A Tropospheric Delay Model for the user of the Wide Area Augmentation System

Similar documents
Multipath and Atmospheric Propagation Errors in Offshore Aviation DGPS Positioning

Monitoring the Ionosphere and Neutral Atmosphere with GPS

E. Calais Purdue University - EAS Department Civil 3273

Estimating Zenith Total Delay Residual Fields by using Ground-Based GPS network. Presented at EUREF Symposium 2010 Gävle,

Atmospheric propagation

Estimating Zenith Total Delay Fields by using Ground-Based GPS network

Investigation on the Impact of Tropospheric Delay on GPS Height Variation near the Equator

AUSPOS GPS Processing Report

FieldGenius Technical Notes GPS Terminology

Global Positioning System: what it is and how we use it for measuring the earth s movement. May 5, 2009

Atmospheric Effects. Atmospheric Refraction. Atmospheric Effects Page 1

Tajul Ariffin Musa. Tajul A. Musa. Dept. of Geomatics Eng, FKSG, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai, Johor, MALAYSIA.

Atmospheric Investigations for WAAS

Use of GNSS Radio Occultation data for Climate Applications Bill Schreiner Sergey Sokolovskiy, Doug Hunt, Ben Ho, Bill Kuo UCAR

The impact of tropospheric mapping functions based on numerical weather models on the determination of geodetic parameters

A study of the ionospheric effect on GBAS (Ground-Based Augmentation System) using the nation-wide GPS network data in Japan

Modelling GPS Observables for Time Transfer

Johannes Böhm, Paulo Jorge Mendes Cerveira, Harald Schuh, and Paul Tregoning

COSMIC / FormoSat 3 Overview, Status, First results, Data distribution

OPAC-1 International Workshop Graz, Austria, September 16 20, Advancement of GNSS Radio Occultation Retrieval in the Upper Stratosphere

Precision N N. wrms. and σ i. y i

3. Radio Occultation Principles

Ionospheric Estimation using Extended Kriging for a low latitude SBAS

Performance of Long-Baseline Real-Time Kinematic Applications by Improving Tropospheric Delay Modeling

Rec. ITU-R P RECOMMENDATION ITU-R P *

THE IMPACT OF TROPOSPHERIC DELAY TOWARDS THE ACCURACY OF GPS HEIGHT DETERMINATION

Impact of Different Tropospheric Models on GPS Baseline Accuracy: Case Study in Thailand

LOCAL IONOSPHERIC MODELLING OF GPS CODE AND CARRIER PHASE OBSERVATIONS

LOCAL DEFORMATION MONITORING USING REAL-TIME GPS KINEMATIC TECHNOLOGY: INITIAL STUDY

THE INFLUENCE OF ZENITH TROPOSPHERIC DELAY ON PPP-RTK. S. Nistor a, *, A.S. Buda a,

ARAIM Fault Detection and Exclusion

Detection of Abnormal Ionospheric Activity from the EPN and Impact on Kinematic GPS positioning

[This page intentionally left blank.]

RECOMMENDATION ITU-R P Attenuation by atmospheric gases

Local GPS tropospheric tomography

Effects of tropospheric refraction on radiowave propagation

An Investigation of Local-Scale Spatial Gradient of Ionospheric Delay Using the Nation-Wide GPS Network Data in Japan

Characterizing Atmospheric Turbulence and Instrumental Noise Using Two Simultaneously Operating Microwave Radiometers

Estimation Method of Ionospheric TEC Distribution using Single Frequency Measurements of GPS Signals

Bernese GPS Software 4.2

Lecture 12: Curvature and Refraction Radar Equation for Point Targets (Rinehart Ch3-4)

Link Budgets International Committee on GNSS Working Group A Torino, Italy 19 October 2010

AN INVESTIGATION ON THE USE OF GPS FOR DEFORMATION MONITORING IN OPEN PIT MINES

GPS: History, Operation, Processing

CHAPTER 2 GPS GEODESY. Estelar. The science of geodesy is concerned with the earth by quantitatively

