Galileo and QZSS precise orbit and clock determination using new satellite metadata

AbstractDuring 2016–2018, satellite metadata/information including antenna parameters, attitude laws and physical characteristics such as mass, dimensions and optical properties were released for Galileo and QZSS (except for the QZS-1 optical coefficients). These metadata are critical for improving the accuracy of precise orbit and clock determination. In this contribution, we evaluate the benefits of these new metadata to orbit and clock in three aspects: the phase center offsets and variations (PCO and PCV), the yaw-attitude model and solar radiation pressure (SRP) model. The updating of Galileo PCO and PCV corrections, from the values estimated by Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt and Deutsches GeoForschungsZentrum to the chamber calibrations disclosed by new metadata, has only a slight influence on Galileo orbits, with overlap differences within only 1 mm. By modeling the yaw attitude of Galileo satellites and QZS-2 spacecraft (SVN J002) according to new published attitude laws, the residuals of ionosphere-free carrier-phase combinations can be obviously decreased in yaw maneuver seasons. With the new attitude models, the 3D overlap RMS in eclipse seasons can be decreased from 12.3 cm, 14.7 cm, 16.8 cm and 34.7 cm to 11.7 cm, 13.4 cm, 15.8 cm and 32.9 cm for Galileo In-Orbit Validation (IOV), Full Operational Capability (FOC), FOC in elliptical orbits (FOCe) and QZS-2 satellites, respectively. By applying the a priori box-wing SRP model with new satellite dimensions and optical coefficients, the 3D overlap RMS are 5.3 cm, 6.2 cm, 5.3 cm and 16.6 cm for Galileo IOV, FOCe, FOC and QZS-2 satellites, with improvements of 11.0%, 14.7%, 14.0% and 13.8% when compared with the updated Extended CODE Orbit Model (ECOM2). The satellite laser ranging (SLR) validation reveals that the a priori box-wing model has smaller mean biases of − 0.4 cm, − 0.4 cm and 0.6 cm for Galileo FOCe, FOC and QZS-2 satellites, while a slightly larger mean bias of − 1.0 cm is observed for Galileo IOV satellites. Moreover, the SLR residual dependencies of Galileo IOV and FOC satellites on the elongation angle almost vanish when the a priori box-wing SRP model is applied. As for satellite clocks, a visible bump appears in the Modified Allan deviation at integration time of 20,000 s for Galileo Passive Hydrogen Maser with ECOM2, while it almost vanishes when the a priori box-wing SRP model and new metadata are applied. The standard deviations of clock overlap can also be significantly reduced by using new metadata.

[1]  Qile Zhao,et al.  An a priori solar radiation pressure model for the QZSS Michibiki satellite , 2018, Journal of Geodesy.

[2]  L. Mervart,et al.  Extended orbit modeling techniques at the CODE processing center of the international GPS service for geodynamics (IGS): theory and initial results , 1994, manuscripta geodaetica.

[3]  H. Fliegel,et al.  Global Positioning System Radiation Force Model for geodetic applications , 1992 .

[4]  E. C. Pavlis,et al.  High‐accuracy zenith delay prediction at optical wavelengths , 2004 .

[5]  Peter Steigenberger,et al.  The Multi-GNSS Experiment (MGEX) of the International GNSS Service (IGS) - Achievements, prospects and challenges , 2017 .

[6]  W. Folkner,et al.  The Planetary and Lunar Ephemeris DE 421 , 2009 .

[7]  O. Montenbruck,et al.  IGS White Paper on Satellite and Operations Information for Generation of Precise GNSS Orbit and Clock Products , 2017 .

[8]  R. Dach,et al.  Geocenter coordinates estimated from GNSS data as viewed by perturbation theory , 2013 .

[9]  Z. Altamimi,et al.  ITRF2014: A new release of the International Terrestrial Reference Frame modeling nonlinear station motions , 2016 .

[10]  H. Schuh,et al.  Short Note: A global model of pressure and temperature for geodetic applications , 2007 .

[11]  Peter Steigenberger,et al.  Generation of a consistent absolute phase-center correction model for GPS receiver and satellite antennas , 2007 .

[12]  Rolf Dach,et al.  IGS Technical Report 2015 , 2016 .

[13]  Rolf Dach,et al.  CODE’s five-system orbit and clock solution—the challenges of multi-GNSS data analysis , 2017, Journal of Geodesy.

