Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 February 2019
To achieve fast satellite selection for a multi-Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS), thereby reducing the burden on a receiver's processing element and the cost of hardware, and improving the utilisation ratio of receiver signal channels, the relationship between the number of satellites and Geometric Dilution Of Precision (GDOP), the number of satellites selected and the computation time is analysed. A fast rotating partition algorithm for satellite selection based on equal distribution of the sky is proposed. The algorithm divides the satellite selection process into two parts: rough selection and detailed selection. Unhealthy satellites, according to a health identifier, and low elevation angle satellites with a large troposphere delay are eliminated during the rough selection process. During the detailed satellite selection process, the satellite sky is divided and rotated to match satellites based on the average angle distance between the satellite and central partition line. Static data from the International GNSS Service (IGS) station and dynamic data collected at China University of Mining and Technology were used to verify the algorithm, and the results demonstrated that an inverse matrix could be avoided to reduce computation complexity. Additionally, the new satellite selection algorithm has the merit that there is little effect on the computation when the selected satellites and number of satellites in the field increased. A single system of the Global Positioning System (GPS) and double system of GPS/Globalnaya Navigazionnaya Sputnikovaya Sistema (GLONASS) both passed the hypothesis test for each epoch. By including BeiDou Navigation Satellite System (BDS) data, data utilisation increased to more than 95% using the rotating partition algorithm. Also, the GDOP and positioning performance of a rotating partition algorithm and an optimal Dilution Of Precision (DOP) algorithm are compared in this paper, and the analysis result shows that both of the algorithms have only a small difference of GDOP and have comparable positioning performance.