avigation and ntegrity utonomous atellite avigation...
TRANSCRIPT
S T A T E M E N T
O F W O R K
document title/ titre du document
AVIGATION AND NTEGRITY UTONOMOUS ATELLITE AVIGATION YSTEM
prepared by/ reference/réference issue/édition 3 revision/révision 6 date of issue/date d’édition 23-01-2006 status/état Issue Document type/type de document Statement of Work Distribution/distribution
préparé par
a
ESTEC Keplerlaan 1 - 2201 AZ Noordwijk - The Netherlands Tel. (31) 71 5656565 - Fax (31) 71 5656040
GSP_SoW 3.6.doc
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page ii of iv
A P P R O V A L
Title Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System titre
issue issue
3 revision revision
6
author auteur
date date
23-01-2006
approved by Activity TEB approuvé by
date date
23-01-2006
C H A N G E L O G
reason for change /raison du changement issue/issue revision/revision date/date
C H A N G E R E C O R D
Issue: 3 Revision: 6
reason for change/raison du changement page(s)/page(s) paragraph(s)/paragraph(s)
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page iii of iv
T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................1 1.1 Scope..................................................................................................................................................1 1.2 Applicable Documents .......................................................................................................................2 1.3 Reference Documents ........................................................................................................................2 1.4 Acronyms ...........................................................................................................................................3
2 BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES .......................................................................................5 2.1 Background ........................................................................................................................................5 2.2 Objectives...........................................................................................................................................5
3 TASKS AND DEVELOPMENT LOGIC.....................................................................................8 3.1 Scope of activities ..............................................................................................................................8 3.2 Definition Phase (General Tasks) ......................................................................................................9 3.3 Deliverables of the Definition Phase .................................................................................................9 3.4 Detailed Tasks of the Definition Phase............................................................................................10 3.5 SW Tool Implementation, Test Definition and Execution Phase, (General Tasks) ........................15 3.6 Deliverables of the SW Tool Implementation Phase .......................................................................16 3.7 Detailed Tasks of the SW Tool Implementation Phase ...................................................................17 3.8 Intermediate Experimentation Phase (General Tasks).....................................................................18 3.9 Deliverables of the Intermediate Experimentation Phase ................................................................18 3.10 Detailed Tasks of the Intermediate Experimentation Phase ............................................................19 3.11 Final Experimentation Phase (General Tasks).................................................................................21 3.12 Deliverables of the Final Experimentation Phase ............................................................................21 3.13 Detailed Tasks during the Final Experimentation Phase .................................................................22
4 MANAGEMENT......................................................................................................................23
TECHNICAL APPENDIX A (TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS) ...................................................25
TECHNICAL APPENDIX B (ECSS-E-40 TAILORING) ..............................................................28
TECHNICAL APPENDIX C (TECHNICAL FEATURES AUTONOMY-RELATED EXISTING IN THE GPS SYSTEM AND FORESEEN FOR THE GALILEO SYSTEM)........................................34
TECHNICAL APPENDIX D (OBSERVABLES FOR THE ON-BOARD OD&TS PROCESS) ....41
TECHNICAL APPENDIX E (ON BOARD ORBIT DETERMINATION PROCESS) .....................67
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page iv of iv
TECHNICAL APPENDIX F ON BOARD CLOCK DETERMINATION PROCESS......................76
TECHNICAL APPENDIX G (ISL LINKS PHYSICAL DEFINITION)............................................85
TECHNICAL APPENDIX H (GROUP DELAY CALIBRATION)..................................................91
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 1 of 101
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Scope The proposed study will assess the feasibility, preliminary system definition and performance for a Global Satellite Navigation System, targeting very stringent accuracy requirements as well as a significant level of satellite autonomy, beyond the specifications of the Galileo System, currently under development by the European Space Agency.
This document describes:
The activity development logic, in terms of activity phases, with their respective tasks and deliverables. Four different project phases are defined and described within the document, namely the:
Definition Phase. SW Tool Implementation, Test Definition and Execution Phase. Intermediate Experimentation Phase. Final Experimentation Phase.
The project specific management requirements, including schedule and reporting aspects
Finally the document contains:
One applicable appendix on technical requirements (appendix A)
One applicable appendix on general SW requirements (ECSS-E40 tailored) (appendix C)
One reference appendix describing the technical autonomy-related features existing in the GPS System and those foreseen for the Galileo System (appendix D)
Four reference appendixes (appendixes E, F, G and H) which should be considered by the
Bidder as concrete technical guidelines describing a certain orientation of the design. These appendixes aim merely to define a starting point for the development, and to prove its feasibility. The critical assessment and consolidation of these inputs during the activity development, could lead to deviations from the original guidelines, either enhancing system performances or reducing system complexity.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 2 of 101
1.2 Applicable Documents
1. ECSS-E-40 Part1B " Space engineering - software" and Part2B " DRDs" as tailored in Appendix C
1.3 Reference Documents
1- Robert Wolf: Satellite Navigation, GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, Orbit Determination, Orbit Estimation, Orbit Simulation, Inter-satellite Links, Onboard Ephemeris Determination, Integrity Monitoring. (http://137.193.200.177/ediss/wolf-robert/inhalt.pdf)
2- “J. Hammesfahr, A. Hornbostel, J. Hahn, H. L. Trautenberg, B. Eissfeller, R. Wolf, H.
Malthan, P. Souty, P.Tavella, W.Shafer: Inter-satellite Ranging and Autonomous Ephemeris Determination for Future Navigation Systems.
3- María Dolores Laínez Samper: Galileo Test Bed V1 Orbit Determination and Time
Synchronization Computation Performance Assessment - Detailed Processing Model Volume 1: Pre-Processing and Validation. GT-DS-GMV-TC-0123
4- María Dolores Laínez Samper: Galileo Test Bed V1 Orbit Determination and Time
Synchronization Computation Performance Assessment - Detailed Processing Model Volume 2: OD&TS. GT-DS-GMV-TC-0123
5- Kenneth R. Brown: The Theory of the GPS Composite Clock, proc. ION-GPS, 1991, pages
221-241
6- D.R. Cox, H.D.Miller, The theory of stochastic processes, Science Paperbacks Chapman and Hall, London 1965, Cap. 2,5
7- J. Hahn, S. Bedrich: Common view, Clock synchronization of remote atomic clocks using
GPS and PRARE onboard ERS2, proc 10th European Frequency and Time Forum, Brighton UK, 1996, pp. 393-398
8- Michael P. Scardera: The NAVSTAR GPS Master Control Station’s KAlman Filter
experience, Flight Mechanics / Estimation Theory Symposium 1990, NASA conference proceedings, CP 3102, 1991
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 3 of 101
1.4 Acronyms EDDN External Data Dissemination Network ERP Earth Rotation Parameters ESA European Space Agency G/S Ground Segment GACF Ground Assets Control Facility GCS Ground Control Segment GLONASS Global Navigation Satellite System (Russian) GMS Ground Mission Segment GNSS Global Navigation Satellite System (generic) GPS Global Positioning System GSP General Studies Programme GSS Galileo Sensor Station GST Galileo System Time ISL Inter Satellite Links ITRF International Terrestrial Reference Frame LEO Low Earth Orbit MCF Mission Control Facility MDDN Mission Data Dissemination Network MEO Medium Earth Orbit MGF Message Generation Facility MKMF Mission Key Management Facility MNE Monitoring Network Equipment MSF Mission Support Facility MUCF Mission Uplink Control Facility NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration ODTS Orbit Determination and Time Synchronization OSPF Orbit and Synchronization Processing Facility PRSKMF Public Regulated Service Key Management Facility PTF Precise Timing Facility S/C Spacecraft S/S Space Segment SKMF Satellite Key Management Facility SPF Satellite Processing Facility SPR Software Problem Report SRP Solar Radiation Pressure SVN Space Vehicle Number SW Software TWTT Two Way Time Transfer
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 4 of 101
ULS Uplink Station UTC Universal Time Coordinated VSAT Very Small Aperture Terminal WAN Wide Area Network
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 5 of 101
2 BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
2.1 Background This study is intended a valuable input for improving present Navigation Systems and future evolutions of GNSS Systems (e.g. Galileo II) The Galileo Satellite Navigation System currently under development by European Space Agency, is intended to provide a significantly improved performance level, in terms of accuracy, integrity and continuity when compared with existing Systems. Nevertheless current performance objectives are on one hand not sufficient for a certain number of highly demanding applications, e.g. absolute surveying (not differential technology based); and on the other hand have yielded to a considerable level of complexity and dependability on the deployment of Ground Segment infrastructure, mostly in terms of tracking network (Galileo Sensor Stations,(GSS)), mission uplink network (Uplink Stations (ULS)) and Mission Data Dissemination Network. Despite these current difficulties, performance targets for future Global Navigation Satellite System have to be more ambitious, while increasing or maintaining System availability, but reducing dramatically the dependability on Ground Segment assets. All these targeted improvements, are very challenging, for the existing and mature technology, as applied within the development of the Galileo Satellite Navigation System. Alternative and innovative technologies and methods, in the navigation area, could be the key to fulfil these more demanding requirements.
2.2 Objectives The objectives of this activity are to investigate alternative, innovative technologies and methods in the navigation area, with the view of bringing, as a minimum, the following benefits on current Systems:
Enhanced satellite autonomy. Reduced G/S infrastructure, in terms of tracking network and uplink stations Satisfy severe security constrains, in terms of geographical location of the G/S facilities. Enhanced accuracy for the orbit and clock navigation data Higher refresh rate of navigation data Reduced operational cost
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 6 of 101
In view of the above objectives, the Contractor shall investigate, as a minimum, the following technologies and methods:
Inter-satellite links ranging signals Inter-satellite ranging measurements processed in the Ground Segment (G/S) On board orbit and clock determination Inter-satellite communication links, to exchange between spacecrafts navigation, telemetry,
telecommand and ranging data In the above defined high level frame this Study targets two different scenarios, namely:
The first scenario, named as “Galileo-like constellation” analyzes the benefits of ISL, when navigation processing is either entirely or partially located on board each spacecraft, in a Galileo-like constellation.
The second scenario, named as “Galileo-like + LEO constellation” analyzes the benefits of
ISL, when navigation processing are either entirely or partially located on board each spacecraft, in a Galileo-like scenario in which a few LEO satellites are incorporated for calibration and monitoring purpose. In this Study the Galileo-like constellation is named as Principal Constellation, while the LEO satellites are named as Auxiliary satellites.
The Study shall explore and clarify the advantages and drawbacks of different techniques for the on-board processing considering ISL input observables, generating the satellite orbits and clocks. The Study shall analyze the technical feasibility of enhancing satellite accuracy and autonomy in the provision of navigation data, by means of on-board processing considering ISL input observables; with or without information exchanges between processors in different satellites. It shall clarify the:
Strategy for on-board satellite navigation data (orbit and clock) determination and prediction, including on-board satellite orbit and clock determination and prediction algorithms
The level of independence from ground based assets, in determining an adequate clock reference strategy (e.g. on-board clock ensemble).
Approach for the navigation data exchange between satellites of the Space Segment. Approach for the navigation data exchange between Space Segment and Ground Segment
(e.g. for linking the navigation data to UTC and ITRF).
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 7 of 101
Performance assessment in relevant scenarios, covering both nominal and degraded
constellation scenarios For this purpose the activities that are necessary have been identified and have been structured in four high level sets, which are listed hereafter:
Tasks regarding the on board orbit determination process
Tasks regarding the on board clock determination process
Tasks regarding ISL physical characterization
Tasks regarding group delay real time calibration
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 8 of 101
3 TASKS AND DEVELOPMENT LOGIC
3.1 Scope of activities [3.1.1] The contractor shall provide a justified design (architecture and technologies) for an
navigation system implementing ISL, that provides navigation observables orbit and clock prediction. A design and architectural definition is already provided with the ITT (please see appendixes), however the tenderer may challenge these suggestions and is invited to propose alternative solutions or modifications with adequate justification.
[3.1.2] Within the architectural design activities, the following activities shall be performed by
the contractor:
Selection of the technical solution for the ISL-based architecture, including a detailed definition of its components, the technologies and design drivers.
Confirmation and justification of the feasibility of the recommended solution. Identification of SW tool to be employed in the activity, and justification for the
definitive choice taken. Development of the SW tools to perform the activity (as far as possible by tailoring of
existing SW tools) Definition of the experimentation to be performed. Analysis of the results and conclusions.
[3.1.3] These activities shall be backed up by the assessment of techniques, technologies and
means to implement the ISL-based navigation system. [3.1.4] The selection, justification and confirmation of a solution for an ISL-based navigation
system, shall be supported by quantitative analysis [3.1.5] The activities shall be carried out in 4 sequential phases, identified as follows:
Definition Phase. SW Tool Implementation, Test Definition and Execution Phase. Intermediate Experimentation Phase. Final Experimentation Phase.
[3.1.6] Each one of these phases shall be subject of a review by the Agency who will declare the
objectives defined for this phase as achieved or failed.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 9 of 101
3.2 Definition Phase (General Tasks) [3.2.1] The contractor shall analyze the reference material provided by the Agency (Appendixes
E, F, G, H and I). [3.2.2] The Definition Phase shall include at least the following activities:
Analyze the technical specification and applicable documents. Perform the functional decomposition and the architectural design of the system
including design trade offs and selection of the baseline concept. Quantitative engineering analyses to justify the architecture and design. Quantitative engineering analyses comparing different architectural solutions Identification of elements which would be new design. Assessment of feasibility for new design elements Identification of critical technologies and quantification of key parameters, .for new
design elements Preliminary definition of experimentation test cases and test scenarios. Selection and justification of ODTS SW tool to be used for the activity (e.g. Bernese). Definition of the modifications required on the SW tool in order to perform the foreseen
experimentation Autonomy capability versus G/S complexity G/S simplification in the enhanced System
[3.2.3] The Definition Phase shall end after successful completion of the Definition Review
(DR). Successful completion of this review will lead to authorization by the Agency to start the activities corresponding to the next phase.
