comparing
The variance of unit weight and the standard error for these adjusted coordinates to the published coordinates of
the minimally constrained adjustment of the Missouri River the benchmarks can help determine if an observation at one
network were both substantially less than one, as indicated by of the benchmarks is of poor quality or if it simply does not
the failed Chi-squared test (fig. 4–5); however, because the fit well with the other benchmarks and should not be used as
processing software automatically compensates for observa- control in the network. In the Missouri River network, NGS
tion uncertainties that are too high or too low, the passing or benchmark TEK had the largest misclosure error (difference
failure of the Chi-squared test has no true bearing on the qual- between the observed/shifted coordinates to published coordi-
ity of the adjustment (Ashtech Precision Products, 2001). nates) but did pass the quality assurance (QA) test according
The least squares adjustment applies small corrections to to the specifications given for this project (fig. 4–9).
each observation until the network “fits” together. The solution Finally, the fully constrained network adjustment can be
that fits most optimally is the one that produces the smallest performed once all quality checks meet the project require-
corrections to all observations. These small corrections are ments and all blunders or poor observations have been
termed standard residuals. Small standard residuals usually removed. Before running the adjustment, the other NGS
account for random error in each observation, whereas large benchmarks need to be set as fixed control in the network [in
standard residuals typically represent a blunder in the dataset. this case there are only 2 other benchmarks (TEK and MJ84),
The complicating factor in assessing standard residuals is that but in a typical Level II survey, there should be at least 3
residuals (and random error) increase with increasing base- more elevation control points (for a total of 4) to set as fixed].
line length. Review of the residuals from the Missouri River After the fully constrained network has been adjusted, the
minimally constrained network adjustment indicated that same quality-control statistics must be evaluated to determine
all residuals are small (fig. 4–8). The magnitude of standard if the final adjustment meets the project requirements. The
residuals alone does not provide a full qualitative assessment control tie will only show the control points that were not
of the adjusted observations. If a network adjustment produces held fixed in the network, but will provide a sense of the final
a large standard residual, there are many potential causes adjustment quality by comparing shifted positions to pub-
that should be evaluated to determine if the large residual is lished positions. In addition, the uncertainty of each adjusted
acceptable. If a large standard residual results from observa- coordinate is described by the difference in delta x, y, and z
tion uncertainties because of poor satellite coverage and short at the 95-percent confidence level (fig. 4–10). In the Missouri
observation times, then large residuals may not be acceptable River network, the two newly established benchmarks had an
08:20 16:34 17:55 19:35 21:08
TEK OMA1
EXPLANATION
1014
NGS benchmark OMA1
NGS benchmark TEK EXPLANATION
NGS benchmark MJ84 Quality assurance baseline for held
control TEK and MJ84
08:20 Time
Recovered and trusted National Geodetic Survey (NGS)

benchmarks (vertical order II) MJ84
EXPLANATION
Site ID Control points (NGS benchmarks) used in the network for developed baseline
QA Quality assurance test based on project specifications. “Fail” appears if the test did not pass. Blank represents the test passing
Easting Miscl. Easting misclosure; numerical difference, in meters, between observed and shifted easting coordinate values
Northing Miscl. Northing misclosure; numerical difference, in meters, between observed and shifted northing coordinate values
Appendixes 1–4 95
Elev. miscl. Elevation misclosure; numerical difference, in meters, between observed and shifted elevation coordinate values
Horz. Miscl. Horizontal misclosure; numerical difference, in meters, between observed and shifted horizontal distance values
Figure 4–9. Adjustment software depicting control tie information and quality-assurance test from the minimally constrained Missouri River network adjustment.
Figure 4–9. Adjustment software depicting control tie information and quality assurance test from the minimally constrained Missouri River network adjustment.
08:20 16:34 17:55 19:35 21:08
TEK OMA1
EXPLANATION 1013
1014
Observation times for control and objective points
NGS benchmark OMA1
NGS benchmark TEK EXPLANATION