Modeling and Simulation of GNSS with NS2

Broadcast Ionospheric Model Accuracy and the Effect of Neglecting Ionospheric Effects on C/A Code Measurements on a 500 km Baseline

Atmospheric Delay Reduction Using KARAT for GPS Analysis and Implications for VLBI

Trimble Business Center:

Assessment of WAAS Correction Data in Eastern Canada

Estimation of Rain attenuation and Ionospheric delay at a Low-Latitude Indian Station

An Assessment of Mapping Functions for VTEC Estimation using Measurements of Low Latitude Dual Frequency GPS Receiver

Ionospheric Tomography with GPS Data from CHAMP and SAC-C

Ionospheric Modeling for WADGPS at Northern Latitudes

GPS: History, Operation, Processing

Integrity of Satellite Navigation in the Arctic

Measurement Error and Fault Models for Multi-Constellation Navigation Systems. Mathieu Joerger Illinois Institute of Technology

Propagation Problems in Satellite Navigation

GPS Ray Tracing to Show the Effect of Ionospheric Horizontal Gradeint to L 1 and L 2 at Ionospheric Pierce Point

GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM (GPS) PERFORMANCE OCTOBER TO DECEMBER 2013 QUARTERLY REPORT. GPS Performance 08/01/14 08/01/14 08/01/14.

GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM (GPS) PERFORMANCE APRIL TO JUNE 2017 QUARTERLY REPORT

Ionospheric Corrections for GNSS

Fundamentals of GPS Navigation

Study of small scale plasma irregularities. Đorđe Stevanović

EFFECTS OF IONOSPHERIC SMALL-SCALE STRUCTURES ON GNSS

Lecture 8: GIS Data Error & GPS Technology

GNSS-based estimation of slant total delay towards satellite

Validation of Multiple Hypothesis RAIM Algorithm Using Dual-frequency GNSS Signals

Accuracy Assessment of GPS Slant-Path Determinations

Monitoring the Auroral Oval with GPS and Applications to WAAS

Algorithms for inverting radio occultation signals in the neutral atmosphere

Effect of Quasi Zenith Satellite (QZS) on GPS Positioning

Evaluation of Multi-Constellation GNSS Precise Point Positioning (PPP) Techniques in Egypt

Estimation of Tropospheric Propagation Delay for Long Base Line in Gps Positioing

RADIOWAVE PROPAGATION

Effect of errors in position coordinates of the receiving antenna on single satellite GPS timing

The Wide Area Augmentation System

GPS Error and Biases

Modeling of Ionospheric Refraction of UHF Radar Signals at High Latitudes

Waveform Processing of Nadir-Looking Altimetry Data

NR402 GIS Applications in Natural Resources

Resection. We can measure direction in the real world! Lecture 10: Position Determination. Resection Example: Isola, Slovenia. Professor Keith Clarke

April - 1 May, GNSS Derived TEC Data Calibration

Sources of Error in Satellite Navigation Positioning

ARAIM: Utilization of Modernized GNSS for Aircraft-Based Navigation Integrity

GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM (GPS) PERFORMANCE JANUARY TO MARCH 2016 QUARTERLY REPORT

Evaluation of GNSS as a Tool for Monitoring Tropospheric Water Vapour

A Terrestrial Multiple-Receiver Radio Link Experiment at 10.7 GHz - Comparisons of Results with Parabolic Equation Calculations

Determination of the correlation distance for spaced antennas on multipath HF links and implications for design of SIMO and MIMO systems.

Integer Ambiguity Resolution for Precise Point Positioning Patrick Henkel

Optimization of a Vertical Protection Level Equation for Dual Frequency SBAS

Monitoring the 3 Dimensional Ionospheric Electron Distribution based on GPS Measurements

Attenuation by atmospheric gases

Comparative analysis of the effect of ionospheric delay on user position accuracy using single and dual frequency GPS receivers over Indian region

Latest PPP Efforts at UNB ( )

Demonstrations of Multi-Constellation Advanced RAIM for Vertical Guidance using GPS and GLONASS Signals

RECOMMENDATION ITU-R P Prediction of sky-wave field strength at frequencies between about 150 and khz

Several ground-based augmentation system (GBAS) Galileo E1 and E5a Performance

Introduction to DGNSS

EFFECTS OF SCINTILLATIONS IN GNSS OPERATION

Transcription:

A Tropospheric Delay Model for the user of the Wide Area Augmentation System J. Paul Collins and Richard B. Langley 1st October 1996

+641&7%6+1 OBJECTIVES Develop and test a tropospheric propagation delay model for the WAAS user. Determine the bounds of the tropospheric delay contribution to the pseudorange error budget. LIMITATION Lack of real-time meteorology to quantify the state of the atmosphere.

