Galileo Space Infrastructure R&D

Transcription

1 Ref. Ares(2014) /11/2014 Navigation solutions powered by Europe GNSS GNSS Session 1 Galileo Space Infrastructure R&D Chair: Eric Guyader, Xavier Maufroid Galileo and EGNOS Programme Management DG Enterprise and Industry 1

2 4 June, 2014 The European GNSS Programmes 2 Introduction Navigation solutions powered by Europe The objective of the session is to discuss lines of research and technology development which contribute to the evolution of the EGNSS systems on the short, medium, and long term. In the course of 2014 the results from the workshop, and other inputs, will be used to develop the Horizon 2020 "European GNSS" RTD long term plan Therefore, the European Commission is keen in offering the EU space industry a forum of discussion to exchange views on the remarkable trends in GNSS and to contribute to the R&D roadmap towards "2 nd Generation".

3 4 June, 2014 The European GNSS Programmes 3 Scope Navigation solutions powered by Europe Stakeholders to propose R&D ideas related to Space infrastructure R&D Ideas can result in Actions to be developed in the frame of H2020 Open discussion on those ideas Identify pro's and con's Check if there is general consensus on the idea

4 4 June, 2014 The European GNSS Programmes 4 Organization of the session Navigation solutions powered by Europe Duration: 1h45' A few ideas are first presented by selected speakers Mr Miguel Romay, GMV Future Satnav systems Mr Thomas Mayer, ADS Global and regional satnav systems Mr Kristian Pauly, OHB Alternative orbits Mr Stefan Sassen, ADS Inter Satellite links Mrs Eulàlia Pares, IoG Alert broadcast service Mr Jose Diego, Castilla y Leon Innovation agency SMEs and space segment activities NOTE: such selection of topics is not representative of any decision for future developments; it is illustrative and is just meant to trigger discussion with the audience on a broad range of space segment related subjects. Discussion follows with the audience: On the ideas presented by the speakers, Or on different topics related to space segment. Do not hesitate to speak up and express your thoughts, vision and R&D ideas!

5 4 June, 2014 The European GNSS Programmes 5 Guidelines to the speakers Navigation solutions powered by Europe Quick presentation max. 5 minutes Introduce yourself and your company (business area, function ) Avoid company publicity, history, background, management structure, list of projects, focus on your message, and elaborate on it. Advantages, benefits, but also risks and complexity

6 4 June, 2014 The European GNSS Programmes 6 Pattern of questions Navigation solutions powered by Europe What are the capacities that should be developed in Europe by for future satellite navigation systems and services? Why do you think this should be developed? What research steps are required to reach such a capacity? Are there any gaps in the current European GNSS R&D portfolio? Or are there any gaps in European technology to support a given direction? Which research and technology development lines are needed to enhance the European non-dependence of current and future GNSS technologies?

7 4 June, October, 2014 The European GNSS Programmes 7 Navigation solutions powered by Europe Navigation solutions powered by Europe Thank you for your attention Have a good workshop! Navigation solutions powered by Europe

8 H2020 GNSS RTD Workshop The Future Satellite Navigation Systems 4 th June, 2014 Brussels Space Infrastructure R&D Miguel M. Romay Merino GMV GMV, 2014 Property of GMV All rights reserved

9 INTRODUCTION GMV, 2014 Property of GMV All rights reserved

10 INTRODUCTION PPP, RTK, Inertial Sensors, WiFi, UWB, Augmentations, Regional Systems, etc GPS GPS GLONASS WAAS GPS GLONASS WAAS EGNOS COMPASS GALILEO QZSS GAGAN IRNSS SDCM The Future Satellite Navigation Systems 04/06/2014 Page 3 GMV, 2014

11 PRECISE POINT POSITIONING GMV, 2014 Property of GMV All rights reserved

12 Metres Metres PPP INTEGRITY TRIALS RESULTS No integrity failures have been detected. This is an example of an urban trajectory of about 40 minutes, more tests have been performed and no integrity failures were detected in any of them. It can be seen that in most of the cases horizontal PLs below 0.5 m and vertical PLs below 1 m can be obtained. The cases in where PLs are high correspond normally to cases with a very bad geometry or with anomalous measurements, mainly due to multipath Horizontal PL H_PL_(m) Time in Seconds Horizontal errors and PLs Vertical PL V_PL_(m) Time in Seconds Vertical errors and PLs The Future Satellite Navigation Systems 04/06/2014 Page 5 GMV, 2014