3.3 Deliverables of the Definition Phase [3.3.1] The contractor shall deliver at the Definition Review a data package, with content
accordingly to the table below:
REVIEW
DELIVERABLE (BY DEFAULT DOCUMENT TITLE)
ISSUE
System Architecture Definition File (SADF) Issue 1.0
System Architecture Justification File (SAJF) (Including a detailed description of the traded off technologies)
Issue 1.0
DR
Experimentation Platform Definition File (EPDF)
Issue 1
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 10 of 101
Experimentation Platform Acceptance Test Procedures (EPAP)
Issue 1 (Final)
Test Case Experimentation Plan (TCEP) (Describing the Test Cases and Scenarios)
Issue 1.0
On-board Orbit Determination Detailed Processing Model
Issue 1.0
On-board Clock Determination Detailed Processing Model
Issue 1.0
Experimentation Platform User Manual Draft
[3.3.2] The contractor shall update the data package for Agency approval as a result of the
review discussion and agreements.
3.4 Detailed Tasks of the Definition Phase The Definition Phase shall cover, as a minimum, the following tasks by means of analysis: Regarding the constellation definition
[3.4.1] The Bidder shall optimize the auxiliary constellation definition. The constellation
parameters, described in the Appendix A (Technical Requirements), shall be optimized by the Contractor, including the number of auxiliary satellites, which are merely in charge of performing some system internal functions
[3.4.2] The contractor shall select an existing ODTS tool (e.g. Bernese) allowing the required
adaptations for the activity Regarding the orbit determination process shall be understood as both orbit restitution and orbit
prediction throughout the entire document.
The Study shall explore and clarify the advantages and drawbacks of the different alternatives for the on-board orbit determination and prediction process, analyzing in detail at least the following related areas:
[3.4.3] The sub-set of S/S to S/S observables to be processed on board each spacecraft for orbit
determination
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 11 of 101
[3.4.4] The sub-set of S/S to G/S observables to be processed on board each spacecraft for orbit
determination [3.4.5] The type of orbit estimation process (e.g. Batch, Kalman filter, etc) [3.4.6] The estimated parameters. The analysis shall include an assessment on the benefit of
estimating: Solar Radiation Pressure coefficients Earth Rotation Parameters delta coefficients
[3.4.7] The on-board CPU time consumption, indicating the minimum time span between
consecutive refreshments of the broadcast orbit [3.4.8] The power consumption of the on-board Orbit Determination board [3.4.9] The achievable performance in terms of broadcast orbit error in nominal scenarios (e.g.
availability of the full S/S and G/S) [3.4.10] The performance degradation in terms of broadcast orbit error, in nominal scenarios (e.g.
availability of the full S/S and G/S), when contact with the G/S is interrupted Regarding the clock determination process shall be understood as both clock restitution and
clock prediction throughout the entire document
The Study shall explore and clarify the advantages and drawbacks of different alternatives for the on-board clock determination and prediction process, analyzing in detail at least the following related areas:
[3.4.11] The sub-set of S/S to S/S observables to be processed on board each spacecraft for clock
determination [3.4.12] The definition of the navigation system time reference, independently from G/S clocks [3.4.13] The relativistic effects on the satellites on board clocks, when observed from either other
spacecrafts or from ground stations [3.4.14] The type of clock estimation process (e.g. Batch, Kalman filter, etc) [3.4.15] The estimated clock parameters [3.4.16] The on-board CPU time consumption, indicating the minimum time span between
consecutive refreshments of the broadcast clock [3.4.17] The power consumption of the on-board Clock Determination board
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 12 of 101
[3.4.18] The achievable performance in terms of clock error in nominal scenarios (e.g. availability
of the full S/S) [3.4.19] The performance degradation in terms of broadcast clock error, in nominal scenarios (e.g.
availability of the full S/S), when contact with the G/S is interrupted [3.4.20] The sub-set of S/S to G/S observables to be processed on board each spacecraft for the
estimation of the steering parameters necessary to refer the navigation system time to G/S based clocks or time external references
[3.4.21] The achievable performances in terms of steering parameters error in nominal scenarios
(e.g. availability of the full S/S) [3.4.22] The performance degradation in terms of steering parameters error, in nominal scenarios
(e.g. availability of the full S/S), when contact with the G/S is interrupted Regarding the ISL link physical definition the Study shall explore and clarify the advantages
and drawbacks of different alternatives. The Study shall clarify the: [3.4.23] Optimization of the ISL connectivity scheme between spacecrafts, or in other words with
what satellites is a given satellite supposed to establish a link [3.4.24] Optimization of the connectivity scheme between spacecrafts and ground [3.4.25] Number of “system internal” frequencies for ranging between principal satellites (see
Appendixes) [3.4.26] Frequency band for the “system internal” frequencies, as a compromise between key
parameters such as the antenna size or the propagation losses, and ITU allocated bands for ISLs. Selected band shall be compatible with an accurate control of the antenna group delay.
[3.4.27] Number of “system external” frequencies carrying ranging signals to the users (see
Appendixes) [3.4.28] Frequency sub-band for the “system external” frequencies. The frequency band for the
“system external” frequencies is the L band, including by default the Galileo frequencies Regarding the ranging signals they shall consist on pseudo-random sequences which are
generated in a synchronized way by both transmitter and receiver; and transmitted modulated on a radio-frequency carrier. The design is oriented to cross-link observables. The Study shall clarify the:
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 13 of 101
[3.4.29] Characteristics of the ranging signal, in terms of power density function [3.4.30] Characteristics of the ranging signal generation unit [3.4.31] Link budget [3.4.32] Characteristics of the ranging measurements quality [3.4.33] The ranging signals, leading to a ranging accuracy compatible with the Study’s objectives
in terms of orbit and clock determination accuracy. [3.4.34] The selection of the ranging signals shall target fast re-acquisition Regarding the cross-links antenna design the study shall analyze the:
[3.4.35] Feasibility and convenience of a phase array based antenna with its radiating elements
placed symmetrically on a spherical surface [3.4.36] Feasibility and convenience of alternative designs proposed by the Contractor, such as a
passive pattern [3.4.37] Group delay introduced by the antenna subsystem in the ranging signals, and its potential
dependency versus beam orientation Regarding the communication links.
[3.4.38] The Study shall analyze the possibility of re-using the ranging frequencies for
communication purposes either while ranging is being performed or during a different time slot exclusively dedicated for this purpose; or whether it is necessary to establish a different set of “system internal” frequencies for communication purposes.
The Study shall clarify the: [3.4.39] Exchanged information, including navigation, ranging data, telemetry and telecommand [3.4.40] Necessary bandwidth [3.4.41] Communication signal characteristics (including multiple access schemes) [3.4.42] Technology in terms of on-board transmitting and receiving chains [3.4.43] Performance assessment in relevant scenarios, in terms of BER and communication
delays
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 14 of 101
[3.4.44] Transmitting and receiving on board antennas [3.4.45] Compatibility with other RF links [3.4.46] Link budget Regarding the group delay calibration
[3.4.47] The Study shall explore and clarify the advantages and drawbacks of different methods
for the “system external” ranging signals group delay calibration, either based on the auxiliary satellites observations, or on satellite local means or on any other alternative method.
[3.4.48] The description of the on-board equipment required for performing this calibration Regarding the operational concept
[3.4.49] The Study shall identify the different operations modes, initialisation, switch between
ground-supported and autonomous modes [3.4.50] The Study shall propose a preliminary high level system operational concept [3.4.51] The Study shall identify the necessary adaptations to the navigation algorithms in order to
support the proposed mode transitions. All tasks shall consider the design guidelines described in the Appendixes E, F, G and H. These appendixes aim, either to define the starting point for the development, or merely to prove its feasibility. The study shall analyze the benefits from deviating from these guidelines if as result either performance improves or system complexity diminishes.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 15 of 101
3.5 SW Tool Implementation, Test Definition and Execution Phase,
(General Tasks) [3.5.1] The contractor shall select an existing ODTS tool (e.g. Bernese) allowing the required
adaptations for the activity. [3.5.2] The SW tool shall be adapted, as necessary, in order to make possible the processing of
ISL measurements, in addition to the conventional space to ground measurements. [3.5.3] The contractor shall develop the auxiliary tools necessary to generate the input
measurements to the SW Tool, more precisely synthetic ISL measurements, and space to ground measurements..
[3.5.4] The SW tool user interface shall allow a flexible definition of the ISLs in terms of
number and in terms of type amongst the following:
Both S/Cs are part of the navigation constellation, One S/Cs is part of the navigation constellation and the other S/C is an auxiliary
LEO Both S/Cs are part of the auxiliary constellation,
Allowing simulations not only on the baseline architecture resulting from the Definition Phase but also with other combinations of ISLs.
[3.5.5] The SW tool output shall provide the accuracy of the orbit and clock determination and
prediction for each S/C. [3.5.6] The contractor shall perform a validation of the tool according to the needs of the study [3.5.7] The contractor shall define the test cases and scenarios for experimentation, covering
both the baseline architecture and other possible architectures derived from different combinations of ISLs and ground to space observables. The experimentation shall include, at least the following three scenarios:
ISLs between MEO navigation satellites ISLs between MEO navigation satellites, and between MEO and LEO
satellites, ISLs between MEO navigation satellites, between MEO and LEO satellites,
and between LEO satellites [3.5.8] The contractor shall update during this phase the documentation produced in previous
phases in order to input the modifications that arise as the study evolves.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 16 of 101
[3.5.9] The SW Tool Implementation, Test Definition and Execution Phase shall end after
successful completion of the SW Implementation and Test Review/Experimentation Test Review (ERR).
3.6 Deliverables of the SW Tool Implementation Phase [3.6.1] The contractor shall deliver at the SW Implementation and Test Review/Experimentation
Test Review a data package, with content accordingly to the table below:
REVIEW
DELIVERABLE (BY DEFAULT DOCUMENT TITLE)
ISSUE
Experimentation Platform Acceptance Test Results (EPAR) (Including all implemented adaptations)
Issue 1 (Final)
System Architecture Definition File (SADF) Issue 2.0
System Architecture Justification File (SAJF) Issue 2.0
Test Case Experimentation Plan (TCEP)
Issue 2.0
On-board Orbit Determination Detailed Processing Model
Issue 2.0
On-board Clock Determination Detailed Processing Model
Issue 2.0
ERR
Experimentation Platform User Manual Issue 1.0
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 17 of 101
[3.6.2] The contractor shall update during this phase the documentation produced in previous
phases in order to input the modifications that arise as the study evolves. [3.6.3] The contractor shall update the data package for Agency approval as a result of the
review discussion and agreements.
3.7 Detailed Tasks of the SW Tool Implementation Phase The SW Tool Implementation, Test Definition and Execution Phase shall cover, as a minimum, the following tasks, by means of analysis: [3.7.1] The review and refinement of the outputs of Tasks [3.4.9] up to [3.4.34] [3.7.2] The review and refinement of the outputs of Tasks [3.4.47] up to [3.4.48]
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 18 of 101
3.8 Intermediate Experimentation Phase (General Tasks) [3.8.1] This phase shall provide the first experimentation of the ISL based architecture for
navigation systems. The contractor shall perform during this phase the experimentation defined in previous phases.
[3.8.2] The experimentation plan shall be modified and adapted as required during the activity
according to the needs and evolution of the study. [3.8.3] The contractor shall perform simulations for different scenarios in order to assess the
performance achieved trade off with the complexity of the proposed architecture. [3.8.4] Software Problem Report (SPR) in the SW tool, cannot result in a reduction of the
experimentation scope. [3.8.5] The contractor shall update during this phase the documentation produced in previous
phases in order to input the modifications that arise as the study evolves. [3.8.6] The Intermediate Experimentation Phase shall end after successful completion of the
Intermediate Experimentation Phase Review (IER)
3.9 Deliverables of the Intermediate Experimentation Phase [3.9.1] The contractor shall deliver at the Intermediate Experimentation Phase Review a data
package, with content accordingly to the table below:
REVIEW
DELIVERABLE (BY DEFAULT DOCUMENT TITLE)
ISSUE
Test Case Experimentation Results (TCER) Issue 1
System Architecture Definition File (SADF) Issue 2.1
System Architecture Justification File (SAJF) Issue 2.1
IER
Test Case Experimentation Plan (TCEP) Issue 2.1
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 19 of 101
On-board Orbit Determination Detailed Processing Model Issue 2.1
On-board Clock Determination Detailed Processing Model Issue 2.1
Experimentation Platform User Manual Issue 1.1
[3.9.2] The contractor shall update during this phase the documentation produced in previous
phases in order to input the modifications that arise as the study evolves. [3.9.3] The contractor shall update the data package for Agency approval as a result of the
review discussion and agreements.
3.10 Detailed Tasks of the Intermediate Experimentation Phase The Intermediate Experimentation Phase shall cover, as a minimum, the following tasks mostly by means of experimentation: [3.10.1] The review and refinement of the outputs of Tasks [3.7.1] and [3.7.2] [3.10.2] The detailed and exhaustive experimentation of the design elaborated in the Definition
Phase and consolidated during the SW Tool Implementation Phase. For this purpose all analysis from [3.4.9] up to [3.4.22] and from [3.4.47] up ro [3.4.48] shall be replaced by experimentation results obtained with the help of the SW tool.
[3.10.3] The achievable performance in terms of broadcast orbit error in degraded scenarios (e.g.
availability of merely a reduced S/S or/and a reduced G/S) [3.10.4] The performance degradation in terms of broadcast orbit error in degraded scenarios (e.g.
availability of merely a reduced S/S or/and a reduced G/S), when contact with the G/S is interrupted
[3.10.5] The detail processing model of the orbit estimation algorithms at equation level [3.10.6] Robustness of the preferred alternative to external perturbations (e.g. contaminated
observables) [3.10.7] The achievable performance in terms of broadcast clock error in degraded scenarios (e.g.
availability of merely a reduced S/S)
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 20 of 101
[3.10.8] The performance degradation in terms of broadcast clock error in degraded scenarios
(e.g. availability of merely a reduced S/S), when contact with the G/S is interrupted [3.10.9] The achievable performances in terms of steering parameters error in degraded scenarios
(e.g. availability of merely a reduced S/S) [3.10.10] The performance degradation in terms of steering parameters error, in degraded scenarios
(e.g. availability of merely a reduced S/S), when contact with the G/S is interrupted [3.10.11] The detail processing model of the clock estimation algorithms, at equation level. Note
that clock estimates are relative to the Navigation System Reference Time [3.10.12] The detail processing model of the Navigation System Reference Time steering
algorithms, at equation level [3.10.13] Robustness of the preferred alternative to external perturbations e.g. contaminated
observables
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 21 of 101
3.11 Final Experimentation Phase (General Tasks) [3.11.1] During this phase the contractor shall carry out the activities as described in the previous
phase, endorsing and implementing the inputs provided by the Agency in the Intermediate Experimentation Results Analysis Phase.
