Blog

  • The System: Compass Signal ICD this Month

    The long-awaited signal interface control document (ICD) for China’s growing GNSS will appear this month, according to representatives of the system who spoke in a “Compass: Progress, Status, and Future Outlook” workshop as part of ION GNSS and the CGSIC meetings in Portland in September.

    The ICD has been rumored to be available previously to receiver manufacturers within China, creating some disgruntlement among companies outside the country. One of the workshop panelists affirmed that GPS/Compass chips and receivers are being actively developed by many Chinese manufacturers and research institutes.

    The ICD announcement came among many valuable pieces of information presented during the pre-ION workshop, sponsored by the International Association of Chinese Professionals in Global Positioning Systems and chaired by Jade Morton, professor of electrical and computer engineering at Miami University, Ohio.

    Xiancheng Ding of the Beidou Program Office described Compass as a demo system in transition to an operating navigation system. Two more satellites will launch in 2011, making a total of five new space vehicles this year,as part of a total “simple navigational system” of nine satellites that has been built up, and what is termed a test system over the Asia-Pacific region, to be complete by the end of the year.

    Five more satellites will rise into orbit in 2012, and the system will gradually extend its coverage and improve its performance. Compass will start official regional service by the end of 2012, meeting user requirements in the Asia-Pacific region.

    ICD document v1.0 will be published in 2011, and probably in the month of October. It will be available for international download on the Compass website (as yet without an English version).

    There was some disagreement among panelists as to the final targeted number of satellites in the system: either 30, or 35. Subsequent comments indicated that much of the structure may still be under discussion. The impression given was very much of a dynamic system in formation and growing rapidly.

    In a presentation on “Preliminary Results of GPS/Compass Integrated Positioning and Navigation,” Uanxi Yang of China’s National Administration of GNSS and Applications reported integrated navigation with a Unicore UB 240 Compass/GPS receiver with up to 9-centimeter accuracy, and also mentioned a Shanghai Huace Compass/GPS receiver. Some systematic errors in Compass positioning were reported, and attributed to the sparse satellite distribution currently.

    Yang concluded with the exhortation, “Reasonable Wishes for Compass!” emphasizing the delegation’s desire to continue working diligently on, but with realistic expectations for, the new system.


    Orbit Roundup

    In other satellite news and debuts anticipated around the world:

    GPS. Back-channel reports say the cesium clock aboard SVN-63, the second IIF satellite, is not functioning properly, and that this is at least one reason why the satellite, turned over to 2SOPS control on August 19, has not been set healthy to users.

    [Correction: The September issue and env-gpsworld-integration.kinsta.cloud mistakenly reported that SVN-63 had been set operational on August 23. This is not the case. As of September 29, the satellite is still not healthy to users.]

    After repeated attempts to get the clock working, operators are ready to switch to a rubidium clock onboard, and may already have done so.

    GLONASS. The launch of GLONASS-M No. 42 from Plesetsk is scheduled for October 1. GLONASS-M Nos. 43, 44, 45 from Baikonur may occur as early as November 2. GLONASS-M No. 46 from Plesetsk is now scheduled for November 22. The launch of the next-generation GLONASS-K1 No. 12 from Plesetsk will likely slip to 2012.

    The K1 satellites will not be set healthy, but held in reserve only. The remaining M-generation vehicles launching this year will fill up the 24 almanac slots. GLONASS will have plenty of satellites held in reserve.

    Luch-5A, a Russian geostationary communications satellite that includes an SBAS payload, will launch on December 10 from Baikonur.


    FCC Calls for More Testing on LightSquared Interference

    The U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC)issued a Public Notice on September 14 stating that additional testing is necessary to ensure that LightSquared’s broadband network will not interfere with GPS.

    The notice states: “Following extensive comments received as a result of the technical working group process required by the International Bureau’s Order and Authorization dated January 26, 2011, the Federal Communications Commission, in consultation with NTIA, has determined that additional targeted testing is needed to ensure that any potential commercial terrestrial services offered by LightSquared will not cause harmful interference to GPS operations….

    “For more than three months, the technical working group, comprised of more than 120 participants including representatives from the Department of Defense, Department of Transportation and other federal agencies, the GPS community, various telecommunications companies and LightSquared, conducted an extensive set of tests, and LightSquared submitted a final report on June 30, 2011. The technical working group effort identified potential for harmful interference from LightSquared’s originally proposed deployment based on operation of terrestrial transmitters in both the upper and lower 10 MHz portions of its spectrum. The FCC issued a public notice on June 30, 2011, seeking comment on the report.

    “LightSquared submitted proposed mitigation techniques to remedy the interference to GPS simultaneously with the technical working group final report. Notably, LightSquared proposed to revise its planned deployment to operate terrestrial transmitters only in the lower 10 MHz of its spectrum. The results thus far from the testing using the lower 10 MHz showed significant improvement compared to tests of the upper 10 MHz, although there continue to be interference concerns, e.g., with certain types of high precision GPS receivers, including devices used in national security and aviation applications. Additional tests are therefore necessary.”


    Galileo Counts Down to October 20 for First Validation Satellites

    The first flight of a Russian rocket, Soyuz, from Europe’s spaceport in French Guiana will carry the first two satellites of Europe’s Galileo navigation system into orbit on October 20, and the European Space Agency is reporting on the preparations.

    The Soyuz launcher will be rolled out horizontally to the launch pad on October 14 and raised into its vertical launch position. The upper composite, comprising the Fregat upper stage, payload and fairing, will then be hoisted on top of Soyuz.

    The two Galileo satellites arrived from the Rome facility of Thales Alenia Space Italy, also in mid-September. In 2012, a second pair of satellites will join them in orbit, with the task of proving the design of the Galileo system in advance of the other 26 satellites. The four satellites, built by a consortium led by EADS Astrium Germany, will form the operational nucleus of the full Galileo satnav constellation. They combine reportedly the best atomic clock ever flown for navigation — accurate to one second in three million years — with a powerful transmitter to broadcast precise navigation data worldwide.

    The first Soyuz to rocket up from a port outside Baikonur in Kazakhstan or Plesetsk in Russia, the launch will take place from a new facility 13 kilometers northwest of the Ariane 5 launch site. French Guiana is much closer to the Equator than other launch possibilities, so each Galileo effort will benefit from the Earth’s spin, increasing the maximum payload into geostationary transfer orbit from 1.7 tons to 3 tons.

  • Space-Time Equalization Techniques for New GNSS Signals

    By Pratibha B. Anantharamu, Daniele Borio, and Gérard Lachapelle

    Spatial and temporal information of signals received from multiple antennas can be applied to mitigate the impact of new GPS and Galileo signals’ binary-offset sub-carrier, reducing multipath and interference effects.

    New modernized GNSS such as GPS, Galileo, GLONASS, and Compass broadcast signals with enhanced correlation properties as compared to the first generation GPS signals. These new signals are characterized by different modulations that provide improved time resolution, resulting in more precise range measurements, along with the advantage of being more resilient to multipath and RF interference. One of these modulations is the binary-offset-carrier (BOC) modulation transmitted by Galileo and modernized GPS.

    Despite the benefits of BOC modulation schemes, difficulties in tracking BOC signals can arise. The autocorrelation function (ACF) of BOC signals is multi-peaked, potentially leading to false peak-lock and ambiguous tracking. Intense research activities have produced different BOC tracking schemes that address the issue of multi-peaked BOC signal tracking. Additionally, new tracking schemes including space-time processing can be adopted to further improve the performance of existing algorithms.

    Space-time equalization is a technique that utilizes spatial and temporal information of signals received from multiple antennas to compensate for the effects of multipath fading and co-channel interference. In the context of BOC signals, these kinds of techniques can be applied to mitigate the impact of the sub-carrier, which is responsible for a multi-peaked ACF, reducing multipath and interference effects. In temporal processing, traditional equalizers in time-domain are useful to compensate for signal distortions. But equalization becomes more challenging in the case of BOC signals, where the effect of both sub-carrier and multipath must be accounted for. On the other hand, by using spatial processing, it should be possible to extract the desired signal component from a set of received signals by electronically varying the antenna array directivity (beamforming).

    The combination of an antenna array and a temporal equalizer results in better system performance. Hence the main objective of this research is to apply space-time processing techniques to BOC modulated signals received by an antenna array. The main intent is to enhance the signal quality, avoid ambiguous tracking and improve tracking performance under weak signal environments or in the presence of harsh multipath components.

    The focus of previous antenna-array processing using GNSS signals was on enhancing GNSS signal quality and mitigating interference and/or multipath related issues. Unambiguous tracking was not considered. Here, we develop a space-time algorithm to mitigate ambiguous tracking of BOC signals along with improved signal quality. The main objective is to obtain an equalization technique that can operate on BOC signals to provide unambiguous BPSK-like correlation function capable of altering the antenna array beam pattern to improve the signal to interference plus noise ratio.

    opening Source: Pratibha B. Anantharamu, Daniele Borio, and Gérard Lachapelle
    Space-time adaptive processing structure proposed for BOC signal tracking; the temporal filter provides signal with unambiguous ACF whereas the spatial filter provides enhanced performance with respect to multipath, interference, and noise.

    Initially, temporal equalization based on the minimum mean square error (MMSE) technique is considered to obtain unambiguous ACF on individual antenna outputs. Spatial processing is then applied on the correlator outputs based on a modified minimum variance distortionless response (MVDR) approach. As part of spatial processing, online calibration of the real antenna array is performed which also provides signal and noise information for the computation of the beamforming weights. Finally, the signal resulting from temporal and spatial equalization is fed to a common code and carrier tracking loop for further processing.

    The effectiveness of the proposed technique is demonstrated by simulating different antenna array structures for BOC signals. Intermediate-frequency (IF) simulations have been performed and linear/planar array structures along with different signal to interference plus noise ratios have been considered. A modified version of The University of Calgary software receiver, GSNRx, has been used to simultaneously process multi-antenna data. Further tests have been performed using real data collected from Galileo test satellites, GIOVE-A and GIOVE-B, using an array structure comprising of two to four antennas. A 4-channel front-end designed in the PLAN group, and a National Instruments (NI) signal vector analyzer equipped with three PXI-5661 front-ends (NI 2006) have been used to collect data synchronously from several antennas. The data collected from the antennas were progressively attenuated for the analysis of the proposed algorithm in weak signal environments.

    From the performed tests and analysis, it is observed that the proposed methodology provides unambiguous ACF. Spatial processing is able to efficiently estimate the calibration parameters and steer the antenna array beam towards the direction of arrival of the desired signal. Thus, the proposed methodology can be used for efficient space-time processing of new BOC modulated GNSS signals.

    Signal and Systems Model

    The complex baseband GNSS signal vector received at the input of an antenna array can be modeled as
    E-1 Source: Pratibha B. Anantharamu, Daniele Borio, and Gérard Lachapelle    (1)
    where
    •    M is the number of antenna elements;
    •    L is the number of satellites;
    •    C is a M × M calibration matrix capturing the effects of antenna gain/phase mismatch and mutual coupling;
    •    siSI Source: Pratibha B. Anantharamu, Daniele Borio, and Gérard Lachapelle is the complex M × 1 steering vector relative to the signal from the ith satellite. si captures the phase offsets between signals from different antennas;
    •    NO Source: Pratibha B. Anantharamu, Daniele Borio, and Gérard Lachapelle is the noise plus interference vector observed by the M antennas.

    The ith useful signal component xi (t) can be modeled as
    E-2 Source: Pratibha B. Anantharamu, Daniele Borio, and Gérard Lachapelle   (2)
    where
    •    Ai is the received signal amplitude;
    •    di() models the navigation data bit;
    •    ci() is the ranging sequence used for spreading the transmitted data;
    •    τ0,i, f0,i and φ0,imodel the code delay, Doppler frequency and carrier phase introduced by the communication channel.

    The index i is used to denote quantities relative to the ith satellite. The ranging code ci() is made up of several components including a primary spreading sequence, a secondary code and a sub-carrier.

    For a BPSK modulated signal, the sub-carrier is a rectangular window of duration Tc. In the case of BOC modulated signals, the sub-carrier is generated as the sign of a sinusoidal carrier. The presence of this sub-carrier produces a multi-peaked autocorrelation function making the acquisition/tracking processes ambiguous.

