Advertisement

GPS Solutions

, 23:71 | Cite as

Observation of BDS-2 IGSO/MEOs yaw-attitude behavior during eclipse seasons

  • Fengyu Xia
  • Shirong YeEmail author
  • Dezhong ChenEmail author
  • Nana Jiang
Original Article
  • 202 Downloads

Abstract

The yaw mode history of BDS-2 IGSO/MEOs since 2016 is inferred from reverse kinematic precise point positioning. Experimental results show that C06 (IGSO-1) and C14 (MEO-6) satellites have abandoned the orbit-normal (ON) attitude mode in favor of continuous yaw-steering (CYS) mode since March and September 2017, respectively. BDS C13 (IGSO-6), launched in March 2016, and C16 (IGSO-7) always adopt the CYS mode during eclipse seasons. The majority of BDS-2 IGSO/MEOs still experience attitude switches between nominal and ON mode. Most of the attitude switches from nominal to ON mode take place when the sun elevation angle above the orbital plane (β angle) decreases below 4° \((\left| \beta \right| < 4^\circ )\). A few switches also occur for \(\left| \beta \right|\) slightly above 4°. However, most of the attitude switches from ON to nominal mode are undertaken when \(\left| \beta \right|\) increases to above 4°, but a few switches with \(\left| \beta \right|\) just below 4° happen. The exact switch condition between the two attitude modes is presented in this study. For BDS-2 IGSO/MEOs using the CYS mode, the yaw-attitude model previously established by the Wuhan University (indicated by WHU model) can basically reproduce their yaw maneuvers. However, reverse midnight-turn maneuvers occasionally occur for C13 and C14 for β angles falling into the range \((0^\circ ,0.14^\circ )\). This discrepancy in the form of a reversal in the yaw direction during the noon-turn maneuvers is first observed for C13 and C14 when the β angle is in the range of \(( - \,0.14^\circ ,0^\circ )\). The mismodeling of the satellites attitudes during reverse yaw maneuvers significantly degrades the performance of BDS precise orbit determination (POD). The phase observation residuals extracted from BDS POD reach 40 cm, which thereby leads to the misidentification of a substantial number of observations around orbital midnight and noon points as outliers when the WHU model is applied in our experiments. The WHU model is modified to reproduce the reverse yaw maneuvers of satellites in the post-processing BDS POD. The derived phase residuals decrease to normal levels, and the clock solutions become smoother relative to solutions employing the WHU model.

Keywords

Reverse kinematic precise point positioning Orbit-normal attitude mode Continuous yaw-steering mode Precise orbit determination Reverse yaw maneuvers 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Thanks are due to Chen Wang and Xiaolei Dai for valuable discussion about RKPPP algorithm. We are grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their helpful constructive suggestions and comments which significantly improved the paper quality. This work is partially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 41704032, 41074008, 41431069, 41604028), National Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars (No. 41525014), Special Innovative Major project of Hubei Province (No. 2018AAA066), Postdoctoral Science Foundation of China (No. 2018M642911), and National Key Research and Development Program of China (No. 2018YFC0823704). Finally, the IGS MGEX are greatly acknowledged for providing the multi-GNSS data.