08:20 Time
Recovered and trusted National Geodetic Survey (NGS) MJ84
benchmarks (vertical order II)
EXPLANATION
Site ID Control points (NGS benchmarks) used in the network
STATUS Status of the network adjustment
Latitude Horizontal position of the control point (NGS benchmark)
Longitude Vertical position of the control point (NGS benchmark)
95% Err. 95 percent error; error, in meters, (at 2 sigma or 95 percent confidence)
representing the developed baseline as a “best fit” for the network
Ortho. Ht. Orthometric height; elevation of the control point (NGS benchmark)
Fixed Identification of constrained control point (NGS benchmark)
Figure 4–10. Adjustment software depicting coordinates for the newly established benchmarks resulting from the Missouri River final network adjustment.
Figure 4–10. Adjustment software depicting coordinates for the newly established benchmarks resulting from the Missouri River final network adjustment.
Appendixes 1–4 97
elevation uncertainty of 4.4 cm at the 95-percent confidence together into one large network. The interlinking of these
level; however, without any redundant observations (repeat sessions through network adjustments increases accuracy
vectors) and without any NGS benchmarks to be used at qual- (Schenenwerk, 2011).
ity checks, the real quality of this network is challenging to As an example of using OPUS-Projects, consider a
assess. terrestrial-based laser scan that was performed in southwestern
Other blunder detection and network quality tools not Missouri. The scan included a local railroad bridge requiring a
discussed in this example include loop closure analysis and couple of control points to geo-rectify the scan with horizontal
repeat vector analysis. These are common utilities available and vertical assurance. In addition, datum needed to be estab-
within most software. During a loop closure analysis, each lished at two streamgages in the area.
possible loop will be processed within the network to deter- Mission planning was undertaken as observation days
mine a closure error. This information can be reviewed to help were evaluated for satellite availability, and PDOP and nearby
locate problem vectors and observations. Also, most software CORS data were evaluated for stability and data availability.
calculates repeat vector differences, which can be reviewed to The field campaign involved the following assurances:
determine if the repeat vectors show consistency, or whether • Benchmark evaluation, reconnaissance, field prepara-
the quality of each vector needs to be examined or potentially tion, and data storage.
removed from the network.
The most important step in processing a static survey • Bubble check and calibration of base fixed-height
network is to understand the software being used and the tripod.
quality-control statistics. In summary, the quality of the
network adjustment can be fully understood through different • Base fixed-height tripod or dual-clamped tripod stabi-
quality checks run by the software and through observations of lized by chains or sandbags.
benchmarks that are not used as control in the network.
• Recovery, establishment, and observation forms used to
document existing or established benchmarks (appen-
Static Network Surveying—Using OPUS- dixes 1 and 2).
Projects for Datum Establishment for Terrestrial Level II criteria were applied to a small static network
Imaging and Streamgages survey approach for the surrounding area. Initially, benchmarks
1760, 2216, 2385, and 4430 were selected as exterior points
As referred to earlier in the “Single-Base: Online Posi- to be used within the network. These benchmarks were within
tioning User Service (OPUS)” section, OPUS-Projects is a 60 km of each other and the interior objective points were
web-based utility that improves efficiency and reduces errors within 25 km of the surrounding benchmarks and neighboring
in network processing. OPUS-Projects begins with the cre- objective points. After creating the project using OPUS-Proj-
ation of a project, then proceeds to data set processing using ects, observation metadata were uploaded into the project using
OPUS-S, uploads the data to the project, calculates network an editable mock-up of the datasheets for each mark, which is
session solutions and ultimately a network adjustment. Once shown in figures 4–11 and 4–12. The datasheet mimics similar
the data have been adjusted and reviewed, the data and results information recovered from the NGS IDB and includes obser-
of the project have the option of being published. vation files as well as GNSS receiver model and antenna infor-
Static network processing in OPUS-Projects differs from mation, firmware, and antenna height. After the data had been
typical static network processing because of a few distinct uploaded, OPUS-Projects populated a list of available CORS
steps. OPUS-Projects begins with high-quality OPUS-S stations to integrate into the network and segregate sessions,
solutions. From the data used in these OPUS-S solutions, in this example day 1 (2012-026-A) and day 2 (2012-027-A)
OPUS-Projects creates sessions from each group of data that (fig. 4–13). The developed network in figure 4–13 incorporated
spans similar time. Each session is processed individually. In a CORS station that exceeded baseline lengths required for the
session processing, the user selects which marks and baselines Level II survey; however, removing exterior CORS and reduc-
to process and which ones to constrain horizontally, vertically, ing baseline lengths to the originally prescribed Level II criteria
or three dimensionally (3D). The constraints set in the session allowed only one CORS station to be utilized among the exte-
solutions do not affect the final network adjustment. Results rior benchmarks and interior objective points. For this example,
of the session solutions can be evaluated to detect poor quality however, exterior CORS (exceeding the baseline length of the
data by reviewing the statistical results of the solution and Level II criteria) were used to demonstrate the effectiveness of
by comparing the results from each session. Several different utilizing additional CORS stations.
solutions can be created for each session, including differ- Session processing was performed for both days (day 1
ent marks, baselines, and constraints so that the most effec- and day 2). The session processing dialog (fig. 4–14) ensured
tive solution can be determined. The session-processing step all CORS stations were constrained as horizontal and vertical
acts as blunder detection such that once acceptable solutions (3D). Recall that all marks (benchmarks and objective points)
have been located for all sessions, the session solutions can were processed through OPUS-S initially and values from those
be merged with new constraints chosen to adjust all marks solutions were used as initial coordinates for the projects marks.
Objective point observation day 1