    In order to extract signal parameters such as code delay and Doppler frequency of the ith useful signal xi(t), the incoming signal Incoming-y Source: Pratibha B. Anantharamu, Daniele Borio, and Gérard Lachapelle is correlated with a locally generated replica of the incoming code and carrier. This process is referred to as correlation where the carrier of the incoming signal is at first wiped off using a local complex carrier replica. The spreading code is also wiped off using a ranging code generator. The signal obtained after carrier and code removal is integrated and dumped over T seconds to provide correlator outputs. The correlator output for the hth satellite and mth antenna can be modeled as:
    E-3 Source: Pratibha B. Anantharamu, Daniele Borio, and Gérard Lachapelle   (3)
    where vm,k are the coefficients of the calibration matrix, C and Rτh) is the multi-peaked ACF. τh, fD,h and φh are the code delay, Doppler frequency and carrier phase estimated by the receiver and Δτh, ΔfD,h and Δφh are the residual delay, frequency, and phase errors. nmh is the residual noise term obtained from the processing of η(t). Eq. (3) is the basic signal model that will be used for the development of a space-time technique suitable for unambiguous BOC tracking.

    When BOC signals are considered, algorithms should be developed to reduce the impact of nmh that include receiver noise, interference and multipath components, along with the mitigation of ambiguities in Rτh). Space-time processing techniques have the potential to fulfill those requirements.

    Space-Time Processing

    A simplified representation of a typical space-time processing structure is provided in Figure 1. Each antenna element is followed by K taps with δ denoting the time delay between successive taps forming the temporal filter. The combination of several antennas forms the spatial filter. wmk are the space-time weights with 0 ≤ kK and 0 ≤ mM. k is the temporal index and m is the antenna index.

    Figure_1 Source: Pratibha B. Anantharamu, Daniele Borio, and Gérard Lachapelle
    Figure 1. Block diagram of space-time processing.

    The array output after applying the space-time filter can be expressed as
    E-4 Source: Pratibha B. Anantharamu, Daniele Borio, and Gérard Lachapelle   (4)
    where (wmk)* denotes complex conjugate. The spatial-only filter can be realized by setting K=1 and a temporal only filter is obtained when M=1. The weights are updated depending on the signal/channel characteristics subject to user-defined constraints using different adaptive techniques. This kind of processing is often referred to as Space-Time Adaptive Processing (STAP). The success of STAP techniques has been well demonstrated in radar, airborne and mobile communication systems. This has led to the application of STAP techniques in the field of GNSS signal processing. Several STAP techniques have been developed for improving the performance of GNSS signal processing. These techniques exploit the advantages of STAP to minimize the effect of multipath and interference along with improving the overall signal quality.

    Space-time processing algorithms can be broadly classified into two categories: decoupled and joint space-time processing. The joint space-time approach exploits both spatial and temporal characteristics of the incoming signal in a single space-time filter while the decoupled approach involves several temporal equalizers and a spatial beamformer that are realized in two separate stages (Figure 2).

    Figure_2-B Source: Pratibha B. Anantharamu, Daniele Borio, and Gérard Lachapelle
    Figure 2. Representation of two different space-time processing techniques

    When considering the decoupled approach for GNSS signals, temporal filters can be applied on the data from the different antennas whereas the spatial filter can be applied at two different stages, namely pre-correlation or post-correlation. In the pre-correlation stage, spatial weights are applied on the incoming signal after carrier wipe-off while in the post-correlation stage, spatial weights are applied after the Integrate & Dump (I&D) block on the correlator outputs. In pre-correlation processing, the update rate of the weight vector is in the order of MHz (same as the sampling frequency) whereas the post-correlation processing has the advantage of lower update rates in the order of kHz (I&D frequency). In the pre-correlation case, the interference and noise components prevail significantly in the spatial correlation matrix and would result in efficient interference mitigation and noise reduction. But the information on direct and reflected signals are unavailable since the GNSS signals are well below the noise level. This information can be extracted using post-correlation processing.

    In the context of new GNSS signals, efforts to utilize multi-antenna array to enhance signal quality along with interference and multipath mitigation have been documented using both joint and decoupled approaches where the problem of ambiguous signal tracking was not considered.

    In our research, we considered the decoupled space-time processing structure. Temporal processing is applied at each antenna output and spatial processing is applied at the post-correlation stage. Temporal processing based on MMSE equalization and spatial processing based on the adaptive MVDR beamformer are considered.

    Methodology

    The opening figure shows the proposed STAP architecture for BOC signal tracking. In this approach, the incoming BOC signals are at first processed using a temporal equalizer that produces a signal with a BPSK-like spectrum. The filtered spectra from several antennas are then combined using a spatial beamformer that produces maximum gain at the desired signal direction of arrival. The beamformed signal is then fed to the code and carrier lock loops for further processing. The transfer function of the temporal filter is obtained by minimizing the error:
    E-5 Source: Pratibha B. Anantharamu, Daniele Borio, and Gérard Lachapelle   (5)
    where H(f) is the transfer function of the temporal filter that minimizes the MSE, εMMSES, between the desired spectrum, GD(f), and filtered spectrum, Gx(f)H(f). The spectrum of the incoming BOC signal is denoted by Gx(f). λ is a weighting factor determining the impact of noise with respect to that of an ambiguous correlation function. N0 is the noise power spectral density and C the carrier power. The desired spectrum is considered to be a BPSK spectrum. Since this type of processing minimizes the MSE, it is denoted MMSE Shaping (MMSES).

    Figure 3 shows a sample plot of the ACF obtained after applying MMSES on live Galileo BOCs(1,1) signals collected from the GIOVE-B satellite. The input C/N0 was equal to 40 dB-Hz and the ACF was averaged over 1 second of data. It can be observed
    that the multi-peaked ACF was successfully modified by MMSES to produce a BPSK-like ACF without secondary peaks. Also narrow ACF were obtained by modifying the filter design for improved multipath mitigation. Thus using temporal processing, the antenna array data are devoid of ambiguity due to the presence of the sub-carrier.

    After temporal equalization, the spatial weights are computed and updated based on the following information:

    • The signal and noise covariance matrix obtained from the correlator outputs;
    • Calibration parameters estimated to minimize the effect of mutual coupling and antenna gain/phase mismatch;
    • Satellite data decoded from the ephemeris/almanac containing information on the GNSS signal DoA.

    The weights are updated using the iterative approach for the MVDR beamformer to maximize the signal quality according to the following steps:

    Step 1: Update the estimate of the steering vector for the hthsatellite using the calibration parameters as:
    E-6 Source: Pratibha B. Anantharamu, Daniele Borio, and Gérard Lachapelle   (6)
    Here vi,j represents the estimated calibration parameters using the correlator outputs given by Eq. (3) and shm is the element of the steering vector computed using the satellite ephemeris/almanac data.

    Step 2: Update the weight vector  weightvector (the temporal index, k, is removed for ease of notation) using the new estimate of the covariance matrix and steering vector as
    E-7 Source: Pratibha B. Anantharamu, Daniele Borio, and Gérard Lachapelle   (7)
    where ycaoth is the input signal after carrier wipe-off.

    Repeat Steps 1 and 2 until the weights converge. Finally compute the correlator output to drive the code and carrier tracking loop according to Equation (4).

    The C/N0 gain obtained after performing calibration and beamforming on a two-antenna linear array and four-antenna planar array data collected using the four channel front-end is provided in Figure 4 and Figure 5. The C/N0 plots are characterized by three regions:

    • Single Antenna that provides C/N0 estimates obtained using q0,h alone;
    • Before Calibration that provides C/N0 estimates obtained by compensating only the effects of the steering vector, si, before combining the correlator outputs from all antennas;
    • After Calibration that provides C/N0 estimates obtained by compensating the effects of both steering vector, si and calibration matrix, C, before combining correlator outputs from all antennas.

    After calibration, beamforming provides approximately a C/N0 gain equal to the theoretical one on most of the satellites whereas before calibration, the gain is minimal and, in some cases, negative with respect to the single antenna case. These results support the effectiveness of the adopted calibration algorithm and the proposed methodology that enables efficient beamforming.

    Figure_4 Source: Pratibha B. Anantharamu, Daniele Borio, and Gérard Lachapelle
    Figure 4. C/N0 estimates obtained after performing calibration and beamforming on linear array data.
    Figure 5. C/N0 estimates obtained after performing calibration and beamforming on the planar array data. Source: Pratibha B. Anantharamu, Daniele Borio, and Gérard Lachapelle
    Figure 5. C/N0 estimates obtained after performing calibration and beamforming on the planar array data.

    Results and Analysis

    IF simulated BOCs(1,1) signals for a 4-element planar array with array spacing equal to half the wavelength of the incoming signal has been considered to analyze the proposed algorithm. The input signal was characterized by a C/N0 equal to 42 dB-Hz at an angle of arrival of 20° elevation and 315° azimuth angle.

    A sample plot of the antenna array pattern using the spatial beamformer  is shown in Figure 6. In the upper part of Figure 6, the ideal case in the absence of interference was considered. The algorithm is able to place a maximum of the array factor in correspondence of the signal DoA.

    Figure_6 Source: Pratibha B. Anantharamu, Daniele Borio, and Gérard Lachapelle
    Figure 6. Antenna array pattern for a 4-element planar array computed using a MVDR beamformer in the presence of two interference sources.

    In the bottom part, results in the presence of interference are shown. Two interference signals were introduced at 60 and 45 degree elevation angles. It can be clearly observed that, in the presence of interference, the MVDR beamformer successfully adapted the array beam pattern to place nulls in the interference DoA.

    In order to further test the tracking capabilities of the full system, semi-analytic simulations were performed for the analysis of digital tracking loops. The simulation scheme is shown in Figure 7 and consists of M antenna elements. Each antenna input for the hth satellite is defined by a code delay (τm,h) and a carrier phase value (φm,h) for DLL and PLL analysis. φm,h captures the effect of mutual coupling, antenna phase mismatch and phase effects due to different antenna hardware paths. To analyze the post-correlation processing structure, each antenna input is processed independently to obtain the error signal,  Δτm,h / Δφm,h as E-8 where E-8A are the current delay/phase estimates.

    Figure_7 Source: Pratibha B. Anantharamu, Daniele Borio, and Gérard Lachapelle
    Figure 7. Semi-analytic simulation model for a multi-antenna system comprising M antennas with a spatial beamformer.

    Each error signal is then used to obtain the signal components that are added along with the independent noise components, nenp. The combined signal and noise components from all antenna elements are fed to the spatial beamformer to produce a single output according to the algorithm described in the Methodology section. Finally, the beamformer output is passed through the loop discriminator, filter and NCO to provide a new estimate . The Error to Signal mapping block and the noise generation process accounts for the impact of temporal filtering.

    Figure 8 shows sample tracking jitter plots for a PLL with a single, dual and three-antenna array system obtained using the structure described above.

    Figure_8 Source: Pratibha B. Anantharamu, Daniele Borio, and Gérard Lachapelle
    Figure 8. Phase-tracking jitter obtained for single, dual and three-antenna linear array as a function of the input C/N0 for a Costas discriminator (20 milliseconds coherent integration and 5-Hz bandwidth).

    The number of simulation runs considered was 50000 with a coherent integration time of 20 ms and a PLL bandwidth equal to 5 Hz. As expected the tracking jitter improves when the number of antenna elements is increased along with improved tracking sensitivity. As expected, the C/N0 values at which loss of lock occurs for a three antenna system is reduced with respect to the single antenna system, showing its superiority.

    Real data analysis. Figure 9 shows the experimental setup considered for analysis of the proposed combined space-time algorithm. Two antennas spaced 8.48 centimeters apart were used to form a 2-element linear antenna array structure. The NI front-end was employed for the data collection process to synchronously collect data from the two-antenna system.

    Data on both channels were progressively attenuated by 1 dB every 10 seconds to simulate a weak signal environment until an attenuation of 20 dB was reached. When this level of attenuation was reached, the data were attenuated by 1 dB every 20 seconds to allow for longer processing under weak signal conditions. In this way, data on both antennas were attenuated simultaneously. Data from Antenna 1 were passed through a splitter, as shown in Figure 9, before being attenuated in order to collect signals used to produce reference code delay and carrier Doppler frequencies.

    Figure_9 Source: Pratibha B. Anantharamu, Daniele Borio, and Gérard Lachapelle
    Figure 9. Experimental setup with signals collected using two antennas spaced 8.48 centimeters apart.