6412152*'4+%&'.#; Refractive index in neutral atmosphere greater than unity. Decrease in velocity increases propagation time and equivalent path length (the delay ). Refraction bends raypath - significant at low elevation angles. Hydrostatic zenith delay accurately determined with atmospheric pressure measurement. Ignoring horizontal gradients and assuming azimuthal symmetry allows use of mapping functions (ratios of zenith delay to angle of elevation delay).

Zenith Delay, &'.#;(14/7.#6+1 d z trop = 1 6 N - refractivity r, r 1 - radial distance from centre of earth r r 1 Ndr Refractivity, N k P T k e T k e d = + + T 1 2 3 2 k 1, k 2, k 3 - refractivity constants P d, T, e - atmospheric parameters Total Delay, d = d m + d m trop z hyd hyd z wet wet z z d hyd, dwet hydrostatic and wet zenith delay, m, m hydrostatic and wet mapping function hyd wet

#8+)#6+16;2'#8/1&'.5 Elevation Angle Latitude Height Met. Parameters Altshuler N WAAS N NATO N UNB1 P, T, e, β, λ Central Radio Propagation Laboratory Reference Atmosphere 1958 + Chao dry Mapping Function Saastamoinen Zenith Delay models + Niell Mapping Functions + T T H P P T Rβ T Rβ = β, = e = e T, T, f ( T = 288.15K, P = 113.25mbar, e = 11.7mbar ) 324.8 N units g 4g

&#6#&'5%4+26+1#&241%'55+) Frizzle 95 Experiment, Newfoundland, Canada, March 1995. 12, 3-5 hour flights recording dual frequency GPS and meteorological data at aircraft and ground station. P(Y) code on L1 processed for optimum positions. IGS precise orbits used. Ionosphere largely removed with single differences. Benchmark solutions computed using UNB1 and the simultaneously recorded meteorological data.

(4+<<.'a(.+)*62#6*5 55 3 31 55 5 5 45 45 3 31

March 1th Flight Path Height (m) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 51 5 Latitude 49 48-55 -54-53 Longitude -52

ALTSHULER Latitude Position Differences for March 1 WAAS NATO UNB1 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 Height (m) 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 -.4 -.2.2.4 Latitude Difference (m) -.4 -.2.2.4 Latitude Difference (m) -.4 -.2.2.4 Latitude Difference (m) -.4 -.2.2.4 Latitude Difference (m)

ALTSHULER Longitude Position Differences for March 1 WAAS NATO UNB1 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 Height (m) 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 -.4 -.2.2.4 Longitude Difference (m) -.4 -.2.2.4 Longitude Difference (m) -.4 -.2.2.4 Longitude Difference (m) -.4 -.2.2.4 Longitude Difference (m)

ALTSHULER Height Position Differences for March 1 WAAS NATO UNB1 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 Height (m) 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1-1 1 Height Difference (m) -1 1 Height Difference (m) -1 1 Height Difference (m) -1 1 Height Difference (m)

51.76+1&+(('4'%'5 Latitude Difference (m) Longitude Difference (m) Height Difference (m).3. -.3.3. -.3 1.. -1. Baseline Length Altshuler WAAS NATO UNB1 PDOP Aircraft Height 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Time (minutes) 5 4 3 2 1 6 4 2 6 45 3 15 Baseline (km) PDOP Height (m)

#8)254'57.65 Position Difference Mean and Standard Deviation Position Difference Ranges Position Difference (m).5.4.3.2.1. -.1 -.2 -.3 -.4 -.5 Latitude Longitude Height Altshuler WAAS NATO UNB1 Position Difference (m) 2. 1.5 1..5. Latitude Longitude Height Altshuler WAAS NATO UNB1

#8)2557//#4; Worst case height differences: Altshuler - 1.38m. WAAS - 1.7m. NATO - 1.9m. UNB1 -.71m. Step in WAAS solutions. NATO and UNB1 perform similarly. Altshuler and WAAS: Poor modelling of height change of troposphere delay. Poor elevation angle modelling.

