## 4 Experimental Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \(\theta\) & **Shot No** & **TDoA/\(\hat{\theta}\)** & **50 m** & **100 m** & **150 m** & **200 m** & **250 m** & **300 m** & **350 m** & **400 m** & **450 m** & **500 m** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{\(-15^{\circ}\)} & \multirow{4}{*}{1} & \(\tau_{x}\) & 128 & 125 & 125 & 125 & 125 & 125 & 123 & 122 & 126 \\  & & \(\tau_{y}\) & \(-31\) & \(-32\) & \(-34\) & \(-32\) & \(-33\) & \(-31\) & \(-33\) & \(-30\) & \(-35\) & \(-29\) \\  & & \(\hat{\theta}\) & \(-13.61\) & \(-14.36\) & \(-15.22\) & \(-14.36\) & \(-14.79\) & \(-13.93\) & \(-14.79\) & \(-13.71\) & \(-16.01\) & \(-12.96\) \\ \cline{2-13}  & & \(\tau_{x}\) & 126 & 124 & 124 & 126 & 125 & 125 & 126 & 124 & 126 & 124 \\  & & \(\tau_{y}\) & \(-31\) & \(-31\) & \(-34\) & \(-33\) & \(-32\) & \(-33\) & \(-31\) & \(-34\) & \(-34\) & \(-29\) \\  & & \(\hat{\theta}\) & \(-13.82\) & \(-14.04\) & \(-15.33\) & \(-14.68\) & \(-14.36\) & \(-14.79\) & \(-13.82\) & \(-15.33\) & \(-15.10\) & \(-13.16\) \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{\(-30^{\circ}\)} & \multirow{4}{*}{1} & \(\tau_{x}\) & 111 & 113 & 115 & 112 & 113 & 111 & 115 & 113 & 115 & 114 \\  & & \(\tau_{y}\) & \(-62\) & \(-65\) & \(-60\) & \(-65\) & \(-61\) & \(-68\) & \(-62\) & \(-62\) & \(-64\) & \(-61\) \\  & & \(\hat{\thetaTo investigate the change of the errors with distance, the average of the errors of the shots made at different angles from the same distance was taken to create Table 6. The error change graph with distance according to the values in Table 6 is shown in Figure 16. When Figure 16 is examined, no clear separation is seen in the values of the errors with distance. As seen in Figure 14b, the test site had a slight slope with a maximum elevation angle of \(\varphi_{max}=-1.24^{\circ}\) at 50 m and a minimum elevation angle of \(\varphi_{min}=-0.82^{\circ}\) at 500 m. The \(\phi\) angles calculated using Equation (31) are presented in degrees in Table 7. The experimental \(\tau_{z}\) values are expressed in units of sample. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Distance** & **50 m** & **100 m** & **150 m** & **200 m** & **250 m** & **300 m** & **350 m** & **400 m** & **450 m** & **500 m** \\ \hline Shot1 & 0.91 & 0.97 & 1.10 & 1.52 & 0.79 & 1.66 & 1.04 & 1.02 & 0.92 & 1.26 \\ Shot2 & 1.14 & 0.51 & 1.03 & 0.91 & 0.83 & 0.98 & 0.93 & 0.92 & 1.02 & 1.36 \\ Mean & 1.02 & 0.74 & 1.07 & 1.22 & 0.81 & 1.32 & 0.98 & 0.97 & 0.97 & 1.31 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 6: MAE values of experimental azimuth results with respect to explosion distance. Figure 16: MAE values of the azimuth angle values calculated with experimental results with respect to explosion distance. Figure 15: MAE values of the azimuth angle values calculated with experimental results with respect to explosion angle. The MAE error graph for each distance value for the results obtained in Table 7 is shown in Figure 17. The maximum values in the Figure 17 graph are given in Table 8. The maximum elevation angle at 50 m was also obtained in the experimental study. After 150 m, similar results were obtained. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Azimuth Angle** & \begin{tabular}{c} **Shot** \\ **No** \\ \end{tabular}  & \begin{tabular}{c} **TDoA/\(\phi\)** \\ \end{tabular}  & \begin{tabular}{c} **50 m** \\ \end{tabular}  & \begin{tabular}{c} **100 m** \\ \end{tabular}  & \begin{tabular}{c} **150 m** \\ \end{tabular}  & \begin{tabular}{c} **200 m** \\ \end{tabular}  & \begin{tabular}{c} **250 m** \\ \end{tabular}  & \begin{tabular}{c} **300 m** \\ \end{tabular}  & \begin{tabular}{c} **350 m** \\ \end{tabular}  & \begin{tabular}{c} **400 m** \\ \end{tabular}  & \ \begin{tabular}{c} **450 m** \\ \end{tabular}  & \begin{tabular}{c} **500 m** \\ \end{tabular}