    BOCs(1,1) signals collected using Figure 9 were tracked using the temporal and spatial processing technique described in the opening figure. The C/N0 results obtained using single and two antennas are provided in Figure 10. In the single antenna case, only temporal processing was used. In this case, the loop was able to track signals for an approximate C/N0 of 19 dB-Hz. Using the space-time processing, the dual antenna system was able to track for nearly 40 seconds longer than the single antenna case, thus providing around 2 dB improvement in tracking sensitivity.

    Figure_10 Source: Pratibha B. Anantharamu, Daniele Borio, and Gérard Lachapelle
    Figure 10. C/N0 estimates obtained using a single antenna, temporal only processing and a dual-antenna array system using space-time processing.

    Conclusions

    A combined space-time technique for the processing of new GNSS signals including a temporal filter at the output of each antenna, a calibration algorithm and a spatial beamformer has been developed. The proposed methodology has been tested with simulations and real data. It was observed that the proposed methodology was able to provide unambiguous tracking after applying the temporal filter and enhance the signal quality after applying a spatial beamformer. The effectiveness of the proposed algorithm to provide maximum signal gain in the presence of several interference sources was shown using simulated data. C/N0 analysis for real data collected using a dual antenna array showed the effectiveness of combined space-time processing in attenuated signal environments providing a 2 dB improvement in tracking sensitivity.


    Pratibha B. Anantharamu received her doctoral degree from Department of Geomatics Engineering, University of Calgary, Canada. She is a senior systems engineer at Accord Software & Systems Pvt. Ltd., India.

    
Daniele Borio received a doctoral degree in electrical engineering from Politecnico di Torino. He is a post-doctoral fellow at the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission.


    Gérard Lachapelle holds a Canada Research Chair in Wireless Location in the Department of Geomatics Engineering, University of Calgary, where he heads the Position, Location, and Navigation (PLAN) Group.

  • Innovation: Filling in the Gaps

    Innovation: Filling in the Gaps

    Improving Navigation Continuity Using Parallel Cascade Identification

    By Umar Iqbal, Jacques Georgy, Michael J. Korenberg, and Aboelmagd Noureldin

    To reliably navigate with fewer than four satellites, GPS pseudoranges needs to be augmented with measurements from other sensors, such as a reduced inertial sensor system or RISS. What is the best way to combine the RISS measurements with the GPS measurements? The classic approach is to integrate the measurements in a conventional tightly coupled Kalman filter. But in this month’s column, we look at how a mathematical procedure called parallel case identification can improve the Kalman filter’s job, when navigating with three, two, one, or even no GPS satellites.

    GPS World photo
    INNOVATION INSIGHTS by Richard Langley

    THREE, TWO, ONE, ZERO! Can you still navigate with just a GPS receiver when the number of tracked GPS satellites drops from four to none? As we know, pseu- doranges from a minimum of four satellites, preferably well spaced out in the sky, are required for three-dimensional positioning. That’s because there are four unknowns to estimate: the three position coordinates (latitude, longitude, and height) and the offset of the receiver clock from GPS System Time. If we had a stable clock in the receiver, then we could hold the clock offset constant and have 3D navigation with just three satellites. But for every 3 nanoseconds of clock drift, we will have about 1 meter of pseudorange error, which will lead to several meters of position error depend- ing on the receiver-satellite geometry. On the other hand, we could hold the height coor- dinate constant (viable for navigation over slowly changing topography or at sea) and estimate the horizontal coordinates and the receiver clock offset. So far, so good.

    What if the number of tracked satellites then drops to two? We can now only esti- mate two unknowns. They could be the two horizontal coordinates, if we hold both the receiver clock offset and the height fixed. Any errors in those fixed values will propagate into the estimated horizontal coordinates but the resulting position errors might still be acceptable. Instead of holding the clock offset
    fixed, we could assume a constant heading and compute the position along the assumed trajectory. However, navigation will rapidly deteriorate as soon as we make the first turn. And one satellite? We would have to make assumptions about the vehicle trajectory, the height, and the clock offset, with likely very poor results. And with no satellites? We might be able to navigate over a short period of time by “dead reckoning,” assuming a constant trajectory and speed, but the resulting positions will be educated guesses at best.

    Clearly, if we want to reliably navigate with fewer than four satellites we need to augment the GPS pseudoranges with measurements from some other sensors. A common approach is to use inertial measurement units or IMUs. A complete IMU consists of three accelerometers and three gyroscopes, and small, cost-effective microelectromechanical IMUs are readily available. For land navigation, however, it can be advantageous to use a reduced inertial sensor system or RISS, consisting of one single-axis gyroscope, two accelerometers, and the vehicle speedometer. We can also make use of GPS pseudorange rates along with the pseudoranges.

    But what is the best way to combine the RISS measurements with the GPS measurements? The classic approach is to integrate the measurements in a conventional tightly coupled Kalman filter. But in this month’s column, we look at how a mathematical procedure called parallel cascade identification can improve the Kalman filter’s job, when navigating with three, two, or even one GPS satellite.


    The Global Positioning System meets the requirements for numerous navigational applications when there is direct line-of-sight (LOS) to four or more GPS satellites. Vehicular navigation systems and personal positioning systems may suffer from satellite signal blockage as LOS to at least four satellites may not be readily available when operating in urban landscapes with high buildings, underpasses, and tunnels, or in the countryside with thick forested areas. In such environments, a typical GPS receiver will have difficulties attaining and maintaining signal tracking, which causes GPS outages resulting in degraded or non-existent positioning information. Due to these well-known limitations of GPS, multi-sensor system integration is often employed. By integrating GPS with complementary motion sensors, a solution can be obtained that is often more accurate than that of GPS alone.

    Microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) inertial sensors have enabled production of lower-cost and smaller-size inertial measurement units (IMUs) with little power consumption. A complete IMU is composed of three accelerometers and three gyroscopes. These MEMS sensors have composite error characteristics that are stochastic in nature and difficult to model. In traditional low-cost MEMS-based IMU/GPS integration, a few minutes of degraded GPS signals can cause position errors, which can reach several hundred meters. For full 3D land vehicle navigation, we had earlier proposed a low-cost MEMS-based reduced inertial sensor system (RISS) based on only one single-axis gyroscope, two accelerometers, and the vehicle odometer, and we have integrated this system with GPS. RISS mitigates several error sources in the full-IMU solution; moreover, RISS reduces system cost further due to the use of fewer sensors. Another enhancement can be achieved by using tightly coupled integration, which can provide GPS aiding for a navigation solution when the number of visible satellites is three or lower, removing the foremost requirement of loosely coupled integration, which is visibility of at least four satellites. GPS aiding during limited GPS satellite availability can improve the operation of the navigation system for tightly coupled systems. Thus, in our reseach, a Kalman filter (KF) is used to integrate low-cost MEMS-based RISS with GPS in a tightly coupled scheme.

    The KF employed in tightly coupled RISS/GPS integration utilizes pseudoranges and pseudorange rates measured by the GPS receiver. The accuracy of the position estimates is highly dependent on the accuracy of the range measurements. The tightly coupled solutions presented in the literature assume that the pseudorange measurement, after correcting for ionospheric and tropospheric delays, satellite clock errors, and ephemeris errors, only have errors due to the receiver clock and white noise. These latter two are the only errors modeled inside the measurement model in the tightly coupled solutions presented in the literature. Experimental investigation of the GPS pseudoranges for vehicle trajectories in different areas and for different scenarios showed that, in addition, there are residual correlated errors. Since it has been experimentally proven that there are residual correlated errors in addition to white noise and receiver clock errors, we have proposed using a nonlinear system identification technique called parallel cascade identification (PCI) to model such correlated errors in pseudorange measurements.

    We propose that the PCI model for the residual pseudorange errors be cascaded with a KF since this nonlinear model cannot be included inside the KF measurement model. The normal operation of a KF is as follows: the difference between the measured pseudorange and pseudorange rate from the mth GPS satellite and the corresponding RISS-predicted estimates of pseudorange and pseudorange rate are used as a measurement update for the KF integration, which computes the estimated RISS errors and corrects the mechanization output. We propose the use of a PCI module, where the role of PCI is to model the pseudorange residual errors. When GPS is available, estimated full 3D position, velocity, and attitude are obtained by integrating the MEMS-based RISS with GPS. In parallel, as a background routine, a PCI model is built for each visible satellite to model its pseudorange error. The actual pseudorange of each visible satellite is used as the input to the model; the target output is the error between the corrected pseudorange (calculated based on corrected receiver position from the integrated solution) and the actual pseudorange. This target output provides the reference output to build the PCI model of the pseudorange residual error. Dynamic characteristics between system input and output help to identify a nonlinear PCI model and the algorithm can then achieve a residual pseudorange error model.

    When fewer than four satellites are visible, the identified parallel cascades for the remaining visible satellites will be used to predict the pseudorange errors for these satellites and correct the pseudorange values to be provided to the KF. This improvement of pseudorange measurements will result in a more accurate aiding for RISS, and thus more accurate estimates of position and velocities.

    We examined the performance of the proposed technique by conducting road tests with real-life trajectories using a low-cost MEMS-based RISS. The ultimate check for the proposed system’s accuracy is during GPS signal degradation and blockage. This work presents both downtown scenarios with natural GPS degradation and scenarios with simulated GPS outages where the number of visible satellites was varied from three to zero. The results are examined and compared with KF-only tightly coupled RISS/GPS integration without pseudorange correction using a PCI module. This comparison clearly demonstrates the advantage of using a PCI module for correcting pseudoranges for tightly coupled integration.

    RISS/GPS Integration

    Earlier, we proposed the reduced inertial sensor system to reduce the overall cost of a positioning system for land vehicles without appreciable performance compromise depending on the fact that land vehicles mostly stay in the horizontal plane. It is the gyroscope technology that contributes the most both to the overall cost of an IMU and to the performance of the INS. In RISS mechanization, the heading (azimuth) angle is obtained by integrating the gyroscope measurement, ωz. Since this measurement includes the component of the Earth’s rotation as well as rotation of the local level frame on the Earth’s curved surface, these quantities are removed from the measurement before integration. Assuming relatively small pitch and roll angles for land vehicle applications, we can write the rate of change of the azimuth angle directly in the local level frame as:
    E-1 Source: Richard Langley   (1)
    where ωe is the Earth’s rotation rate, φ is the latitude, ve is the east velocity of the vehicle, h is the altitude of the vehicle and RN is the normal (prime vertical) radius of curvature of the vehicle’s position on the reference ellipsoid.

    The two horizontal accelerometers can be employed for obtaining the pitch and roll angles of the vehicle. Thus, a 3D navigation solution can be achieved to boost the performance of the solution. When the vehicle is moving, the forward accelerometer measures the forward vehicle acceleration as well as the component due to gravity, g. To calculate the pitch angle, the vehicle acceleration derived from the odometer measurements, aod, is removed from the forward accelerometer measurements, fy. Consequently, the pitch angle is computed as:

    E-2 Source: Richard Langley (2)

    Similarly, the transversal accelerometer measures the normal component of the vehicle acceleration as well as the component due to gravity. Thus, to calculate the roll angle, the transversal accelerometer measurement, fx, must be compensated for the normal component of acceleration. The roll angle is then given by:

    E-3 Source: Richard Langley(3)

    The computed azimuth and pitch angles allow the transformation of the vehicle’s speed along the forward direction, vod (obtained from the odometer measurements) to east, north, and up velocities (ve, vn, and vu respectively) as follows:
    E-4 Source: Richard Langley(4)
    where Rlb is the rotation matrix that transforms velocities in the vehicle body frame to the navigation frame. The east and north velocities are transformed and integrated to obtain position in geodetic coordinates (latitude, φ, and longitude, λ). The vertical component of velocity is integrated to obtain altitude, h. The following equation shows these operations:
    E-5 Source: Richard Langley(5)

    where, in addition to the terms already defined, RM is the meridional radius of curvature. We have used the KF as the estimation technique for tightly coupled RISS/GPS integration in our approach. KF is an optimal estimation tool that provides a sequential recursive algorithm for the optimal least mean variance (LMV) estimation of the system states. In addition to its benefits as an optimal estimator, the KF provides real-time statistical data related to the estimation accuracy of the system states, which is very useful for quantitative error analysis. The filter generates its own error analysis with the computation of the error covariance matrix, which gives an indication of the estimation accuracy.

