R: [teqc] latest development version of teqc on-line (16 Mar 2009)

Lou Estey lou at unavco.org
Wed Mar 18 11:56:41 MDT 2009


> The seg fault using the original nav file, mate0750.09n, must be occuring
> in the gap code and is expecting a nav message for some SV which has been
> eliminated.

Ok, easily fixed.  Doing a qc with the original nav file vs. the combined
nav file shows only a minor difference:

original nav:
Possible obs >  10.0 deg:  24558
...
       first epoch    last epoch    hrs   dt  #expt  #have   %   mp1   mp2 o/slps
SUM 09  3 16 00:00 09  3 16 23:59 23.98  30  24558  24238  99  0.24  0.27    898

combined nav:
Possible obs >  10.0 deg:  24557
...
       first epoch    last epoch    hrs   dt  #expt  #have   %   mp1   mp2 o/slps
SUM 09  3 16 00:00 09  3 16 23:59 23.98  30  24557  24238  99  0.24  0.27    898

and this difference of 1 expected observation is just due to the minor
differences in the orbits and computed position between the two runs --
well within the noise for the qc.

> Besides fixing that problem, I suppose this also calls into question the
> current constraint on eliminating a GPS nav message.  The code (for quite
> a while now) has been rejecting any GPS nav message where ToE - ToW is
> outside of -130 minutes or +180 minutes.  Your nav file has many message
> where ToE - ToW to -720 minutes (== 1/2 day; this excludes the one with
> ToE - ToW = -960 minutes == 16 hours).  Any thoughts on this?

I'm still open to changing these bounds.

--lou


More information about the teqc mailing list