Skip to main content
Log in

Analysis of Galileo/BDS/GPS signals and RTK performance

  • Original Article
  • Published:
GPS Solutions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

New satellites and signals become available with the modernization of GNSS, especially for Galileo and BDS. The current Galileo constellation comprises 4 IOV (in-orbit validation) and 14 FOC (full operational capability) satellites which transmit signals on five frequencies. In addition to BDS-II regional navigation system, five BDS-III experimental (BDS-IIIs) and eight BDS-III satellites have been launched. It is worthwhile to evaluate the performance of these new satellites and signals. First, these signals are assessed in regard to carrier-to-noise density ratio (C/N0), code multipath (MP) combination, and triple-frequency carrier phase ionospheric-free and geometry-free (DIF) combination. The C/N0 of Galileo IOV satellites is several dB-HZ lower than that of the FOC satellites, while that of the IOV satellite E19 is always the lowest, regardless of receiver type. As for BDS, the C/N0 of the BDS-IIIs are higher than that of BDS-II but lower than that of BDS-III. The difference of C/N0 among GPS satellites is not obvious. Among all the signals, the performance of E5 is the best which may be related to its advanced modulation scheme, while the L2 is the worst. The code multipath on E5 is independent of the satellite elevation due to its good MP suppression performance, which may be related to its wide signal bandwidth. The RMSs of MP for Galileo signals are even smaller than that of GPS. Being free of the systematic code errors of BDS-II, the RMS of BDS-IIIs MP errors is comparable with that of GPS and Galileo. In addition, the multipath errors show an obvious periodic behavior, which differs with the types of satellites. Similarly, the DIF combinations also possess elevation-dependent and periodic characteristics. Note that the inter-frequency bias variations present in BDS-II and GPS IIF satellites are absent for Galileo satellites. The accuracy of Galileo SPP is comparable to that of GPS, but better than that of BDS. Although there are no significant differences for the RTK results of the three systems, the double-differenced carrier phase and code residuals of E5 is the smallest among all the signals.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amiri-Simkooei AR, Tiberius CCJM (2007) Assessing receiver noise using GPS short baseline time series. GPS Solutions 11(1):21–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angrisano A, Gaglione S, Gioia C, Borio D, Fortuny-Guasch J (2013) Testing the test satellites: the Galileo IOV measurement accuracy. In: International conference on localization and GNSS, IEEE 2013, 13(2):1–6

  • Becerra GEV (2008) Analysis of stochastic properties of GPS observables. Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, Division of Geodetic Science, 2008

  • Cai C, Luo X, Liu Z, Xiao Q (2014) Galileo signal and positioning performance analysis based on four IOV satellites. J Navig 67(5):810–824

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cai C, He C, Santerre R, Pan L, Cui X, Zhu J (2015) A comparative analysis of measurement noise and multipath for four constellations: GPS, BeiDou, GLONASS and Galileo. Surv Rev 48(349):287–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diessongo T, Schüler T, Junker S (2014) Precise position determination using a Galileo E5 single-frequency receiver. GPS Solutions 18(1):73–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ESA (2016) Galileo fact sheet. http://esamultimedia.esa.int/docs/ galileo/Galileo-factsheet-2016.pdf

  • Estey L, Meertens C (1999) TEQC: the multi-purpose toolkit for GPS/GLONASS data. GPS Solutions 3(1):42–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaglione S, Angrisano A, Castaldo G, Freda P, Gioia C, Innac A (2015) The first Galileo FOC satellites: from useless to essential. In: Geoscience and remote sensing symposium, IEEE

  • Hauschild A, Montenbruck O, Sleewaegen J, Huisman L, Teunissen P (2012) Characterization of Compass M-1 signals. GPS Solut 16(1):117–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langley R, Banville S, Steigenberger P (2012) First results: precise positioning with Galileo prototype satellites. GNSS Design Test 23(9):45–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Lei W, Wu G, Tao X, Bian L, Wang X (2017) BDS-II satellite-induced code multipath: mitigation and assessment in new-generation IOV satellites. Adv Space Res 60(12):2672–2679