    In tightly coupled RISS/GPS system architecture, instead of using the position and velocity solution from the GPS receiver as input for the fusion algorithm, raw GPS observations such as pseudoranges and Doppler shifts are used. The range measurement is usually known as a pseudorange due to the contamination of errors, such as atmospheric errors, as well as synchronization errors between the satellite and receiver clocks.

    After correcting for the satellite clock error and the ionospheric and tropospheric errors, we can obtain a corrected pseudorange. The receiver clock error and the residual errors remaining in the corrected pseudorange, assumed as white Gaussian noise, are the only errors modeled inside the measurement model in the tightly coupled solutions presented in the literature. Experimental investigation of the GPS pseudoranges in trajectories in different areas and under different scenarios showed that the residual errors are not just white noise as assumed in the literature, but, in fact, are correlated errors. As the GPS observables are used to update the KF, a technique must be developed to adequately model these errors to improve the overall performance of the KF. We propose using PCI to model these correlated errors. A PCI module models these errors, and then provides corrections prior to sending the GPS pseudoranges to aid the KF during periods of GPS partial outages (when the number of visible satellites drops below four).

    Parallel Cascade Identification

    What is PCI? System identification is a procedure for inferring the dynamic characteristics between system input and output from an analysis of time-varying input-output data. Most of the techniques assume linearity due to the simplicity of analysis since nonlinear techniques make analysis much more complicated and difficult to implement than for the linear case. However, for more realistic dynamic characterization nonlinear techniques are suggested. PCI is a nonlinear system identification technique proposed by one of us [MJK]. This technique models the input/output behavior of a nonlinear system by a sum of parallel cascades of alternating dynamic linear (L) and static nonlinear (N) elements. The parallel array shown in Figure 1 can be built up one cascade at a time.

    Figure 1. Block diagram of parallel cascade identification. Source: Richard Langley
    Figure 1. Block diagram of parallel cascade identification.

    It has been proven that any discrete-time Volterra series with finite memory and anticipation can be uniformly approximated by a finite sum of parallel LNL cascades, where the static nonlinearities, N, are exponentials and logarithmic functions. [A Volterra series, named after the Italian mathematician and physicist Vito Volterra, is similar to the more familiar infinite Taylor series expansion of a function used, for example, in systems analysis, but the Volterra series can include system “memory” effects.] It has been shown that any discrete-time doubly finite (finite memory and order) Volterra series can be exactly represented by a finite sum of LN cascades where the N are polynomials. A key advantage of this technique is that it is not dependent on a white or Gaussian input, but the identified individual L and N elements may vary depending on the statistical properties of the input chosen. The cascades can be found one at a time and nonlinearities in the models are localized in static functions. This reduces the computation as higher order nonlinearities are approximated using higher degree polynomials in the cascades rather than higher order kernels in a Volterra series approximation.

    The method begins by approximating the nonlinear system by a first such cascade. The residual (that is, the difference between the system and the cascade outputs) is treated as the output of a new nonlinear system, and a second cascade is found to approximate the latter system, and thus the parallel array can be built up one cascade at a time. Let yk(n) be the residual after fitting the kth cascade, with yo(n) = y(n). Let zk(n) be the output of the kth cascade, so
    E-6 Source: Richard Langley(6)
    where k = 1, 2, …

    The dynamic linear elements in the cascades can be determined in a number of ways. The method we have employed uses cross correlations of the input with the current residual. Best fitting of the current residuals was used to find the polynomial coefficients of the static nonlinearities. These resulting cascades are such that they drive the cross-correlations of the input with the residuals to zero. However, a few basic parameters have to be specified in order to identify a parallel cascade model, including the memory length of the dynamic linear element that begins each cascade, the degree of the polynomial static nonlinearity that follows the linear element (this polynomial is best fit to minimize the mean-square error (MSE) of the approximation of the residual), the maximum number of cascades allowable in the model, and a threshold based on a standard correlation test for determining whether a cascade’s reduction of the MSE justifies its addition to the model.

    Augmented Kalman Filter

    In the previous section, the parallel cascade model was briefly presented, together with a simple method for building up the model to approximate the behavior of a dynamic nonlinear system, given only its input and output. In order to apply PCI to 3D RISS/GPS integration, we propose the use of a KF-PCI module, where the role of PCI is to model the residual errors of GPS pseudoranges.

    In full GPS coverage when four or more satellites are available to the GPS receiver, the KF integrated solution provides an adequate position benefiting from both GPS and RISS readings, and the PCI builds the model for the pseudorange errors for each visible satellite. The input of each PCI module is the pseudorange of the visible mth GPS satellite, and the reference output is the difference between the observed pseudorange and the estimated pseudorange from the corrected navigation solution.

    The reference output has no corrections during full GPS coverage. It is only used to build the PCI model. Dynamic characteristics between system input and output help to achieve a residual pseudorange error model as shown in the Figure 2.

    Figure 2. Block diagram of augmented KF-PCI module for pseudoranges during GPS availability. Source: Richard Langley
    Figure 2. Block diagram of augmented KF-PCI module for pseudoranges during GPS availability.

    During partial GPS coverage, when there are fewer than four satellites available, the PCI modules for all satellites cease training, and the available PCI model for each visible satellite is used to predict the corresponding residual pseudorange errors, as shown in Figure 3. The KF operates as usual, but in this instance the GPS observed pseudorange is corrected by the output of the corresponding PCI. The pre-built PCI models, only for the visible satellites during the partial outage, predict the corresponding residual pseudorange errors to obtain a correction. Thus, the corrected pseudorange can then be obtained.

    During a full GPS outage, when no satellites are available, the KF operates in prediction mode and the PCI modules neither provide corrections nor operate in training mode.

    FIGURE 3 Block diagram of augmented KF-PCI module for pseudoranges during limited availability of GPS. Source: Richard Langley
    FIGURE 3 Block diagram of augmented KF-PCI module for pseudoranges during limited availability of GPS.

    Experimental Setup

    The performance of the developed navigation solution was examined with road test experiments in a land vehicle. The experimental data collection was carried out using a full-size passenger van carrying a suite of measurement equipment that included inertial sensors, GPS receivers, antennae, and computers to control the instruments and acquire the data as shown in the Figure 4. The inertial sensors used in our tests are packaged in a MEMS-grade IMU. The specifications of the IMU are listed in Table 1.

    TABLE 1 IMU specifications. Source: Richard Langley
    Table 1. IMU specifications.

    The vehicle’s forward speed readings were obtained from vehicle built-in sensors through the On-Board Diagnostics version II (OBD II) interface. The sample rate for the collection of speed readings was 1 Hz. The GPS receiver used in our integrated system was a high-end dual-frequency unit. Our results were evaluated with respect to a reference solution determined by a system consisting of another receiver of the same type, integrated with a tactical grade IMU.

    This system provided the reference solution to validate the proposed method and to examine the overall performance during simulated GPS outages.
    Several road test trajectories were carried out using the setup described above. The road test trajectory considered for this article was performed in the city of Kingston, Ontario, Canada, and is shown in Figure 5. This road test was performed for nearly 48 minutes of continuous vehicle navigation and a distance of around 22 kilometers. Ten simulated GPS outages of 60 seconds each were introduced in post-processing (they are shown as blue circles overlaid on the map in Figure 5) during good GPS availability. The trajectory was run four times with the simulated partial outages having three, two, one, and zero visible satellites, respectively. The case with no satellites seen is like a scenario that would occur in loosely coupled integration. The errors estimated by KF-PCI and KF-only solutions were evaluated with respect to the reference solution.

    Experimental Results

    The results in Figure 6 and Figure 7 demonstrate the benefits of the proposed PCI module. The main benefit of using PCI for pseudorange correction is the modeling capability, which enables correction of the raw GPS measurements. The benefit of more satellite availability can also be seen from these results. Figures 6 and 7 clearly show that both the average maximum position error and the average root-mean-square (RMS) position error are lower with the KF-PCI approach compared to the conventional KF, even when data from only one satellite is available.

    FIGURE 6 Bar graph showing average maximum positional errors for all outages. Source: Richard Langley
    Figure 6. Bar graph showing average maximum positional errors for all outages.
    Figure 7. Bar graph for RMS positional errors for all outages. Source: Richard Langley
    Figure 7. Bar graph for RMS positional errors for all outages.

    To gain more insight about the performance of the proposed technique to enhance the aiding of the KF by correcting the pseudoranges, we can look at the results of KF-PCI and KF approaches with different numbers of satellites visible to the receiver for one of the artificial outages. Figure 8 shows a map featuring the different compared solutions during outage number 8. Eight solutions are presented for the cases of three, two, one, and zero satellites observed for the standard KF and KF with PCI. To get some idea of the vehicle dynamics during this outage, we can examine Figure 9, which depicts the forward speed of the vehicle as well as its azimuth angle as obtained from the reference solution. There is a significant variation in speed, with only a small variation in azimuth.

    FIGURE 8 Performance of tightly coupled 3D-RISS during outage #8. Source: Richard Langley
    Figure 8. Performance of tightly coupled 3D-RISS during outage #8.
    ▲ FIGURE 9 Vehicle dynamics (speed and azimuth) during GPS outage #8. Source: Richard Langley
    Figure 9. Vehicle dynamics (speed and azimuth) during GPS outage #8.

    Figure 10 illustrates the performance differences between the KF-PCI and KF-only solutions for different numbers of satellites for this outage. Similar to Figure 7, Figure 10 shows the average RMS position differences between the KF-PCI and KF-only solutions and the reference solution (without the artificial outages). While the differences increase as the number of available satellites decreases, the accuracies may still be acceptable for many navigation purposes.

    And while the differences between the KF-PCI and KF-only approaches for this particular outage are small, the KF-PCI approach consistently provides better accuracy.

    FIGURE 10 Performance of PCI-KF (shades of blue for different number of satellites) and KF (shades of green for different number of satellites) of tightly coupled 3D-RISS during outage #8. Source: Richard Langley
    Figure 10. Performance of PCI-KF (shades of blue for different number of satellites) and KF (shades of green for different number of satellites) of tightly coupled 3D-RISS during outage #8.

    Conclusion

    In this article, we have described a novel design for a navigation system that augments a tightly coupled KF system with PCI modules using low-cost MEMS-based 3D RISS and GPS observations to produce an integrated positioning solution. A PCI module is built for each satellite during good signal availability where the integrated solution presents a good position estimate. The output of each PCI module provides corrections to the GPS pseudoranges of the corresponding visible satellite during GPS partial outages, thereby decreasing residual errors in the GPS observations. This KF-PCI module was tested with real road-test trajectories and compared to a KF-only approach and was shown to improve the overall maximum position error during GPS partial outages.

    Future work with PCI for modeling the residual pseudorange errors will consider replacing the KF with a particle filter to provide more robust integration and a consistent level of accuracy.

    Acknowledgments

    The research discussed in this article was supported, in part, by grants from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, the Geomatics for Informed Decisions (GEOIDE) Network of Centres of Excellence, and Defence Research and Development Canada. The equipment was acquired by research funds from the Directorate of Technical Airworthiness and Engineering Support, the Canada Foundation for Innovation, the Ontario Innovation Trust, and the Royal Military College of Canada. The article is based on the paper “Modeling Residual Errors of GPS Pseudoranges by Augmenting Kalman Filter with PCI for Tightly Coupled RISS/GPS Integration” presented at ION GNSS 2010, the 23rd International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation held in Portland, Oregon, September 21–24, 2010.

    Manufacturers

    The test discussed in this article used a NovAtel Inc. OEM4 dual-frequency GPS receiver and a Crossbow Technology Inc., now Moog Crossbow IMU300CC-100 MEMS-grade IMU. The On-Board Diagnostics data was accessed with a Davis Instruments CarChip Pro data logger. The reference solutions were provided by a NovAtel G2 Pro-Pack SPAN unit, interfacing a NovAtel OEM4 receiver with a Honeywell HG1700 tactical grade IMU.


    Umar Iqbal is a doctoral candidate at Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada. He received a master’s of electrical engineering degree in integrated positioning and navigation systems from Royal Military College (RMC)  of Canada, Kingston, in 2008. He also holds an M.Sc. in electronics engineering from the Ghulam Ishaq Khan Institute of Engineering Sciences and Technology, Topi, Pakistan, and a B.Sc. in electrical engineering from the University of Engineering and Technology, Lahore, Pakistan. His research focuses on the development of enhanced performance navigation and guidance systems that can be used in several applications including car navigation.

