Moderate Geomagnetic Storm Condition, WAAS Alerts and real GPS Positioning Quality

Vladislav Vladimir Demyanov (Irkutsk State Transport University)
Xinggang Zhang (National Time Service Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences)
Xiaochun Lu (National Time Service Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences)

Article ID: 343

DOI: https://doi.org/10.30564/jasr.v2i1.343

Abstract


The most significant part of the Wade Area Augmentation System (WAAS) integrity data consists of the User Differential Range Error (UDRE) and the Grid Ionospheric Vertical Error (GIVE). WAAS solutions are not completely appropriate to determine the GIVE term within the entire wade area coverage zone taking in account real irregular structure of the ionosphere. It leads to the larger confidence bounding terms and lower expected positioning availability in comparison to the reality under geomagnetic storm conditions and system outages. Thus a question arises: is the basic WAAS concept appropriate to provide the same efficiency of the integrity monitoring for both “global differential correction (i.e. clock, ephemeris etc)” and “local differential correction (i.e. ionoshrere, troposhpere and multipath)”? The aim of this paper is to compare official WAAS integrity monitoring reports and real positioning quality in US coverage zone (CONUS) and Canada area under geomagnetic storm conditions and system outages. In this research we are interested in comparison between real GPS positioning quality based on one-frequency C/A ranging mode and HAL (VAL) values which correspond to the LP, LPV and LPV200 requirements. Significant mismatch of the information between WAAS integrity data and real positioning quality was unfolded as a result of this comparison under geomagnetic storms and system outages on February, 2011 and June 22, 2015. Based on this result we think that in order to achieve high confidence of WAAS positioning availability alerts real ionospheric measurements within the wide area coverage zone must be involved instead of the WAAS GIVE values. The better way to realize this idea is to combine WAAS solutions to derive “global differential corrections” and LAAS solutions to derive “local differential corrections”.

Keywords


Ionosphere and SBAS;Auroral oval and WAAS integrity;DGPS;Differential GNSS integrity under geomagnetic storms

Full Text:

PDF

References


[1] Aarons J, Mullen JP, Whitney H. [et al.] (1981) VHF Scintillation Activity Over Polar Latitudes. Geophysical. Res. Lett. 8: 277–280. doi: 10.1029/GL008i003p00277

[2] Afraimovich EL, Astafieva EI, Demyanov VV (2004) Ionosphere Geomagnetic Variations and GPS Positioning Errors During the Major Magnetic Storm on 29–31 October 2003. International Reference Ionosphere News 11 (3–4): 10–14

[3] Afraimovich EL, Astafyeva EI, Demyanov VV, and Gamayunov IF (2009) Mid-latitude amplitude scintillation of GPS signals and GPS performance slips. Advances in Space Research 43: 964–972. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2008.09.015

[4] Benton CJ, and Mitchell CN (2012) GPS satellite oscillator faults mimicking ionospheric phase scintillation. GPS Solutions 16:477-482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-011-0247-3

[5] Benton CJ, and Mitchell CN (2014) Further observations of GPS satellite oscillator anomalies mimicking ionospheric phase scintillation. GPS Solutions 18: 387-391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-013-0338-4

[6] Datta-Barua S, Lee J, Pullen S, Luo M, Ene A, Qiu D, Zhang G, Enge P (2010) Ionospheric threat parameterization for local area Global-Positioning-System-based aircraft landing systems. J Aircraft 47(4):1141–1151. doi:10.2514/1.46719

[7] Demyanov VV, Yasyukevich YV, Ishin AB, and Astafyeva EI (2012) Effects of ionosphere super-bubble on the GPS positioning performance depending on the orientation relative to geomagnetic field. GPS Solutions 16:181-189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-011-0217-9

[8] Demyanov VV, and Likhota RV (2015) The method of GNSS positioning availability control for transportation applications. Machines, Technologies, Materials 5:11-13. ISSN 1313-0226

[9] El-Mowafy A (2014a) GNSS Multi-Frequency Receiver Single-Satellite Measurement Validation Method. GPS Solutions 18(4): 553-561. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-013-0352-6

[10] El-Mowafy A (2014b) GNSS multi-frequency receiver single-satellite measurement validation method. GPS Solutions 18: 553. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-013-0352-6

[11] Estey L. and Meertens C (1999) TEQC: The Multi-Purpose Toolkit for GPS/GLONASS Data. GPS Solutions 3(1): 42-49. doi: doi:10.1007/PL00012778

[12] Global positioning system wide area augmentation system (WAAS) performance standard (2008). Appendix B, 1st Edition

[13] Hakansson M, Jensen ABO, Horemuz M, and Hedling G (2017) Review of code and phase biases in multi-GNSS positioning. GPS Solutions 21:849–860. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-016-0572-7

[14] Hilla S, and Cline M (2004) Evaluating pseudorange multipath effects at stations in the National CORS Network. GPS Solutions 7:253–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-003-0073-3

