Journal of Geodesy

, Volume 80, Issue 8–11, pp 429–456 | Cite as

Twenty years of evolution for the DORIS permanent network: from its initial deployment to its renovation

  • Hervé FagardEmail author
Original Article


The ground network is one of the major components of the DORIS system. Its deployment, managed by the French national mapping agency [Institut Géographique National, (IGN)], started in 1986 at a sustained pace that allowed it to reach 32 stations upon the launch of the first DORIS-equipped satellite (SPOT-2) in 1990. For the first generation of transmitting antennas, the installation procedures were adapted to the decimetre performance objective for the DORIS system. During the second era of the deployment of an even denser network, the antenna support layouts gradually evolved towards a better quality, thus improving the long-term stability of the antenna reference point, and a new antenna model allowed a more accurate survey. As the positioning accuracy of the DORIS system improved, it was necessary to review the antenna stability for the whole network. A first stability estimation, using criteria like antenna model and support design, was followed by a major renovation effort which started in 2000 and is now almost complete. In 6 years, through the renovation or installation of 43 stations and the implementation of new installation procedures to meet more stringent stability requirements, significant improvement in network quality was achieved. Later a more analytical approach, taking into account the characteristics of each element that support the antenna, has been taken to assess the potential stability of all DORIS occupations. IGN is also in charge of its operational maintenance, an intensive activity on account of the significant failure rate of the successive generations of equipment. Nevertheless, thanks to its unique density and homogeneity, DORIS has maintained a very good coverage rate of the satellite orbits. Through 38 well-distributed current co-locations with the Global Positioning System, Satellite Laser Ranging and Very Long Baseline Interferometry techniques in its current 56-station network, DORIS contributes significantly to the realisation of the International Terrestrial Reference System. DORIS stations in areas where no other space geodesy technique is available provide a significant contribution to the study of plate tectonics. Many stations co-located with tide gauges contribute to the monitoring of sea level changes. Although it has several advantages over similar techniques, there is still room for improvement in the DORIS network.


DORIS Tracking network Geodesy Reference frames Co-location 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Supplementary material

190_2006_84_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (116 kb)
Supplementary material
190_2006_84_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (116 kb)
Supplementary material
190_2006_84_MOESM3_ESM.xls (58 kb)
Supplementary material