13 FIRST PPP RESULTS WITH GALILEO Four Galileo satellites are now in orbit All four of them are simultaneously visible for short time periods (few hours) Accurate ephemeris products have been generated for them, which have been used for carrying out the very first Galileo fed PPP processes Achieved results are really remarkable Accuracies better than 10 cm have been obtained in a post-processing batch static Galileo only scenario Accuracies of about 5 cm have been obtained in a post-processing sequential static Galileo + GPS scenario The Future Satellite Navigation Systems 04/06/2014 Page 6 GMV, 2014

14 FUTURE SYSTEMS GMV, 2014 Property of GMV All rights reserved

15 FUTURE SYSTEMS. INTRODUCTION The main challenge is to envisage how a future GNSS may look like: Do we need four complete Global Navigation Satellite Systems? If we consider the additional augmentation and regional systems plus the new emerging positioning techniques our answer is: No When defining a future system we need to take into account not only technical aspects but also other considerations It can be seen that when GPS, GLONASS, COMPASS and Galileo will become operational around 40 satellites will be in view at any location 40 satellites are more than enough to ensure redundancy and the increase in performances do not justify the associated costs The Future Satellite Navigation Systems 04/06/2014 Page 8 GMV, 2014

16 FUTURE SYSTEMS. CONSTELLATIONS A MEO constellation with 36 satellites, composed at the sum of 4 constellations with 9 satellites each: Walker 36/3/0 Semi major axis Km, 24 hours repeatability Circular orbits with 56,5 degrees inclination Four regional complements over USA, Europe, Russia and China: 8 satellites per complement, 6 GEIO and 2 GEO GEIO satellites are in three orbital planes at an inclination of 63,4 degrees. For the GEIO satellites, the eccentricity, RAAN and mean anomalies have been optimised to provide the best performances The total number of satellites is 68, 17 satellites per system (to be compared against 120, 43% reduction) The Future Satellite Navigation Systems 04/06/2014 Page 9 GMV, 2014

17 FUTURE SYSTEMS. GROUND SEGMENT EVOLUTIONS Future Satellite Systems must be more simple and operational costs must be reduced Several alternatives can be envisaged: A more complex space segment. Moving functionalities from ground to space Improved algorithms at ground segment level The second option is clearly preferred, minimum cost and complexity A test has been performed using GPS real data with new algorithms and only four stations!! Estimated Orbit Errors Stations Network Estimated Clock Errors The Future Satellite Navigation Systems 04/06/2014 Page 10 GMV, 2014

18 CONCLUSIONS GMV, 2014 Property of GMV All rights reserved

19 CONCLUSIONS As a conclusion we envisage the future as a combination of: Only one classical GNSS global system constituted by different contributions from different countries or regions A set of regional navigation satellite systems, to improve geometrical configuration and to transmit navigation information or additional services in the region A set of SBAS systems, integrated with the satellite regional complements and associated ground segments, to provide Safety of Life Services Completely new positioning algorithms, benefiting from the availability of dual frequency measurements, phase measurements, and PPP like algorithms at user level Additional non satellite navigation techniques at user level GNSS will then be more global, ensuring international cooperation, reducing development and maintenance costs and improving dramatically the performances The Future Satellite Navigation Systems 04/06/2014 Page 12 GMV, 2014

20 Thank you Miguel M. Romay Merino GNSS Business Unit GMV, 2014 Property of GMV All rights reserved

21 Horizon 2020 GNSS RTD Workshop Session on Galileo Space Infrastructure R&D Brussels, Alternative Orbits for Future Galileo Systems Dr. Kristian Pauly OHB System AG

22 Rationale / Background The orbits for the next generation of Galileo will be driven by the requirements for the system. These requirements are currently not defined, yet. There are currently studies carried out wrt this topic, e.g. on behalf of ESA in the scope of several EGEP71 phase A/B1 studies. Two main focusses are: Improve system performance Reduce overall cost Comparing the relative cost of the different Galileo segments with the cost of other similar systems, i.p. ground / ops / and launch segment seem to have a higher ratio than comparable systems. So likely improvements can be achieved in these areas. Ideas how to achieve that are e.g.: find strategies that puts more satellites on a given launcher, reduce the large number of ground stations, reduce complexity of operations. Orbits are an important system parameter in this overall picture. OHB AG / Horizon 2020 GNSS RTD Workshop, Brussels Page 2