6412152*'4+%*'+)*6&'2'&'%; Hyd. Zenith Delay d P = P T T P κ d z hyd z hyd = f( P) z = τ P hyd g Rβ hyd z hyd T = T β H = τ κ P d hyd At user s altitude (H) Wet Zenith Delay d e T z wet = z wet ( e T βλ) = f,,, z e = τwet T e T e T T T κ λ g 1 Rβ wet z e = τwet κwet T

7$/1&'.57//#4; Require values for: Surface pressure (P ), Surface temperature (T ), Surface water vapour pressure (e ), Temperature lapse rate (β), and Water vapour lapse rate (λ). UNB1 - Global constant values (STP). UNB2 - Latitudinal averages (various sources). UNB3 - U.S. Standard Atmosphere Supplements, 1966. (temporal variation based on Niell mapping function concepts). UNB4 - Modification to UNB3 temperature profile.

March 15th Flight Path Height (m) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 52 Latitude 5 48-58 -56 Longitude -54-52

UNB1 Latitude Position Differences for March 15 UNB2 UNB3 UNB4 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 Height (m) 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 -.1.1 Latitude Difference (m) -.1.1 Latitude Difference (m) -.1.1 Latitude Difference (m) -.1.1 Latitude Difference (m)

UNB1 Longitude Position Differences for March 15 UNB2 UNB3 UNB4 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 Height (m) 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 -.1.1 Longitude Difference (m) -.1.1 Longitude Difference (m) -.1.1 Longitude Difference (m) -.1.1 Longitude Difference (m)

UNB1 Height Position Differences for March 15 UNB2 UNB3 UNB4 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 Height (m) 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 -.4 -.2.2.4 Height Difference (m) -.4 -.2.2.4 Height Difference (m) -.4 -.2.2.4 Height Difference (m) -.4 -.2.2.4 Height Difference (m)

/'6'141.1)+%#.241(+.'5 March 15 6 UNB1 UNB2 UNB3 5 UNB4 UNB1 UNB2 UNB3 UNB4 6 5 Height (m) 4 3 4 3 Height (m) 2 2 1 1-4 -3-2 -1 1 2 Temperature ( C) 2 4 6 8 1 12 Water Vapour (mbar)

7$)254'57.65 All data Position Difference Mean and Standard Deviation Position Difference Ranges Position Difference (m).2.1. -.1 -.2 Latitude Longitude Height UNB1 UNB2 UNB3 UNB4 Position Difference (m) 1.5 1..5. Latitude Longitude Height UNB1 UNB2 UNB3 UNB4

7$)254'57.65 Data upto 1 km in altitude (above msl) Position Difference Mean and Standard Deviation Position Difference Ranges Position Difference (m).3.2.1. -.1 -.2 -.3 Latitude Longitude Height UNB1 UNB2 UNB3 UNB4 Position Difference (m) 1..5. Latitude Longitude Height UNB1 UNB2 UNB3 UNB4

'4414/1&'..+) 1 1 9 9 8 8 7 7 Height (km) 6 5 4 6 5 4 Height (km) 3 3 2 2 1 1 -.12 -.8 -.4..4 -.12 -.8 -.4..4 Hydrostatic Zenith Delay Error (m) Wet Zenith Delay Error (m) (P ) = +.25 mbar (T ) = -38.9 K (β) = -2.6 K/km Total (β) = -2.6 K/km (T ) = -38.9 K (λ) = -1.75 (e ) = -1.98 mbar Total

7$)2557//#4; Error model shows potential impact of: incorrect water vapour pressure at surface, incorrect scaling of total surface pressure. Improvement in position solutions follows improved representation of water vapour profile. Most near-surface biases reduced by UNB3 and UNB4. Altitude bias introduced by UNB3. Most consistent results throughout flight paths provided by UNB4.