(January 26, 2012)
Modified from OPUS-projects

Objective point observation day 2 Global Navigation Integrated Antenna Reference
(January 27, 2012) Satellite System antenna Point (ARP)
(GNSS) model antenna and receiver height and receiver
and receiver firmware
Figure 4–11. An editable mock-up survey datasheet within the Online Position User Service (OPUS) Projects web-based utility
identifying an objective point established at a local streamgage.
Figure 4–11. An editable mock-up survey datasheet within the Online Position User Service (OPUS) projects web-based utlility identifying
Appendixes 1–4 99
Objective point observation day 1

(January 26, 2012)
Modified from OPUS-projects

Objective point observation day 2 Global Navigation Integrated Antenna Reference
(January 27, 2012) Satellite System antenna Point (ARP)
(GNSS) model antenna and receiver height and receiver
and receiver firmware
Figure 4–12. An editable mock-up survey datasheet within the Online Position User Service (OPUS) Projects web-based utility
identifying an objective point established as a ground control point for a terrestrial laser scan.
Figure 4–12. An editable mock-up survey datasheet within the Online Position User Service (OPUS) projects web-based utlility identifying an
objective point established as a ground control point for a terrestrial laser scan.
Benchmarks and objective

points used within the
static network survey
Continually Operating
Reference Stations (CORS)
used within the static
network survey
0 10 KILOMETER Modified from OPUS projects
0 10 MILE
Benchmarks and objective points used in day 1 and day 2.

Sessions and solutions available
Figure
Figure4–13. Static
4–13. Static survey
survey network
network developed
developed within
within Online
Online Position
Position UsersUsers Service
Service (OPUS)
(OPUS) projects
projects web-based
web-based utility. utility.
Appendixes 1–4 101
Solution name: ‘A’ in this example

represents day 1 observations
Online Position User Service (OPUS) solution values
Solution span: Time span of the data used as initial coordinates for the project’s marks
excluding the Continuously Operating
Reference Station (CORS)
Benchmarks and objective points used in

session processing. A check in the
box identifying a “HUB” indicates the Reference frame used
marks are preferentially selected for to process initial Online
baselines (as opposed to those marks Position User Service
that are not identified as a “HUB,” which (OPUS) solutions
might only be included in only one or
two baselines)
Continually Operating Reference Station

(CORS) used in session processing and
constrained to a three-dimensional (3D) Reference frame used to
position (both horizontal and vertical) process Continuously
Operating Reference
Station (CORS)
Heights can either be constrained by
the ellipsoid or orthometric heights
generated by the current 2009 Geoid National Spatial Reference System Reference Frame Accepted coordinates
2009 Geoid Model are used from
The satellite system in which processing data originate Continually Operating
Reference Station
Elevation mask that omits satellites whose elevations (CORS)
are below this limit
Modified from OPUS projects

