Methodology and Case Studies of Signal-in-Space Error Calculation

Similar documents
Methodology and Case Studies of Signal-in-Space Error Calculation Top-down Meets Bottom-up

Recent Progress on Aviation Integrity

GPS Signal-in-Space Anomalies in the Last Decade

Introduction to Advanced RAIM. Juan Blanch, Stanford University July 26, 2016

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

Near Term Improvements to WAAS Availability

ARAIM Fault Detection and Exclusion

GPS in Mid-life with an International Team of Doctors

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

Lessons Learned During the Development of GNSS Integrity Monitoring and Verification Techniques for Aviation Users

Integrity of Satellite Navigation in the Arctic

Prototyping Advanced RAIM for Vertical Guidance

Satellite Navigation Science and Technology for Africa. 23 March - 9 April, Air Navigation Applications (SBAS, GBAS, RAIM)

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

Characterization of GPS Clock and Ephemeris Errors to Support ARAIM

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

FAA GNSS Programs & GPS Evolutionary Architecture Study (GEAS) Status

GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM (GPS) PERFORMANCE JULY TO SEPTEMBER 2018 QUARTERLY REPORT 3

Aviation Grade. Chips Off the Block IIF

Assessment of Nominal Ionosphere Spatial Decorrelation for LAAS

Global Navigation Satellite Systems II

UNIT 1 - introduction to GPS

On Location at Stanford University

GNSS-based Flight Inspection Systems

GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM (GPS) PERFORMANCE OCTOBER TO DECEMBER 2017 QUARTERLY REPORT

ARAIM Integrity Support Message Parameter Validation by Online Ground Monitoring

GPS Signal-in-Space Integrity Performance Evolution in the Last Decade

GNSS & Coordinate Systems

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

Development of a GAST-D ground subsystem prototype and its performance evaluation with a long term-data set

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

A Differential Reference Station Algorithm For Modular Decentralized GPS/GNSS Master Station Architecture. Oct. 28, 2010

Introduction to DGNSS

VERTICAL POSITION ERROR BOUNDING FOR INTEGRATED GPS/BAROMETER SENSORS TO SUPPORT UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLE (UAV)

Impact of Personal Privacy Devices for WAAS Aviation Users

GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM (GPS) PERFORMANCE JANUARY TO MARCH 2017 QUARTERLY REPORT

SYSTEMATIC EFFECTS IN GPS AND WAAS TIME TRANSFERS

Modelling GPS Observables for Time Transfer

Analysis of a Three-Frequency GPS/WAAS Receiver to Land an Airplane

Satellite-Based Augmentation System (SBAS) Integrity Services

Clock Synchronization of Pseudolite Using Time Transfer Technique Based on GPS Code Measurement

Challenges and Solutions for GPS Receiver Test

ESTIMATION OF IONOSPHERIC DELAY FOR SINGLE AND DUAL FREQUENCY GPS RECEIVERS: A COMPARISON

Lecture 2 Satellite orbits and clocks computation and accuracy

On Location at Stanford University

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

GLONASS Signal-in-Space Anomalies Since 2009

The Wide Area Augmentation System

GNSS PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT AND DATA RECORDING GUIDELINES IN AVIATION

Carrier Phase GPS Augmentation Using Laser Scanners and Using Low Earth Orbiting Satellites

The Possibility of Precise Automobile Navigation using GPS/QZS L5 and (Galileo E5) Pseudo ranges

Asia Oceania Regional Workshop on GNSS Precise Point Positioning Experiment by using QZSS LEX

Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS)Part I EE 570: Location and Navigation

NGA s Support for Positioning and Navigation

Figure 2: Maximum Ionosphere-Induced Vertical Errors at Memphis

Interoperation and Integration of Satellite Based Augmentation Systems

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

Assessment of WAAS Correction Data in Eastern Canada

Global Correction Services for GNSS

GPS Geodetic Reference System WGS 84

GNSS Solutions: Do GNSS augmentation systems certified for aviation use,

Time and frequency transfer methods based on GNSS. LIANG Kun, National Institute of Metrology(NIM), China

Horizontal Advanced RAIM: Operational Benefits and Future Challenges

Low-Elevation Ionosphere Spatial Anomalies Discovered from the 20 November 2003 Storm

Weighted RAIM for Precision Approach

GNSS Integrity Monitoring

Matlab Simulation Toolset for SBAS Availability Analysis

FieldGenius Technical Notes GPS Terminology

EE 570: Location and Navigation

The Benefits of Three Frequencies for the High Accuracy Positioning

Ionospheric Corrections for GNSS

Assessing & Mitigation of risks on railways operational scenarios

Understanding GPS: Principles and Applications Second Edition

Incorporating GLONASS into Aviation RAIM Receivers

Modernizing WAAS. Todd Walter and Per Enge, Stanford University, Patrick Reddan Zeta Associates Inc.