[15] ICD-GPS-200C, «Navstar GPS Space Segment/Navigation User Interfaces», April, 2000

[16] Jakowski N, Mayer C, Wilken V, Borries C, and Doherty PH (2007) Ionosphere Storms at High and Mid-latitudes Monitored by Ground and Space Based GPS Techniques. In: Proceedings of the International Beacon Satellite Symposium, Boston College, June 11–15, Boston, USA

[17] Kintner PM, Kil H, and E. de Paula (2001) Fading Time Scales Associated with GPS Signals and Potential Consequences. Radio Science 36(4): 731–743. doi:10.1029/1999RS002310

[18] Lekshmi DV, Balan N, Ram ST, and Liu JY (2011) Statistics of geomagnetic storms and ionospheric storms at low and mid latitudes in two solar cycles. Journal of Geophysical Research, VOL. 116, A11328. doi:10.1029/2011JA017042

[19] Mimimum Operation Performance Standard: MOPS DO-229C. Version C, Appendix A: Wade Area Augmentation System Signal Specification, 2001 RTCA Inc.

[20] Montenbruck O, Steigenberger P and Hauschild A (2015) Broadcast versus precise ephemerides: a multi-GNSS perspective. GPS Solutions 19:321–333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-014-0390-8

[21] Mylnikova AA, Yasyukevich YV, Kunitsyn VE, and Padokhin AM (2015) Variability of GPS/GLONASS differential code biases. Results in Physics 5: 9–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2014.11.002

[22] Paulo L, Fortes S, Lin T, and Lachapelle G (2015) Effects of the 2012–2013 solar maximum on GNSS signals in Brazil. GPS Solutions 19:309–319. doi:10.1007/s10291-014-0389-1

[23] Rife J, Walter T, and Blanch J (2004) An Overbounding SBAS and GBAS Error Distributions with Excess-Mass Functions.

[24] Presented at the International Symposium on GNSS/GPS, December, 2004, Sydney, Australia [Electronic resource]. – Stanford, 2004. URL:http://web.stanford.edu/group/scpnt/gpslab/pubs/papers/Rife_IGNSS_2004.pdf.

[25] SARPS Amendment 77, Annex 10 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, Aeronautical Telecommunications: International Standards and Recommended Practices, Volume 1, Radio Navigation Aids, November 2002

[26] Schaer S (2012) Overview of GNSS biases. International GNSS Service. Workshop on GNSS Biases. [Electronic resource]. URL: http://www.biasws2012.unibe.ch/pdf/bws12_1.3.1.pdf

[27] Sieradzki R and Paziewski J (2016) Study on reliable GNSS positioning with intense TEC fluctuations at high latitudes // GPS Solutions 20:553–563. doi:10.1007/s10291-015-0466-0

[28] Themens DR, Jayachandran PT, Langley RB, MacDougall J W, and Nicolls M J (2013) Determining receiver biases in GPS-derived total electron content in the auroral oval and polar cap region using ionosonde measurements. GPS Solutions 17:357–369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-012-0284-6

[29] Tossaint M, Samson J, Toran F, Ventura-Traveset J, Hernandez-Pajares M, Juan JM, Sanz J, Ramos-Bosch P (2007) The Stanford—ESA integrity diagram: a new tool for the user domain SBAS integrity assessment. Navigation, Institute of Navigation, vol 54, no 2, pp 153–162. doi: 10.1002/j.2161-4296.2007.tb00401.x

[30] Veettil SV, Haralambous H, and Aquino M (2017) Observations of quiet-time moderate midlatitude L-band scintillation in association with plasma bubbles. GPS Solutions 21:1113–1124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-016-0598-x

[31] Walter T, Blanch J, and Rife J (2004) Treatment of Biased Error Distributions in SBAS. Presented at the International Symposium on GNSS/GPS, December, 2004, Sydney, Australia [Electronic resource]. – Stanford, 2004. URL:http://web.stanford.edu/group/scpnt/gpslab/pubs/papers/Walter_ISGNSS_2004.pdf

[32] Walter T, Enge P, Reddan P (2004) Modernizing WAAS. Presented at the International Symposium on GNSS/GPS, December, 2004, Sydney, Australia [Electronic resource]. – Stanford, 2004. URL:http://web.stanford.edu/group/scpnt/gpslab/pubs/papers/Walter_IONGNSS_2004.pdf.

[33] Wide-area augmentation system performance analysis report, Report #36. Reporting Period: January 1 to March 31, 2011. Available from: http://www.nstb.tc.faa.gov/DisplayArchive.htm

[34] Wide-area augmentation system performance analysis report, Report #53. Reporting Period: April 1 to June 30, 2015. Available from: http://www.nstb.tc.faa.gov/DisplayArchive.htm

[35] Xia L (2004) Multipath in GPS navigation and positioning. GPS Solutions 8:49–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-004-0085-7


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright © 2019 Author(s)


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.