Constraint weight based on the uncertainty associated with the coordinate where
“loose” implies 1 meter, “normal” implies 1 centimeter, and “tight” implies 0.1 millimeter.
Constraints applied in the session solution do not propagate to the network adjustment.
Constraints are applied such that they limit the estimated change of the unknown (predicted)
coordinate value by the magnitude of the weight.
Figure 4–14. Online Position User Service (OPUS) projects session processing of a network of Global Navigation Satellite System
(GNSS)
Figure observations.
4–14. Online Position User Service (OPUS) projects session processing of a network of Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS)
observations.
Hubs were designated among all marks and CORS stations benchmarks 1760, 2216, 2385, and 4430 that were used as
such that these would be preferentially selected for baseline constraints, were tabulated as well as a check on benchmark
development. All processing preferences, such as the output ‘a001’ (table 4–2). Residual values resulting from compar-
reference frame and geoid model, the elevation mask or cut ing known and final adjusted values were within 0.03 m in
off angle, and the weighted constraint criteria were selected to this example. Also, the occupation time among objective
perform processing of a solution (fig. 4–14). points was a minimum of 2.5 hours (as opposed to the 1-hour
Once session solutions had been performed and opti- minimum requirement within the Level II criteria). Although
mized to produce the most effective session result, both ses- the baseline lengths of the Level II criteria were exceeded
sions (day 1 and day 2) were combined into an adjustment. In when choosing to include additional exterior CORS, it would
this example, all benchmarks were constrained to the vertical be feasible to represent the survey as Level II quality (despite
only, ensuring the orthometric derived height (Geoid09) had baseline exceedence) based on additional occupation time for
been selected and the known elevations for each benchmark objective points, and the residuals reflected by the final adjust-
entered (fig. 4–15). Also, CORS were again (similar to ses- ment results of both session solutions (table 4–2).
sion processing) constrained horizontally and vertically (3D) Greater detail regarding session processing, adjustments,
and to the orthometric height (Geoid09). Processing prefer- and evaluation of results can be obtained from training specific
ences are similar to session procession regarding the output to OPUS-Projects. As referred to in the “Single-Base: Online
reference frame, geoid model (2009), and constraint weights Positioning User Service (OPUS)” section, OPUS-Projects
(fig. 4–15). is currently (2012) in beta release and training is offered to
Session processing and adjustment results are avail- ensure successful use of OPUS-Projects, as well as being
able by email from OPUS. For this example, residuals of authorized for project creation and management.
Name entered for

performed adjustment
Adjusment conducted for day 1 observations Day 2 obsevations are also available for adjustment
Benchmarks and objective

points used in the adjustment
Reference frame used
to process initial Online
Benchmarks constrained vertical
Position User Service
only with entered known values
(OPUS) solutions
from National Geodetic Survey
datasheet
Continually Operating
Reference Station (CORS) Reference frame used
used in the adjustment and to process Continuously
constrained to the orthometric Operating Reference
height produced by the most Station
current geoid (GEOID09) (CORS)
National Spatial Reference System Reference Frame

2009 Geoid Model
Modified from OPUS projects

Constraint weight based on the uncertainty associated with the coordinate where
“loose” implies 1 meter, “normal” implies 1 centimeter, and “tight” implies 0.1 millimeter.
Constraints applied in the session solution do not propagate to the network adjustment.
Constraints are applied such that they limit the estimated change of the unknown (predicted)
coordinate value by the magnitude of the weight
Figure 4–15. Adjustment performed within the Online Position User Service (OPUS) Projects web-based utility.
Table 4–2. Static network survey uncertainty analysis using Online Position User Service (OPUS) projects
Figure 4–15. Adjustment performed within the Online Position User Service (OPUS) projects web-based utility.
results.
[m, meter; NAVD 88, North American Vertical Datum of 1988; --, no observation or no benchmark; NA, not applicable; red,
vertically constrained marks during adjustment; a001, local city utility benchmark that was not constrained, but used as a check]
Processing session Adjustment Benchmarks