    Jacques Georgy received his Ph.D. degree in electrical and computer engineering from Queen’s University in 2010. He received B.Sc. and M.Sc. degrees in computer and systems engineering from Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt, in 2001 and 2007, respectively. He is working in positioning and navigation systems for vehicular, machinery, and portable applications with Trusted Positioning Inc., Calgary, Alberta, Canada. He is also a member of the Navigation and Instrumentation Research Group at RMC. His research interests include linear and nonlinear state estimation, positioning and navigation by inertial navigation system/global positioning system integration, autonomous mobile robot navigation, and underwater target tracking.

    Michael J. Korenberg is a professor in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Queen’s University. He holds an M.Sc. (mathematics) and a Ph.D. (electrical engineering) from McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, and has published extensively in the areas of nonlinear system identification and time-series analysis.

    Aboelmagd Noureldin is a cross-appointment associate professor with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Queen’s University and the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at RMC. He is also the founder and leader of the Navigation and Instrumentation Research Group at RMC. He received the B.Sc. degree in electrical engineering and the M.Sc. degree in engineering physics from Cairo University, Giza, Egypt, in 1993 and 1997, respectively, and the Ph.D. degree in electrical and computer engineering from The University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, in 2002. His research is related to artificial intelligence, digital signal processing, spectral estimation and de-noising, wavelet multiresolution analysis, and adaptive filtering, with emphasis on their applications in mobile multisensor system integration for navigation and positioning technologies.

    FURTHER READING

    ◾ Reduced Inertial Sensing Systems

    Integrated Reduced Inertial Sensor System/GPS for Vehicle Navigation: Multi-sensor Positioning System for Land Applications Involving Single-Axis Gyroscope Augmented with Vehicle Odometer and Integrated with GPS by U. Iqbal and A. Noureldin, published by VDM Verlag Dr. Müller, Saarbrucken, Germany, 2010.

    “A Tightly-Coupled Reduced Multi- Sensor System for Urban Navigation” by T.B. Karamat, J. Georgy, U. Iqbal, and A. Noureldin in Proceedings of ION GNSS 2009, the 22nd International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation, Savannah, Georgia, September 22–25, 2009, pp. 582–592.

    “An Integrated Reduced Inertial Sensor System – RISS/GPS for Land Vehicle” by U. Iqbal, A.F. Okou, and A. Noureldin, in Proceedings of PLANS 2008, IEEE/ION Position Location and Navigation Symposium, Monterey, California, May 5–8, 2008, pp. 912– 922, doi: 0.1109/PLANS.2008.4570075.

    ◾ Integrated Positioning

    “Experimental Results on an Integrated GPS and Multisensor System for Land Vehicle Positioning” by U. Iqbal, T.B. Karamat, A.F. Okou, and A. Noureldin in International Journal of Navigation and Observation, Hindawi Publishing Corporation, Vol. 2009, Article ID 765010, 18 pp., doi: 10.1155/2009/765010.

    “Performance Enhancement of MEMS Based INS/GPS Integration for Low Cost Navigation Applications” by A. Noureldin, T.B. Karamat, M.D. Eberts, and A. El-Shafie in IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, Vol. 58, No. 3, March 2009, pp. 1077–1096, doi: 10.1109/TVT.2008.926076.

    Aided Navigation: GPS with High Rate Sensors by J.A. Farrell, published by McGraw-Hill, New York, 2008.

    Global Positioning Systems, Inertial Navigation, and Integration by M.S. Grewal, L.R. Weill, and A.P. Andrews, 2nd ed., published by Wiley- Interscience, Hoboken, New Jersey, 2007.

    “Continuous Navigation: Combining GPS with Sensor-based Dead Reckoning by G. zur Bonsen, D. Ammann, M. Ammann, E. Favey, and P. Flammant in GPS World, Vol. 16, No. 4, April 2005, pp. 47–54.

    Inertial Navigation and GPS” by M.B. May in GPS World, Vol. 4, No. 9, September 1993, pp. 56–66.

    ◾ Kalman Filtering

    Kalman Filtering: Theory and Practice Using MATLAB, 2nd ed., by M.S. Grewal and A.P. Andrews, published by John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, 2001.

    The Kalman Filter: Navigation’s Integration Workhorse” by L.J. Levy, in GPS World, Vol. 8, No. 9, September, 1997, pp. 65–71.

    Applied Optimal Estimation by the Technical Staff, Analytic Sciences Corp., ed. A. Gelb, published by The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1974.

    ◾ Parallel Cascade Identification

    “Simulation of Aircraft Pilot Flight Controls Using Nonlinear System Identification” by J.M. Eklund and M.J. Korenberg in Simulation, Vol. 75, No. 2, August 2000, pp.72–81, doi: 10.1177/003754970007500201.

    “Parallel Cascade Identification and Kernel Estimation for Nonlinear Systems” by M.J. Korenberg in Annals of Biomedical Engineering, Vol. 19, 1991, pp. 429–455, doi: 10.1007/ BF02584319.

    “Statistical Identification of Parallel Cascades of Linear and Nonlinear Systems” by M.J. Korenberg in Proceedings of the Sixth International Federation of Automatic Control Symposium on Identification and System Parameter Estimation, Washington, D.C., June 7–11, 1982, Vol. 1, pp. 580–585.

    ◾ On-Board Diagnostics

    “Low-cost PND Dead Reckoning using Automotive Diagnostic Links” by J.L. Wilson in Proceedings of ION GNSS 2007, the 20th International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation, Fort Worth, Texas, September 25–28, 2007, pp. 2066–2074.

  • Out in Front: C’mon, People Now

    In this hour of crisis, in this hour of need, I would recall for you the immortal words of the Brotherhood of Man, as reprised here by their disciples, Sonny and Cher:

    For united we stand,
    Divided we fall,
    And if our backs should
    ever be against the wall,
    We’ll be together,
    Together, you and I.

    Or will we?

    The LightSquared crisis has been and continues to be the most perplexing and fascinating episode I have followed in 11 years of covering the GNSS community. Fascinating because it has so many political and societal implications, as well as tangled-up technical, application, and business issues. In the end, it’s all about money. Money and power.

    It further fascinates me from a sociological point of view. The way the unfolding of this process has affected the GNSS community, in particular the subset of that community that is the GPS industry in the United States, strikes many reverberating chords.

    At first glance, we can say that the crisis has pulled a diverse community together, united it against a common foe. Witness the work of the Coalition, the agreement among the TWG sub-groups, the NPEF, the chorus of supporting letters and comments in the FCC docket, and so on. This is true — but only to an extent.

    I believe the opposite is also true: it has exposed cracks or fissures within the community, driven wedges into those cracks, and widened the cracks into gaps. It has exploited natural divisions that exist because GNSS technology is so widespread in applications and variegated in types of users. The process threatens to fracture the industry, and the community, further. That’s alarming.

    In the early going, response was fairly uniform: how can LightSquared and the FCC do this? How can we stop them? Thus the Coalition to Save Our GPS was formed. The Coalition has functioned very ably, but in fact it represents only one segment of the community: the high-precision segment. It is staffed and directed, to my knowledge, largely by Trimble and John Deere with some help and assistance from the off-shore and aviation segments. There is participation and membership from other areas, but generally, high precision drives it.

    This is also largely true of the GPS Industry Council. I am making broad generalizations that are surely inaccurate, to a degree. The GPS Industry Council earlier served the community in the pre-LightSquared negotiations of 2002 and continues to do so today alongside the Coalition It is similarly oriented towards the interests of its principal members.

    The high-precision bias, if you will, of the scenario became apparent to me when I tried to recruit webinar speakers and contributed editorial pieces from the other end of the GPS community: consumer and handheld receiver and cell-phone chip manufacturers. These companies, among whom I number Qualcomm (which long ago snapped up SnapTrack), Broadcom (acquired Global Locate a few years ago), and CSR (now owns the company formerly known as SiRF), declined to participate, speak out, or become involved in any public way. They seemed content to stand on the sidelines, watching. A newly appointed Qualcomm board member of the PNT Excomm Advisory Committee recused himself from participation in LightSquared-related activities.

    Why? Money. These companies are much closer to, in many cases are business partners with, the wireless carriers and the cell-phone manufacturers who have stock in seeing 4G happen and broadband roll out across the land. The L1 GPS companies feel they have to be fairly careful about how they proceed.

    As one person from such a company told me, “I think we tend to have a positive view, which is contrary to everyone else. This was a political issue, not a technical one, and the political wheels were in motion for a long time. Now, it’s up to us to decide how to deal with it. Whine and cry that we were cheated and duped, or seize the day and do what we are good at: engineer our way out.

    “It’s interesting how much this industry likes staring at its own navel, rather than looking (or listening) to other points of view. It is what I call ‘violent agreement’.”

    No matter how violently you may disagree with this view, it is vital that you be aware that it exists within the same group that you are part of.

    So we have the beginnings of a split, of something that could become a gulf, between the high-precision and the consumer segments of the industry.

    On the second hand, we have the military, many of whom — now these are the oldtimers — are secretly pleased by the travail the industry and civil users are going through. Because they never really liked sharing GPS with the civils anyway. However shortsighted, impractical, and shoot-yourself-in-the-foot this attitude may seem, it also exists, and is held by powerful, influential people.

    Third, some people within and without the GNSS community accept some or all of the LightSquared claims: that there’s no problem, or if there is a problem then filters can solve it, that alternative solutions are ready-to-hand or can be found through diligence. You may disagree, violently or non-violently, with these believers; you must still take them into serious account.

    Finally, JAVAD GNSS has announced a partnership with LightSquared and declared that “LightSquared not only can coexist with GPS, it complements it.” The company has always set an independent course, but this breaks new ground.

    What to do?

    My colleague Eric Gakstatter perceived the need for a more broad-based organization, an all-inclusive industry and users association, which the GPS Industry Council patently is not, however earnestly it has tried to serve that purpose in the absence of anyone else to do so.

    Almost simultaneously, Glen Gibbons wrote a column in his magazine proposing just such an association. “The need for more effective, continuing organization and representation of the GNSS community — manufacturers, service providers, and users — seems clear. . . . Common interests abound, and I’m not just referring to the RF issues that fuel the present furor,” he stated.

    We have an assortment of forums already: the Civil Global Positioning System Service Interface Committee, industry councils in the United States, Europe, and Japan, the Institute of Navigation. But these bodies cannot represent nor accomplish — it is not in their respective charters to do so — all that must be represented and accomplished.

    Building and maintaining a new entity will not be easy, because the GNSS community is more diverse, and I venture to say more divided, than we may like to admit. A consensus-driven organization of divergent interests is a very ornery thing; just ask the European Union about its efforts to mount Galileo.

    A coalition of like-minded folks united around one issue differs greatly from a broad organization assembling diverse points of view. The GPS community may never speak with one voice, even in the matter of its own survival. But other courses of action lie open to us.

    Test Till You Drop. The new phase of Lower 10 testing extends into November. After that, the JAVAD filter technology must be widely distributed, as soon as it is available, to all interested parties and rigorously tested to determine its validity and, equally important, its extrapolability to other proprietary receiver technologies well established in the field. I dare say there are many further aspects that must be thoroughly investigated and analyzed before anybody asserts that “We’re not [doing] anything that creates problems for GPS safety and service.” Because Julius Genachowski said we can’t.

    Long after the unfounded claims and the tortured analogies have lapsed into dust, the laws of electromagnetic
    behavior will go on working, as they have always done. And very admirably at that.

    C’mon, people now,
    Call on your physics.
    Everybody get together,
    Try to use your analytics,
    Right now.

  • Compass ICD in October; Harmonizing GNSS

    China’s GNSS, Compass or Beidou, intends to publish its signal interface control document (ICD) in October. Representatives of the system made an unprecedented showing at ION GNSS in Portland, and referred frankly to “internal deliberations” that may be at the root of much of the public uncertainty about the system’s planned structure and timeline. Meanwhile, representatives of other navigation satellite systems also delivered updates on their status and plans. Everyone is concerned about LightSquared interference, but everyone continues to move forward.