  1. Altamimi Z, Sillard P, Boucher C (2002) ITRF2000, a new release of the international terrestrial reference frame for earth science applications. J Geophys Res 107(B10):2214. DOI 10.1029/2001JB000561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Altamimi Z (2003) ITRF and co-location sites. In: Proceedings of the IERS workshop on site co-location, IERS technical note no. 33, Matera, Italy. publications/tn/tn33/tn33_008.pdfGoogle Scholar
  3. BIH (1988) Annual report for 1987. Observatoire de Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  4. Boucher C, Fagard H (1991) DORIS stations coordinates. In: Proceedings of the international DORIS orbit computation workshop, Toulouse, France, OctoberGoogle Scholar
  5. Boucher C, Cazenave A, Dufour JP, Essaïfi N, Feissel M, Gambis D, Willis P (1994) Proposal to include DORIS as a new technique in IERS. Rapport technique GRGS no. 12. Groupe de Recherche de Géodésie Spatiale, FranceGoogle Scholar
  6. Boucher C, Altamimi Z, Feissel M, Sillard P (1996) Results and analysis of the ITRF94. IERS technical note no. 20. Observatoire de Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  7. Boucher C, Altamimi Z, Sillard P (1999) The 1997 international terrestrial reference frame (ITRF97). IERS technical note 27. Observatoire de Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  8. Cazenave A, Dominh K, Ponchaut F, Soudarin L, Cretaux JF, Le Provost C (1999) Sea level changes from TOPEX-Poseidon altimetry and tide gauges, and vertical crustal motions from DORIS. Geophys Res Lett 26(14):2077–2080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cretaux JF, Soudarin L, Cazenave A, Bouille F (1998) Present-day tectonic plate motions and crustal deformations from the DORIS space system. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 103(B12):30167–30181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Defense Mapping Agency (1987) Department of Defense World Geodetic System 1984—its definition and relationships with local geodetic coordinate systems. DMA technical report 8350.2Google Scholar
  11. Fagard H, Orsoni A (1998) The DORIS network: review and prospects. In: Proceedings of the DORIS days, Toulouse, April, Centre National d’Études Spatiales, FranceGoogle Scholar
  12. Fagard H, Orsoni A (2000) Current status and evolution prospects of the DORIS network. In: Proceedings of the DORIS days, Toulouse, France, May. doris_days_2000/fagard.pdfGoogle Scholar
  13. Geodetic Survey Division (1995) Guidelines and specifications for ACP and CBN site selection and monumentation. Natural Resources Canada, Canada Centre for Remote Sensing, 615 Booth Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0E9, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  14. Hugentobler U, Schaer S, Fridez P (2001) Bernese GPS Software, version 4.2. Astronomical Institute University of Bern, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  15. IDS (2004) Recommendations of the IDS plenary meeting, Paris, France, May. recom_2004.pdfGoogle Scholar
  16. Jayles, Nhun Fat and Tourain (2006) DORIS: system description and control of the signal integrity. J Geod (in press). DOI 10.1007/s00190-006-0046-8Google Scholar
  17. Le Bail (2006) Estimating the noise in space-geodetic positioning. The case of DORIS. J Geod (in press). DOI 10.1007/s00190-006-0088-yGoogle Scholar
  18. Massmann FH, Flechtner F, Raimondo JC, Reigber C (1997) Impact of PRARE on ERS-2 POD. Adv Space Res 19(11): 1645–1648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Moore AW, Neilan RE (2005) The International GPS Service tracking network: enabling diverse studies and projects through international cooperation. J Geodyn 40(4–5):461–469. DOI 10.1016/j.jog.2005.10.009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pavlis EC, Mertikas SP and The GAVDOS Team (2004) The GAVDOS mean sea level and altimeter calibration facility: results for Jason-1. 3rd Jason special issue. Mar Geod 27(3–4):631–655. DOI 10.1080/01490410490902106Google Scholar
  21. Pearlman MR, Degnan JJ, Bosworth JM (2002) The International Laser Ranging Service. Adv Space Res 30(2):135–143. DOI 10.1016/S0273-1177(02)00277-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Schluter W, Himwich E, Nothnagel A, Vandenberg N, Whitney A (2002) IVS and its important role in the maintenance of the global reference systems. Adv Space Res 30(2):145–150. DOI 10.1016/S0273-1177(02)00278-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Schlüter W, Hase H, Böer A, Riepl S, Cecioni A (2002) TIGO starts its operation in Concepción in 2002. CSTG bulletin no. 17. International Association of GeodesyGoogle Scholar
  24. Snajdrova K, Boehm J, Willis P, Haas R, Schuh H (2006) Multi-technique comparison of tropospheric zenith delays derived during the CONT02 campaign. J Geod 79(10–11):613–623. DOI 10.1007/s00190-005-0010-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tavernier G, Soudarin L, Larson K, Noll C, Ries J, Willis P (2002) Current status of the DORIS pilot experiment and the future international DORIS service. Adv Space Res 30(2):151–156. DOI 10.1016/S0273-1177(02)00279-XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tavernier G, Granier JP, Jayles C, Sengenes P, Rozo F (2003) The current evolution of the DORIS system. Adv Space Res 31(8):1947–1952. DOI 10.1016/S0273-1177(03)00155-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Tavernier G, Fagard H, Feissel-Vernier M, Lemoine F, Noll C, Ries J, Soudarin L, Willis P (2005) The international DORIS service (IDS). Adv Space Res 36(3):333–341. DOI 10.1016/ j.asr.2005.03.102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Tavernier G, Fagard H, Feissel-Vernier M, Le Bail K, Lemoine F, Noll C, Noomen R, Ries JC, Soudarin L, Valette JJ, Willis P (2006) The International DORIS Service: genesis and achievement. J Geod (in press). DOI 10.1007/s00190-006-0082-4Google Scholar
  29. Wessel P, Smith W (1998) New, improved version of the generic mapping tools released. EOS Trans AGU 79:579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wilkins GA (1989) Review of the achievements of project MERIT for the intercomparison of techniques for monitoring the rotation of the Earth, in the Earth’s rotation and reference frames for geodesy and geodynamics. In: Babcock AK, Wilkins GA (eds) Proceedings of IAU symposium, vol. 128. Kluwer, Norwell, pp 227– 232Google Scholar
  31. Willis P, Boucher C, Fagard H, Altamimi Z (2005) Geodetic applications of the DORIS system at the French Institut Geographique National. C.R. Geoscience 337(7):653–662. DOI 10.1016/j.crte.2005.03.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Yunck TP, Bertiger WI, Wu SC, Bar-Sever YE, Christensen EJ, Haines BJ, Lichten SM, Muellerschoen RJ, Vigure Y, Willis P (1994) First assessment of GPS-based reduced dynamic orbit determination on TOPEX/Poseidon. Geophys Res Lett 21(7):541–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institut Géographique NationalService de Géodésie et NivellementSaint-Mandé CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations