scholarly journals Ground-Based GPS for Validation of Climate Models: The Impact of Satellite Antenna Phase Center Variations

2010 ◽  
Vol 48 (10) ◽  
pp. 3847-3854 ◽  
Author(s):  
Per Jarlemark ◽  
Ragne Emardson ◽  
Jan Johansson ◽  
Gunnar Elgered
GPS Solutions ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Susanne Beer ◽  
Lambert Wanninger ◽  
Anja Heßelbarth

AbstractGNSS satellite and receiving antennas exhibit group delay variations (GDV), which affect code pseudorange measurements. Like antenna phase center variations, which affect phase measurements, they are frequency-dependent and vary with the direction of the transmitted and received signal. GNSS code observations contain the combined contributions of satellite and receiver antennas. If absolute GDV are available for the receiver antennas, absolute satellite GDV can be determined. In 2019, an extensive set of absolute receiver antenna GDV was published and, thus, it became feasible to estimate absolute satellite antenna GDV based on terrestrial observations. We used the absolute GDV of four selected receiver antenna types and observation data of globally distributed reference stations that employ these antenna types to determine absolute GDV for the GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, BeiDou, and QZSS satellite antennas. Besides BeiDou-2 satellites whose GDV are known to reach up to 1.5 m peak-to-peak, the GPS satellites show the largest GDV at frequencies L1 and L5 with up to 0.3 and 0.4 m peak-to-peak, respectively. They also show the largest satellite-to-satellite variations within a constellation. The GDV of GLONASS-M satellites reach up to 25 cm at frequency G1; Galileo satellites exhibit the largest GDV at frequency E6 with up to 20 cm; BeiDou-3 satellites show the largest GDV of around 15 cm at frequencies B1-2 and B3. Frequencies L2 of GPS IIIA, E1 of Galileo FOC, and B2a/B2b of BeiDou-3 satellites are the least affected. Their variations are below 10 cm.


2011 ◽  
Vol 47 (11) ◽  
pp. 1885-1893 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Bock ◽  
A. Jäggi ◽  
U. Meyer ◽  
R. Dach ◽  
G. Beutler

2016 ◽  
Vol 90 (8) ◽  
pp. 773-785 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Steigenberger ◽  
M. Fritsche ◽  
R. Dach ◽  
R. Schmid ◽  
O. Montenbruck ◽  
...  

Navigation ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 247-255 ◽  
Author(s):  
GERHARD WÜBBENA ◽  
MARTIN SCHMITZ ◽  
FALKO MENGE ◽  
GÜNTER SEEBER ◽  
CHRISTOF VÖLKSEN

Sensors ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (19) ◽  
pp. 5536
Author(s):  
Andrzej Araszkiewicz ◽  
Damian Kiliszek

Knowledge of Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) antenna phase center variations plays a key role in precise positioning. Proper modeling is achieved by accessing antenna phase center corrections, which are determined in the calibration process. For most receiver antenna types, the International GNSS Service provides such corrections for two GPS and GLONASS carrier signals. In the case of Galileo, access to phase center corrections is difficult; only antennas calibrated in the anechoic chambers have available corrections for Galileo frequencies. Hence, in many of the studies, GPS-dedicated corrections are used for these Galileo frequencies. Differential analysis was conducted in this study to evaluate the impact of such change. In total, 25 stations belonging to the EUREF Permanent Network and equipped with individual calibrated antennas were the subject of this research. The results for both the absolute and relative positioning methods are clear: using GPS L2 corrections for Galileo E5a frequency causes a bias in the estimated height of almost 8 mm. For the horizontal component, a significant difference can be noticed for only one type of antenna.


GPS Solutions ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 389-395 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. P. Ortiz de Galisteo ◽  
C. Toledano ◽  
V. Cachorro ◽  
B. Torres

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document