[3.11.2] See requirement [4.4.2] [3.11.3] See requirement [4.4.3] [3.11.4] See requirement [4.4.4] [3.11.5] See requirement [4.4.5] [3.11.6] See requirement [4.4.6] [3.11.7] The Final Experimentation Phase shall end after successful completion of the Final
Experimentation Phase Review (FER). Successful completion of this review will lead to the completion and close out of the study.
3.12 Deliverables of the Final Experimentation Phase [3.12.1] The contractor shall deliver at the Intermediate Experimentation Phase Review a data
package, which content accordingly to the table below:
REVIEW
DELIVERABLE (BY DEFAULT DOCUMENT TITLE)
ISSUE
ODTS SW procured during activity, including all necessary licenses and libraries.
N/A
Experimentation Platform (HW) Final version
SW developed during activity, including all necessary licenses and libraries.
Final version
FER
Test data produced in the simulations and used for the analysis.
Final version
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 22 of 101
Final report (including a synthesis of the results and the conclusions)
Issue 1.0
System Architecture Definition File (SADF)
Issue 2.2
System Architecture Justification File (SAJF) Issue 2.2
On-board Orbit Determination Detailed Processing Model
Issue 2.2
On-board Clock Determination Detailed Processing Model
Issue 2.2
Experimentation Platform User Manual Issue 1.2
[3.12.2] The contractor shall update during this phase the documentation produced in previous
phases in order to input the modifications that arise as the study evolves. [3.12.3] The contractor shall update the data package for Agency approval as a result of the
review discussion and agreements.
3.13 Detailed Tasks during the Final Experimentation Phase The Final Experimentation Phase shall cover, as a minimum, the following tasks, by means of experimentation: [3.13.1] The review and refinement of the outputs of Tasks [3.10.1] up to [3.10.13] by means of
additional experimentation
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 23 of 101
4 MANAGEMENT The standard requirements for management, reporting and meetings, which are described as an appendix to the contract, sections 1, 2 and 3 respectively, shall apply to this activity. Sections 4 and 5 of the mentioned appendix, on deliverables and commercial evaluation respectively, are not applicable to this study. The following additional requirements are incorporated to the mentioned appendix, section 1, on management: The contractor shall exercise an effective and transparent management of the work, providing
ESA at any time with all information necessary to undertake corrective measures if needed. The contractor shall organise the activity, propose a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and
provide an adequate allocation of tasks. The overall activity shall be completed in 12 months with the following intermediate milestone
dates:
Milestones Date (months)
Kick –off (KO) KO Definition Phase Review (DR) KO + 04.0 m SW Tool Implementation, Test Definition and Execution Phase Review (ERR) KO + 09.0 m
Intermediate Experimentation Phase Review (IER) KO + 10.5 mFinal Experimentation Phase Review (FER) KO + 12.0 m
After successful completion of each of the intermediate reviews (Definition Phase Review, SW
Tool Implementation, Test Definition and Execution Phase Review, and Intermediate Experimentation Results Analysis Phase Review) the Agency will authorise the continuation of the activity and the initiation of the following phase.
The following additional requirements are incorporated to the mentioned appendix, section 2, on reporting: Minutes shall be distributed in Word or/and PDF format. Any presentations done at the
meeting shall be attached to the minutes in PPT format.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 24 of 101
The following requirements replace entirely the mentioned appendix section 4, on deliverables: All items procured or developed under the contract shall be the property of the Agency at the
closure of the contract The Contractor shall submit to the Agency for information or approval (as applicable) all
technical notes, specifications, test and demonstration plans and other documents as they become available during the execution of the contract, at the latest by the agreed date of delivery
Any technical documentation to be discussed at a meeting with the Agency shall be submitted
at least 5 working days weeks prior to such a meeting The Contractor shall submit technical documents from subcontractors to the Agency normally
only after review and acceptance The Contractor shall give to the Agency prior notice without delay of any meetings with third
parties to be held in connection with the contract. The Agency reserves the right of participation in such meetings.
With due notice to the Contractor and with the Contractor's agreement, the Agency reserves the
right to invite third parties to meetings to facilitate information exchange. For all meetings the Contractor shall ensure that proper notice is given at least 2 weeks in
advance. The Contractor shall be responsible for ensuring the participation of his and of the sub-contractor(s)’ personnel as needed
For each meeting the Contractor shall provide an agenda and handouts of his presentation (if
any) If deemed necessary, the Agency or the Contractor may request ad hoc meetings.
Nominally, these documents and reports are to be provided in electronic form, in PDF
(including signatures) and in MS-WORD The list of contract output and deliverables given in previous chapter is neither exclusive nor
exhaustive and needs to be amended by the contractor as required.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 25 of 101
TECHNICAL APPENDIX A (TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS)
REQ-010: The Study shall be performed for two different constellations, associated to the Scenario I and Scenario II, which are described hereafter.
REQ-020: The Scenarios are defined in terms of Principal and Auxiliary satellites, being the Principal Satellites those which broadcast navigation signals to the GNSS user, and being the Auxiliary Satellites those merely in charge of some internal system functionalities, transparent to the GNSS user.
REQ-030: SCENARIO I
PRINCIPAL SATELLITES
Walker definition ppp fpt // 27/3/1 (GALILEO)
Number of satellites pt 27
Number of planes pp 3
Number of satellites per plane p
pp p
ts = 9
Pattern unit pp tu /360 o= 13.3°
Slot spacing
pp up * 40°
Node spacing
pp us * 120°
Satellite phasing
pp uf * 13.3°
Inclination 56° (GALILEO)
Orbit radius 29600 km (GALILEO)
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 26 of 101
Right ascension for the first plane node pα
AUXILIARY SATELLITES
Not applicable
The Scenario “I” considers exclusively Principal Satellites, and correspond exactly to the Galileo constellation. Tables above summarize all constellation parameters.
REQ-040: SCENARIO II
PRINCIPAL SATELLITES
As in Scenario I (GALILEO)
AUXILIARY SATELLITES
Walker definition aaa fpt // TBD (6/3/1)
Number of satellites at 6
Number of planes ap 3
Number of satellites per plane a
aa p
ts = 2
Pattern unit aa tu /360 o= 60°
Slot spacing
(spacing between spacecrafts in the same plane) aa up * 180°
Node spacing
(spacing between planes on the equator) aa us * 120°
Satellite phasing
(spacing between spacecrafts on consecutive planes) aa uf * 60°
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 27 of 101
Inclination TBD
Orbit radius TBD (LEO)
Right ascension for the first plane node 2* pp
p
us+α o60+pα
The Scenario “II” considers the same Principal Satellites as the Scenario I, this is the Galileo MEO constellation, plus a reduced LEO constellation of Auxiliary Satellites. Table above summarizes all auxiliary constellation parameters.
REQ-050: The number of auxiliary satellites shall be minimize as far as possible
REQ-060: The study shall target orbit prediction accuracies below 1 centimetre level
REQ-070: The study shall target clock prediction accuracies below 1 centimetre level
REQ-080: The group delay real time calibration shall target sub-centimetre level accuracy
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 28 of 101
TECHNICAL APPENDIX B (ECSS-E-40 TAILORING) Software process mapping to work packages
The software development processes introduced in ECSS-E40 part 1B are mapped on the work
packages and activities or tasks of the Statement of Work in the following way:
ECSS-E40 part 1B processes & activities Reference in the Statement of Work
System Engineering Processes related to software:
- System requirements,
- System architecture,
- System design & Hardware/Software partitioning,
Definition phase (part of*)
*: Experiment Platform Definition File , On Board Orbit Determination Detailed Processing Model ,
On Board Clock Determination Detailed Processing Model
SRR Merged with PDR
Software Requirements & Architecture Engineering Process:
- Software requirements specification,
- Interface Control Document
- Software architecture,
Definition phase (part of*)
*: On Board Orbit Determination Detailed Processing Model , On Board Clock Determination
Detailed Processing Model
PDR DR
Software Design & Implementation Engineering Process:
- Detailed design,
- Code,
- Unit tests,
- Integration tests,
SW tool implementation, Test definition and Execution Phase (part of)
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 29 of 101
DDR N/A
Software Validation Process:
- Software validation wrt TS
N/A
CDR N/A
Software Validation Process:
-Software Validation wrt RB
SW tool implementation, Test definition and Execution Phase (part of)
QR ERR
Software Delivery & Acceptance Implicitly included in the Final Experiment Phase
AR FER
Software Operation N/A
Software maintenance During the whole life cycle for evolutive maintenance if ODTS software is a COTS to be modified
During the 6 months warranty period for corrective maintenance of the new developed items (e.g. utilities)
Software management process Not formally required since management factors are not the keys drivers ( COST is Firm Fixed Price , DELAY is also fixed) of this project but a SDP ( that can be part of a global system development plan) is asked in the proposal
Software verification process - Experiment Platform RB/TS – SVTS/SATS traceabilty
- Timing & Sizing Budget Report
- Numerical Accuracy Report
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 30 of 101
List of ECSS-E40 applicable requirements
ECSS-E-40 part 1B from 28 November 2003 5.2 System Engineering Processes related to software 5.2.2.1 System requirements specification 5.2.3.1a System design 5.2.5.2 Control and data interfaces for system level integration 5.2.7.1 Software maintenance requirements 5.3 Software Management Process (only at proposal) 5.3.2.1 Definition of software life cycle 5.3.2.2 Software life cycle identification 5.3.2.3 Identification of inputs and outputs associated to each phases 5.3.2.4 Identification of documentation relevant to each 5.3.2.5 Identification of interface between the development and the maintenance processes 5.3.2.6 Requirements baseline at the SRR (at PDR in that case ) 5.3.2.7 Software technical specification phase 5.3.2.8 PDR (Preliminary Design Review) 5.3.2.11 software verification and validation process 5.3.2.12 QR (Qualification Review) 5.3.2.13 AR (Acceptance Review) 5.3.3.2 Support to software reviews 5.3.3.3 Technical reviews 5.3.4.1 Interface definition 5.3.5.1 Technical budget and margin philosophy 5.3.5.2 Technical budget and margin status at each milestone 5.4.2.1 Establishment and documentation of software requirements / software requirements specification: 5.4.2.1-a software requirements – functional and performance 5.4.2.1-e software requirements – data definition and DataBase requirements 5.4.2.1-f software requirements – Interfaces external to the software item 5.4.2.3 Identification of requirements unique identifier 5.4.3.1 Transformation of software requirements into a software architecture 5.4.3.2 Software design description 5.4.3.3 Software design documentation 5.4.3.4 Software architectural design contents 5.4.3.11 Evaluation of reuse of predeveloped software 5.4.3.12 Analysis of potential reusability 5.4.3.14 Conducting a preliminary Design Review (PDR) 5.5.2.1 Detailed design of each software components 5.5.2.2 Development and documentation of the software interface detailed design
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 31 of 101
ECSS-E-40 part 1B from 28 November 2003 5.5.2.8 Development and documentation of the software user manual 5.5.3.1 Development and documentation of the software units, test procedures and test data 5.6 Software validation process 5.6.4.1 Development and documentation of a software validation testing specification (SVTS) wrt RB 5.6.4.2 Conducting the validation wrt RB 5.6.4.3 Updating the software user manual 5.6.4.5 Conducting a Qualification Review (QR) 5.7 Software delivery and acceptance 5.7.2 Software delivery and installation 5.7.2.1 Preparation of the software product 5.7.3 Software acceptance 5.7.3.1 Acceptance test planning 5.7.3.2 Acceptance test execution 5.7.3.3 Executable code generation and installation 5.7.3.4a Supplier’s support to customer’s acceptance 5.7.3.4c Acceptance testing documentation 5.7.3.5 Evaluation of acceptance testing 5.7.3.6 Conducting an Acceptance Review (AR) 5.8 Software verification process 5.8.3 Verification activities 5.8.3.7 Verification of test specifications 5.8.3.12a / as support for verification of software requirements & architectural design / sizing (memory) and timing (CPU load) estimation 5.8.3.12c/ as support for verification of software coding and testing / sizing (memory) and timing (CPU utilization in WCET) calculation 5.8.3.13 Behaviour modelling verification 5.10.2.3 problem reporting and handling 5.10.2.4 Implementation of configuration management process 5.10.3.1 Problem analysis 5.10.3.2 Problem verification 5.10.3.3 Development of options for modifications 5.10.3.4 Documentation of problem, analysis and implementation 5.10.3.5 Customer approval of selected modifications options 5.10.4.1 Analysis and documentation of product modification 5.10.4.2 Documentation of software product changes 5.10.4.3 Invoking of software engineering process for modification implementation
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 32 of 101
Document Requirement List [as specified in ECSS-E-40 part 2B (15 November 2004)]
The ECSS software standards are completed with some DRDs, describing the most important software documents. The DRD list is a subset of the exhaustive list of documents to be produced in order to cover all the work output required by the ECSS standards.
The expected output of the requirements resulting of this tailoring shall be placed in the documents identified in the right column of the table below “GSP Study deliverable”.
It is highlighted that the left column of the table below, “ECSS Documentation” does not refer to the actual deliverables of the GSP activity, but should be understood as a list of outputs, which should appear within the real activity deliverables (found in the right column).
Note that most of the requirements outputs should imply merely a brief section within one of the identified GSP deliverables, result of a limited effort, which should not jeopardize the experimentation activities which are the core and objective of the GSP activity.
Note as well that this section refers exclusively to any new SW developed within the activity, and necessary for the experimentation.