Validation of the WAAS MOPS Integrity Equation

Introduction to the Global Positioning System

ABSOLUTE CALIBRATION OF TIME RECEIVERS WITH DLR'S GPS/GALILEO HW SIMULATOR

GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEMS. Knowing where and when

Fast convergence of Trimble CenterPoint RTX by regional augmentation

GPS Global Positioning System

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

Studies On GNSS Open Service Performance Standard Template

Interoperability between EGNOS and WAAS: Tests Using ESTB and NSTB

COMPARISON OF GPS COMMERCIAL SOFTWARE PACKAGES TO PROCESSING STATIC BASELINES UP TO 30 KM

Effects of magnetic storms on GPS signals

An Introduction to GPS

Phase Center Calibration and Multipath Test Results of a Digital Beam-Steered Antenna Array

Ionospheric Rates of Change

Optimization of a Vertical Protection Level Equation for Dual Frequency SBAS

NR402 GIS Applications in Natural Resources

Improved Ephemeris Monitoring for GNSS

Availability Impact on GPS AviationduetoStrong Ionospheric Scintillation

Characterization of Signal Deformations for GPS and WAAS Satellites

Distributed integrity monitoring of differential GPS corrections

PRECISE TIME DISSEMINATION USING THE INMARSAT GEOSTATIONARY OVERLAY

Improved User Position Monitor for WAAS

Compact multi-gnss PPP corrections messages for transmission through a 250 bps channel

The Global Positioning System

Performance Assessment of Dual Frequency GBAS Protection Level Algorithms using a Dual Constellation and Non-Gaussian Error Distributions

Transcription:

Methodology and Case Studies of Signal-in-Space Error Calculation Top-down Meets Bottom-up Grace Xingxin Gao *, Haochen Tang *, Juan Blanch *, Jiyun Lee +, Todd Walter * and Per Enge * * Stanford University, USA + KAIST, Korea September 23, 2009 Research funded by Federal Aviation Administration

Outline Introduction Signal-in-space error Methodology Top-down Methodology Bottom-up Case Studies Planned satellite position outage, PRN 10, Day 39 of Year 2007 Unplanned clock anomaly, PRN 07, Day 229 of Year 2007 2

Error Sources of GPS Signals Signal in space error - Satellite position -Clock - Other Propagation error - Ionosphere - Troposphere Ionosphere Delay Troposphere Delay Receiver and local environment error - Receiver clock - Multipath 3

Motivation & Prior Work Motivation signal-in-space, propagation and receiver errors have been well studied, but better understanding is still required Essential for GPS integrity Satellite failures are identified if the signal-in-space errors exceed 4.42*URA (User Range Accuracy) The statistics of signal-in-space errors are useful for evaluating URA Prior work of signal-in-space error calculation KAIST, Jiyun Lee. GEAS presentations since early 2009 Ohio Univ., Frank Van Grass. GEAS presentation 2009 FAATC, Tom McHugh for WAAS PAN report IIT, Boris Pervan, et al. GEAS presentation in Sept. 2008 Aerospace, Karl Kovach, presented at SCPNT in Nov. 2008 David L. M. Warren and John F. Raquet, Broadcast vs. precise GPS ephemerides: a historical perspective, GPS Solutions, 2004 Jefferson D, Bar-Sever Y (2000) Accuracy and consistency of broadcast GPS ephemeris data. Proc ION-GPS-2000 4

Signal in Space (SIS) Errors Main errors Satellite position Satellite clock Other code-carrier incoherence signal deformation Inter-signal errors satellite antenna phase center variation satellite antenna group delay center variation relativistic correction errors 5

Methodology Overview: Top-down vs. Bottom-up Top-down Signal in space error - Satellite position -Clock - Other Bottom-up Signal in space error - Satellite position -Clock - Other Propagation error - Ionosphere - Troposphere Ionosphere Troposphere Signal in space error satellite position error + clock error User receiver error - Receiver clock - Multipath Signal in space error = total pseudo-range error - receiver clock error - multipath error - ionosphere error - troposphere error 6

Bottom-up Methodology, Flow Chart Start Pick proper broadcast ephemerides based on the time of the truth Propagate broadcast satellite positions to the time of the truth Propagate broadcast satellite clock error to the time of the truth Calculate the difference between the propagated broadcast ephemerides and the truth Project the ephemeris error to a certain receiver on Earth Bottom-up Signal in space error - Satellite position -Clock - Other Signal in space error = satellite position error + clock error End 7