23 Orbit Alternatives Option 1 (chemical to MEO, as FOC) Remake of the current IOV/FOC approach Launch 2 Sats on Soyuz-Fregat, 4 Sats on Ariane 5 After launch, there is a 4 hour coast phase Satellites are separated into MEO directly; satellites carry chemical propulsion for orbit maintenance and spare satellite activation Volumetric and mass constraints limit extension of capabilities for next generation of Galileo satellites Fast installation of ground spares Radiation environment is harsh Launcher payload will at least for Soyuz not drastically improve OHB AG / Horizon 2020 GNSS RTD Workshop, Brussels Page 3

24 Orbit Alternative Option 2 (Electric to MEO / IGSO) Current EGEP71 studies for Galileo 2 nd Gen. foresee this as baseline. Extend time allowed to bring satellites into same MEO orbit as in IOV/FOC. Due to the time allowed, electrical propulsion becomes a valid option. Electrical propulsion can then solve the chicken and egg problem of more satellites launched, with higher performance compared to IOV/FOC, as the job for the launcher gets easier while satellites can still be heavier (thanks to a much higher I sp ). Current thruster state of the art (almost) fulfils lifetime requirements. Start from GTO allows for option to still carry a commercial passenger in parallel on Ariane 5. Also missions to Inclined Geo-synchronous orbits (IGSO) could be undertaken with little change to the satellites themselves. Issues: Radiation environment is even harsher, ground spare introduction may take too long if sats in the same plane fail shortly after another OHB AG / Horizon 2020 GNSS RTD Workshop, Brussels Page 4

25 Orbit Alternative Option 3 (LEO) Quite a drastic change to the approach followed with Giove, IOV, and FOC would be the introduction of a LEO constellation for the next generation of Galileo. More satellites needed ( 70, depending on orbit height), but (much) less performance needed per satellite (10% of power, 50% of mass compared to IOV/FOC with comparable signal strength). Load on Ops / Ground Segment increases compared to Option 1&2. Launch philosophy is more of the shotgun kind (so many sats per launch), volume constraints will thus become harsher. Single launcher failure would take more satellites out (more risk). Might still be more cost effective with e.g. inter-satellite links. Electrical propulsion does not really make sense here. Orbit maintenance becomes more of an issue (shorter intervals). Radiation hardness becomes less of a issue, as environment in LEO is much less harsh than MEO/IGSO. OHB AG / Horizon 2020 GNSS RTD Workshop, Brussels Page 5

26 What Technology Developments do we need? The following technologies are thus deemed valuable for the next generation of Galileo satellites: Inter-satellite Link Electrical Propulsion (for Option 2) Robust clocks With these three, the FOC performance can be achieved more cost-effectively. Further technology developments would become necessary as system performance requirements become more ambitious, and might encompass: Highly efficient and/or Gossamer-type solar arrays (large areas that can be folded to a very small space) Payload-related developments (encryption, modulation, output power, etc.) OHB AG / Horizon 2020 GNSS RTD Workshop, Brussels Page 6

27 Conclusions There is a wide trade space that can / should be covered en route to the next generation of Galileo satellites. The overall system design is heavily dependent on orbits (LEO, MEO, IGSO, mix?), but even more so on the system performance goals, which can range anywhere between: "same as FOC" to "vastly improved performance-wise compared IOV/FOC. Add-on requirements and secondary payloads can easily become design drivers (e.g.: local signal augmentation, military-grade robust NAV signals, environmental monitoring units, laser retro reflectors). Focus is appreciated here. Competition is good - in all segments! Don t put all your eggs in the same basket, reduce risk, schedule, and cost. A cost-effective and successful system and project requires well thought-through and concise goals and requirements. OHB AG / Horizon 2020 GNSS RTD Workshop, Brussels Page 7

28 This document and its content is the property of Astrium [Ltd/SAS/GmbH] and is strictly confidential. It shall not be communicated to any third party without the written consent of Astrium [Ltd/SAS/GmbH]. Galileo Space Infrastructure R&D Directions for Inter-Satellite-Link GNSS Evolution H2020 GNSS RTD Workshop Brussels, 4 June 2014 Dr. Stefan Sassen Electronics Airbus Defence and Space

