GPS Solutions

, Volume 16, Issue 1, pp 105–116

Ionospheric effects on relative positioning within a dense GPS network

Original Article

Abstract

Local variability in total electron content can seriously affect the accuracy of GNSS real-time applications. We have developed software to compute the positioning error due to the ionosphere for all baselines of the Belgian GPS network, called the Active Geodetic Network (AGN). In a first step, a reference day has been chosen to validate the methodology by comparing results with the nominal accuracy of relative positioning at centimeter level. Then, the effects of two types of ionospheric disturbances on the positioning error have been analyzed: (1) Traveling ionospheric disturbances (TIDs) and (2) noise-like variability due to geomagnetic storms. The influence of baseline length on positioning error has been analyzed for these three cases. The analysis shows that geomagnetic storms induce the largest positioning error (more than 2 m for a 20 km baseline) and that the positioning error depends on the baseline orientation. Baselines oriented parallel to the propagation direction of the ionospheric disturbances are more affected than others. The positioning error due to ionospheric small-scale structures can be so identified by our method, which is not always the case with the modern ionosphere mitigation techniques. In the future, this ionospheric impact formulation could be considered in the development of an integrity monitoring service for GNSS relative positioning users.

Keywords

Ionosphere GNSS network Relative positioning TID Geomagnetic storm 

References

  1. Brown N, Keenan R, Richter B, Troyer L (2005) Advances in ambiguity resolution for RTK applications using the new RTCM V3.0 master-auxiliary messages. Proceedings of ION GNSS 2005, Long Beach, CA, 73–80Google Scholar
  2. Brown N, Geisler I, Troyer L (2006) RTK rover performance using the master-auxiliary concept. J Glob Position Syst 5:135–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chen HY, Rizos C, Han S (2004) An instantaneous ambiguity resolution procedure suitable for medium scale GPS reference station network. Surv Rev 37:396–410Google Scholar
  4. Gende M, Mohino Harris E, Brunini C, Radicella SM, Herraiz M (2005) Ionospheric biases correction for coordinates derived from GPS single point positioning. Ann Geophys, 48:439–444Google Scholar
  5. Gomez L, Sabbione JI, Van Zele MA, Meza A, Brunini C (2007) Determination of a geomagnetic storm and substrom effects on the ionospheric variability from GPS observations at high latitudes. Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics 69:955–968CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hernandez-Pajares M, Juan JM, Sanz J (2000) Application of ionospheric tomography to real-time GPS carrier-phase ambiguities resolution, at scales of 400–1,000 km and with high geomagnetic activity. Geophys Res Lett 27:2009–2012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hernandez-Pajares M, Juan JM, Sanz J (2006) Medium-scale traveling ionospheric disturbances affecting GPS measurements: spatial and temporal analysis. J Geophy Res, 111:A07S11Google Scholar
  8. Hofmann-Wellenhof B, Lichtenegger H, Collins J (2001) GPS theory and Practice, 5th revised edition, Springer, Wien, NewYorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Janssen V (2009) A comparison of the VRS and MAC principles for network RTK. Proceedings of international global navigation satellite systems society, IGNSS Symposium 2009, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  10. Leick A (2004) GPS satellite surveying third edition. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Lejeune S, Warnant R (2008) A novel method for the quantitative assessment of the ionosphere effect on high accuracy GNSS applications, which require ambiguity resolution. J Atmos Sol Terr Phys 70:889–900CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Mayer C, Jakowski N, Borries C, Pannowitsch T, Belabbas B (2008) Extreme ionospheric conditions over Europe observed during the last solar cycle. In: NAVITEC 2008, ESA/ESTEC, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  13. Mohino E (2008) Understanding the role of the ionospheric delay in single-point single-epoch GPS coordinates. J Geodesy 82:31–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ou JK, Wang ZJ (2004) An improved regularization method to resolve integer ambiguity in rapid positioning using single frequency GPS receivers. Chin Sci Bull 49:196–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Saito A, Nishimura M, Yamamoto M, Fukao S, Kubota M, Shiokawa K, Otsuka Y, Ishii M, Sakanoi T, Miyazaki S (2001) Traveling ionospheric disturbances detected in the FRONT campaign. Geophys Res Lett 82:31–45Google Scholar
  16. Stankov SM, Warnant R, Stegen K (2009) Trans-ionospheric GPS signal delay gradients observed over mid-latitude Europe during the geomagnetic storms of October–November, 2003. Adv Space Res 43:1314–1324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Tsugawa T, Saito A (2003) Damping of large-scale traveling ionospheric disturbances detected with GPS networks during the geomagnetic storm, J Geophys Res, 108(A3)Google Scholar
  18. Vollath U, Landau H, Chen X (2002) Network RTK—concept and performance. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on GPS/GNSS, Wuhan, ChinaGoogle Scholar
  19. Wanninger L (1999) The performance of virtual reference stations in active geodetic GPS-networks under solar maximum conditions. In: Proceedings of ION GPS 99, Nashville TN, USA, p 1419–1427Google Scholar
  20. Warnant R, Pottiaux E (2000) The increase of the ionospheric activity as measured by GPS. Earth Planets Space 52:1055–1060Google Scholar
  21. Wautelet G, Lejeune S, Warnant R (2009) Effects of ionospheric small-scale structures on GNSS. In: Proceedings of IRST 2009, Edinburgh, UK, April, p 196–200Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Royal Meteorological Institute of BelgiumBrusselsBelgium
  2. 2.Geomatics UnitUniversity of LiègeLiègeBelgium

Personalised recommendations