Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Receiver autonomous integrity monitoring availability and fault detection capability comparison between BeiDou and GPS

  • Published:
Journal of Shanghai Jiaotong University (Science) Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper used the statistical methods of quality control to assess receiver autonomous integrity monitoring (RAIM) availability and fault detection (FD) capability of BeiDou14 (Phase II with 14 satellites), BeiDou (Phase III with 35 satellites) and GPS (with 31 satellites) for the first time. The three constellations are simulated and their RAIM performances are quantified by the global, Asia-Pacific region and temporal variations respectively. RAIM availability must be determined before RAIM detection. It is proposed that RAIM availability performances from satellites and constellation geometry configuration are evaluated by the number of visible satellites (NVS, NVS > 5) and geometric dilution of precision (GDOP, GDOP < 6) together. The minimal detectable bias (MDB) and minimal detectable effect (MDE) are considered as a measure of the minimum FD capability of RAIM in the measurement level and navigation position level respectively. The analyses of simulation results testify that the average global RAIM performances for BeiDou are better than that for GPS except global RAIM holes proportion. Moreover, the Asia-Pacific RAIM performances for BeiDou are much better than that for GPS in all indexes. RAIM availability from constellation geometry configuration and RAIM minimum FD capability for BeiDou14 are better than that for GPS in Asia-Pacific region in all cases, but the BeiDou14 RAIM availability from satellites are worse than GPS’s. The methods and conclusions can be used for RAIM prediction and real-time assessment of all kinds of Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) constellation.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. BDS-SIS-ICD-B1I-1.0, BeiDou navigation satellite system signal in space interface control document-open service signal b1I (version 1.0) [S].

  2. Teunissen P J G. Quality control and GPS [M]//Teunissen P J G, Kleusberg A. GPS for geodesy. 2nd ed. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 1998.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Teunissen P J G. Minimal detectable biases of GPS data [J]. Journal of Geodesy, 1998, 72(4): 236–244.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Ochieng W Y, Sheridan K F, Sauer K, et al. An assessment of the RAIM performance of a combined Galileo/GPS navigation system using the marginally detectable errors (MDE) algorithm [J]. GPS Solutions, 2002, 5(3): 42–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Verhagen S. Performance analysis of GPS, Galileo and integrated GPS-Galileo [Ch]//ION GPS 2002. Portland, OR, USA: The Institute of Navigation, 2002: 2208–2215.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Wu F, Kubo N, Yasuda A. Performance evaluation of GPS augmentation using Japanese Quasi-Zenith satellite system [J]. Earth Planets Space, 2004, 40(4): 1249–1260.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Hewitson S, Wang J. GNSS receiver autonomous integrity monitoring (RAIM) performance analysis [J]. GPS Solutions, 2006, 10(3): 155–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 692-5720, Air force space command capstone requirements document for global position, velocity, and time determination capability (draft) [S].

  9. 692-5720, Air force space command capstone requirements document for global position, velocity, and time determination capability (draft) [S].

  10. Walter T, Enge P, Blanch J, et al. Worldwide vertical guidance of aircraft based on modernized GPS and new integrity augmentations [J]. Proceedings of the IEEE, 2008, 96(12): 1918–1935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gratton L, Joerger M, Pervan B. Carrier phase relative RAIM algorithms and protection level derivation [C]//Proceedings of the 2009 International Technical Meeting of the Institute of Navigation. Anaheim, CA, USA: The Institute of Navigation, 2010: 256–264.

    Google Scholar 

  12. GNSS Evolutionary Architecture Study. GNSS evolutionary architecture study, phase II — panel report [R]. Washington D C, USA: Federal Aviation Administration, 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Xu H, Wang J, Zhan X. GNSS satellite autonomous integrity monitoring (SAIM) using inter-satellite measurements [J]. Advances in Space Research, 2011, 47(7): 1116–1126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Parkinson B W, Spilker J J, Axelrad P, et al. Global positioning system: Theory and applications (volume II) [M]. Washington D C: AIAA, 1996.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  15. Tiberius C, Joosten P. Quality control and integrity [EB/OL]. (2006-11-01) [2013-05-03]. http://www.citg.tudelft.nl/over-faculteit/afdelingen/geoscience-and-remote-sensing/research-themes/gps/quality-control-and-integrity/.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Hewitson S. Quality control for integrated GNSS and inertial navigation systems [D]. Kensington, NSW, Australia: School of Surveying and Spatial Information Systems, the University of New South Wales, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Verhagen S. Studying the performance of global navigation satellite systems: A new software tool [J]. GPS World, 2002, 13(6): 60–65.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Ober P B. RAIM performance: How algorithms differ [C]//The Proceedings of the 11th International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of the Institute of Navigation (ION GPS-98). Nashville, Tennessee: The Institute of Navigation, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  19. GPS-SPS-PS, Global positioning system standard positioning service performance standard (4th edition) [S].

  20. Teunissen P J G. Quality control in integrated navigation systems [J]. IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine, 1990, 5(7): 35–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200240, China

    Xian-li Su  (苏先礼), Xing-qun Zhan  (战兴群), Man-cang Niu  (牛满仓) & Yan-hua Zhang  (张炎华)

  2. The Staff Institute of Technology, China Academy of Engineering Physics, Mianyang, 621900, Sichuan, China

    Xian-li Su  (苏先礼)

Authors
  1. Xian-li Su  (苏先礼)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xing-qun Zhan  (战兴群)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Man-cang Niu  (牛满仓)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yan-hua Zhang  (张炎华)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xing-qun Zhan  (战兴群).

Additional information

Foundation item: the National High Technology Research and Development Program (863) of China (No. 2011AA120503)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Su, Xl., Zhan, Xq., Niu, Mc. et al. Receiver autonomous integrity monitoring availability and fault detection capability comparison between BeiDou and GPS. J. Shanghai Jiaotong Univ. (Sci.) 19, 313–324 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12204-014-1505-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12204-014-1505-7

Key words

CLC number

Search

Navigation