29 This document and its content is the property of Astrium [Ltd/SAS/GmbH] and is strictly confidential. It shall not be communicated to any third party without the written consent of Astrium [Ltd/SAS/GmbH]. Inter-Satellite-Link Objectives Confidential Inter-Satellite-Link Objectives Improved robustness and reduction of dependence from ground segment Command and monitoring ability automatic on-board generation of navigation messages (autonav) reduction ground remote infrastructure and improving security Cost benefit of the system on the long term Reduction of number of TTC, ULS, GSS, Reduced GDDN infrastructure and service cost Better navigation performance increased ephemeris and clock update atmospheric error free ranging from satellite to satellite Introduction of new services ISL for observations of troposphere and ionosphere Enabler for Precise Point Positioning / Real Time Kinematic (PPP/RTK) services Inter-Satellite-Link Data Dissemination: Housekeeping data: TM and TC Mission data Navigation Messages: OS/SAR, PRS including keys, CS data Range observations: Code, phase, doppler, C/N0, etc. for NSS/L&C and ISL/K Contingency data Satellite and NSS patches/memory dumps

30 This document and its content is the property of Astrium [Ltd/SAS/GmbH] and is strictly confidential. It shall not be communicated to any third party without the written consent of Astrium [Ltd/SAS/GmbH]. Galileo Connectivity Architecture Confidential ISL Connectivity Scheme S/C <-> S/C Ranging and Communication ISL provide additional Ranging and Connectivity NSS: Next Generation GSS GCC: Ground Control Centre S/C: Satellite of Galileo Constellation R&C: Ranging and Communication

31 This document and its content is the property of Astrium [Ltd/SAS/GmbH] and is strictly confidential. It shall not be communicated to any third party without the written consent of Astrium [Ltd/SAS/GmbH]. Inter-Satellite-Link System Architecture Confidential

32 This document and its content is the property of Astrium [Ltd/SAS/GmbH] and is strictly confidential. It shall not be communicated to any third party without the written consent of Astrium [Ltd/SAS/GmbH]. Inter-Satellite-Link Transceiver Architecture Confidential

33 This document and its content is the property of Astrium [Ltd/SAS/GmbH] and is strictly confidential. It shall not be communicated to any third party without the written consent of Astrium [Ltd/SAS/GmbH]. R&D Priorities (I) Confidential Inter-Satellite-Link (ISL) is a key enabler for GNSS ISL improves System Robustness and System Autonomy ISL reduces Ground Infrastructure and System, Operations and Maintenance Cost ISL enhances Navigation Performance ISL technology can also be beneficial to other space missions Core Components of Inter-Satellite-Link are: Steerable Antenna RF Section Tx and Rx Module Transceiver SW Security Module

34 This document and its content is the property of Astrium [Ltd/SAS/GmbH] and is strictly confidential. It shall not be communicated to any third party without the written consent of Astrium [Ltd/SAS/GmbH]. R&D Priorities (II) Confidential Following Technologies or Building-Blocks need to be available for ISL Fast (500MHz) and cost efficient AD and DA conversion High Speed Digital Modulation Fast Signal Processing ASIC/FPGA for high signal modulations Pre-distortion / equalizing algorithms tailored to space platforms Complete EGSE and channel emulator Creation of Synergies with other Galileo equipment and functions Identification of common building blocks Higher integration level of payload functions, e.g. NSGU, CMCU/ONCLE, OBIMU, ISL Continued Benchmark with other GNSS Constellations

35 EU GNSS Research and Technology Space Infrastructures R&D M. Eulàlia Parés CTTC Geomatics Division 04/06/2014 1

36 MOTIVATION 2

37 IDEA 3

38 WHY GNSS? 4

39 WHAT IS NEEDED? HW: Communications SW: Protocols Users Hazart Alarm Services HW: Commertial service receiver HW: Uninterrupted Connection with GNSS control center 5

40 WHAT IS NEEDED? HW: Communications SW: Protocols Users Hazart Alarm Services HW: Commertial service receiver / transmitter HW: Uninterrupted Connection with GNSS control center 6

41 ACTORS Space agencies Users GNSS receivers industry International Telecomm. Union Security agencies Hazart Alarm Services 7