ECSS Document ECSS Acronym in DRD
GSP Study Deliverable
SW System Specification SSS SW Interface Requirements Document
-
System partition with definition of items
System Configuration Item List
Software Requirements Specification
SRS
Software Interface Control Document
-
Software Design Document: Software static and/or dynamic architecture
SDD
System Architecture Definition File Experimentation Platform Definition File On-Board Orbit Determination Detailed Processing Model On board Clock Determination Detailed Processing Model
Software Release Document SRD ODTS & utilities software release notes
Software Delivery - ODTS software executable, licenses, libraries, documentation , input and output data
Software User Manual SUM Experimentation Platform User Manual
Software Validation Testing SVTS Experimentation Platform
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 33 of 101
Specification wrt RB Acceptance Test Plan - Software Validation Test Report wrt RB
-
Acceptance Testing Documentation
-
Acceptance Test Report -
Acceptance Test Procedures Experimentation Platform Acceptances Test Report
(Analyses, Inspection & RoD) verification report wrt RB
-
Software Traceability Matrices -
Experimentation Platform Acceptance Test Procedures
Software Reuse File (if any) SRF ODTS Software Reuse
File Software Budget Report - Numerical Accuracy Analysis Report
-
Validation Evaluation Report wrt RB
-
Experimentation Platform Acceptance Test Procedures (special test) Experimentation Platform Acceptances Test Report
Software Acceptance Data Package - SW delivery notice Procured Software Component Lists
- System Architecture Definition File Experimentation Platform Definition File
PR & NCR - Modification analysis report -Problem analysis report
- SPR and CR
Software Development Plan (at proposal only)
SDP As part of the Proposal
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 34 of 101
TECHNICAL APPENDIX C (TECHNICAL FEATURES AUTONOMY-RELATED EXISTING IN THE GPS SYSTEM AND FORESEEN FOR THE GALILEO SYSTEM) GALILEO Galileo will be an independent, global European-controlled satellite-based navigation system. It will have a constellation of satellites monitored and controlled by a Ground Control Segment.
The overall Galileo System is illustrated in the figure above. The Galileo Space Segment will comprise a constellation of thirty satellites in medium-Earth orbit (as defined in the table below). Each satellite will broadcast four ranging signals carrying clock synchronisation, ephemeris, integrity and other data, depending on the particular signal.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 35 of 101
GALILEO SPACE SEGMENT
Walker definition ppp fpt // 27/3/1 (GALILEO)
Number of satellites pt 27
Number of planes pp 3
Number of satellites per plane p
pp p
ts = 9
Pattern unit pp tu /360 o= 13.3°
Slot spacing
(spacing between spacecrafts in the same plane) pp up * 40°
Node spacing
(spacing between planes on the equator) pp us * 120°
Satellite phasing
(spacing between spacecrafts on consecutive planes) pp uf * 13.3°
Inclination 56° (GALILEO)
Orbit radius 29600 km (GALILEO)
Right ascension for the first plane node ( )tGALα
The Galileo Ground Segment will control the whole Galileo constellation; monitor the satellite health and up-load data for subsequent broadcast to users. The key elements of this data such as clock synchronisation, ephemeris, will be calculated from measurements made by a network of approximately 40 Galileo receiving stations. The Ground Segment is split into: The Ground Control Segment (GCS) in charge of monitoring and & control of the Galileo
constellation, The Ground Mission Segment (GMS) in charge of the determination and dissemination of the
navigation and integrity data
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 36 of 101
The Ground Mission Segment (please see next figure) is composed of:
GSS: Galileo Sensor Stations: GSS are in charge of Galileo satellites navigation signals monitoring, associated arrival time measurements relative to their reference and results routing to the Ground Segment Processing Facilities. MDDN: Communications network
OSPF Orbitography and Synchronization Processing Facility in charge of Orbit determination
and time Synchronisation Processing (OD&TS) i.e. Galileo satellites ephemeris and clock correction parameters estimation and prediction as well as Signal In Space Accuracy (SISA) determination for Galileo satellites. MGF: Message Generation Facility is in charge of multiplexing and routing navigation/integrity
data to be sent for mission uplink. MUCF: Mission Uplink Control Facility in charge of determining the contact plan for each
satellite and for each up-link station antenna, etc. ULS: Up-link stations in charge of navigation, data transmission up to Galileo satellites
PTF: Precise Timing Facility in charge of Precision Time processing, including Two Way Time
Transfer (TWTT) with UTC (k), and Galileo System Time (GST) establishment and a number of additional facilities such as the MCF, MSF, SPF, GACF, MKMF, SKMF and PRSKMF, etc
The Galileo System does not consider ISL technology and has no demanding specification in terms of satellite autonomy in the Galileo System Requirements document. Concrete specifications can be found in the table below
GAL
SATELLITE
RELEVANT SPECIFICATIONS
Satellite Working Without Guarantee: The Galileo satellite shall automatically set the Satellite Navigation Service level status flag in each Navigation Data Message to “working without guarantee” if the satellite receives no valid up-link signals for a period which it shall be possible to pre-set to any value from 100 minutes to 10 orbits
.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 37 of 101
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 38 of 101
GPS The NAVSTAR Global Positioning System is managed by the NAVSTAR GPS Joint Program Office at the Space and Missile Systems Centre, Los Angeles Air Force Base, California. The GPS space segment consists of into six orbital planes, requiring a minimum of four satellites in each, to operate. The Global Positioning Service Space Segment comprises a nominal constellation of twenty four satellites in medium-Earth orbit (as defined in the Table below), plus 6 in orbit spares. Each satellite broadcasts one open ranging signal carrying clock synchronisation, and ephemeris.
GPS SPACE SEGMENT
Number of satellites pt 24
Number of planes pp 6
Number of satellites per plane p
pp p
ts = 4
Pattern unit pp tu /360 o=
15°
Node spacing
(spacing between planes on the equator) pp us * 60°
Inclination 55°
Orbit radius 20200 km
Right ascension for the first plane node ( )tGPSα
The GPS constellation currently contains four different types of GPS satellites called Block II, Block IIA, Block IIR and Block IIRM (first satellite launched in September 26, 2005). The allocation of satellites to planes, labelled from A to F, and plane slots numbered from 1 up to 5, is detailed below:
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 39 of 101
CURRENT BLOCK II/IIA/IIR/IIR-M SATELLITES =========================================
LAUNCH LAUNCH FREQ US SPACE ORDER PRN SVN DATE STD PLANE COMMAND ** ----------------------------------------------------------------- *II-1 14 14 FEB 1989 19802 *II-2 13 10 JUN 1989 20061 *II-3 16 18 AUG 1989 20185 *II-4 19 21 OCT 1989 20302 *II-5 17 11 DEC 1989 20361 *II-6 18 24 JAN 1990 20452 *II-7 20 26 MAR 1990 20533 *II-8 21 02 AUG 1990 20724 II-9 15 15 01 OCT 1990 Cs D5 20830 *IIA-10 23 26 NOV 1990 20959 IIA-11 24 24 04 JUL 1991 Cs D6 21552 IIA-12 25 25 23 FEB 1992 Cs A2 21890 *IIA-13 28 10 APR 1992 21930 IIA-14 26 26 07 JUL 1992 Rb F2 22014 IIA-15 27 27 09 SEP 1992 Cs A4 22108 IIA-16 01 32 22 NOV 1992 Cs F6 22231 *IIA-17 29 29 18 DEC 1992 Rb F5 22275 *IIA-18 22 03 FEB 1993 22446 IIA-19 31 31 30 MAR 1993 Cs C5 22581 IIA-20 07 37 13 MAY 1993 Rb C4 22657 IIA-21 09 39 26 JUN 1993 Cs A1 22700 IIA-22 05 35 30 AUG 1993 Rb B4 22779 IIA-23 04 34 26 OCT 1993 Rb D4 22877 IIA-24 06 36 10 MAR 1994 Rb C1 23027 IIA-25 03 33 28 MAR 1996 Cs C2 23833 IIA-26 10 40 16 JUL 1996 Cs E3 23953 IIA-27 30 30 12 SEP 1996 Rb B2 24320 IIA-28 08 38 06 NOV 1997 Cs A3 25030 ***IIR-1 42 17 JAN 1997 IIR-2 13 43 23 JUL 1997 Rb F3 24876 IIR-3 11 46 07 OCT 1999 Rb D2 25933 IIR-4 20 51 11 MAY 2000 Rb E1 26360 IIR-5 28 44 16 JUL 2000 Rb B3 26407 IIR-6 14 41 10 NOV 2000 Rb F1 26605 IIR-7 18 54 30 JAN 2001 Rb E4 26690 IIR-8 16 56 29 JAN 2003 Rb B1 27663 IIR-9 21 45 31 MAR 2003 Rb D3 27704 IIR-10 22 47 21 DEC 2003 Rb E2 28129 IIR-11 19 59 20 MAR 2004 Rb C3 28190 IIR-12 23 60 23 JUN 2004 Rb F4 28361 IIR-13 02 61 06 NOV 2004 Rb D1 28474 IIR-M1 17 53 26 SEP 2005 C4 * Satellite is no longer in service. ** US SPACE COMMAND, previously known as the NORAD object number; also referred to as the NASA Catalog number. Assigned at successful launch. *** Unsuccessful launch.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 40 of 101
The GPS Ground Segment consists of five monitoring stations (Hawaii, Kwajalein, Ascension Island, Diego Garcia, Colorado Springs), three ground antennas, (Ascension Island, Diego Garcia, Kwajalein), and a Master Control station located at Schriever AFB in Colorado. The GPS System considers ISL technology and has direct specifications in terms of satellite autonomy. Relevant information can be found in the table below:
GPS
SATELLITE
RELEVANT SPECIFICATIONS
Block II
Corresponds to the space vehicle numbers SVN 13 through 21. Block II satellites were designed to provide 14 days of operation without contact from the Ground Segment.
Note: The Block IIs were launched from February 1989 through October 1990.
Block IIA
Corresponds to the space vehicle numbers SVN 22 through 40. Block IIA satellites were designed to provide 180 days of operation without contact with the Ground Segment. During the 180 day autonomy, degraded accuracy will be evident in the navigation message
Note: The Block IIAs were launched from November 1990 through November 1997.
Block IIR
Corresponds to the space vehicle numbers SVN 41 through 62. Block IIR satellites are designed to provide at least 14 days of operation without contact from the CS and up to 180 days of operation when operating in the autonomous navigation (AUTONAV) mode. Full accuracy will be maintained using a technique of ranging and communication between the Block IIR satellites. The cross-link ranging will be used to estimate and update the parameters in the navigation message of each Block IIR satellite without contact from the Ground Segment Note: The Block IIRs launching started in January 1997
Block IIR-M
Corresponds to the space vehicle number SVN 53. Block IIR-M satellites incorporate respect Block IIR two new military signals and a second civil signal Note: The Block IIR-Ms launching started in September 2005
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 41 of 101
TECHNICAL APPENDIX D (OBSERVABLES FOR THE ON-BOARD OD&TS PROCESS) Principal satellite to principal satellite observable: Two types of observables are used for orbit determination, namely:
• Halved “Two way range cross-links” • Halved “Range rate cross-links”
which are obtained by linear combinations of other more elemental observables; concretely from conventional pseudorange and Doppler observables. The process yielding to the orbit determination input observables is explained hereafter, with the help of the figure below:
Where:
• iSV refers to the space vehicle “i” • z
wp refers to a one way range observable (pseudorange), being the transmitter “z” and the
receiver “w”
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 42 of 101
The study considers that the one-way observables are derived from the correlation between a PRN code generated by one spacecraft, in transmission mode, and an identical PRN code replicated by other spacecraft, in reception mode. Concretely the study might consider by default the following measurement scheme amongst Principal Satellite’s pairs (e.g. aSV and bSV ):
1. aSV starts the transmission of the PRN “A” code (first bit) towards bSV at time pt , modulated on system carrier 1sf
2. bSV starts the transmission of the PRN “A” code (first bit) towards aSV at time pt ,
modulated on system carrier 1sf
3. aSV ends the transmission of the PRN “A” code A (last bit) towards bSV at time maxtt p ∆+ , modulated on system carrier 1sf
4. bSV end the transmission of the PRN “A” code (last bit) towards aSV at time
maxtt p ∆+ , modulated on system carrier 1sf
5. aSV receives the transmission of the PRN “A” code (first bit) from bSV at time app tt ,∆+ , modulated on system carrier 1sf
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 43 of 101
6. bSV receives the transmission of the PRN “A” code (first bit) from aSV at time bpp tt ,∆+ , modulated on system carrier 1sf
7. aSV ends the reception of the PRN “A” code (last bit) from bSV at
time max, ttt app ∆+∆+ , modulated on system carrier 1sf
8. bSV ends the reception of the PRN code (last bit) from aSV at time max, ttt bpp ∆+∆+ , modulated on system carrier 1sf
In this scheme:
• PRN “A” is common to all satellites
• aptt ,max ∆<<∆ . For dimensioning purposes the shorter propagation time amongst satellites that is considered is 60 ms, while the maximum transmission duration has been limited to 30 ms.
• aSV and bSV are ether in transmitting or in receiving, but never doing both actions
simultaneously.
• The 0/ NC ratio of the received signal allows a very accurate tracking. This is ensured by:
o Narrow beam antennas, with small side lobes at both transmitter and receiver
ensuring:
High antenna gains Absence of interference Absence of multipath
o High transmission signal power
• aSV and bSV host real time information on:
o The position and velocity of each spacecraft o The clock offset and drift of each spacecraft
• aSV and bSV host an Atomic Frequency Standard
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 44 of 101
In the above described scheme the correlation of the PRN “A” code, received between
app tt ,∆+ and max, ttt app ∆+∆+ , by the aSV , with a replica of the PRN “A” code generated
internally in aSV is possible. The same statement can be done for the PRN “A” code, received between bpp tt ,∆+ and max, ttt bpp ∆+∆+ , by the bSV . The following two one way observables are obtained in the above scheme:
( )max, tttp appba ∆+∆+ and ( )max, tttp bpp
ab ∆+∆+ which are given by the following equations:
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( ) ( )max,max,max
max,maxmax,max,
ttttttHttH
tttCttCtttdtttp
appbaapp
RXap
bTX
appapb
appbaapp
ba
∆+∆++∆+∆+−∆++
∆+∆+−∆++∆+∆+=∆+∆+
ε
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( ) ( )max,max,max
max,maxmax,max,
ttttttHttH
tttCttCtttdtttp
bppabbpp
RXbp
aTX
bppbpa
bppabbpp
ab
∆+∆++∆+∆+−∆++
∆+∆+−∆++∆+∆+=∆+∆+
ε
Where
• ( )max, tttd appba ∆+∆+ refers to the distance traveled by the signal transmitted from
satellite bSV , at maxtt p ∆+ , till it reaches aSV , at max, ttt bpp ∆+∆+ .