    This month’s column is a two-parter: a guest appearance by Len Jacobson, editorial advisory board member for GPS World magazine and president of Global Systems and Marketing Inc.  Len writes on the “Harmonizing GNSS” aspect, the briefings by all systems and their efforts to achieve compatibility and interoperability. Then I’ll return with an account of the Compass panel that formed part of the CGSIC meeting immediately preceeding ION.


    len_jacobsonHarmonizing GNSS

    by Len Jacobson

    Representatives of the International Committee on GNSS (ICG) participated in briefings and a panel discussion at the ION-GNSS Conference in Portland on Thursday, Sept. 22, 2011. The ICG is a committee formed under the auspices of the United Nations Office of Outer Space Affairs. The purpose of the panel was to acquaint the audience with the activities of the ICG and to allow the global and regional satellite navigation systems providers to describe their policies and efforts with regard to interoperability and compatibility among the various GNSS and to advise how multi-GNSS services could be harmonized.

    Rick Hamilton from the U.S. Coast Guard Navigation Center organized the panel, and Jeffrey Auerbach, from the same U.S. Department of State (DOS) office as the U.S. ICG representative Dave Turner, moderated it.

    The first speaker was Sharafat Gadimova, from the ICG Executive Secretariat. She described the functions and make-up of the ICG and suggested visiting their web site www.icgsecretariat.org for further information. The next meeting of the ICG is scheduled for December 4–9, 2012 in China.

    David Turner, the deputy director of the Office of Space and Advanced Technology in the DOS, reiterated the President’s 2010 Space Policy and in particular the addition emphasizing international cooperation and more use of foreign systems by the U.S. government to enhance GPS. Turner co-chairs Working Group (WG)-A on compatibility and interoperability. He discussed a Multi-GNSS Monitoring Network using new and existing GNSS monitoring receivers and networks. He stated that the various GNSS geodetic and timing references can be found on the ICG web site.

    Dr. Sergey Revnivykh, deputy director-general, GLONASS Information and Analysis Center, stated his desire that all GNSS be considered equal. In this sense, Russian policy differs from U.S. policy, which considers GPS as the premier GNSS. Dr. Revnivykh discussed the GLONASS System of Differential Correction and Monitoring (SCDM), the Russian version of WAAS. It will augment both GLONASS and GPS. He had to leave after his presentation so was not able to participate in the ensuing panel discussion.

    Independently, we have learned from GLONASS communications that the launch of GLONASS-M No. 42 from Plesetsk is scheduled to take place on October 1 at 20:19 UTC. The launch of GLONASS-M Nos. 43, 44, 45 from Baikonur may occur as early as November 2. The launch of GLONASS-M No. 46 from Plesetsk is now scheduled for November 22. The launch  of the next-generation GLONASS-K1 No. 12 from Plesetsk will likely slip to 2012. Additionally, Luch-5A, a Russian geostationary communications satellite that includes an SBAS payload, will launch together with Amos-5, a Russian-built Israeli communications satellite, on December 10 from Baikonur.

    Next we heard a short briefing by Xavier Maufroid from the Galileo Implementation office of the European Commission in Belgium. He stressed compatibility with all services, and then interoperability. He stated that the European Union (EU) is concerned about LightSquared (LS) because LS transmissions could affect Galileo reception in the United States and also could expand to provide a similar disruption in Europe if they were to expand into that area. And if not LS, then someone else could attempt a similar broadband service over Europe with the same potential to interfere with Galileo. He later added that 7 billion euros are budgeted for Galileo between 2014 and 2021.

    From the Chinese Electronics Technology Group came Dr. Xiancheng Ding, the deputy director-general. He described Beidou (Compass) as having nine satellites with five more to be launched in 2012. This will provide regional service by the end of 2012, including over Australia and New Zealand. Beidou has a communications capability for short messaging, which is needed in rural China.

    Dr. Ding said the Beidou signal interface control document (ICD) would be released soon. Other sources indicate it to be as early as October 2011. He indicated that Beidou is fully funded for phase 2 (regional system) and will probably be funded for phase 3 (global system).

    The final briefer was Dr. Satoshi Kogure from the Japan Space Ageny. He gave a QZSS update similar to one given in other ION GNSS sessions.

    During the panel interchange and answers to questions from the audience, various combinations of signals were discussed as needing to be compatible. That is, to not interfere in same frequency band and to comply with International Telecommunications Union (ITU) regulations. Specific signal pairs mentioned in this context included: GPS L1 and L5 with Galileo; Compass and future GLONASS CDMA; the QZSS LEX with Galileo; and others.

    A WG-A workshop proposed jointly to ICG to study the potential noise impact of too many satellites. By 2020, more than 100 satellites are expected to be transmitting the myriad of GNSS signals, with up to 35 in view at any one place. This could cause mutual interference, which in turn could cause degradation in the levels of service of the various GNSS.

    Dr. Kogure described a Multiple GNSS demo campaign sponsored in part by the Japanese Space Agency consisting of tens of receivers monitoring GNSS signals over Asia and the Western Pacific. For multi-GNSS testing there is better availability in these region as there are initially more GNSS signals in view. This experiment is a prototype of a multi-GNSS monitoring network with 20 QZSS receivers by March of 2012 and 40 by a year later. China will supply Beidou receivers to Japan for the multi-GNSS Monitoring Network in cooperation with the ICG. There will be a workshop on this topic in November in Korea.

    There is still an issue between China and the EU on frequency compatibility for authorized services, but Dr. Xiancheng said a technical solution is known. Negotiations are still ongoing.

    All members of the panel were cognizant of the LS problem and are focused on providing interference detection and mitigation for their GNNS.


    Compass ICD in October

    The long-awaited signal interface control document (ICD) for China’s growing GNSS will appear this month, according to representatives of the system who spoke in a “Compass: Progress, Status, and Future Outlook” workshop as part of ION GNSS and the CGSIC meetings in Portland in September.

    The ICD has been rumored to be available previously to receiver manufacturers within China, creating some disgruntlement among companies outside the country. One of the workshop panelists affirmed that GPS/Compass chips and receivers are being actively developed by many Chinese manufacturers and research institutes.

    The ICD announcement came among many valuable pieces of information presented during the pre-ION workshop, sponsored by the International Association of Chinese Professionals in Global Positioning Systems. The workshop was chaired by Jade Morton, professor of electrical and computer engineering at Miami University, Ohio.

    Dr. Xiancheng Ding of the Beidou Program Office described Compass as a demo system in transition to an operating navigation system. Two more satellites will launch in 2011, making a total of five new space vehicles this year,as part of a total “simple navigational system” of nine satellites that has been built up, and what is termed a “test system” over the Asia-Pacific region, to be complete by the end of the year.

    Five more satellites will rise into orbit in 2012, and the system will graduallly extend its coverage and improve its performance. Compass will start official regional service by the end of 2012, meeting user requirements in the Asia-Pacific region.

    ICD document v1.0 will be published in 2011, and probably in the month of October. It will be available for international download on the Compass website, www.beidou.gov.cn (as yet without an English version), also at www.compass.gov.cn.

    There was some disagreement among panelists as to the final targeted number of satellites in the system: either 30, or 35. Subsequent comments indicated that much of the structure may still be under discussion. The impression given was very much of a dynamic system in formation and growing rapidly.

    In a presentation on “preliminary Results of GPS/Compass Integrated Positioning and Navigation,” Dr. Uanxi Yang of China’s National Administration of GNSS and Applications reported integrated navigation with a Unicore UB 240 Compass/GPS receiver, and also mentioned a Shanghai Huace Compass/GPS receiver. Some systematic errors in Compass positioning were reported, and attributed to the sparse satellite distribution currently.

    Dr. Yang concluded with the exhortation, “Reasonable Wishes for Compass!” emphasizing the desire of the delegation to continue working hard on, but with realistic expectations for, the new system.

  • INTERGEO 2011: The World’s Largest Geospatial Conference

    INTERGEO, held in Germany every year, is the best all-around geospatial conference that allows vendors to showcase their technologies. With ~17,500 attendees, it’s certainly the largest geospatial conference in the world. From my experience, it’s also the best.

    Simply, INTERGEO attracts vendors who offer a collection of technologies from GPS/GNSS to remote sensing, 3D scanners, and mapping software that would satisfy the curiosity and needs of any geospatial professional. As I wrote last year, don’t expect to be tied up in sessions, this is a trade show where people come to visit the vendor booths, and the foot traffic is non-stop.The display booths are fantastic. Check out Topcon’s booth below. The seating looks like the airliner I flew in to Germany on.

    Topcon introducing Magnet, their Cloud-Based Precise Positioning Solution

    Lidar data processing and management software, such as Terrasolid’s solution, was common at INTERGEO. As the cost of high-precision data becomes much cheaper to collect, the bottle-neck becomes data processing and management.

    Lidar data management

    3D mobile mapping was a hot topic. This 3D Laser Mapping vehicle was used to help assess damage in Japan after the March 11, 2011 earthquake.

    3D scanning autos were abound on the trade show floor

    The world’s leading GNSS receiver manufacturers attend in full force. You’ll see every major vendor.

    Javad GNSS displaying their receivers as well as their new iPad app

    As expected and reported over the past few years, the market for machine control products is developing and expanding. There were a number of interesting displays, including this one from Moba AG.

    Demonstration of Moba’s excavator machine control system

    UAV’s (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) also continue to be a hot topic. The benefits of UAV for remote sensing geospatial activities are clear. What’s not clear is the commercial adoption of UAVs for mapping. Europe and other countries have been much more progressive than the U.S., which still severely limits the use of UAVs for non-government and non-university activities.

    UAV Mapping Vehicle Supplier Gatewing

    Of course, BIM (Building Information Modeling) is another significant trend and there were no lack of vendors at INTERGEO on that topic. The GIS world has just started to get a handle on mapping outdoors while indoor mapping is vastly untouched. OrthoGraph displays their indoor mapping app for the iPad.

    OrthoGraph Architect for iPad

    I heard some good things about OpenStreetMap. I’ve written about OSM before. Take a look at their website when you have a chance. Also exhibiting was OpenSeaMap.

    Open Street Map stand

    At the Nuremberg Messe, there was plenty of space to accommodate the ~17,500 attendees as well as an outdoor demonstration area.

    INTERGEO 2011 outdoor demonstration area

    On the second day of the INTERGEO conference, the Forum for Satellite Navigation (SatNav-Forum) held its one-day meeting. This was the first time it was co-located with INTERGEO. You can view the agenda here, though it’s in German so you’ll need to use an online translator. Note that yours truly gave a short presentation in the afternoon. Some Galileo literature I read tried to make the point that Galileo is superior to GPS and GLONASS. I tried to make the point that GPS and Galileo (Europe’s GPS) are complimentary systems, not competitive systems. By using both GPS and Galileo, high-precision horizontal and vertical data will be very easy and inexpensive to collect in the future. I hope I made my point.

    SatNav-Forum display at INTERGEO

    Back to the INTERGEO conference. If your company manufacturers something related to geospatial hardware or software, you’re making a big mistake if you are not attending INTERGEO. This is, by far, the single best conference in the world to attend in order to understand the latest trends and developments in GIS, surveying, engineering, and all other geospatial-related disciplines.

     

    Thanks, and see you next week.
    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric
  • Spectracom Debuts New GNSS Simulator Capabilities at ION-GNSS

    PORTLAND, Oregon — Spectracom announced at the ION-GNSS conference the introduction of new capabilities for its GSG line of GPS GNSS constellation simulators. These features reinforce Spectracom’s offerings for flexible, user-friendly, and affordable characterization and test of GPS and GNSS devices and systems. Key features include:

    • GLONASS+GPS capability: the first in a line of GNSS simulators to simultaneously reproduce multiple GNSS signals, in accurate synchronization, for testing the latest multi-constellation receivers.
    • The introduction of GSG StudioView PC software to provide easy creation and editing of simulation scenarios including a Google Maps-based trajectory builder.
    • The ability to support very high velocity and acceleration simulations for aerospace applications.
    • A web browser interface for easy remote control and monitoring of the simulator.

    Designed with development and test engineers in mind, the GSG-54 8-channel simulator and GSG-55 16-channel simulator support quick and efficient qualification of designs and performance under virtually any condition unlike live-sky or record-and-replay solutions, Spectracom said. Together with the simplicity, portability, and repeatability, users can run more tests, and extend the test set-up into manufacturing and final test environments.

    “As the integration of GPS receivers continue to proliferate in a wide range of devices, engineers need efficient and practical solutions to qualify the robustness of their designs and final assembled products. We understand the importance value plays in GPS and GNSS test solutions and are excited to introduce the ability to readily test complex scenarios at a price under $20K,” said Spectracom chief technical officer John Fischer.

