Mitigating high latitude ionospheric scintillation effects ...
Scintillation effects on Galileo service performance
description
Transcript of Scintillation effects on Galileo service performance
BUNVC
All rights reserved, 2010, Thales Alenia Space
Te
mplate
refe
rence
: 1001
817
03F
-EN
Scintillation effects on Galileo service performance
All rights reserved, 2010, Thales Alenia Space
BUNVC
Page 2
Presentation Overview
Galileo context
Scintillation main Characteristics
GISM Model Uncertainties
Integrity Algorithm Response to Scintillation
Scintillation Impact on Galileo performance (SISMA & User Availability)
Conclusions
All rights reserved, 2010, Thales Alenia Space
BUNVC
Page 3
Galileo Performance are required to be met at Sun Spot Number equal to 250. Corresponds to the maximum monthly SSN identified over the last 60 years.
Such specification can appear very stringent, However: It makes sense when looking at
it from a user service point of view
Indeed it is difficult to imagine that the safety of life service is no longer available every peak solar cycles.
Galileo context (1/3)
GALILEO
VERY WORST CASE
WORST CASE
STRONG
MEDIUM
GALILEO
VERY WORST CASE
WORST CASE
STRONG
MEDIUM
All rights reserved, 2010, Thales Alenia Space
BUNVC
Page 4
Galileo also specified to provide a worldwide safety of life service. This requires the deployment of a worldwide 40 GSS stations network. Out of 40, 14 stations are within the scintillation area (+/- 20 degrees around the
Magnetic Equator.
4 to 5 stations may be affected at the same time for several hours Affected means that one line of sight has a S4 larger than 0.7.
15,00000
16,00000
17,00000
18,00000
19,00000
20,00000
21,00000
22,00000
23,00000
24,00000
25,00000
1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37
Station ID
Galileo context (2/3)
Galileo Sensor Station Network
All rights reserved, 2010, Thales Alenia Space
BUNVC
Page 5
The main differentiator of Galileo system with respect to GPS is the capability to provide real time integrity information to the user The service to be provided by Galileo is tailored for civil aviation applications. It needs then to
be available quasi 100% of the time. The monitoring needs to be continuous in the sense that when the service is available at T0, it
shall remain available until T0 plus 15 seconds in order to enable the completion of critical phase of flight.
High level impact on Galileo system performance: Orbit Determination, Time Synchronisation function
Not critical thanks to the redundancy of stations sized for integrity performance purpose. Integrity determination function
Continuity of service: Scintillation is one of the main drivers Loss of lock and Cycle slips at receiver level makes GSS data not proper for integrity monitoring
IPF (Integrity Processing Facility) discards the data as soon as the phase noise gets significant Availability of service: Same situation as continuity.
Galileo context (3/3)
All rights reserved, 2010, Thales Alenia Space
BUNVC
Page 6
Scintillation main characteristics (1/2)
Scintillation phenomena is statistically characterised by two parameters:
which is the standard deviation of the phase scintillation variation.
The scintillation phase error is considered to follow a zero-mean normal Probability Density Function
S4, linked to the standard deviation of
the normalised intensity variation Characterised the C/N variations in
presence of scintillation The amplitude variation follows a
Nakagami distribution with m=S4-2
All rights reserved, 2010, Thales Alenia Space
BUNVC
Page 7
A key parameter to take into account at Galileo performance assessment is that scintillation has a very specific time and geographical distribution It mainly affects stations that are localised on the geo magnetic equator (+/- 20
degrees) and to certain extent stations in polar areas. Stations in the equatorial regions are not affected all the time. The scintillation
phenomenon lasts only a few hours after sunset (following TEC gradient) When a station is affected, all the lines of sight are not impacted the same way. Half
of the satellite in sight may be affected.
Scintillation main characteristics (2/2)
All rights reserved, 2010, Thales Alenia Space
BUNVC
Page 8
S4 Amplitude The following figure shows the S4 parameters obtained with the
GISM configured with a solar flux of 300 according to universal daytime at Fucino (Italy).
Such area is a priory not subject to strong scintillation since located in mid latitude area. However the GISM provides unexpected results since it can be noticed that the S4 parameters reaches 1.65.
GISM Model Uncertainties (1/4)
Literature usually mentions that the S4 shall not exceed 1.4 or even 1 as stated in the SIPIC
Attempt to produce time series with S4 larger than 1 with the GISM have been unsuccessful
All rights reserved, 2010, Thales Alenia Space
BUNVC
Page 9
210 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300-800
-600
-400
-200
0
200
400
600
Time (s)
Pha
se E
rror
(de
gree
s)
Frequency Correlation An critical point to clarify in order to assess GNSS robustness to
scintillation is the correlation of the phase noise between frequency.
If the error is correlated with 1/f² frequency factor it can be fully removed with ionosphere free combination.
Otherwise the error is even amplified by the “gamma” factor.