• ( )max, tttd bpp
ab ∆+∆+ refers to the distance traveled by the signal transmitted from
satellite aSV , at maxtt p ∆+ , till it reaches bSV , at max, ttt app ∆+∆+ .
• ( ) ≠∆+∆+ max, tttd app
ba ( )max, tttd bpp
ab ∆+∆+
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 45 of 101
• ( )maxttC p
b ∆+ refers to the on board clock of bSV at maxtt p ∆+
• ( )max, tttC bppb ∆+∆+ refers to the on board clock of bSV at max, ttt app ∆+∆+
• ( ) ≅∆+ maxttC p
b ( )max, tttC bppb ∆+∆+ for the maximum bpt ,∆ which for dimensioning
purposes can be set in 300 ms (equivalent to 90000 Km), assuming a conventional AFS on board bSV
• ( )maxttC p
a ∆+ refers to the on board clock of aSV at maxtt p ∆+
• ( )max, tttC appa ∆+∆+ refers to the on board clock of aSV at max, ttt bpp ∆+∆+
• ( ) ≅p
a tC ( )max, tttC appa ∆+∆+ for the maximum apt ,∆ which for dimensioning
purposes can be set in 300 ms (equivalent to 90000 Km), assuming a conventional AFS on board aSV
• ( )maxttH p
bTX ∆+ refers to the on board PRN “A” code signal group delay, within the
bSV payload, from its generation, coherent with the on board clock, till it reaches the transmitting antenna phase center for the system frequency 1sf at maxtt p ∆+
• ( )max, tttH app
RXa ∆+∆+ refers to the on board PRN “A” code signal group delay, within
the aSV payload, from its reception at the receiving antenna phase center for the system frequency 1sf , till it reaches the PRN “A” code correlator on board, at
max, ttt app ∆+∆+
• ( )maxttH p
aTX ∆+ refers to the on board PRN “A” code signal group delay, within the
aSV payload, from its generation, coherent with the on board clock, till it reaches the transmitting antenna phase center for the system frequency 1sf at maxtt p ∆+
• ( )max, tttH bpp
RXb ∆+∆+ refers to the on board PRN “A” code signal group delay, within
the bSV payload, from its reception at the receiving antenna phase center for the system frequency 1sf , till it reaches the PRN “A” code correlator on board, at
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 46 of 101
max, ttt bpp ∆+∆+
• ( ) ( )max, tttHtH app
bTXp
bTX ∆+∆+≅ assuming conventional group delay stabilities for the
on board bSV transmitting chain.
• ( ) ( )max, tttHtH appaTXp
aTX ∆+∆+≅ assuming conventional group delay stabilities for
the on board aSV reception chain.
• ( ) ( )max, tttHtH bppRXbp
RXb ∆+∆+≅ assuming conventional group delay stabilities for
the on board bSV transmitting chain.
• ( ) ( )max, tttHtH appRXap
RXa ∆+∆+≅ assuming conventional group delay stabilities for
the on board aSV transmitting chain.
• ( ) ≠pbTX tH ( )p
RXb tH as one the first is a group delay associated to the bSV transmitting
chain of the PRN “A” code, modulated on the system frequency 1sf , while the second
is a group delay associated to the bSV reception chain.
• ( ) =paTX tH ( )p
RXa tH as one the first is a group delay associated to the bSV transmitting
chain of the PRN “A” code, modulated on the system frequency 1sf , while the second
is a group delay associated to the bSV reception chain.
• ( )max, ttt appba ∆+∆+ε refers to the one way observable error at max, ttt app ∆+∆+ ,
which is labeled as ( )pba tε , as it does not introduce any confusion
• ( )max, ttt bpp
ab ∆+∆+ε refers to the one way observable error at max, ttt bpp ∆+∆+ , which
is labeled as ( )pab tε , as it does not introduce any confusion
Therefore the basic one way observables, under the above mentioned conditions can be expressed in the following simplified form:
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 47 of 101
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )p
bap
RXap
bTXpap
bapp
baapp
ba ttHtHtCtCtttdtttp ε+−+−+∆+∆+=∆+∆+ max,max,
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )p
abp
RXbp
aTXpbp
abpp
abbpp
ab ttHtHtCtCtttdtttp ε+−+−+∆+∆+=∆+∆+ max,max,
The distances ( )max, tttd app
ba ∆+∆+ and ( )max, tttd bpp
ab ∆+∆+ can be converted to the
( ) ( )pbap
ba tdtd = observable, which corresponds with the geometrical distance between aSV
and bSV at time pt . For this purpose, it can be used, the a priori knowledge of:
• ( )( )
dttttdd app
ba max, ∆+∆+
, which can observed from Doppler observables or computed
• The satellite positions and clocks at time pt Assuming all the above corrections are applied, and adapting the terminology for ( )tp a
b , so that it refers to the common transmission time pt , it finally results in:
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )pbap
RXap
bTXpap
bp
bap
ba ttHtHtCtCtdtp ε+−+−+=
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )p
abp
RXbp
aTXpbp
ap
abp
ab ttHtHtCtCtdtp ε+−+−+=
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 48 of 101
In terms of simultaneity between different observations:
• zwp and w
zp are simultaneous, ( )wz,∀
• zwp and '
'wzp are not simultaneous, unless
⎩⎨⎧
==
wwzz
''
Consistently, the one way observables are:
• ( ) ( )[ ]pabp
ba tptp ,
• ( ) ( )[ ]r
acr
ca tptp ,
Each pair ( ) ( )[ ]p
abp
ba tptp , can be transformed in a pair ( ) ( )[ ]p
abp
ba tCtd ˆ,ˆ in the following way:
( ) ( )[ ]( ) ( ) ( )( )
( ) ( ) ( )( )⎪⎪
⎩
⎪⎪
⎨
⎧
−=
+=
=
2ˆ
2ˆ
ˆ,ˆ
pabp
ba
pab
pabp
ba
pba
pabp
ba
tptptC
tptptd
tCtd
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( )⎪⎪
⎩
⎪⎪
⎨
⎧
+−−−
+−=
+−+−
+=
=
−
+
pbap
RXbp
aTXp
RXap
bTX
papbpba
pbap
RXbp
aTXp
RXap
bTX
pabpab
ttHtHtHtH
tCtCtC
ttHtHtHtH
tdtd
ε
ε
2ˆ
2ˆ
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( )⎪⎪
⎩
⎪⎪
⎨
⎧
++
++
−−=
+−
+−
+=
=
−
+
pbap
RXbp
bTXp
RXap
aTX
papbpba
pbap
RXbp
bTXp
RXap
aTX
pabpab
ttHtHtHtH
tCtCtC
ttHtHtHtH
tdtd
ε
ε
22ˆ
22ˆ
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 49 of 101
Where:
• ( ) =pab td ( ) ( )pabp
ba tdtd = is the distance between satellites ""a and ""b at pt
• ( )pba t+ε refers to average between ( )pa tε and ( )pb tε • ( )pba t−ε refers to the semi-difference between ( )pa tε and ( )pb tε
The observable ( )pab td is used for orbit determination, after a number of manipulations described afterwards. This observable has the following characteristics:
• It is a purely ionosphere-free observable. • It is a purely troposphere free observable • It is a purely on board clocks free observable • It is not affected by any ambiguity • It is biased by the amount (slowly varying along time)
( ) ( )( ) ( ) ( )( )2
pRXbp
aTXp
RXap
bTX tHtHtHtH −+−
• It is affected by the local multipath caused by the satellite structure nearby the antenna
receiving the one way signal • It is affected by the local on-board receiver noise
The observable ( )p
ba tC is an on board clock observable, which nevertheless is considered just an
auxiliary measurement for the clock estimation process. This observable has the following characteristics:
• It is a purely ionosphere-free observable. • It is a purely troposphere free observable • It is a purely orbit/geometry free observable • It is not affected by any ambiguity • It is biased by the amount (slowly varying along time)
( ) ( )( ) ( ) ( )( )22
pRXbp
bTXp
RXap
aTX tHtHtHtH +
++
• It is affected by the local multipath caused by the satellite structure nearby the antenna
receiving the one way signal
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 50 of 101
• It is affected by the local on-board receiver noise
The errors ( )pba t+ε and ( )pba t−ε affecting the observables ( )pab td and ( )p
ba tC are uncorrelated
as demonstrated below, at least as far as the errors ( )pba tε and ( )p
ab tε affecting the one way
observables ( )pba tp and ( )p
ab tp are:
• Uncorrelated • Identical from a statistical perspective
( ) ( )b
apba Nt σε ,0≈
( ) ( )a
bpab Nt σε ,0≈
( ) ( )p
abp
ba tt σσ =
This is demonstrated below:
( )
( )( )( )
( )( ) ⎟⎟
⎠
⎞
⎜⎜
⎝
⎛=
⎟⎟⎟
⎠
⎞
⎜⎜⎜
⎝
⎛
2
2
00
pab
pba
pba
pba
tt
t
tCov
σ
σ
ε
ε
( )
( )
( )
( )⎟⎟⎟
⎠
⎞
⎜⎜⎜
⎝
⎛
⎟⎟
⎠
⎞
⎜⎜
⎝
⎛
−=⎟⎟⎟
⎠
⎞
⎜⎜⎜
⎝
⎛
−
+
pba
pba
pba
pba
t
t
t
t
ε
ε
ε
ε
21
21
21
21
What yields to the following covariance matrix:
( )
( )( )( )
( )( ) ⎟⎟
⎠
⎞
⎜⎜
⎝
⎛
−⎟⎟
⎠
⎞
⎜⎜
⎝
⎛
⎟⎟
⎠
⎞
⎜⎜
⎝
⎛
−=⎟⎟⎟
⎠
⎞
⎜⎜⎜
⎝
⎛
−
+
21
21
21
21
00
21
21
21
21
2
2
pab
pba
pba
pba
tt
t
tCov
σ
σ
ε
ε
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 51 of 101
( )( )
( )( ) ( )( ) ( )( ) ( )( )
( )( ) ( )( ) ( )( ) ( )( )⎟⎟⎟⎟⎟⎟
⎠
⎞
⎜⎜⎜⎜⎜⎜
⎝
⎛
+−
−+
=⎟⎟⎠
⎞⎜⎜⎝
⎛
−
+
44
44
2222
2222
pbap
bap
bap
ba
pbap
bap
bap
ba
pba
pba
tttt
tttt
tt
Cov
σσσσ
σσσσ
εε
Under the mentioned assumption that ( ) ( )p
abp
ba tt σσ = it follows:
( )( )
( )( )
( )( )⎟⎟⎟⎟⎟⎟
⎠
⎞
⎜⎜⎜⎜⎜⎜
⎝
⎛
=⎟⎟⎠
⎞⎜⎜⎝
⎛
−
+
20
02
2
2
p
p
pba
pba
t
t
tt
Covσ
σ
εε
The standard deviation of the errors ( )pba t+ε and ( )pba t−ε is smaller than that of the originals
errors ( )pba tε and ( )p
ab tε .
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 52 of 101
The observable ( )pab td requires, as mentioned before, some further manipulations before it can be entered in the orbit determination process, in order to remove the bias due to group delays, both in the satellites transmission and reception chains. Concretely the following differencing scheme is proposed: Given the following observables:
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( )11111
11 22ˆ
pbap
RXbp
bTXp
RXap
aTX
pabpab ttHtHtHtH
tdtd ++−
+−
+= ε
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( )22222
22 22ˆ
pcap
RXcp
cTXp
RXap
aTX
pacpac ttHtHtHtH
tdtd ++−
+−
+= ε
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( )33333
33 22ˆ
pbdp
RXbp
bTXp
RXdp
dTX
pdbpdb ttHtHtHtH
tdtd ++−
+−
+= ε
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( )44444
44 22ˆ
pcdp
RXcp
cTXp
RXdp
dTX
pdcpdc ttHtHtHtH
tdtd ++−
+−
+= ε
Where 1pt , 2pt , 3pt and 4pt are close enough to consider that the all the terms referring to biases stay constant. The following new observable can be derived:
( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( ) ( )( )( ) ( )( ) ( ) ( )( )4321
43214321 ,,,ˆ
pcdpbdpcapba
pdcpdbpacpabppppbcad
tttt
tdtdtdtdttttd
++++ −−−
−−−=∇∆
εεεε
This observable has the following characteristics:
• It is a purely ionosphere-free observable. • It is a purely troposphere free observable • It is a purely on board clocks free observable • It is not affected by any ambiguity • It is affected by the local multipath caused by the satellite structure nearby the antenna
receiving the one way signal
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 53 of 101
• It is affected by the local on-board receiver noise
The above observable is very similar to a double difference, except in the fact that the four observations are not simultaneous except from the perspective of the terms it intends to cancel. The observable ( )p
bcad td∇∆ yields to the following observation equation:
( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )d
ad
ppppbcada
dpppp
bcad
ca
cpppp
bcada
cpppp
bcad
ba
bpppp
bcada
bpppp
bcad
aa
apppp
bcada
apppp
bcad
ppppbcadpppp
bcad
apr
vttttd
rr
ttttd
apr
vttttd
rr
ttttd
apr
vttttd
rr
ttttd
apr
vttttd
rr
ttttd
ttttdttttd
00
0
43210
0
4321
00
0
43210
0
4321
00
0
43210
0
4321
00
0
43210
0
4321
43214321
...,,,,,,
...,,,,,,
...,,,,,,
...,,,,,,
,,,,,,ˆ
rr
rr
r
rr
rr
r
rr
rr
r
rr
rr
r
∂∂
+∆∂
∇∆∂+∆
∂
∇∆∂+
∂∂
+∆∂
∇∆∂+∆
∂
∇∆∂+
∂∂
+∆∂
∇∆∂+∆
∂
∇∆∂+
∂∂
+∆∂
∇∆∂+∆
∂
∇∆∂+
∇∆=∇∆
Where
• ir0r refers to the a priori initial position for iSV at time 0t
• iv0r refers to the a priori initial velocity for iSV at time 0t
• iap 0r refers to the a priori auxiliary parameter vector for iSV at time 0t
• ( )4321 ,,, ppppbcad ttttd∇∆ refers to the computed version of the observation, based on the a
priori knowledge of the satellite orbits and clocks. This equation is further detailed to better understand the difference respect other observation equations commonly used for orbit determination.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 54 of 101
( ) ( )
( )( )
( ) ( )( )
( )
( )( )
( ) ( )( )
( )
( )
( )( )
( ) ( )( )
( )
( )( )
( ) ( )( )
( )
( )
( )( )
( ) ( )( )
( )
( )( )
( ) ( )( )
( )
( )
( )( )
( ) ( )( )
( )
( )( )
( ) ( )( )
( )
( )d
ddp
d
pd
ppppbcad
dp
d
pd
ppppbcad
ddp
d
pd
ppppbcad
dp
d
pd
ppppbcad
c
ccp
c
pc
ppppbcad
cp
c
pc
ppppbcad
ccp
c
pc
ppppbcad
cp
c
pc
ppppbcad
b
bbp
b
pb
ppppbcad
bp
b
pb
ppppbcad
bbp
b
pb
ppppbcad
bp
b
pb
ppppbcad
a
aap
a
pa
ppppbcad
ap
a
pa
ppppbcad
aap
a
pa
ppppbcad
ap
a
pa
ppppbcad
ppppbcadpppp
bcad
ap
vvtr
trttttd
vtr
trttttd
rrtr
trttttd
rtr
trttttd
ap
vvtr
trttttd
vtr
trttttd
rrtr
trttttd
rtr
trttttd
ap
vvtr
trttttd
vtr
trttttd
rrtr
trttttd
rtr
trttttd
ap
vvtr
trttttd
vtr
trttttd
rrtr
trttttd
rtr
trttttd
ttttdttttd
0
00
4
4
4321
0
3
3
4321
00
4
4
4321
0
3
3
4321
0
00
4
4
4321
0
2
2
4321
00
4
4
4321
0
2
2
4321
0
00
3
3
4321
0
1
1
4321
00
3
3
4321
0
1
1
4321
0
00
2
2
4321
0
1
1
4321
00
2
2
4321
0
1
1
4321
43214321
...