Residual
Day 1 Day 2 2d order NAVD 88
Mark Elevation, elevation,
elevation, elevation, elevation,
m m
m m m
0632 360.991 360.99 361.000 -- NA
0642 363.530 363.52 363.530 -- NA
1760 390.875 390.91 390.889 390.910 -0.021
2216 440.781 440.79 440.784 440.802 -0.018
2385 313.346 313.37 313.367 313.396 -0.029
2608 370.475 -- 370.494 -- NA
4430 418.712 418.73 418.726 418.745 -0.019
6205 344.791 -- 344.816 -- NA
a001 -- 373.26 373.264 373.266 -0.002
Appendixes 1–4 103
Publishing support provided by:

Rolla Publishing Service Center
For more information concerning this publication, contact:

Chief, USGS Office of Surface Water
12201 Sunrise Valley Drive
Reston, VA 20192
(703) 648–5301
Or visit the Office of Surface Water Web site at:

http://water.usgs.gov/osw/
Back cover. Datum establishment for high-water mark surveys post Hurricane Irene at the Neuse River in New Bern, North Carolina.
Photograph by Brian Pointer, 2011, USGS.
Rydlund and Densmore— Methods of Practice and Guidelines for Using Survey-Grade GNSS to Establish Vertical Datum in the USGS—T & M 11–D1
ISBN 978-1-4113-3500-4
Printed on recycled paper

tm11 D1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

tm11 D1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

tm11 D1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Methods of Practice and Guidelines for Using Survey-Grade

Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) to Establish

Techniques and Methods 11–D1

U.S. Department of the Interior

By Paul H. Rydlund, Jr., and Brenda K. Densmore

Techniques and Methods 11–D1

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2012

8. Photographs showing fixed-height and adjustable fixed-height center pole tripod

Conversion Factors and Datums

Abbreviations and Acronyms

LiDAR Light Detection and Ranging

RTCM Radio Technical Commission for Maritime Services

By Paul H. Rydlund, Jr., and Brenda K. Densmore

Abstract uncertainties can be misleading. GNSS users can benefit from

Separation distance positive away from the earth

Figure 1. Relation between the ellipsoid, geoid, and orthometric heights.

Figure 1. Relation between the ellipsoid and geoid.

Number of Average Standard Number of Average Standard

Figure 2. Tribrachs used

to GNSS surveys, defined as the change in speed in which

enhancements (L1C and L2C with optimized signal design) to

The required wireless communication can be a source

• Assessment of radio range as comparing flat or “Rubber duck”

• Proximity of radio towers or airports as other

• “Mobile whip” antennas for RTK surveying

• Upper and lower frequency range limits of the

• Upper and lower elements of the whip antenna

• Elevate antenna as high as possible (usually with

RTK bridge (fig. 6) that can be used to interface to the internet

Figure 7. Data collectors used for Global

Fixed-height center pole tripod.

Adjustment with legs

Modified from Henning, 2010

Modified from Henning, 2010

5. Proceed with the circular level vial adjustment

Figure 9. Circular level vial adjustment on fixed-height center poles.—Continued

Monumented benchmark in top of concrete structure.

Example of U.S. Geological Survey benchmark

Standard metal tablet

Note: Centerpunch useful for

Non-monumented sawed groove benchmark in iron

Modified from Kenney, 2010

Monumented Feno Markers GNSS Equipment Summary and Checklist

Mission Planning and Error Sources

0.49 0.82 8.20

3.28 Line of equal depth, in feet, of possible

the day, geographic location, and season (Henning, 2010).

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration–National Weather Service

Visible sky with 10–15 degree

Ionosphere Troposphere Earth

Satellite signal blocked by elevation mask

Poor vertical dilution of precision (VDOP) Satellite

Figure 15. Horizontal and vertical relation to quality dilution of precision.

Satellite signal path

Figure 16. Multipath development from illustrated objects.

Assembling and powering up GNSS equipment are not

Error source Planning Mitigation