Model Uncertainties (2/4)
The current model does not allow assessing the correlation between two frequencies.
Indeed only one frequency can be simulated at the same time, and two consecutive runs with exactly the same configuration show different results.
The following picture shows three example of time series obtained with three successive runs of the GISM with the exact same configuration file
All rights reserved, 2010, Thales Alenia Space
BUNVC
Page 10
Phase Time series (Wrapped or Unwrapped) Current models for time series generation seem to artificialy
maintain the phase error in between +/- 180°. When the conditions is suppressed, the phase error is drastically
increased with no longer gaussian behviour. Error can go up to 60 cm !
Model Uncertainties (3/4)
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
time in seconds
Pha
se e
rror
in c
m
SF150 Sphi=1.5 rad
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
time in seconds
Pha
se e
rror
in c
m
SF150 Sphi=1 rad
All rights reserved, 2010, Thales Alenia Space
BUNVC
Page 11
Fading dynamic (receiver model) Fading dynamic drives the response of the receiver in terms of loss of lock. Current formula assumes a fading constant over the loop bandwidth. This may be valid for wide loop bandwidth (10 to 100 Hz) used for on user
receivers but not for the ground receivers (1 Hz).
Model Uncertainties (4/4)
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1-45
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
Time (s)
Fad
ing
dB
Improvement of the receiver model in order to better characterise receiver response and hence, GNSS system performance is really needed.
All rights reserved, 2010, Thales Alenia Space
BUNVC
Page 12
Integrity Algorithm response to scintillation
Impact of Scintillation on Galileo integrity capability cannot be derived directly from ground receivers response.
Response of the integrity algorithm processing those data is also a performance driver. Algorithms response is correlated with the quality of the received data
Loss of Lock When the receiver looses lock, the measurement is no longer available to the integrity
processing facility. The phenomena is amplified by the integrity algorithm convergence constraints as follows
10 mn are necessary for a single line of sight to be reintroduced in the integrity computations.
If more than half of the line of sight belonging to a same station are discarded, the whole station is considered as faulty, and all the lines of sight are rejected by the Integrity Algorithm
40 mn are necessary to reintroduced a rejected station in the integrity computations.
All rights reserved, 2010, Thales Alenia Space
BUNVC
Page 13
Integrity Algorithm response to scintillation
Phase Noise / Cycle sips Even if tracking is maintained by the receiver, the data can be rejected at Integrity
algorithm level if considered too corrupted for integrity monitoring assessment. Integrity algorithm makes an extensive use of phase measurements.
Barrier are implemented to reject data with excessive phase noise and cycle slips. Threshold set to 1.32 radians, correlates with a rejection of the data at S4 around 0.7
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
18,6
19,2
19,8
20,4 21
21,6
22,1
22,7
23,3
23,9
0,48
Local time (hour)
S4/
Sig
ma
Ph
i
S4
Sigma phi (rad)
Sphi IPF Threshold
All rights reserved, 2010, Thales Alenia Space
BUNVC
Page 14
Test with Real GPS data (collected from the IGS network) Phase noise measured at Kourou (affected by scintillation with S4 equal to 0.6)
Excessive phase noise clearly spotted during scintillation periods Rejection rate us constant to 10% (because of data gaps observed on this real data set) but
significantly increased during scintillation period because of phase noise barrier
Integrity Algorithm response to scintillation
All rights reserved, 2010, Thales Alenia Space
BUNVC
Page 15
Galileo Integrity monitoring quality is communicated to users through the SISMA (Signal In Space Monitoring Accuracy). In nominal conditions (left), SISMA in between 60 to 95 cm (99.99%) In severe scintillation conditions (right, SF300), SISMA in between 1 to 2.5 m (99.99%)
Scintillation Impact on Integrity Monitoring performance
All rights reserved, 2010, Thales Alenia Space
BUNVC
Page 16
Impact at user level depends from the number of stations and user alarm limit value (mainly vertical) With 40 stations and 35 meters vertical alarm limit (LPV200), availability above 99.5% is obtained. Sensitivity analysis to analyse the possibility to reduce the number of stations to 28
In severe scintillation conditions, availability drops down to 90%
Scintillation Impact on User Availability
All rights reserved, 2010, Thales Alenia Space
BUNVC
Page 17
Conclusions
Galileo system is designed in order to provide high continuity and availability performance in severe scintillation conditions.
Key parameters for performance assessment are the receiver response to scintillation, in particular, loss of lock and cycle slips. Integrity Algorithm transfer function
At first order, Line of sights affected by scintillations are rejected by the integrity algorithms.
Receiver impact is second order since data are rejected because of excessive phase noise before it becomes significant at receiver level (S4<0.7).
Scintillation impacts significantly GMS performance but can be recovered by increasing the number of stations.
Assessment performed with available models that may have some limitations Severe conditions, polar region.
Needs to be confirmed in real conditions