References

  1. Bar-Sever YE (1996) A new model for GPS yaw attitude. J Geod 70(11):714–723.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00867149 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beutler G, Brockmann E, Gurtner W, Hugentobler U, Mervart L, Rothacher M, Verdun A (1994) Extended orbit modeling technique at CODE processing center of the international GPS service for geodynamics (IGS): theory and initial results. Manuscr Geod 19:367–386Google Scholar
  3. Cao X, Zhang S, Kuang K, Liu T, Gao K (2018) The impact of eclipsing GNSS satellites on the precise point positioning. Remote Sens 10(1):94.  https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10010094 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dai X, Ge M, Lou Y, Shi C, Wickert J, Schuh H (2015) Estimating the yaw-attitude of BDS IGSO and MEO satellites. J Geod 89(10):1005–1018.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-015-0829-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dilssner F (2017) A note on the yaw attitude modeling of BeiDou IGSO-6. a report dated November 20, 2017. http://navigation-office.esa.int/attachments_24576369_1_BeiDou_IGSO-6_Yaw_Modeling.pdf. Accessed 21 Sept 2018
  6. Dilssner F, Springer T, Gienger G, Dow J (2011a) The GLONASS-M satellite yaw-attitude model. Adv Space Res 47(1):160–171.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2010.09.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dilssner F, Springer T, Enderle W (2011b) GPS IIF yaw attitude control during eclipse season. AGU Fall Meeting, San Francisco. http://acc.igs.org/orbits/yaw-IIF_ESOC_agu11.pdf. Accessed 9 Dec 2018
  8. Dilssner F, Springer T, Schönemann E, Enderle W (2014) Estimation of satellite Antenna Phase Center corrections for BeiDou. In: Proceedings of IGS workshop 2014, June 23–27, PasadenaGoogle Scholar
  9. Dilssner F, Laufer G, Springer T, Schonemann E, Enderle W (2018) The BeiDou attitude model for continuous yawing MEO and IGSO spacecraft. EGU 2018, Vienna. http://navigation-office.esa.int/attachments_29393052_1_EGU2018_Dilssner_Final.pdf. Accessed 10 Nov 2018
  10. Ebert K, Oesterlin W (2005) Dynamic yaw steering method for spacecraft. European patent specification EP 1526072B1. http://www.freepatentsonline.com/EP1526072.pdf. Accessed 10 Jan 2019
  11. Ge M, Gendt G, Dick G, Zhang FP (2005) Improving carrier-phase ambiguity resolution in global GPS network solutions. J Geod 79(1–3):103–110.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00190-005-0447-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. GSA (2017) Galileo satellite metadata. https://www.gsc-europa.eu/support-to-developers/galileo-satellite-metadata. Accessed 28 Sept 2018
  13. Guo J, Zhao Q, Geng T, Su X, Liu J (2013) Precise orbit determination for COMPASS IGSO satellites during yaw maneuvers. In: Sun J, Jiao W, Wu H, Shi C (eds) Proc. China satellite navigation conference (CSNC) 2013, vol 245, pp 41–53.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37407-4_4 Google Scholar
  14. Guo J, Chen G, Zhao Q, Liu J, Liu X (2017) Comparison of solar radiation pressure models for BDS IGSO and MEO satellites with emphasis on improving orbit quality. GPS Solut 21(2):511–522.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-016-0540-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kouba J (2009) A simplified yaw attitude model for eclipsing GPS satellites. GPS Solut 13(1):1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-008-0092-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kouba J (2013) A note on the December 2013 version of the eclips.f subroutine. http://acc.igs.org/orbits/eclipsDec2013note.pdf. Accessed 2 Nov 2018
  17. Kouba J (2017) Notes on December 2017 version of the ECLIPS subroutine. http://acc.igs.org/orbits/eclips_Dec_2017.tar. Accessed 23 Apr 2018
  18. Kuang D, Desai S, Sibois A (2017) Observed features of GPS block IIF satellite yaw maneuvers and corresponding modeling. GPS Solut 21(2):739–745.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-016-0562-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liu Y, Jia X, Ruan R (2017) BeiDou IGSO satellite orbit precision analysis based on new attitude control mode. J Geodesy Geodyn 37(6):614–617.  https://doi.org/10.14075/j.jgg.2017.06.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Montenbruck O, Schmid R, Mercier F, Steigenberger P, Noll C, Fatkulin R, Kogure S, Ganeshan AS (2015) GNSS satellite geometry and attitude models. Adv Space Res 56(6):1015–1029.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asr.2015.06.019 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 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
  22. Sakic P, Mansur G, Viegs E, Männel B, Schuh H (2018) Toward a Multi-constellation combination: Improving the IGS orbit and clock combination software for MGEX products. In: Proceedings of IGS workshop 2018, Oct 28–Nov 2, WuhanGoogle Scholar
  23. Wang C, Guo J, Zhao Q, Liu J (2018) Yaw attitude modeling for BeiDou I06 and BeiDou-3 satellites. GPS Solut 22:117.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-018-0783-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wanninger L, Beer S (2015) BeiDou satellite-induced code pseudo-range variations: diagnosis and therapy. GPS Solut 19(4):639–648.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-014-0423-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wu JT, Wu SC, Hajj GA, Bertiger WI, Lichten SM (1993) Effects of antenna orientation on GPS carrier phase. Manuscr Geod 18:91–98Google Scholar
  26. Ye S, Xia F, Zhao L, Xia P, Chen D (2017) Impact analysis of yaw attitude on BDS precise point positioning. Acta Geod Cartogr Sin 46(8):71–977.  https://doi.org/10.11947/j.AGCS.2017.20170094 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Zhao Q, Wang C, Guo J, Wang B, Liu J (2018) Precise orbit and clock determination for BeiDou-3 experimental satellites with yaw attitude analysis. GPS Solut 22:4.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-017-0673-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.GNSS Research CenterWuhan UniversityWuhanChina
  2. 2.China Railway Siyuan Survey and Design Group Co., Ltd.WuhanChina

Personalised recommendations