Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
SpringerLink
Log in

Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring for Fixed Ambiguity Precise Point Positioning

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
China Satellite Navigation Conference (CSNC) 2014 Proceedings: Volume II

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering ((LNEE,volume 304))

Abstract

There are still many challenges in Precise Point Positioning (PPP) including formulation of mathematical models, fast resolution of integer ambiguities, ambiguity validation and integrity monitoring. Research to date has focused on error modelling and ambiguity resolution. The ambiguity validation and integrity monitoring is still to be investigated in detail. Early research on PPP integrity has addressed the transferability of the Carrier phase based Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring (CRAIM) algorithms developed for conventional Real Time Kinematic positioning (cRTK). However, there are significant differences between cRTK and PPP in the characteristics of the corresponding residual errors. For example, the satellite clock errors are removed in cRTK; while there are still satellites clock errors remaining in PPP after the application of correction products. The magnitude of these residual satellite clock errors depends on the quality of the products used. The residual errors in PPP are expected to be bigger than those in cRTK. These errors have significant negative impacts on ambiguity validation and integrity monitoring. This paper addresses these challenges.A Doubly Non-Central F distribution (DNCF) is justified for the use with popular ratio test for ambiguity validation. The residual errors in the PPP are characterised for the two key processes in RAIM, failure detection and derivation of protection levels. The correction products used for tests were from Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales (CNES). The GNSS measurement data used were from the American National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). This selection is to ensure that data from same stations used to test the method are not part of the data sets for the generation of correction products. A dataset from 2 NOAA stations was used for testing. Test results show that the PPP algorithm with the DNCF based ambiguity validation can reach sub-decimetre accuracy. The protection levels calculated shown to over-bound the position errors all the time. The relative lower protection levels give the potential for the proposed method to be used in critical high accuracy applications.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Boehmm J, Niell A et al (2006) Global mapping function (GMF): a new empirical mapping function based on numerical weather model data. Geophys Res Lett 33(7):1–4

    Google Scholar 

  2. Chen G, Herring TA (1997) Effects of atmospheric azimuthal asymmetry on the analysis of space geodetic data. J Geophys Res 102:20,489–20,502

    Google Scholar 

  3. Collins P (2008) Isolating and estimating undifferenced GPS integer ambiguities. In: Proceedings of the ION NTM, San Diego, CA

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dach R, Hugentobler U et al (2007) Bernese GPS Software Version 5.0 user manual, University of Bern, Switzerland

    Google Scholar 

  5. Dong D, Bock Y (1989) Global positioning system network analysis with phase ambiguity resolution applied to crustal deformation studies in California. J Geophys Res 94:3949–3966

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Euler HJ, Schaffrin B (1991) On a measure for the discernability between different ambiguity solutions in the static-kinematic GPS-mode. IAG Symposia no 107, Kinematic Systems in Geodesy, Surveying, and Remote Sensing. Springer, pp 285–295

    Google Scholar 

  7. Feng S, Ochieng W, Moore T, Hill C, Hide C (2009) Carrier phase-based integrity monitoring for high-accuracy positioning. GPS Solutions 13:13–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Feng S, Ochieng W et al (2012) Integrity monitoring for carrier phase ambiguities. J Navig 65:41–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Ge M, Gendt G et al (2008) Resolution of GPS carrier-phase ambiguities in precise point positioning (PPP) with daily observations. J Geodesy 82:389–399

    Google Scholar 

  10. Geng J, Teferle FN, Shi C, Meng X, Dodson AH, Liu J (2009) Ambiguity resolution in precise point positioning with hourly data. GPS Solutions 13:263–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Jokinen A, Feng S, Schuster W, Ochieng W, Yang L, Moore T, Hill C (2013) Improving ambiguity validation and integrity monitoring of precise point positioning (PPP). In: Proceeding of the ION GNSS, Nashville, TN, USA, 16–20 Sept 2013

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kouba J (2009) Guide to using International GNSS service (IGS) products. Geodetic Survey Division, Natural Resources Canada, Ottawa

    Google Scholar 

  13. Larson RE, Dressler RM, Ratner RS (1967) Application of the Extended Kalman filter to ballistic trajectory estimation. Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park

    Google Scholar 

  14. Laurichesse D (2011) The CNES real-time PPP with undifferenced integer ambiguity resolution demonstrator. In: Proceedings of the 24th international technical meeting of the satellite division of the institute of navigation (ION GNSS 2011), Portland, Oregon

    Google Scholar 

  15. Laurichesse D (2012) Phase biases estimation for undifferenced ambiguity resolution. In: PPP-RTK & open standards symposium. Frankfurt am Main, Germany

    Google Scholar 

  16. Laurichesse D, Mercier F (2007) Integer ambiguity resolution on undifferenced GPS phase measurements and its applications to PPP. In: Proceedings of the 20th international technical meeting of the satellite division of the institute of navigation (ION GNSS 2007), Fort Worth, TX

    Google Scholar 

  17. Leandro R, Santos M, Langley RB (2006) UNB neutral atmosphere models: development and performance. In: Proceedings of ION NTM 2006, Monterey, California

    Google Scholar 

  18. Melbourne W (1985) The case for ranging in GPS based geodetic systems. In: Proceedings of the 1st international symposium on precise positioning with the global positioning system. Rockville, Maryland

    Google Scholar 

  19. Shi J, Gao Y (2013) A comparison of three PPP integer ambiguity resolution methods. GPS Solutions. doi:10.1007/s10291-013-0348-2

    Google Scholar 

  20. Teunissen PJG (1993) Least-squares estimation of the integer GPS ambiguities. In: The general meeting of the international association of Geodesy, Beijing, China

    Google Scholar 

  21. Teunissen P (1998) A class of unbiased integer GPS ambiguity estimators. Artif Satell 33:4–10

    Google Scholar 

  22. Wishner RP, Tabaczynski JA, Athans M (1969) A comparison of three non-linear filters. Automatica 5:487–496

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Zumberge JF, Heftin MB et al (1997) Precise point positioning for the efficient and robust analysis of GPS data from large networks. J Geophys Res 102:5005–5017

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work is partially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC: 61328301).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Transport Studies, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Imperial College London, London, SW7 2AZ, UK

    Shaojun Feng, Altti Jokinen & Washington Ochieng

  2. Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, China

    Jianye Liu & Qinghua Zeng

Authors
  1. Shaojun Feng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Altti Jokinen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Washington Ochieng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jianye Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Qinghua Zeng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shaojun Feng .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China

    Jiadong Sun

  2. China Satellite Navigation Office, Beijing, China

    Wenhai Jiao

  3. Navigation Headquarters, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China

    Haitao Wu

  4. Department of Electronic Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China

    Mingquan Lu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Feng, S., Jokinen, A., Ochieng, W., Liu, J., Zeng, Q. (2014). Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring for Fixed Ambiguity Precise Point Positioning. In: Sun, J., Jiao, W., Wu, H., Lu, M. (eds) China Satellite Navigation Conference (CSNC) 2014 Proceedings: Volume II. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, vol 304. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54743-0_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-54743-0_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-54742-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-54743-0

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation