以e-GNSS即時動態定位系統應用於，數值地籍測量準確度分析──以草屯框架為例

Application of e-GNSS RTK positioning system to the accuracy analysis of numerical cadastral survey-taking the Caotun framework as an example

近年來e-GNSS即時動態定位系統的普及化，使得即時取得高精度定位成果及增進作業效率不再遙不可及。且e-GNSS具備多種坐標框架解算，若能正確應用e-GNSS即時動態定位系統於地籍測量作業，除可克服圖根點位遺失或相互通視不良之問題，亦能提高作業效率。本研究應用一般使用e-GNSS即時動態定位系統在不同作業模式下，所產生不同的誤差概念。以各三種不同坐標框架的作業方式，各自補設圖根補點，再以這些補設點為已知點，先以三參數轉換方式將各界址點坐標轉換與補設點為同一框架，來分析以上不同作業方式所產生資料庫母體間所呈現差異，再依據各不同坐標框架分別採取實地放樣。將不同框架下的坐標放樣值於實地界址直接後驗比較，將會得到與直接觀測的差值，而這個差值趨近於誤差值與真值之間。經研究結果顯示，以e-GNSS依上述不同方式所測定之成果，在精確度上，確實與不同的作業方式產生截然不同的結果。其中以草屯框架所產生的差值最小，但與前述實地直接後驗放樣點與確定界址點間，其平均較差為8.6公分。

In recent years, the popularization of e-GNSS real-time dynamic positioning system has made it no longer difficult to obtain high-precision coordinate positioning results and improve operational efficiency in real time. In addition, e-GNSS has a variety of coordinate frame calculations. If the e-GNSS real-time dynamic positioning system can be correctly applied to cadastral survey operations,it can not only overcome mapping control point loss or poor mutual visibility, but also improve operational efficiency. This study uses the e-GNSS real-time dynamic positioning system to produce different error concepts under different operating modes. Using three different coordinate frame operation methods, each supplement subsidiary station, and then use these supplement points as known points, and first convert and supplement each parcel corner coordinate by three-parameter conversion Point is the same framework, first analyze the gaps between the database matrices generated by the above different operation methods. Then take field measurements according to different coordinate frames. Directly A Posteriori comparison of the coordinate stakeout values under the two different frameworks with the field boundary will result in the direct observation gap, which is close to the error value and true value. The research results show that the results measured by e-GNSS in the previous different methods, in Accuracy, do produce completely different results from different operating methods. Among them, the difference produced by the Caotun frame is the smallest, but the average error between the measurement point and the determined point in the field directly A Posteriori is 8.6 cm.