Top-down Methodology, Data Source Data Source: Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) / National Satellite Test Bed (NSTB) Network - 38 stations in North America, with 3 receivers per station - Data update rate: 1 Hz - Output pseudo-range measurements and navigation messages 8

Bottom-up Methodology, Data Sources Broadcast ephemeris: International GNSS Service (IGS) network http://igscb.jpl.nasa.gov/network/netindex.html Precise ephemeris: National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) network 9 http://earth-info.nga.mil/gandg/sathtml/stationmap.gif

Methodology Comparison: Top-down vs. Bottom-up Data Source Control of data source Data update rate Depend on post-processed truth Include all SIS errors Receiver glitches Remove all non SIS errors Receiver coverage Data availability Top-down WAAS & NSTB Yes High, every 1 sec No Yes No for WAAS No Limited (CONUS) Difficult to retrieve past data Bottom-up IGS & NGA No Low, 15 min Yes No Yes Yes Worldwide, but not even Available 10

Case Studies Planned satellite position outage, PRN 10, Day 39 of Year 2007

Ground Track of PRN 10, Day 39-40 of Year 2007 12

Worst Projected Ephemeris Error PRN 10, Day 39 of 2007 Worst projected ephemeris error ( X, Y, Z, b ) SV set unhealthy SV set unhealthy Zoom in Planned Outage 13

Top-down vs. Bottom-up, 100-sec Smoothing PRN 10 Day 39 50 100-sec smooth 100-sec smoothing 40 Actual Top-down Error Calculated Bottom-upError Projected Ephemeris Error (m) 30 20 10 Top-down Bottom-up 0-10 17 17.5 18 18.5 19 19.5 20 20.5 21 UTC (hour) Atlantic City NJ, 39.44º N 74.56º W 14

Discrepancies of Top-down vs. Bottom-up, 100-sec Smoothing 3 100-sec smooth Discrepancies of projected ephemeris error (meters) 2 1 0-1 -2-3 -4 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 UTC (hour) Atlantic City NJ, 39.44º N 74.56º W 15

Top-down vs. Bottom-up, 15-min Smoothing PRN 10 Day 39 50 15-min smooth 15-min smoothing 40 Actual Top-down Error Calculated Bottom-upError Projected Ephemeris Error (m) 30 20 10 Top-down Bottom-up 0-10 17 17.5 18 18.5 19 19.5 20 20.5 21 UTC (hour) Atlantic City NJ, 39.44º N 74.56º W 16

Discrepancies of Top-down vs. Bottom-up, 15-min Smoothing 3 15-min smooth Discrepancies of projected ephemeris error (meters) 2 1 0-1 -2-3 -4 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 UTC (hour) Atlantic City NJ, 39.44º N 74.56º W 17

Case Studies Unplanned clock anomaly, PRN 07, Day 229 of Year 2007

Ground Track of PRN 07, Day 229 of Year 2007 19

Worst Projected Ephemeris Error PRN 07, Day 229 of 2007 Worst projected ephemeris error ( X, Y, Z, b ) Anomaly 20

Top-down vs. Bottom-up, Arcata CA, 100-sec Smoothing Worst projected ephemeris error (meters) 25 20 15 10 5 0 Bottom-up Projected ephemeris error URA 4.42*URA Top-down Actual projected ephem error Bottom-up Top-down -5 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 UTC time (hours) Arcata CA, 40.97º N 124.11º W 21

Discrepancies of Top-down vs. Bottom-up, 100-sec Smoothing worst projected ephemeris error discrepancies (m) 2 1 0-1 -2-3 -4 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 UTC Time (hour) Arcata CA, 40.97º N 124.11º W 22

Conclusion (1/2) Compared two approaches to calculate signal-in-space error Top-down: strips off all other errors from the pseudo-range errors, leaves alone signal-in-space errors Bottom-up: builds up signal-in-space errors from satellite position errors and clock errors Top-down and bottom-up both have pros and cons Data Source Control of data source Data update rate Depend on post-processed truth Include all SIS errors Receiver glitches Remove all non SIS errors Receiver coverage Data availability Top-down WAAS & NSTB Yes High, every 1 sec No Yes No for WAAS No Limited (CONUS) Difficult to retrieve past data Bottom-up IGS & NGA No Low, 15 min Yes No Yes Yes Worldwide, but not even Available 23