Height Position Differences for March 1 WAAS UNB4 6 6 5 5 Height (m) 4 3 Height (m) 4 3 2 2 1 1-1 1 Height Difference (m) -1 1 Height Difference (m)

Height Position Differences for March 15 WAAS UNB4 6 6 5 5 Height (m) 4 3 Height (m) 4 3 2 2 1 1-1 1 Height Difference (m) -1 1 Height Difference (m)

24+%+2.'51(4#;64#%+) Application of Snell s Law to a spherically stratified medium. nr+ ( R+ h hi i) sin( φ R+ ) hi = n ( R+ h ) sin( φ ) R+ hi+ 1 i+ 1 R+ hi+ 1

4#&+151&'.#7%*5+6'5 Alert Kotzebue Iqaluit Whitehorse The Pas Landvetter St. John s Denver Grand Jnc. Oakland Nashville Guam San Juan

4#;64#%'4'57.65 (Ray-trace minus model prediction) Residual Distribution Mean and Standard Deviation Residual Distribution Maxima and Minima 1.5 3 1. 2.5 1 Error (m). -.5-1. -1.5 UNB1 UNB2 UNB3 UNB4 WAAS 5 1 15 2 25 3 9 Error (m) -1-2 -3 UNB1 UNB2 UNB3 UNB4 WAAS 5 1 15 2 25 3 9 Elevation Angle (deg) Elevation Angle (deg)

14/#.&+564+$76+16'56 4 Gaussian Plot of Zenith Delay Residuals 3 Normalised Residual Distribution 2 1-1 -2-3 UNB1 UNB2 UNB3 UNB4 WAAS -4-4 -3-2 -1 1 2 3 4 Theoretical Normal N(,1) Distribution

6412152*'4+%&'.#;'4414.+/+6 x + 2σ Range Error (from ray-trace data) 1σ Range Error for AFCRL model 2.5 2.5 Delay Error (m) 2. 1.5 1. UNB1 UNB2 UNB3 UNB4 WAAS ALTS NATO Delay Error (m) 2. 1.5 1. Curve A Curve B Curve C Curve D.5.5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Elevation Angle (deg) Elevation Angle (deg)

':64'/'%1&+6+15 Hydrostatic Delay: Nominal: 2.3m @ zenith 23.32m @ 5 deg. Wet Delay (UNB3, Tropics): Nominal:.28m @ zenith 3.m @ 5 deg. SLP = 9 mbar, delay = 2.6m range error = -.26m @ zenith -2.65m @ 5 deg. Height Bias = -2.4m max PW = 8mm, delay =.51m range error = +.23m @ zenith +2.46m @ 5 deg. Height Bias = +2.24m SLP = 184 mbar, delay = 2.47m range error = +.17m @ zenith +1.73m @ 5 deg. Height Bias = +1.57m min PW = mm, delay = m range error = -.28m @ zenith -3.m @ 5 deg. Height Bias = -2.73m

%1%.75+15 Navigation-type models unsuitable for aircraft navigation. Poor height dependency. Poor mapping functions. Models based on physical principles are superior. Provision of correct meteorological values important. All models susceptible to extreme conditions. Only real-time measurements will overcome these problems. Even so, wet delay error can still be large. Under normal conditions UNB3 and UNB4 limit delay error to ~1.5m at 5 degrees elevation angle. UNB3 model provides best results near surface. UNB4 consistent at all altitudes represented by GPS data.

(7674'914- Investigation of environmental extremes frequency duration magnitude Assessment of methods to cope ground monitoring of atmospheric conditions provision of real-time atmospheric parameters barometric pressure accurate hydrostatic delay temperature computation of saturation profile - upper limit of wet delay

#%-19.'&)'/'65 Transport Canada Aviation (TCA). Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). National Research Council (NRC). Atmospheric Environment Service (AES). Virgilio Mendes.