Advertisement

GPS Solutions

, 22:60 | Cite as

Elevation-dependent pseudorange variation characteristics analysis for the new-generation BeiDou satellite navigation system

  • Renyu Zhou
  • Zhigang Hu
  • Qile Zhao
  • Pengbo Li
  • Wei Wang
  • Chengyan He
  • Chenglin Cai
  • Zongpeng Pan
Original Article

Abstract

To validate the new system design and the new technology of the third-generation BDS (BeiDou-3), five non-GEO experimental satellites were launched during 2015 and 2016. In addition to the B1I and B3I signals that have been emitted by BeiDou-2, three newly designed civil signals (B1C, B2a, and B2b) were first transmitted by these satellites and are planned to be partly applied to the official BeiDou-3 satellites. In this study, the signature of elevation-dependent systematic biases in code measurements, which are commonly observed from BeiDou-2 satellites, was investigated for the three new civil signals based on observations collected using different types of receivers at different locations. Our results show that the RMS of multipath combination residuals of the new civil signal B1C was statistically larger than those of B2a and B2b signals. This indicates that B1C tends to be more seriously affected by multipath effects than B2a and B2b. Furthermore, the station elevation-dependent and satellite nadir- and azimuth-dependent multipath signatures were analyzed in detail. The results show that elevation-dependent variations in code measurements of B1I and B3I signals still exist for BeiDou-2 satellites, including the latest IGSO-6 (C13) launched in 2016. Based on different receivers which are equipped with all-in-view antennas, these types of code biases seem to be absent in the legacy B1C, B2a, and B2b frequency bands for BeiDou-3 in-orbit validation satellites. However, benefited from multipath-free conditions, results from a 40-m dish antenna reveal that the satellite-induced code pseudorange variations still exist in the bands of B1C, B2a, and B2b of BeiDou-3 in-orbit validation satellites, although their variation ranges are only at a level of approximately 0.1 m.

Keywords

B1C B2a B2b BeiDou-3 Elevation-dependent pseudorange variation Multipath combination 40-m high-gain dish antenna 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was sponsored by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 41604029, 41574027, 41574030, and 61501430). The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and improvements to this manuscript.

References

  1. Avila-Rodriguez J et al (2008) The MBOC modulation: the final touch to the Galileo frequency and signal plan. Navigation 55(1):15–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cai C, Gao Y, Pan L, Dai W (2014) An analysis on combined GPS/COMPASS data quality and its effect on single point positioning accuracy under different observing conditions. Adv Space Res 54(5):818–829.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2013.02.019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chen J, Hu X, Tang C, Zhou S, Guo R, Pan J, Li R, Zhu L (2016) Orbit determination and time synchronization for new-generation Beidou satellites: preliminary results. Sci Sin Phys Mech Astron.  https://doi.org/10.1360/SSPMA2016-00281 (in Chinese) Google Scholar
  4. CSNO (2012) Report on the development of BeiDou Navigation Satellite System (version 2.1). BeijingGoogle Scholar
  5. CSNO (2016) BeiDou Navigation Satellite System signal in space interface control document (Open Service Signal (Version 2.1)). BeijingGoogle Scholar
  6. Hauschild A, Montenbruck O, Sleewaegen JM, Huisman L, Teunissen PJG (2012) Characterization of compass M-1 signals. GPS Solut 16(1):117–126.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-011-0210-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hein GW et al (2006) MBOC: the new optimized spreading modulation recommended for GALILEO L1 OS and GPS L1C. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/ION PLANS 2006, Institute of Navigation, San Diego, CA, 25–27 April, pp 883–892Google Scholar
  8. Irsigler M, Eissfeller B (2003) Comparison of multipath mitigation techniques with consideration of future signal structures. In: Proceedings of ION GPS/GNSS 2003, Institute of Navigation, Portland, OR, 9–12 Sept, pp 2584–2592Google Scholar
  9. Irsigler M, Hein GW, Eissfeller B (2004) Multipath performance analysis for future GNSS signals. In: Proceedings of ION NTM 2004, Institute of Navigation, San Diego, CA, 26–28 Jan, pp 225–238Google Scholar
  10. Lei WY, Wu GC, Tao XX, Bian L, Wang XL (2017) BDS satellite-induced code multipath: mitigation and assessment in new-generation IOV satellites. Adv Space Res 60(12):2672–2679.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2017.05.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Montenbruck O et al (2017) The Multi-GNSS Experiment (MGEX) of the International GNSS Service (IGS)—achievements, prospects and challenges. Adv Space Res 59(7):1671–1697.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2017.01.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. OS-SIS-ICD (2010) European GNSS (Galileo) Open Service—signal in space interface control document. Publications Office of the European UnionGoogle Scholar
  13. Rocken C, Meertens C (1992) UNAVCO receiver tests. UNAVCO Memo 8Google Scholar
  14. SCIO (2016) China’s BeiDou Navigation Satellite System. Foreign Languages Press, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  15. Shi C, Zhao QL, Hu ZG, Liu JN (2013) Precise relative positioning using real tracking data from COMPASS GEO and IGSO satellites. GPS Solut 17(1):103–119.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-012-0264-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Simsky A (2006) Three’s the charm: triple-frequency combinations in future GNSS. Inside GNSS 1(5):38–41Google Scholar
  17. Tan S, Zhou B, Guo S, Liu Z (2010) Studies of compass navigation signals design. Sci Sin Phys Mech Astron 40(5):514–519 (in Chinese) Google Scholar
  18. Thoelert S, Meurer M, Erker S, Montenbruck O, Hauschild A, Fenton P (2012) A multi-technique approach for characterizing the SVN49 signal anomaly, part 2: chip shape analysis. GPS Solut 16(1):29–39.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-011-0204-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. US.DoD (2013) Global positioning systems directorate systems engineering & integration-interface specification IS-GPS-200 (IS-GPS-200H)Google Scholar
  20. Wang GX, de Jong K, Zhao QL, Hu ZG, Guo J (2015) Multipath analysis of code measurements for BeiDou geostationary satellites. GPS Solut 19(1):129–139.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-014-0374-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Wanninger L, Beer S (2015) BeiDou satellite-induced code pseudorange variations: diagnosis and therapy. GPS Solut 19(4):639–648.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-014-0423-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Xie X, Geng T, Zhao Q, Liu J, Wang B (2017) Performance of BDS-3: measurement quality analysis, precise orbit and clock determination. Sensors 17(6):1233.  https://doi.org/10.3390/s17061233 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Xu G (2007) GPS: theory, algorithms, and applications. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  24. Zhang X, He X, Liu W (2017a) Characteristics of systematic errors in the BDS Hatch–Melbourne–Wübbena combination and its influence on wide-lane ambiguity resolution. GPS Solut 21(1):265–277.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-016-0520-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Zhang XH, Wu MK, Liu WK, Li XX, Yu S, Lu CX, Wickert J (2017b) Initial assessment of the COMPASS/BeiDou-3: new-generation navigation signals. J Geod 91(10):1225–1240.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-017-1020-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.GNSS Research CenterWuhan UniversityWuhanPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.National Engineering Center for Satellite Positioning SystemWuhanPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.Beijing Institute of Tracking and Telecommunication TechnologyBeijingPeople’s Republic of China
  4. 4.National Time Service CenterChinese Academy of SciencesXi’anPeople’s Republic of China
  5. 5.Guilin University of Electronic TechnologyGuilinPeople’s Republic of China
  6. 6.Institute of Surveying and MappingInformation Engineering UniversityZhengzhouPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations