Hi,
For sp3 loading, we've noticed that an erroneous sp3 header produce erroneous orbits, without any error nor warning.
Here is an example. The header of the sp3 file list 22 satellites
If some satellites are missing in the following of the sp3 file (see example below), no error will be raised but values between satellites are inverted.
Some satellites that are present in the file have nan values, while their orbit is affected to missing satellites.
It seems that georinex consider that the PRN list and order provided in the header is perfectly respected in all the sp3 file.
It would seem safer to check this assumption.
Do not hesitate to contact me for further information or illustrative example.
Best regards,
Julie
Hi, For sp3 loading, we've noticed that an erroneous sp3 header produce erroneous orbits, without any error nor warning. Here is an example. The header of the sp3 file list 22 satellites
If some satellites are missing in the following of the sp3 file (see example below), no error will be raised but values between satellites are inverted.
PE02 -12258.470842 26121.024316 -6548.977657 0.000000 0 0 0 0
PE03 -7826.716255 16135.521186 23546.215580 0.000000 0 0 0 0
PE11 -19604.366144 -12971.980636 -17978.787132 0.000000 0 0 0 0
PE12 -13244.678838 -26459.496272 37.645637 0.000000 0 0 0 0
PE13 19588.036289 13589.496267 17559.573017 0.000000 0 0 0 0
PE15 13259.227302 26468.614882 -157.332178 0.000000 0 0 0 0
PE19 10583.962532 -15352.242433 -22987.604964 0.000000 0 0 0 0
PE21 20994.068337 -17578.374339 -11264.712287 0.000000 0 0 0 0
PE24 -17481.627195 -2989.065053 23676.628695 0.000000 0 0 0 0
PE31 -4534.816110 -19662.972313 21662.863053 0.000000 0 0 0 0
PE33 885.597832 -23683.780793 17737.077590 0.000000 0 0 0 0
PE36 -14365.237726 7202.838619 -24848.960747 0.000000 0 0 0 0
Some satellites that are present in the file have nan values, while their orbit is affected to missing satellites.
It seems that georinex consider that the PRN list and order provided in the header is perfectly respected in all the sp3 file. It would seem safer to check this assumption.
Do not hesitate to contact me for further information or illustrative example. Best regards, Julie