Premium
Characterization of the impact of GLONASS observables on receiver bias estimation for ionospheric studies
Author(s) -
Vergados Panagiotis,
Komjathy Attila,
Runge Thomas F.,
Butala Mark D.,
Mannucci Anthony J.
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
radio science
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.371
H-Index - 84
eISSN - 1944-799X
pISSN - 0048-6604
DOI - 10.1002/2015rs005831
Subject(s) - global positioning system , glonass , total electron content , satellite , environmental science , latitude , observable , remote sensing , geodesy , ionosphere , meteorology , computer science , geography , gnss applications , tec , physics , telecommunications , quantum mechanics , astronomy
This study investigates the impact of including the Russian Globalnaya Navigazionnaya Sputnikovaya Sistema (GLONASS) and Global Positioning System (GPS) observables in the estimation of the GPS satellite and receiver interfrequency delay biases. Efforts to advance the total electron content accuracy are directly linked to improving the satellite and receiver bias estimation. This analysis is a preliminary assessment of the impact of including GLONASS observables in the bias estimation process. We analyze bias series from 84 globally distributed stations between 17 February 2015 and 31 March 2015. We find that inclusion of GLONASS observables in the biases retrieval algorithm systematically reduces receiver biases at 88% of the stations than when only GPS observables are used. The difference is <1.0 total electron content unit (TECU; 1 TECU = 10 16 el m −2 ), which falls within the bias retrieval uncertainty. However, due to its systematic behavior it must be characterized and documented. We also compare the bias series between two centers, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and the Center for Orbit Determination in Europe. Our analysis shows that the mean difference between the two centers varies from station to station, with a value <1.0 TECU for 57% of the stations, suggesting an excellent intercenter agreement. For the other stations, the differences can reach up to 5.0 TECU. Finally, the stability of the bias retrievals over time is latitudinally dependent. Low‐latitude and middle‐latitude stations exhibit systematically the largest and smallest scatter, respectively, whereas stations at high latitudes obtain intermediate values.