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li H, Zhou X, Wu B, Wang J (2012) Estimation of the inter-frequency clock bias for the satellites of PRN25 and PRN01. Sci China Phys Mech Astronomy 55(11):2186–2193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu H, Lian B (2016) New generation GNSS signal processing and evaluation technology. National Defense Industry Press, Beijing, pp 108–111

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma X, Shen Y (2014) Multipath error analysis of compass triple frequency observations. Positioning 05(1):12–21. https://file.scirp.org/Html/2-8501082_ 42595.htm

  • Montenbruck O, Dach R, Steigenberger P, Hauschild A (2012) Apparent clock variations of the block IIF-1 (svn62) GPS satellite. GPS Solut 16(3):303–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montenbruck O, Hauschild A, Steigenberger P, Hugentobler U, Teunissen P, Nakamura S (2013) Initial assessment of the compass/BeiDou-2 regional navigation satellite system. GPS Solut 17(2):211–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montenbruck O, Steigenberger P, Prange L, Deng Z, Zhao Q, Perosanz F 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Odijk D, Teunissen P, Huisman L (2012) First results of mixed GPS + GLOVE single-frequency RTK in Australia. J Spatial Sci 57(1):3–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Odijk D, Teunissen P, Khodabandeh A (2014) Galileo IOV RTK positioning: standalone and combined with GPS. Survey Rev 46(337):267–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Odolinski R, Teunissen P, Odijk D (2015) Combined BDS, Galileo, QZSS and GPS single-frequency RTK. GPS Solut 19(1):151–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pan L, Zhang X, Liu J, Li X, Li X (2016) Analysis and correction of the inter-frequency clock bias for BeiDou satellites. In: China satellite navigation conference, pp 151–157

  • Shi C, Zhao Q, Hu Z, Liu J (2013) Precise relative positioning using real tracking data from compass GEO and IGSO satellites. GPS Solut 17(1):103–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simsky A (2006) Three’s the charm: triple-frequency combinations in future GNSS. Inside GNSS 1(5):38–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Simsky A, Sleewaegen J, Crisci M (2006) Performance assessment of Galileo ranging signals transmitted by GSTB-v2 satellites. In: Proceedings of ION GNSS 2006, Institute of Navigation, Fort Worth, TX, USA, 26–29 Sept, pp 1547–1559

  • Steigenberger P, Montenbruck O (2016) Galileo status: orbits, clocks, and positioning. GPS Solut 21(2):319–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tran M (2004) Performance evaluations of the new GPS L5 and L2 civil (L2c) signals. Navigation 51(3):199–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wanninger L, Beer S (2015) BeiDou satellite-induced code pseudorange variations: diagnosis and therapy. GPS Solut 19(4):639–648

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiao G, Li P, Sui L, Heck B, Schuh H (2018) Estimating and assessing Galileo satellite fractional cycle bias for PPP ambiguity resolution. GPS Solut 23(1):3–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang Y, Li J, Wang A, Xu J, He H, Guo H, Shen J, Dai X (2014) Preliminary assessment of the navigation and positioning performance of BeiDou regional navigation satellite system. Sci China Earth Sci 57(1):144–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang Y, Tang J, Montenbruck O (2017) Chinese navigation satellite systems. Springer handbook of global navigation satellite systems. Springer International Publishing, Berlin, pp 273–304

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zaminpardaz S, Teunissen P (2017) Analysis of Galileo IOV + FOC signals and E5 RTK performance. GPS Solut 21(4):1855–1870

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang X, Wu M, Liu W, Li X, Yu S, Lu C (2017) Initial assessment of the COMPASS/BeiDou-3: new-generation navigation signals. J Geodesy 91(10):1225–1240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou R, Hu Z, Zhao Q, Li P, Wang W, He C (2018) Elevation-dependent pseudorange variation characteristics analysis for the new-generation BeiDou satellite navigation system. GPS Solut 22(3):60

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is funded by the National Natural Science Funds of China (Grant Nos. 41674016, 41274016, 41774037).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guorui Xiao.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tian, Y., Sui, L., Xiao, G. et al. Analysis of Galileo/BDS/GPS signals and RTK performance. GPS Solut 23, 37 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-019-0831-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10291-019-0831-5

Keywords

Navigation