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
...
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
...
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
...
,,,,,,
,,,,,,
,,,,,,ˆ
r
rr
r
rr
r
r
rr
r
rr
r
r
r
rr
r
rr
r
r
rr
r
rr
r
r
r
rr
r
rr
r
r
rr
r
rr
r
r
r
rr
r
rr
r
r
rr
r
rr
r
r
∂∂
+
∆⎥⎥⎦
⎤
⎢⎢⎣
⎡
∂
∂
∂
∇∆∂+
∂
∂
∂
∇∆∂+
∆⎥⎥⎦
⎤
⎢⎢⎣
⎡
∂
∂
∂
∇∆∂+
∂
∂
∂
∇∆∂+
∂∂
+
∆⎥⎥⎦
⎤
⎢⎢⎣
⎡
∂
∂
∂
∇∆∂+
∂
∂
∂
∇∆∂+
∆⎥⎥⎦
⎤
⎢⎢⎣
⎡
∂
∂
∂
∇∆∂+
∂
∂
∂
∇∆∂+
∂∂
+
∆⎥⎥⎦
⎤
⎢⎢⎣
⎡
∂
∂
∂
∇∆∂+
∂
∂
∂
∇∆∂+
∆⎥⎥⎦
⎤
⎢⎢⎣
⎡
∂
∂
∂
∇∆∂+
∂
∂
∂
∇∆∂+
∂∂
+
∆⎥⎥⎦
⎤
⎢⎢⎣
⎡
∂
∂
∂
∇∆∂+
∂
∂
∂
∇∆∂+
∆⎥⎥⎦
⎤
⎢⎢⎣
⎡
∂
∂
∂
∇∆∂+
∂
∂
∂
∇∆∂+
∇∆=∇∆
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 55 of 101
The orbit determination might also process the Doppler observations. An improvement, in terms of accuracy, robustness and autonomy could result from the processing of this additional information.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 56 of 101
Principal satellite to auxiliary satellite observables: Two types of observables are used for orbit determination, namely:
• Halved “One way minus one way range cross-links” • Halved “Range rate cross-links”
which are obtained by linear combinations of other more elemental observables; as described in section Technical Appendix D. The nomenclature followed for these observables is described hereafter, with the help of the figure below:
Where:
• iSV refers to the space vehicle “i”, which belongs to the principal constellation • iSV ˆ refers to the space vehicle “i”, which belongs to the auxiliary constellation • z
wp refers to a one way range observable, being the transmitter “z” and the receiver “w”
In the figure above:
• zwp and w
zp are simultaneous, ( )wz,∀
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 57 of 101
• zwp and '
'wzp are not simultaneous, unless
⎩⎨⎧
==
wwzz
''
The one way observables depicted in the previous figure are ( ) ( )[ ]q
aaq
aa tptp ˆˆ , .
Each pair ( ) ( )[ ]q
aaq
aa tptp ˆˆ , is transformed in a pair ( ) ( )[ ]q
aaq
aa tCtd ˆˆ ˆ,ˆ in an analogous way to the
transformation from pair ( ) ( )[ ]pabp
ba tptp , can be transformed in a pair ( ) ( )[ ]p
abp
ba tCtd ˆ,ˆ , described
in section Technical Appendix D The observable ( )qaa td ˆ
ˆ is used for orbit determination. This observable has the same
characteristics as the ( )pab td observable described in previous section. The observable ( )q
aa tC ˆˆ could be used for clock determination. This observable has the same
characteristics as the ( )pba tC observable described in previous section.
The errors ( )qaa tˆ+ε and ( )qaa tˆ−ε affecting the observables ( )qaa td ˆ
ˆ and ( )qaa tC ˆˆ are uncorrelated
assuming that the errors ( )qaa tˆε and ( )q
aa tˆε fulfil the same type of conditions that were identified
for ( )pba tε and ( )p
ab tε in the previous section.
As described in section Technical Appendix D, the Doppler observable could be considered as an additional orbit determination observable.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 58 of 101
In addition to the above described observables, the auxiliary satellites perform additional one-way ranging observations based on the ranging signals at the different user frequencies. These additional observables are further described with the help of the figure below:
These additional observables have the same characteristics:
• Type: zwp , with nomenclature accordingly to that followed in section Technical
Appendix D, being wSV an auxiliary satellite. • Observations per user frequency:
o z
wp could be any of the following observables ( )1uzw fp , ( )2u
zw fp , ( )3u
zw fp , ...
being 1uf , 2uf , 3uf , … the different user frequencies, broadcast by the principal
satellites
• Simultaneity of satellite observations:
o ( )uxzw fp and ( )''
uxzw fp are simultaneous, ',' xz ∀∀
o ( )ux
zw fp and ( )'' ux
zw fp are simultaneous, ',' xw ∀∀
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 59 of 101
Principal satellite to ground station observables: Two types of observables are used for orbit determination, namely:
• Halved “Two way range cross-links” • Halved “Range rate cross-links”
which are obtained by linear combinations of other more elemental observables; as described in section Technical Appendix D. The nomenclature followed for these observables is described hereafter, with the help of the figure below:
These additional observables have the same characteristics:
• Type: zwp , with nomenclature accordingly to that followed in section Technical
Appendix D, being zSV a principal (not an auxiliary) satellite and yST a ground station.
• Observations per user frequency:
o z
wp could be any of the following observables ( )1szw fp , ( )2s
zw fp , ( )3s
zw fp , ...
being 1sf , 2sf , 3sf , … the different system frequencies, broadcast by the
principal satellites
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 60 of 101
• Simultaneity of satellite observations:
o ( )sx
zw fp and ( )''
' sxwz fp are simultaneous, ( ) ',',' xwwzz ∀==∀
o ( )ux
zw fp and ( )''
' uxzw fp are not simultaneous, ( )[ ] ',',' xTRUEwwzz ∀≠≠=∀
o ( )ux
zw fp and ( )''
' uxzw fp are not simultaneous, ( )[ ] ',',' xTRUEwwzz ∀≠=≠∀
Consistently the one way observables depicted in the previous figure are: • ( ) ( )[ ]sxrasxr
a ftpftp ,,, 11
Each pair of simultaneous one way observations responds to the following expression:
( ) ( )[ ]
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )⎪⎩
⎪⎨
⎧
+−+++−+=
+−+++−+=
=
ra
sxraTXsxr
RXsxr
ar
arr
ar
asxr
a
rasxrRXasxrTXsxrarararrasxra
sxra
sxra
tftHftHftItTtCtCtdftp
tftHftHftItTtCtCtdftp
ftpftp
1111111
1111111
11
~,,,,
~,,,,
,,,
ε
ε
Where:
• ( ) ( )ra
ra tdtd 11 = refers to the distance between satellites ""a and ground station "1" at rt
• ( ) ( )rr tCtC 1
1 = refers to the ground station “1” clock ""b at rt • ( ) ( )rar
a tCtC = refers to the on board clock of the satellite ""a at rt
• ( ) ( ) ( )sxrasxr
asxra ftIftIftI ,,, 11
1 == is the propagation delay, due to the ionosphere, in the propagation of the ranging signals, at system frequency sxf
• ( ) ( ) ( )rara
ra tTtTtT 111 == is the propagation delay, due to the troposphere, in the
propagation of the ranging signals • ( )ra t1~ε refers to the one way ( )ra tp1 observable error at rt • ( )r
a t1~ε refers to the one way ( )r
a tp1 observable error at rt • ( )sxrTX ftH ,1 , ( )sxr
RXa ftH , , ( )sxr
RX ftH ,1 and ( )sxraTX ftH , follow the same nomenclature
used for ( )rbTX tH , ( )r
RXa tH , ( )r
RXb tH and ( )r
aTX tH , respectively, in section Technical
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 61 of 101
Appendix D; with the exception that in section Technical Appendix D the dependency of these terms with the carrier frequency (and in fact with the modulated ranging signal bandwidth) is not made explicit. Please note that in fact there is a further dependency with the modulated ranging signal bandwidth)
The set of observables:
( ) ( )[ ]1111 ,,, sr
asra ftpftp
( ) ( )[ ]212
1 ,,, sra
sra ftpftp
( ) ( )[ ]3131 ,,, sr
asra ftpftp
………………
are transformed by a linear combination geometry-preserved (Condition 1) one-way range, as described below:
{ }( ) ( )
{ }( ) ( )
∑
∑∑
∑∑
=
⎥⎥⎥⎥⎥⎥⎥
⎦
⎤
⎢⎢⎢⎢⎢⎢⎢
⎣
⎡
=⎟⎟⎠
⎞⎜⎜⎝
⎛=
=⎟⎟⎠
⎞⎜⎜⎝
⎛=
gg
gsgr
ag
gsggr
agr
a
gsgrag
gsggragra
k
ftpkfktpktp
ftpkfktpktp
1
,,,
,,,,
111
111
Which are detailed hereafter:
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 62 of 101
{ }( ) { }( )[ ]
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )[ ] ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )[ ] ( )⎪⎪⎩
⎪⎪⎨
⎧
+−+++−+
+−+++−+
=
∑∑∑
∑∑∑
gsgr
ag
gsgr
aTXsgr
RXg
gsgr
agr
arr
ar
a
gsgrag
gsgr
RXasgrTXg
gsgragrararra
gra
gra
ftkftHftHkftIktTtCtCtd
ftkftHftHkftIktTtCtCtd
ktpktp
,~,,,
,~,,,
,,,
111111
111111
11
ε
ε
This observable is:
• An ionospheric-free observable (Condition 2) if the following additional condition is imposed:
( ) 0,1 =∑
gsgrag ftIk
• Optimum (from error contamination perspective) if the following additional conditions
are imposed
( ){ }
( )
sfrequenciesystemofnumberp
gisgragi
Rkgsgrag ftkEftkE
pgi
=
∈ ⎪⎭
⎪⎬⎫
⎪⎩
⎪⎨⎧
⎥⎥⎦
⎤
⎢⎢⎣
⎡⎟⎟⎠
⎞⎜⎜⎝
⎛=
⎥⎥⎦
⎤
⎢⎢⎣
⎡⎟⎟⎠
⎞⎜⎜⎝
⎛∑∑
2
1
2
1 ,~min,~ εε
where [ ]...E refers to the mathematical expectation
The gk optimum coefficients that fulfill Condition 1 and Condition 2 simultaneously can be derived by the Lagrange method for identifying the conditioned minimum; concretely by solving the follow set of equations:
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 63 of 101
{ }( ) ( )( )[ ] ( )
{ }( )
{ }( )
{ }( )⎪⎪⎪⎪
⎩
⎪⎪⎪⎪
⎨
⎧
=∂
Φ∂
=∂
Φ∂
∀=∂
Φ∂
++=Φ ∑∑∑
0,,
0,,
,0,,
,,~,,
2
21
1
21
21
121
21221
λλλ
λλλ
λλ
λλελλ
g
g
gg
g
gsgrag
gg
gsgragg
k
k
kk
k
ftIkkftEkk
Where • iλ is the Lagrange’s coefficient associated to Condition “i”
The proposed selection of gk coefficients yields to the following observables:
( ) ( )[ ]
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )[ ] ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )[ ] ( )⎪⎪⎩
⎪⎪⎨
⎧
+−++−+
+−++−+
=
∑
∑
ra
gsgr
aTXsgr
RXgr
arr
ar
a
rag
sgrRXasgrTXgrararra
ra
ra
tftHftHktTtCtCtd
tftHftHktTtCtCtd
tptp
11111
11111
11
,,
,,
,
ε
ε
Where
( ) ( )
( ) ( )⎪⎪⎩
⎪⎪⎨
⎧
=
=
∑
∑
gsgr
agr
a
gsgragra
ftkt
ftkt
,~
,~
11
11
εε
εε
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 64 of 101
The observables ( ) ( )[ ]r
ara tptp 1
1 , can be finally transformed in ( ) ( )[ ]ra
ra tCtd 11 ˆ,ˆ as described
in section Technical Appendix D. The result is as follows:
( ) ( )
( ) ( )[ ] ( ) ( )[ ]( )
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( )[ ] ( ) ( )[ ]( )⎪
⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪
⎩
⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪
⎨
⎧
+−−−
+
+−=
+−+−
+
+=
=
−
+
∑∑
∑∑
rbag
sgrRX
sgraTXg
gsgr
RXasgrTXg
rarbrba
rbag
sgrRX
sgraTXg
gsgr
RXasgrTXg
rabrab
tftHftHkftHftHk
tCtCtC
tftHftHkftHftHk
tdtd
ε
ε
2
,,,,
ˆ
2
,,,,
ˆ
11
11
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( )[ ] ( ) ( )[ ] ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( )[ ] ( ) ( )[ ] ( )⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪
⎩
⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪⎪
⎨
⎧
++
−+
+
+−=
+−
+−
+
+=
=
−
+
∑∑
∑ ∑
rbag
sgrRXasgr
aTX
gg
sgrRX
sgrTXg
raspapbpba
rbag g
sgrRXasgr
aTX
gsgr
RXsgrTX
g
rarabrab
tftHftH
kftHftH
k
tTtCtCtC
tftHftH
kftHftH
k
tTtdtd
ε
ε
2,,
2,,
ˆ
2,,
2,,
ˆ
11
11
1
Where:
• ( ) =ra td 1 ( ) ( )ra
ra tdtd 11 = is the distance between satellites ""a and ""b at rt
• ( )ra tT 1 is the propagation delay, due to the troposphere, in the propagation of the
ranging signal • ( )ra t1+ε refers to average between ( )ra tε and ( )rt1ε • ( )ra t1−ε refers to the semi-difference between ( )ra tε and ( )rt1ε
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 65 of 101
The observable ( )ra td 1
ˆ is used for orbit determination. This observable has the following characteristics:
• It is an ionosphere-free observable. • It is a not an troposphere free observable • It is a purely on board clocks free observable • It is not affected by any ambiguity • It is affected by the local multipath caused by the satellite structure nearby the antenna
receiving the one way signal • It is biased by the amount (slowly varying along time)
( ) ( )[ ] ( ) ( )[ ]∑ ∑
−+
−
g g
sgrRXasgr
aTX
gsgr
RXsgrTX
g
ftHftHk
ftHftHk
2,,
2,, 1
1
• It is affected by the local on-board receiver noise
The observable ( )ra tC1ˆ could be used for clock determination. This observable has the following characteristics:
• It is a purely ionosphere-free observable. • It is a purely troposphere free observable • It is a purely orbit/geometry free observable • It is not affected by any ambiguity • It is biased by the amount (slowly varying along time)
( ) ( )[ ] ( ) ( )[ ]∑∑
+−
+
g
sgrRXasgr
aTX
gg
sgrRX
sgrTXg
ftHftHk
ftHftHk
2,,
2,, 1
1
• It is affected by the local multipath caused by the satellite structure nearby the antenna
receiving the one way signal • It is affected by the local on-board receiver noise
The errors ( )ra t1+ε and ( )ra t1−ε affecting the observables ( )ra td 1
ˆ and ( )ra tC1ˆ are uncorrelated assuming that the errors ( )qa t1ε and ( )q
a t1ε fulfil the same type of conditions that were identified
for ( )pba tε and ( )p
ab tε in section Technical Appendix D.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 66 of 101
The observable ( )pab td requires, as in section Technical Appendix D, some further manipulations before it can be entered in the orbit determination process, in order to remove the bias due to group delays, both in the satellites/ ground station transmission and reception chains. The final orbit determination observable is:
( ) ( ) ( )( ) ( ) ( )( )( ) ( )( ) ( ) ( )( )4321
43214321 ,,,ˆ
rcdrbdrcarba
rdcrdbracrabrrrrbcad
tttttdtdtdtdttttd
++++ −−−−−−=∇∆
εεεε
Which observation equation can be found in section Technical Appendix D.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 67 of 101
TECHNICAL APPENDIX E (ON BOARD ORBIT DETERMINATION PROCESS)
The figure above describes a possible scheme for the orbit measurement process for the “One way range cross-links”, which, is described in section Technical Appendix D. It considers a sequential two steps approach, which are described below. The scheme feasibility can be understood under the tracking conditions described in section Technical Appendix D, which are repeated hereafter for commodity:
• The shorter propagation time (for dimensioning purposes) amongst satellites is 60 ms
• The maximum transmission duration has been limited to 30 ms.
