0
$\begingroup$

As part of my PhD field work it would be useful to have latitude/longitude measurements for the locations of ant nests that I am working on. These ant nests can be as close as 50cm together so the accuracy of the system would (I think) need to be higher than is available from a phone or basic GPS system. Does anyone know what system would be best for getting this sort of accuracy? My budget is probably only around £200. If it isn't possible in that price range it would be good to know what system I would need to use so that I can see if I can just borrow such a system.

Thanks a lot!

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ You can try to look for dual GPS recievers. These enhance the precision of GPS, but I doubt that it will be as precise as your spec. Would fit your budget though... $\endgroup$
    – 50k4
    Dec 21 '16 at 11:48
  • $\begingroup$ OK great, I'll have a look at that then! $\endgroup$
    – unknown
    Dec 21 '16 at 11:57
  • $\begingroup$ You can get sub-metre precision from an SBAS receiver, but you'll need line-of-sight visibility to the SBAS satellite for your area of the world. $\endgroup$ Feb 8 '17 at 13:27
  • $\begingroup$ UBlox C94-M8P RTK kit dual-receiver promises 2-cm precision using a fixed and a rover GPS that communicate over UHF. It's 359€. $\endgroup$ Feb 8 '17 at 13:36
0
$\begingroup$

I suggest you are going to look into Chen at al 2015 "Computationally efficient carrier integer ambiguity resolution in multiepoch gps/ins: a common-position-shift approach" This is a very good paper, which allows location down to a centimeter level. Anyway this approach is not plug and play, I fear you have to implement it on your own. I'm not aware of any open source implementation so far. More over if you are trying to locate the ants within a forest, then gps is a not the best approach. Gps uses some wavelengths which are absorbed easily by water and well the trees do contain at lot of water. Long story told short: gps in the forest will never be as accurate as you need.

I know this is not the answer you expected, hope it can help a bit

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ OK I guess that won't work very well then. Thanks a lot for your help! $\endgroup$
    – unknown
    Feb 6 '17 at 10:50

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.