Conclusion (2/2) Two case studies Planned outage? Outage type Site investigated PRN 10, Day 39 of Year 2007 Yes Satellite position Atlantic City, NJ PRN 07, Day 229 of Year 2007 No Satellite clock Arcata, CA Top-down and bottom-up match well for both normal and abnormal cases The discrepancies are independent of the filter length of carrier smoothing The discrepancies are due to Inaccurate estimate of iono/tropo/multipath/receiver clock errors Other error sources, e.g. code-carrier incoherence, signal deformation, Intersignal errors, satellite antenna phase center variation, satellite antenna group delay center variation, relativistic correction errors, etc Inaccuracies in precise ephemerides Incorrect choice of active broadcast ephemeris The discrepancies are within +/-4 meters as a starting point Near term goal: better than 1 m 24

Thank You! The authors acknowledge Tom McHugh from the FAA Tech Center for providing the WAAS/NSTB data of the 2007 outages.

Back-up Slides

Top-down Methodology in Detail: Removing Ionosphere Error Signal in space error - Satellite position -Clock Propagation error - Ionosphere - Troposphere User receiver error - Receiver clock - Multipath Top-down Ionosphere Troposphere Dual-frequency iono-free combination: f f ρ ρ ρ 2 2 L1 L2 IF = 2 2 L1 2 2 L2, fl 1 fl2 fl 1 fl2 2 2 fl 1 fl2 IF 2 2 L1 2 2 L2 fl 1 fl2 fl 1 fl2 Φ = Φ Φ ρ : Code measurement Φ : Carrier measurement ρif : Iono-free combination of code measurements, 27

Top-down Methodology in Detail: Removing Troposphere Error Signal in space error - Satellite position -Clock Propagation error - Ionosphere - Troposphere User receiver error - Receiver clock - Multipath Top-down Troposphere Estimate and removal of troposphere error based on WAAS Minimum Operational Standard (MOPS) : σ i, tropo = σ TVE mel ( i ) Troposphere Troposphere delay for mapping function satellite i for satellite i Troposphere Vertical Error 28

Top-down Methodology in Detail: Removing Receiver Multipath Error Carrier smoothing using a recursive filter of length M: Signal in space error - Satellite position -Clock Propagation error - Ionosphere - Troposphere Top-down Carrier smoothing: 1 ( M 1) ρ( ti) = ρ( ti) + [ ρ( ti 1) + ( Φ( ti) Φ( ti 1))], M M ρ( t ) = ρ( t ). 1 1 ρ(): t Code measurement Φ(): t Carrier measurement ρ(): t Smoothed pseudo-range measurement User receiver error - Receiver clock - Multipath 29

Top-down Methodology in Detail: Removing Receiver Clock Error Carrier smoothing using a recursive filter of length M: Signal in space error - Satellite position -Clock Propagation error - Ionosphere - Troposphere User receiver error - Receiver clock - Multipath Top-down Different among satellites, cancels out after averaging Receiver clock error is a common error for pseudo-ranges from all satellites For healthy satellites, the signal in space error is zero-mean i.i.d. Averaging the remaining errors from those healthy satellites cancels out satellite in space errors and leaves alone the user clock bias Common among satellites, remains after averaging 30

Bottom-up Methodology, Data Sources International GNSS Service (IGS) network - Provide broadcast ephemeris - 350+ receivers worldwide - Output pseudo-range measurements and navigation data in RINEX format - Data update every 2 hours National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) network - Provide post-processed true ephemeris - 10+ receivers worldwide - Output satellite position and clock information - Data update every 15 minutes http://igscb.jpl.nasa.gov/network/netindex.html http://earth-info.nga.mil/gandg/sathtml/stationmap.gif 31

Bottom-up Methodology in Detail Start Pick proper broadcast ephemerides based on the time of the truth Choose the most recent TTOM Propagate broadcast satellite positions to the time of the truth Propagate broadcast satellite clock error to the time of the truth Calculate the difference between the propagated broadcast ephemerides and the truth Project the ephemeris error to a certain receiver on earth Use Kepler s equations Based on the clock drift and the drift rate The broadcast and true ephemerides are of the same time stamp for fair comparison Project along line-of-sight between the satellite and the receiver End 32

Ephemeris Error Satellite Position PRN 10, Day 39 of 2007 Ephemeris error ( X, Y, Z ) SV set unhealthy SV set unhealthy Zoom in The ephemeris anomaly of PRN 10 on Day 39 is due to satellite position errors. 33

Ephemeris Error Clock PRN 07, Day 229 Year 2007 The clock error is the cause of the anomaly. 34