    As a part of Spectracom’s focus on supporting fast and efficient test operations, the company also announced GSG StudioView PC software. In addition to Spectracom’s GSG simulators capability of configuration and operation without the need for an external computer, GSG StudioView allows users to build and manage complex simulation scenarios including visual trajectories. It also supports the import and conversion of trajectory files from other software applications and devices such as Google Earth.

    Spectracom also announced the new model GSG-56 GNSS constellation simulator with support for GPS and GLONASS receivers. “We understand the importance of the industry trend to augment GPS and ensure a high degree of reliability and affordability of new products and services that depend on new GNSS constellations,” said Lisa Withers, Spectracom president and CEO. “Toward that end, we believe our newly expanded line of simulators will stand up to these challenges and with the new GSG-56 provide easy access to test multiple GNSS receivers.” Availability of the GSG-56 is slated for the first quarter of 2012.

    The ION-GNSS conference runs September 21-23 at the Portland Convention Center. Spectracom is exhibiting with its sister company, SpectraTime, in booth #718.

  • Countdown to Galileo Launch via Soyuz Rocket Under Way


    Assembly of the three-stage Soyuz takes place. The Soyuz will carry the first two Galileo satellites into orbit. (Photo courtesy of ESA.)

     

    The first Soyuz flight from Europe’s Spaceport in French Guiana will carry the first two satellites of Europe’s Galileo navigation system into orbit on October 20, and the European Space Agency is reporting on the preparations.

    On September 12, final assembly began on the three-stage Soyuz ST-B, consisting of four first-stage boosters clustered around the core second stage, topped off by the third stage. The Launcher Flight Readiness Review in July gave the green light to begin assembling the rocket.

    The campaign began on August 16 in the assembly and testing building — known by its original "MIK" Russian acronym — with electrical and mechanical tests of the upgraded, reignitable Fregat-MT upper stage. It will carry an additional 900 kg of propellants for its double-satellite load. Fregat was then moved to the Payload Preparation Building S3B to fill its four spherical propellant tanks.

    Soyuz will be rolled out horizontally to the launch pad on October 14 and raised into its vertical launch position. A new 45-meter-tall mobile gantry was built specifically for Soyuz operations in French Guiana. It protects the satellites and the launcher from the humid tropical environment and provides access to the Soyuz at various levels for checkout activities. The upper composite, comprising the Fregat upper stage, payload and fairing, is then hoisted on top of Soyuz.

    October’s launch will be doubly historic: the first Soyuz from a spaceport outside of Baikonur in Kazakhstan or Plesetsk in Russia and the start of building Europe’s Galileo satnav constellation. The two Galileo satellites have arrived from the Rome facility of Thales Alenia Space Italy — the first on September 7, the second on September 14 — and are undergoing initial preparations.
       
    The next step will be to attach the satellites to Fregat, followed by the fairing.

    Next year, the second pair of satellites will join them in orbit, proving the design of the Galileo system in advance of the other 26 satellites. These first four satellites, built by a consortium led by EADS Astrium Germany, will form the operational nucleus of the full Galileo satnav constellation. They combine the best atomic clock ever flown for navigation — accurate to one second in three million years — with a powerful transmitter to broadcast precise navigation data worldwide, ESA reports.

  • In-Car Connectivity, Not a Smartphone on Wheels

    The 2011 Frankfurt Motor Show is underway. The Ford Evos concept car is having its debut and overtakes the company’s Sync offering, with a high level of social networking and connectivity features. A departure from the Sync approach of vehicles as smartphones on wheels, this plug-in hybrid is designed to always be connected to the cloud. Some of the distractibility found in the Sync has been diminished. The driver’s “personal cloud” makes automatic adjustments to music, temperature, traffic checks, and navigation that reflect learned personal choices of the driver and her schedule. Hooking a car up to the cloud comes with significant risks. Moving from stand-alone isolated in-vehicle systems to the connected network world carries the threat of being hacked and exposed to viruses. iSec researchers demonstrated unlocking and starting a car by sending text messages to its alarm system. The problem, however, is much broader than having a car stolen.

    White Flag. The industry has surrendered mobile check-in to Foursquare. It isn’t often one gets to report on a Facebook failure, but after one year of disappointing traction, the company has abandoned Places. A location-based social network offering, Facebook Places allowed users to share location at venues, and see who among their contacts were checked in nearby. When Places launched a year ago, it wasn’t clear if start-ups like Foursquare, Gowalla, and Whrrl could compete with Facebook. Yet the day following the Facebook Places launch, Foursquare sign-ups swelled with a record number of new users. Dennis Crowley of Foursquare asserts that they have captured 10 million users by “being about what people are currently doing,” while Facebook records what people have done in the past. Facebook users won’t be able to check in, but can add location to a tag.

    No More Gowalla Badges. Unable to compete with Foursquare on check-ins alone, Gowalla is shedding some of its check-in bells and whistles and adding social travel guides for travelers. These location-based communities emphasize image sharing and storytelling and are now available in 60 cities worldwide. Gowalla is also featuring content from National Geographic and other travel-oriented sites.

    Looking for Metrics. Local, location-based search is a key driver for mobile advertising. Google has 200 million active mobile map users in more than 100 countries. Navigation is search’s bosom buddy. “In general, I think you can look at navigation as a type of conversion, for example, after searching for directions,” says Suroijit Chatterjee of Goggle, as reported by The Where Business. “Better attribution models are needed, however, in order for revenue generation to develop further.”

    Fourth Amendment and Location: Law and Order Edition. In November, the Supreme Court will hear the most important fourth amendment case in years, and it is all about location. The question is whether the police need a warrant to attach a GPS device to a suspect’s vehicle and track movements. The court case arose from an investigation of a Washington man who was suspected of being part of a cocaine selling operation. The police had obtained a search warrant, but installed the tracking device one day late.

    Literary Location Judges. Recent rulings from judges across the country that have included tracking of cell phone locations have sided with protection of privacy. It is common for judges to invoke George Orwell’s 1984 and its depiction of a futuristic police state that keeps citizens under constant surveillance. In November, the Supreme Court Judges will address the specific question of whether the placement of a tracking device on a vehicle qualifies as a search, and if the surveillance by location technology is different from conventional methods such as tailing suspects and stake-outs, which do not require a warrant.

    Navv Revamps. Navv has recreated itself in the navigation industry by adding social networking into its personal navigation offering. Users can share their locations, itineraries, or current routes to their Facebook wall, directly from the app. Check-ins via Foursquare are automated. In March, the Navv navigation app was removed from the Apple App Store in a now-resolved argument with Apple over rights to the navigation app’s name.

    Mark your Calendar. Don’t miss LocNav 2011, October 18-19 in San Jose. The Where Business has co-located its annual Location Business Summit and Navigation conferences to create an even bigger show. I’ll be moderating the panel, “Connecting People Places and Things: Advertising and Social Networking in the Location Ecosystem.” My guests include executives form Expedia, Nokia, Yahoo, and A&G. See you there.

    The October issue of Wireless Pulse will be published one week later than usual to allow reporting on the LocNav show.

  • LightSquared’s Toughest Week So Far

    Like a bad week on the stock exchange, LightSquared hit speed bump after speed bump this week. After Monday when the company boldly claimed there would “be a resolution within a month” to the GPS interference problem, the FCC spanked them Tuesday by ordering more testing. The rest of the week turned even more sour.

    First of all, if you want a good backgrounder on the issue as it relates to the high-precision GPS/GNSS user, you can view my webinar “LightSquared: What It Means To the GPS Surveying/Mapping Community.”

    The issue really isn’t about blame, which is how LightSquared is trying to frame it with the “the GPS industry knew about it” argument. The fact is that hundreds of thousands (LightSquared estimates 750,000 to 1 million) of high-precision GPS receivers would be affected. These are high-end receivers valued at thousands and tens of thousands of dollars each.

    This week (September 12-16), things turned sour for LightSquared. Most alarming is that it really demonstrated how flakey LightSquared’s thought process is, thus substantially reducing the company’s credibility.

    Monday

    On Monday, it was reported that LightSquared said it was confident the FCC would make a decision in the next month. LightSquared Executive VP Martin Harriman said Monday at the Mobile Future Conference “We are at the end of the process and we expect the FCC to make a decision. We have made some big concessions… Sprint wouldn’t sign this big deal if it didn’t expect it to be resolved. I expect there to be a resolution in the next month.”

    Does he really think people are that stupid? Obviously, Sprint would love to have $9 billion of LightSquared’s money, but I guarantee the contract is contingent upon LightSquared gaining approval from the FCC. If I was Sprint, I’d sign it, too. There’s no downside for Sprint to sign the deal!

    After LightSquared’s statement on Monday, the week started going downhill in a hurry for the company.

    Tuesday

    On Tuesday, a day after LightSquared applied pressure and said it “expects the FCC to make a decision,” the FCC threw LightSquared a right jab by issuing a Public Notice stating that further testing is needed to understand the impact of LightSquared’s latest proposal. Following is from the FCC’s Public Notice:

    “This Public Notice is issued pursuant to the provision of LightSquared Subsidiary LLC’s (LightSquared) conditional Ancillary Terrestrial Component (ATC) authorization that LightSquared may not commence ATC operations until the Commission, in consultation with the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), finds that Global Positioning System (GPS) interference concerns have been satisfactorily resolved. Following extensive comments received as a result of the technical working group process required by the International Bureau’s Order and Authorization dated January 26, 2011, the Federal Communications Commission, in consultation with NTIA, has determined that additional targeted testing is needed to ensure that any potential commercial terrestrial services offered by LightSquared will not cause harmful interference to GPS operations.”

    Furthermore, the FCC Public Notice stated:

    “LightSquared submitted proposed mitigation techniques to remedy the interference to GPS simultaneously with the technical working group final report. Notably, LightSquared proposed to revise its planned deployment to operate terrestrial transmitters only in the lower 10 MHz of its spectrum. The results thus far from the testing using the lower 10 MHz showed significant improvement compared to tests of the upper 10 MHz, although there continue to be interference concerns, e.g., with certain types of high precision GPS receivers, including devices used in national security and aviation applications.Additional tests are therefore necessary.”

    It was a no-brainer that the FCC would take this route. It really makes one wonder what these LightSquared guys are thinking. Maybe they think if they behave arrogantly enough, they can “will it” to happen?

    Wednesday

    This story got even better on Wednesday.

    On Wednesday, LightSquared representatives announced that they miraculously “found the solution” to the GPS interference problem with Jeff Carlisle stating, “We have a proof of concept that uses current technology and equipment that is available today and is affordable.” Riiiiight. Obviously, this guy never ran a product development project. He has nothing but a conceptual idea of how the problem might be solved. He further stated that LightSquared’s solution can be placed into production within several months.

    Implementing in the field is a lot different than proving a concept in a lab. Several months? Are you kidding me? Dude, you can’t even get your testing done on all the different GPS makes/models in “several months.” You can’t responsibly test your design concept in “several months,” and you’re already talking about going into mass production in “several months”? Honestly, I’ve lost a lot of respect for LightSquared this week.

    The Technical Working Group (TWG) didn’t test all makes/models of receivers that would be affected, only a sample set. In fact, just like LightSquared’s lack of due diligence in researching the GPS markets to begin with, the company’s doing enough now just to slide by, taking the shortest cut possible. I guarantee you it will be a disaster for the high-precision GPS markets if the LightSquared guys are granted permission to move forward, given their attitude and behavior. Responsible design engineers don’t behave this way. In fact, I’m guessing the design engineer(s) behind the scenes at LightSquared cringe whenever LightSquared executives (e.g., lawyers) make these kinds of flakey statements.

    OK, let’s think about LightSquared’s “fix” for a minute. For sure, it’s going to be a hardware accessory and/or a new antenna, or both. Think about all the high-performance GPS handhelds on the market (Trimble GeoXT/XH, Ashtech ProMark, Mobile Mapper, etc.). Are they really going to suggest a LightSquared “clip-on” accessory for those handheld units? Seriously? How about replacing antennas on CORS? New antennas would need to be characterized by NGS. That’s just the tip of the iceberg. All of this in “several months”?

    I’ve been pretty open-minded about LightSquared proposing a solution, but this really insults our intelligence. But as we’ve seen previously with LightSquared, it’s not about finding a practical solution for the GPS user community; it’s all about selling an idea to the FCC. The problem is that the FCC doesn’t have to live with LightSquared’s half-baked “solution,” we do.

    Ok, that’s about enough news on LightSquared for the week, right?

    Not a chance.