[14]  Peter Steigenberger,et al.  GNSS satellite transmit power and its impact on orbit determination , 2018, Journal of Geodesy.

[15]  R. Dach,et al.  Absolute IGS antenna phase center model igs08.atx: status and potential improvements , 2016, Journal of Geodesy.

[16]  G. Beutler,et al.  A New Solar Radiation Pressure Model for GPS Satellites , 1999, GPS Solutions.

[17]  Shinichi Nakasuka,et al.  An Evaluation of Solar Radiation Pressure Models for QZS-1 Precise Orbit Determination , 2013 .

[18]  Adrian Jäggi,et al.  The CODE MGEX Orbit and Clock Solution , 2015 .

[19]  Peter Steigenberger,et al.  Signal, orbit and attitude analysis of Japan’s first QZSS satellite Michibiki , 2011, GPS Solutions.

[20]  Jan Kouba,et al.  A simplified yaw-attitude model for eclipsing GPS satellites , 2009 .

[21]  O. Francis,et al.  Modelling the global ocean tides: modern insights from FES2004 , 2006 .

[22]  N. K. Pavlis,et al.  The development and evaluation of the Earth Gravitational Model 2008 (EGM2008) , 2012 .

[23]  W. I. Bertiger,et al.  Effects of antenna orientation on GPS carrier phase , 1993, manuscripta geodaetica.

[24]  O. Montenbruck,et al.  IGS-MGEX: Preparing the Ground for Multi-Constellation GNSS Science , 2013 .

[25]  Noriyasu Inaba,et al.  Design and development of the first Quasi-Zenith Satellite attitude and orbit control system , 2009, 2009 IEEE Aerospace conference.

[26]  Michael R Pearlman,et al.  THE INTERNATIONAL LASER RANGING SERVICE , 2007 .

[27]  A. S. Ganeshan,et al.  GNSS Satellite Geometry and Attitude Models , 2015 .

[28]  O. Montenbruck,et al.  Enhanced solar radiation pressure modeling for Galileo satellites , 2015, Journal of Geodesy.

[29]  Florian Dilssner,et al.  The GLONASS-M satellite yaw-attitude model , 2011 .

[30]  Gerald L. Mader,et al.  GPS Antenna Calibration at the National Geodetic Survey , 1999, GPS Solutions.

[31]  Vincenza Luceri,et al.  Creation of the new industry-standard space test of laser retroreflectors for the gnss , 2011 .

[32]  Peter Steigenberger,et al.  Estimation of satellite antenna phase center offsets for Galileo , 2016, Journal of Geodesy.

[33]  Chris Rizos,et al.  The International GNSS Service in a changing landscape of Global Navigation Satellite Systems , 2009 .

[34]  Krzysztof Sośnica,et al.  Validation of Galileo orbits using SLR with a focus on satellites launched into incorrect orbital planes , 2018, Journal of Geodesy.

[35]  Peter Steigenberger,et al.  Galileo satellite antenna modeling , 2015 .

[36]  U. Hugentobler,et al.  Reducing the draconitic errors in GNSS geodetic products , 2014, Journal of Geodesy.

[37]  H. Schuh,et al.  Global Mapping Function (GMF): A new empirical mapping function based on numerical weather model data , 2006 .

[38]  Jing Guo,et al.  Comparison of solar radiation pressure models for BDS IGSO and MEO satellites with emphasis on improving orbit quality , 2017, GPS Solutions.

[39]  P. Steigenberger,et al.  Absolute phase center corrections of satellite and receiver antennas , 2005 .

[40]  Liu Jing-nan,et al.  PANDA software and its preliminary result of positioning and orbit determination , 2003, Wuhan University Journal of Natural Sciences.

[41]  Peter Steigenberger,et al.  Galileo status: orbits, clocks, and positioning , 2017, GPS Solutions.

[42]  J. Saastamoinen,et al.  Contributions to the theory of atmospheric refraction , 1972 .

[43]  Y. Bar-Sever,et al.  New Empirically Derived Solar Radiation Pressure Model for Global Positioning System Satellites During Eclipse Seasons , 2005 .

[44]  R. Dach,et al.  CODE’s new solar radiation pressure model for GNSS orbit determination , 2015, Journal of Geodesy.