processed 
surements. 
th the SPP 
bers of the 
ver in the 
  
  
d 
  
S receiver 
ctical INS 
vith NHC, 
ows the n- 
positional 
| and Up 
ERP 
* EKF*NHC 
5 AKF 
AKF+NHC 
' Reference 
  
system 
  
  
Positioning Error - 
Figure 13. E-errors of the first test integrated system 
N 
  
T T T T 
1 a 
— EKF 
s EKFSNHC 
MÀ AKE 
AKF*NHC 
sot- i i CNE 
  
E 
Error 
  
E 
  
  
  
1 1 1 1 1 ib 
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 
Epoch 
Figure 14. N-errors of the first test integrated system 
  
Positioning Error - U 
T 
    
Error 
  
  
500 
Epoch 
Figure 15. U-errors of the first test integrated system 
Generally speaking, the positional errors estimated by NHC are 
significantly smaller than those estimated by EKF and AKF in 
East direction in most of the cases. On the other hand, the 
position errors of north components estimated by AKF-NHC 
are slightly smaller than those estimated by EKF in North 
direction in most of the cases. Similar trend can be founded in 
height components. Tables 3 and 4 illustrate the error statistics 
of the first test. 
Table 3. Maximum errors of the first test integrated system 
Maximum Error (m) 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
RE E N U 
EKF 355.810 180.105 147.532 
EKF+NHC 255.815 49.031 112.717 
AKF 37.028 27.934 90.271 
AKF+NHC 65.163 66.763 108.849 
  
Table 4. RMS values of the first test integrated system 
  
  
  
  
  
  
RMS (m) 
KE E N U 
EKF 51.902 21.956 32.976 
EKF+NHC 28.731 12.065 30.034 
AKF 10.927 15.521 26.981 
AKF+NHC 9.576 9.422 20.137 
  
  
  
  
  
  
W4.3.2 Tactical INS & Low-cost GPS receiver 
The second testing scenario is to analyze the results of the 
tactical INS with the low-cost GPS receiver proceed with EKF, 
EKF with NHC, AKF and AKF with NHC integration 
algorithms. Figure 16 shows the n-frame trajectories of the 
integration algorithm. The position errors can be plotted as 
shown in Figures 17 to 19, and their error statistics are 
illustrated in Tables 5 and 6. 
International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Volume XXXIX-B7, 2012 
XXII ISPRS Congress, 25 August — 01 September 2012, Melbourne, Australia 
Error 
Error 
Emor 
  
uso 1 1 2 1 1 
  
  
  
  
Vrigectity 
sus We = 
| Fe e PR. 
i 3 ve at cessum EKF+NHC 
m 5 } — à 
| ^ ; AKF«NHC 
2 a Li — Reference 
1] 
i i cmo 
sad 
| i 
i 
nd 
i i. i i i i à i 
: e Ax T p T E: p 
mt 
Figure 16. The trajectories of the second test integrated system 
Positioning Error - E 
T 
  
  
200- 
   
ee ocu E rene eese nee TY 
b 
  
  
1 1 1 1 1 
0 200 400 800 1000 1200 
  
  
600 
Epoch 
Figure 17. E-errors of the second test integrated system 
Positioning Error - N 
T 
  
  
   
  
  
800 
Epoch 
Figure 18. N-errors of the second test integrated system 
gae RW IN 
Positioning Error - U 
   
  
  
1 rite 
0 200 400 800 1000 1200 
600 
Epoch 
Figure 19. U-errors of the second test integrated system 
Table 5. Maximum errors of the second test integrated system 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Maximum Error (m) 
Ry E N U 
EKF 510.536 237.857 174.561 
EKF-NHC 321.329 61.588 141.583 
AKF 48.014 41.810 95.237 
AKF+NHC 76.359 77.690 157.707