• Spacecrafts are either in transmitting or receiving, but never doing both actions simultaneously.
• Excellent 0/ NC ratio of the received signal
• Spacecrafts host accurate real time information on the position and velocity of each
spacecraft, and on the clock offset and drift of each spacecraft
• Spacecrafts host an Atomic Frequency Standard
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 68 of 101
1. First Step: The spacecraft to spacecraft measurements are performed amongst all satellites, except potentially for those in which the propagation path could cross the ionosphere. It has been assumed that given the above described tracking conditions, an accurate range measurement is obtainable in a few milliseconds, e.g. 15 ms. This would yield, for the constellation defined in 0, to an overall observation period of:
( ) ( )p
apap
ktttt 1
21
maxτ⋅−+⋅+
Where:
• pt is the number of principal satellites, which is 27. • at is the number of auxiliary satellites, which is 6. • maxτ is the maximum time span to obtain an accurate one-way range
measurement, which is 30 ms.
• ( ) ( )
21−+⋅+ apap tttt
is the number of independent pair of satellites
• pk is a parallelism factor, which reflects the possibility to perform simultaneously spacecraft to spacecraft ranging measurements for different pairs of satellites, with no common satellite. This factor, and for an even number of
satellites can be as high as( )
2ap tt +
.
For the more demanding scenario (Scenario II) within these analyses, in terms of number of spacecrafts (please refer to 0), the overall measurement process would last 1t∆ :
mst 150050 max1 =<∆ τ
The First Step process is represented in the next figure, in which:
• pkN =1 • "","","","","","" fedcba are principal satellites
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 69 of 101
2. Second Step: The spacecraft to ground station measurements are performed amongst
principal satellites and ground stations. In this case the ionospheric effects on the ranging signals can be corrected by making use of the ranging signals transmitted simultaneously on different frequencies. It has been assumed, as in the case of the First Step that given the above described tracking conditions, an accurate range measurement is obtainable in a few milliseconds, e.g. 15 ms. This would yield, for the constellation defined in 0, to an overall observation period of:
maxmax τ⋅n
Where:
• { }sp ttn ,maxmax = • pt is the number of principal satellites, which is 27. • st is the number of ground stations, which for dimensioning purposes can be
considered 15<< • maxτ is the maximum time span to obtain an accurate one-way range
measurement, which is 30 ms.
For the more demanding scenario (Scenario II) within these analyses, in terms of number of spacecrafts (please refer to 0) and ground stations, the overall measurement process would last 2t∆ :
mst 90030 max2 =<∆ τ
The Second Step process is represented in the figure after to the next, in which:
• max2 nN = • "","","","","","" fedcba area sub-set of satellites amongst the overall set of
satellites, including both principal and auxiliary satellites.
• "4","3","2","1" are ground stations
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 70 of 101
This measurement process, Step 1 → Step 2, is repeated periodically every 3t∆ ms,
cept
ne
rom the ed by
and
atical
being 3t∆ given by the following condition:
( ) msttt 2500213 =∆+∆≥∆
Note that ( )213 ttt ∆+∆=∆ . The presented scheme intends merely to identify “a priori”potential overall conlimitations, but is not necessarily optimum or even adequate. The Study should analyze carefully the most convenient scheme for the measurement process yielding to the “Oway range cross-links” between either two satellites, or between one satellite and one ground station. Note that the measurement process has been kept, intentionally, independent fobservations exchange scheme, which a priori is considered to be performdedicated on-board communication equipment, transmitting on different frequenciesthrough different antennas. The convenience and even the need of such independence should be carefully analyzed within the Study.
The above described scheme guarantees ( ) ( )
spapap tt
tttt⋅+
−+⋅+
21
observables every
epoch, being an epoch any time interval with duration 3t∆ . Note that the above scheme implies a set of measurements which is:
• Refreshed at least once every 5 seconds 50003 <<∆t ms
• Clock free, by generating of “Halve two way range observables” abd .
• Transmitters and receivers group delay free, by applying the mathemoperator ∇∆ to adequate groups of “Halve two way range observables”
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 71 of 101
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 72 of 101
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 73 of 101
The on-board orbitography process is briefly described hereafter.
1. The observations type ( )pbcad td∇∆ are pre-processed. The processing includes blunder
detection and isolation. 2. The observations type ( )p
bcad td∇∆ are corrected from relativistic effects, which modify the
apparent frequency transmitted from each satellites as observed either by other satellites or by the ground stations.
3. The observation equation for each ( )p
bcad td∇∆ measurement is formed.
4. The “a priori” synthetic observation ( )p
bcad td∇∆ for each ( )p
bcad td∇∆ measurement is
formed, based on the “a priori” knowledge on the satellite orbits, as well as in a number of problem parameters.
5. The “a priori” synthetic observation (for each ( )p
bcad td∇∆ ) sensitivity to modifications on
the “a priori” knowledge on the satellite orbits (as well as in a number of problem parameters) is formed.
6. The observation residuals ( )p
bcad td∇∆ - ( )p
bcad td∇∆ are formed
7. Modifications on the “a priori” knowledge on the satellite orbits as well as in a number of
problem parameters, are estimated by minimizing a certain mathematical quadratic form of the observation residuals:
The following new elements respect current ground-based orbit determination processes, such as the one implemented for Galileo, point towards a significant improvement in terms of orbit accuracy:
1. The orbit determination observations are physical clock free 2. The orbit determination observations are physical group delay free
3. The orbit determination observations are propagation effects free. Therefore the observables are purely geometrical. Orbit determination can be separated from Clock determination
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 74 of 101
4. The orbit determination observables are highly accurate, with accuracy at sub-
centimeter level.
5. The orbit determination observables are not ambiguous
Therefore the observables are GPS carrier-phase-like in terms of accuracy, but not ambiguous. Note that the ambiguity resolution is frequently the most consuming process by far in the highly accurate orbit determination algorithms.
6. The relative geometry amongst principal satellites provides a significantly better
observability, on the along track and across track orbit error component. 7. The relative geometry between principal and auxiliary satellites provides a good
observability, on the radial error component (without the need of ground stations). The inclusion of the low orbit auxiliary satellites (together with the processing of long enough batches), much higher exposed to the irregularities of the force models, facilitates the linkage of the inertial positions to the ECEF system
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 75 of 101
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 76 of 101
TECHNICAL APPENDIX F ON BOARD CLOCK DETERMINATION PROCESS
The clock measurement process considers parallel feeding to the on-board timing algorithms, of the following observables: a) input principal spacecraft on-board-clock to auxiliary spacecrafts on–board-clock offsets, and b) input principal spacecraft on-board-clock to ground station clock offset. Two different and independent timing algorithms are considered:
• Generation of the Navigation System Reference Time algorithm, based on the
processing of the principal spacecraft on-board-clock to auxiliary spacecrafts on–board-lock offsets (and potentially drift) performed on each the user frequencies.
The observables principal spacecraft on-board-clock to principal spacecrafts on–board-lock offsets performed on each the system frequencies could complement the information given by the basic algorithm input observables
• Generation of the steering parameters from the Navigation System Reference
Time relative to a ground based time reference algorithm; based on the processing of the principal spacecraft on-board-clock to ground station clock offset (and potentially drift). The clock steering process is based on principal spacecraft to ground stations measurements.
The objective of the Generation of the Navigation System Reference Time Generation Algorithm is to estimate the satellite on-board clock relative to the Navigation System Reference Time which is defined implicitly within the process by means of auxiliary conditions. As result of this process the following information, expressed in the Navigation System Reference Time, is available for each satellite:
• The clock offset at a reference time 0t • The clock drift at a reference time 0t • The clock drift rate at a reference time 0t • The reference time 0t expressed in Navigation System Reference Time
The objective of the Steering of the Navigation System Reference Time Steering Algorithm is to estimate the Navigation System Reference Time steering parameters relative to UTC. As result of this process the following information, expressed in the Navigation System Reference Time, is available for each satellite:
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 77 of 101
• The System Time Reference offset relative to TAI at a reference time
0t • The System Time Reference drift relative to TAI at a reference time 0t • The reference time 0t expressed in Navigation System Reference Time
The following new elements with respect to current ground-based clock determination processes, such as the one implemented for Galileo, point towards a significant improvement in terms of clock accuracy:
1. The clock determination observations are physically geometry free
2. The clock determination observations are propagation effects free. Therefore clock determination can be conceptually speaking separated from the orbit determination. This however is not in contradiction with the fact that a minimum knowledge of the satellite orbits is necessary in order to properly pre-process the observables (e.g. potential relativistic corrections)
3. The clock determination observables are highly accurate, with accuracy
at sub-centimeter level.
4. The composite clock algorithms could provide a higher robustness, based on the reduced weight of any of the individual clock contributors, than a master clock algorithm (even including redundancy).
5. The definition of the System Time Reference through an ensemble of on-
board clocks provides a high level of autonomy.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 78 of 101
A sequential two steps approach, coherent with the one described in Appendix A, has been considered within this document, (again merely for feasibility assessment). The mentioned approach is depicted in the next two figures, where:
• Basic observables which correspond to the additional observables described in 0, and are indicated in red colour. Their properties are repeated hereafter for easing the understanding:
o Type: z
wp , with nomenclature accordingly to that followed in section Technical Appendix D, being wSV an auxiliary satellite and zSV a principal satellite.
o Observations per user frequency: z
wp could be any of the following observables ( )1u
zw fp , ( )2u
zw fp , ( )3u
zw fp , ... being 1uf , 2uf , 3uf , …
the different user frequencies, broadcast by the principal satellites
o Simultaneity of satellite observations:
( )uxzw fp and ( )''
uxzw fp are simultaneous, ',' xz ∀∀
( )uxzw fp and ( )'' ux
zw fp are simultaneous, ',' xw ∀∀
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 79 of 101
• Complementary observables ( )rzw tC , which correspond to the “Halved
“One way minus one way range cross links” described in 0, and are indicated in blue colour. Their properties are repeated hereafter for easing the understanding:
o Type: z
wC , with nomenclature accordingly to that followed in section Technical Appendix D, being wSV an auxiliary satellite and zSV a principal satellite.
o Observations per system frequency: z
wp could be any of the following observables ( )1s
zw fp , ( )2s
zw fp , ( )3s
zw fp , ... being
1sf , 2sf , 3sf , … the different system frequencies, broadcast by the
principal satellites
o Simultaneity of satellite observations:
( )sxzw fp and ( )''
sxzw fp are simultaneous, ',' xzz ∀=
( )uxzw fp and ( )ux
zw fp ' are not simultaneous, ww ≠∀ '
In the next two Figures:
aSV , bSV , fSV are principal satellites cSV , dSV , eSV are principal satellites
The above basic observables require further manipulations before it can be entered in the clock generation process, in order to remove the bias due to auxiliary satellite receiver chain group delay. Concretely the following differencing scheme is proposed:
yw
zw
zyw ppp −=∆
Yielding to the following type of observation equation:
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )[ ] zywugr
yTXugr
zTXryrz
zyw ftHftHtCtCp ε+−+−=∆ ,,
Where:
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 80 of 101
• ( )rz tC refers to the principal satellite “z” clock at rt
• ( )ry tC refers to the principal satellite “y” clock at rt
• ( )ugrzTX ftH , refers to the group delay of the transmitting chain of principal
satellite “z” at rt , at the user frequency ugf
• ( )ugry
TX ftH , refers to the group delay of the transmitting chain of principal satellite “y” at rt , at the user frequency ugf
• ( )rzyw tε refers to the zy
wp∆ observable error at rt
Note that at a given point in time, e.g. rt , the minimum number of zy
wp∆ observables
derived from is given by the formulae:
( ) ap tt 1* −
Where • *
pt is the minimum number of principal satellites observable from an
auxiliary satellite • at is the number of auxiliary satellites
The above mentioned complementary observables do not require further manipulations before it can be entered in the clock generation process. They obey the following type of observation equation:
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )[ ] ( ) ( )[ ]yz
sgrRXysgr
yTXsgr
RXzsgr
zTX
ryrzzy
ftHftHftHftHtCtCC −+
+−
++−= ε
2,,
2,,ˆ
The analysis of the above observation equations implies:
• The set of complementary observations is biased respect to a purely onboard physical clock observable.
o The bias is the difference between the two selected satellites of the
accumulated group delay of the ranging signal through the satellite transmitting and receiving chains.
o The bias refers to the system frequency used for the derivation of the observable.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 81 of 101
• The set of basic observations is biased respect to a purely onboard physical
clock observable.
o The bias is the difference between the two selected satellites of the group delay of the ranging signal through the satellite transmitting chains.
o The bias refers to the user frequency used for the derivation of the observable
• (Conclusion) Each set of complementary observations at the same frequency
is biased respect to the set of basic observables, at a given selected user frequency. The frequency dependability is not always visible in previous Figures.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 82 of 101
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 83 of 101
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 84 of 101
The clock steering process is based on principal spacecraft to ground stations measurements. The objective of the Generation of the Navigation System Reference Time Generation Algorithm is to estimate the satellite on-board clock relative to the Navigation System Reference Time which is defined implicitly within the process by means of auxiliary conditions. As result of this process the following information, expressed in the Navigation System Reference Time, is available for each satellite:
• The clock offset at a reference time 0t • The clock drift at a reference time 0t • The clock drift rate at a reference time 0t • The reference time 0t expressed in Navigation System Reference Time
The objective of the Steering of the Navigation System Reference Time Steering Algorithm is to estimate the Navigation System Reference Time steering parameters relative to UTC. As result of this process the following information, expressed in the Navigation System Reference Time, is available for each satellite:
• The System Time Reference offset relative to TAI at a reference time 0t • The System Time Reference drift relative to TAI at a reference time 0t • The reference time 0t expressed in Navigation System Reference Time
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 85 of 101
TECHNICAL APPENDIX G (ISL LINKS PHYSICAL DEFINITION) Frequencies of the principal satellites to principal satellites links:
• Frequencies carrying a ranging signals
o These frequencies are labeled as saf , s
bf , scf , s
df ,…etc, where the subscript “s” means “system internal”.
o The number of “system internal” frequencies for ranging between principal
satellites is not limited a priori. Nevertheless it is assumed that one single frequency would be sufficient, in this case as no ionospheric correction is necessary.
o Potential frequency bands accordingly to ITU regulations.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 86 of 101
o Ranging signals: The ranging signals consist on pseudo-random sequences, which
are generated in a synchronized way by both transmitter and receiver, and transmitted modulated on a radio-frequency carrier.
o The proposed scheme considers simultaneous cross-links between transmitter and
receiver.
• Frequencies for communication links
o These frequencies are labeled as caf , c
bf ,…etc, where the subscript “s” means “system internal”
o The number of “system internal” frequencies for communication between principal
satellites is not limited a priori. Nevertheless it is assumed that one single frequency could be sufficient.
Frequencies of the principal satellites to auxiliary satellites links:
• Frequencies carrying a ranging signals
o The frequencies labeled as saf , s
bf , scf , s
df ,…etc, are “system internal” frequencies.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 87 of 101
o The number of “system internal” frequencies for ranging between principal and
auxiliary satellites is not limited a priori. Nevertheless it is assumed that these frequencies are common to those “system internal” frequencies.
o These frequencies labeled as u
af , ubf , u
cf , udf ,…etc, are “system external”
frequencies or simply “user” frequencies. The subscript “u” means “user”. They carry the ranging signals available to the user.
o The number of “system external” frequencies is not limited a priori. It is considered
that the minimum number would be 4.
o The frequency band for the “system external” frequencies is the L band, including as a minimum the Galileo frequencies.
• Ranging signals: The similarity to the Galileo signal is intended, nevertheless a certain
tailoring might be necessary.
• Frequencies for communication links
o These frequencies are labeled as caf , c
bf ,…etc, where the subscript “s” means “system internal”.
o The number of “system internal” frequencies for communication between principal
satellites is not limited a priori.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 88 of 101
Frequencies of the principal satellites to ground station links
• Frequencies carrying a ranging signals
It is assumed that “system internal” frequencies for ranging between the principal satellites and the ground stations are those “system internal” frequencies.
• Ranging signals:
o It is assumed that signals for ranging between the principal satellites and the ground stations are those specified for other links
• Frequencies for communication links
o It is assumed that these frequencies are common to those “system internal” frequencies already specified
Satellite antennas:
A navigation antenna sub-system is proposed hereafter. The satellite hosts at least the following antennas:
o Antenna 1: Ultra narrow beam, controllable in azimuth and elevation, for
transmitting the ranging signals on the saf , s
bf , scf , s
df frequencies. As specified in Technical Appendix D, these frequencies have to be selected amongst those identified by the ITU regulations for this purpose.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 89 of 101
This antenna is used both for the transmission of the ranging signals on the “system internal” frequencies to either other satellites (principal or auxiliary) or to ground stations, and for the reception of ranging signals on the “system internal” frequencies from either other satellites (principal or auxiliary) or from ground stations. The antenna design would be such that any potential group delay introduced by the antenna remains stable both versus time for a fixed beam orientation, and versus beam orientation for a fixed time. The antenna design would consist on a phase array based antenna with its radiating elements placed symmetrically on a spherical surface, as indicated in the Figure below.
o Antenna 2: Fixed pattern, for transmitting the ranging signals on the u
af , ubf , u
cf , u
df frequencies. As specified in Technical Appendix D these frequencies are within the L band. This pattern would be isoflux, in other words such that it basically illuminates uniformly, in terms of constant C/No ratio, the Earth Surface, while it minimizes, in an effective way, the power transmitted in any other spatial direction.
o Other Antennas: To be defined within the study. These antennas would serve the
follow communication links:
- Between principal spacecrafts and principal satellites - Between principal satellites and auxiliary satellites - Between principal satellites and ground stations - Between auxiliary satellites and ground stations
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 90 of 101
All the above elements are considered relevant, as the ISL technology for navigation has not been extensively explored in the European GNSS Systems. The proposed approach provides when compared with other alternatives the following advantages:
1- A reduced number of “system internal” frequencies 2- Homogeneity in the satellite definition, as all of them work with the same frequencies 3- The possibility of reducing receiver tracking error due to internal noise, down to
centimeter values 4- The possibility of reducing receiver tracking error due to local multipath, down to
centimeter values 5- The possibility of stabilizing the ranging signal group delay for each satellite
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 91 of 101
TECHNICAL APPENDIX H (GROUP DELAY CALIBRATION) A concrete real time calibration allocation scheme is proposed allowing the estimation of the differences amongst the observations performed with each of these ranging signals either those modulated in the “system external” navigation frequencies or those modulated in the “system internal” navigation frequencies. This calibration is intended at sub-centimeter level, and therefore allows considering a unique set of clock parameters per spacecraft, as well as an enhanced level of autonomy. Current global navigation systems either operational (as GPS) or under development (as Galileo) exhibit an apparent dependability of the on-board Atomic Reference Standard (AFS) offset relative to the Navigation System Reference Time, when observed through different broadcast navigation signals. Such variability is explained by both unavoidable differences in the signal generation, or by different effects on the different navigation signals when injected in the same microwave component. Current GPS signal shows inconsistencies in the range of a few nanoseconds, quite are considered quite stable along time. Such an inconsistency is also foreseen in the Galileo System, and has yielded to consider different clock parameters at navigation message level, one per Galileo service (Open Service (OS), Safety of Life Service(SoL), Public Regulated Service (PRS) and Commercial Service (CS)).
saf , s
bf , scf , s
df The effects which could be observable in global navigation system proposed are:
• Difficulties to define a single satellite on board clock, valid for the user ranging signals modulated in the “system external” navigation frequencies: u
af , ubf , … This is the case
even for half a meter level accuracy. • Difficulties to define a single satellite on board clock, valid for the system ranging signals
modulated in the “system internal” navigation frequencies: uaf , u
bf , … This is the case even for half a meter level accuracy.
• Difficulties to link the on board clock observations performed through navigation signals
modulated in the “system internal” navigation frequencies: uaf , u
bf , …with those performed through navigation signals modulated in the in the “system external” navigation frequencies: u
af , ubf , …
It is proposed a real time calibration scheme of the differences amongst the observations performed with each of these ranging signals either those modulated in the “system external” navigation frequencies or those modulated in the “system internal” navigation frequencies. This calibration is
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 92 of 101
intended aper spacecraft, as well as an The proposStudy, assumi The proposed approach is explained hereafter fointernal” navigation frequencies: For each navigation sigobservable is auxiliary sclock of
The clock estimsatemcoefficients of the unknowns in a The clockonly one ranging signal has been estimestimmGroup Delay for each of the process The estimcom
t sub-centimeter level, and therefore allows considering a unique set of clock paramenhanced level of autonomy.
ed approach, which has been carefully assessed and further developed withinme that the difference between clock parameters for each is stable over periods
nutes.
r the navigation signals modulated in the “system
nals the following observable, described in section 0, is formatellite clock and group delay free. It is a biased observation of the relative
fset between two principal satellites, and is frequency dependent:
( )
eters
this of a few
ed. This
a
the
n ck d
is
( ) ( ) ( )[ ] zywugr
yTXugr
zTXryrz
zyw ftHftHtCtCp ε+−+−=∆ ,,
ation process, is fed by all these observables for different pairs of principalllites and at different frequencies. It solve all the individual input clocks, by the imposition of
inimum variance condition which provides full rank to the first design matrix (matrix ofconventional least squares process).
estimates for a same satellite at different frequencies (for simplicity in the explanatioconsidered per frequency) are differenced respect the clo
ates for a given arbitrarily selected frequency. These observables are input to a seconation process, named as “Differential Group Delay Estimation Process” which
athematically speaking very similar to the “Clock Estimation Process”, and which provides theed frequencies.
ation process, biases slightly all the results in the same direction, what is however pletely transparent for positioning purposes.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 93 of 101
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 94 of 101
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 95 of 101
The proposed approach provides the following advantages:
1- Definition of a single satellite on board clock, valid for all ranging signals modulated in either “system external” or “system internal” frequencies
2- Possibility to use at user level multiple frequencies combinations, mitigating more
efficiently the user tracking error due to local multipath and/or receiver noise The accuracy of existing navigation systems is driven by the accuracy of the ODTS processes used for the orbit and clock prediction the navigation satellites. The accuracy of the ODTS process depends on the fidelity of the ODTS algorithm models and, mostly, on the quality of the navigation signal observables. Navigation signal observables are typically collected on ground through a network of reference stations. The navigation signal observables always present a number of errors due to different contributions through the signal path and on its reception:
Unknown variation of the on-board group delay. Signal propagation through the ionosphere. Signal propagation through the troposphere. Multipath coming from the surrounding environment of the reference station. Interference generated by ground based transmitters.
Performing a measurement of the navigation signal in space (e.g. from a LEO satellite) will provide a measurement that is directly free of iono and tropo errors. Multipath and interference will also be mitigated by the LEO satellite RF environment and also by a proper selection of the antenna design and its location on the spacecraft. Finally the group delay of the navigation signal when traveling through the RF circuits of the navigation satellite can be easily calibrated once the other error contributors are mitigated. This is achieved then by having 2 navigation satellites in view of a LEO satellite. The minimum number of LEO satellite required for being able to perform group delay calibrations to any navigation satellite at any time is two. Additional LEO satellites would provide additional robustness. In order to perform these observations of the navigation signals from space the LEO satellites have to be equipped with a navigation receiver fitted with an atomic clock and an L-band antenna. In addition an ISL based on narrow beam steer able antenna between the LEO and the navigation satellites is needed to perform and provide the measurements to the navigation satellites for its processing.
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 96 of 101
Being the number of elements required for performing these measurements very limited the LEO spacecrafts required would be rather small. Alternatively these calibration equipments could also be part of the payload of other LEO satellites (e.g. GMES) instead of being on-board dedicated spacecrafts. In this case the navigation satellites will obtain a calibration measurement performed on the LEO satellites and allowing them to provide a highly accurate navigation service, while the LEO satellites could benefit from the navigation signals and receiver installed on-board for obtaining a highly accurate orbit and timing (additional navigation receivers would also allow the LEO satellites to perform highly accurate attitude determination based on the high accuracy achieved by the navigation signals through this process).
Navigation and Integrity Autonomous Satellite Navigation System issue 3 revision 6 -
page 97 of 101
END OF DOCUMENT