    Thursday

    On Thursday, The Daily Beast reported that General William Shelton, commander of the U.S. Space Command, said in a classified briefing that the White House tried to pressure him to change his testimony to make it more favorable to LightSquared.

    The Daily Beast reported that Shelton’s prepared testimony was leaked in advance to LightSquared. Reports the website, “The White House asked the general to alter the testimony to add two points
    : that the general supported the White House policy to add more broadband for commercial use; and that the Pentagon would try to resolve the questions around LightSquared with testing in just 90 days. Shelton chafed at the intervention, which seemed to soften the Pentagon’s position and might be viewed as helping the company as it tries to get the project launched, the officials said.”

    The White House confirmed Wednesday that its Office of Management and Budget suggested changes to the general’s testimony but insisted such reviews are routine and not influenced by politics. And it said Shelton will be permitted to give the testimony he wants, without any pressure.

    Kudos to General Shelton for speaking out. His career will likely take a hit for this, especially if this turns into a major political scandal.

    Subsequently, the National Journal reported that Congressman Mike Turner (R-OH), a member of the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, said at a hearing of the Strategic Force panel:

    “In my capacity as a member of the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, I will be asking Chairman Issa [Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif.] and Ranking Member Towns [Rep. Edolphus Towns, D-N.Y.] to promptly investigate this matter.”

    Also on Thursday, Congressman Tom Petri (R-WI) spanked LightSquared for its advertisement in the Wall Street Journal. In response to LightSquared’s claim that the GPS industry is to blame, Petri wrote:

    “This ignores the fact that GPS was located on this part of the spectrum long before LightSquared devised its plan to employ a terrestrial network within the Satellite band of radio spectrum.

    “In fact, your spectrum was purchased at bargain prices because it was not intended for terrestrial operations,” Petri continued.  “If it were always intended for such use, it would have been of much higher value. It became high-value spectrum when it became clear that LightSquared’s business plan was to abuse the ancillary terrestrial authorization and use the spectrum for terrestrial based operations — a radical change to the intended use of spectrum.

    “I would suggest that it is LightSquared using a part of the spectrum for inappropriate purposes that has led to this dilemma,” Petri wrote.  “Don’t blame GPS, a service that is vital to our national security, aviation safety and efficiency, serves billions of users and the overall public good.”

    Friday

    Rounding out the week, on Friday one of Fox News’ lead stories was titled “General Reported He Was Pressured on Testimony About White House-backed Project, Sources Say.” This is a good thing. There’s no way LightSquared is going to fly under the radar at this point.

     

    Rally Organized to Protest Potential GPS Band Interference by LightSquared

    Gavin Schrock, administrator of the Washington State RTK Network (WSRN) consisting of nearly 100 GNSS reference stations, is helping organize a rally to be held on September 22 at 8:30 a.m. in front of the Jackson Federal Building in Seattle. The rally is intended to support GPS and express concerns over a controversial application by LightSquared being considered by the FCC that would cause substantial interference for GPS users.

    He says similar rallies for the same day are being organized in other cities. “These rallies are in support of GPS as a critical public resource, and to voice end user concerns over the proposal being considered by the FCC that could cause damaging interference for high-precision GPS for end users like surveyors, aviation, construction, science, industry, and public safety (a.k.a. the “LightSquared” issue),” Schrock said.

    “The rallies are being spearheaded by surveyors and surveying associations, but other end-user segments are pitching in, like precision agriculture, academia, aviation, and public safety. This is purely grassroots about this specific issue with no other agenda,” he said.

    When I mentioned to him the rally is taking place during the week of the Institute of Navigation (ION) GNSS technical conference in Portland, OR, he said it was planned that way. Good idea. In fact, on Wednesday evening during the ION conference, there’s a LightSquared Discussion Panel taking place (see below).

     

    LightSquared Discussion Panel Next Week at the Institute of Navigation (ION) GNSS Conference

    The discussion panel will be held during the ION-GNSS conference at the Oregon Convention Center, 5:30 p.m.-7:00 p.m. Titled “Can LightSquared and GPS Coexist?”, the session will be moderated by GPS industry veteran Tom Stansell with the panel including:

    Michael Swiek – U.S. GPS Industry Council

    Bruce Peetz – Vice President Advanced Technology and Systems, Trimble Navigation Ltd

    Scott Burgett – Software Engineering Manger – Garmin Ltd

    Patrick Fenton – Chief Technology Officer – NovAtel Inc

    Dr. Paul Galyean – Director of Precise Positioning Systems – Deere & Co./NavCom

    Doug Smith – Chief Network Officer – LightSquared

    Greg Turetzky – Marketing Director for New Technology and IP –  CSR/SiRF

    According to Tom, “this ION meeting will be fairly technical in nature, with panelists talking about the test results and their implications”.

    I will be present at the event and possibly assisting Tom in facilitating the discussions (e.g., microphone runner). Follow my Twitter account if you want to follow the event closely.

    It’s a good mix of very knowledgeable people who can intimately discuss many applications of GPS/GNSS technology, from agriculture and surveying/mapping to consumer applications.

    Each panel member will be allotted ten minutes or less, followed by a Q&A session.

     

    Getting the latest GPS/GNSS (not just LightSquared) news

    If you haven’t signed up for Twitter, please consider it. It’s become a very popular method of getting relevant news quickly. I’ve been using it a lot to blog about conferences and events I’ve been attending. I’m able to attached photos to my Twitter messages to bring you closer to what I’m experiencing. Earlier this week, I was at the Field Technology Conference which I helped organize and sent quite a few Twitter messages with photos about the technical presentations. If your travel budget has been hit hard and you can’t attend conferences you’d like, this is a great way to stay connected to leading edge subjects being discussed at conferences.

    I’ll be sending tweets frequently from the ION GNSS conference next week and the INTERGEO conference the week after.

    You can sign up for a free Twitter account here.

     

    U.S House Committee Committee on Science, Space, Technology “Full Committee Hearing – Impacts of the LightSquared Network” – September 8, 2011

    If you have a chance, listen to all or parts of this hearing:

    Testimony is given by:

     

    Mr. Anthony Russo, Director, The National Coordination Office for Space-Based Positioning, Navigation, and Timing

    Ms. Mary Glackin, Deputy Under Secretary, National Oceanic and Atmosph
    eric Administration

    Dr. Victor Sparrow, Director, Spectrum Policy, Space Communications and Navigation, Space Operations Mission Directorate, National Aeronautics and Space Administration

    Mr. Peter Appel, Administrator, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, Department of Transportation

    Dr. David Applegate, Associate Director, Natural Hazards, U.S. Geological Survey

    Jeffrey J. Carlisle, Executive Vice President, Regulatory Affairs and Public Policy, LightSquared

    Dr. Scott Pace, Director, Space Policy Institute, George Washington University

     

    U.S. House Armed Services Committee Hearing on “Sustaining GPS for National Security – September 15, 2011

     

    If you have a chance, listen to all or parts of this hearing:

    Testimony is given by:

     

    General William L. Shelton, Commander, U.S. Air Force Space Command

    Ms. Teresa M. Takai, Chief Information Officer, U.S. Department of Defense

    Mr. Karl Nebbia, Associate Administrator, Office of Spectrum Management, National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce

    Mr. Anthony J. Russo, National Coordination Office, Space-Based Positioning, Navigation and Training, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

    Mr. Julius Knapp, Chief of the Office of Engineering Technology, Federal Communications Commission

     

     

    Thanks, and see you next time.
    Follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/GPSGIS_Eric
  • USSOCOM Camp Roberts: Where Engineers and Operators Meet to View New Technology

    image001Four weeks ago I attended a USSOCOM and Navy Post Graduate School event known simply as Camp Roberts TNT. Located in a remote part of the California Central Valley near the town of Paso Robles, the best way to describe Camp Roberts is that it’s like a Boy Scout Jamboree for engineers, scientists, and military operators. However, Camp Roberts focuses on the serious business of Special Operations that was made even more somber by the loss of 30 Navy SEALS the day before the start of the event.

    Sunday, as I was packing to go to Camp Roberts, I couldn’t help but reflect on the loss of the Special Operations team that day. I knew that throughout the country there were 30 Navy and Marine Corps officers putting on their dress uniforms to personally deliver the most horrific news a family can get. Each officer held a message that would turn into a dagger which would penetrate and twist in the heart of a mother, wife, or children. At Camp Roberts many attendees had personal connections to the lost troops but everyone hunkered down to the business at hand.

    The USSOCOM Camp Roberts TNT (Tactical Network Testbed) was well attended with more than 850 registered attendees. Camp Roberts is about 15 miles from the charming wine country town of Paso Robles. The camp is mostly dirt roads and gravel, 42 degrees in the morning up to 98 by noon. There are two primary buildings (double wides): a large briefing room that was designed for about 80 but packed with 200, and the TOC (Tactical Operations Center) with numerous flat screens showing different displays depending on who was demonstrating.

    image003Unlike trade shows, TNT is mostly live equipment demos, outside, in the dirt with very informal discussions. But unlike contract delivery testing, perfection was not expected since some of the equipment was still in the development stage. Uniform of the day was khakis, jeans, T-shirts, polo shirts, caps and water bottles. Lunch was a vendor tent with hot dogs, chips and drinks. TNT has become so popular, that other COCOMs are looking to start their own.

    Every morning there was a group meeting led by Dr. Buettner (NPS, retired Navy) who heads up the TNT effort. The staff reviews the plan of the day, demos, weather, safety (heat, snakes, foxes, elk, moving equipment, etc.) and logistics. Each participant quickly explains their demo, time, and location. I highlighted my 30-minute lunch time session on oblique imagery. Dr. Buettner, who has a dry sense of humor, interjected that I may or may not be there in November with a live aircraft demo if the audience gives me a thumbs down. I had good attendance at my presentation and closed by asking for a show of hands if we should come back in November for a live aircraft capture demo. Fortunately all hands went up, which I was quick to point out to Dr. Buettner. He muttered something about old Navy guys being mission focused.

    The majority of demonstrations focused on communications equipment ranging from very secure high bandwidth line of sight to satellite up and down links. Although there was a schedule, the schedule was done primarily to prevent frequency interference so demonstrators had a clean hour or two. Most of the demos went on all day as attendees walked from one tent to another or to remote locations on the base.

    image005

    Ball Aerospace highlighted geospatial technology. Ball had helicopter flying overhead carrying its Flash liDAR system downloading imagery and 3D data.

    For those of you not familiar with Flash LiDAR, it is what the name implies. Rather than a raster point scan the Flash LiDAR shoot all points at once. That permits the union of other data such as full-motion video with the 3D data of the Flash LiDAR. Therefore, 3D video on the fly. Their field of view is was a relatively narrow but engineers are working to widen it.

    image007

    Outside the two main buildings were numerous companies set up under pop-up canopies ranging from Lockheed Martin and Harris with high-end communications gear.

    image009

    Shown here are two battery powered UA’s. The helos with installed video cameras have loiter times of up to 45 minutes. There were many examples of wireless handheld com gear and high bandwidth Line of Sight transmission devices such as the example below.

    image011

    image013

    There was a demonstration of paint-on antennas that turn trees or wall into an antenna and very compact fuel cells shown here.

    image015

    ITT had a field demonstration of a two-way audio/video link designed for corpsman operating in remote locations. The corpsman wore a vest that contained mics, earphones and a video camera (the white device on this man’s vest). The entire system was very light and unobtrusive. It permitted multiple corpsmen to communicate directly with mobile field locations or even a specialist in a hospital. The doctor could see exactly what the corpsman was seeing and give the corpsman directions real time and hands free. This also permitted the doctor to make advance preparations to receive the patient when he was medevaced.

    image017

    All during the field exercise each corpsman was tracked via GIS on an image base map. The tracking and communications were never lost even though the corpsmen were traveling behind hills with no line of sight to the mobile bases. This was accomplished through a system of local and satellite communications that reached back to Reston, Virginia. I could see that this would be beneficial for domestic first responders as well as the military. The quality of the video being sent from the corpsman was extremely good and the GIS display at the mobile base station tracked their movements very accurately.

    Camp Roberts is unique in that it’s not a “sound clip” marketing bombardment like most trade shows. Since attendance is by invitation only, marketing is discouraged. What does happen are informal and in-depth discussions between field operators and engineers. Attendees get a chance to see equipment in action and exchange ideas freely. I felt lucky to be invited and hope that I can do some small part to help our troops accomplish their missions.

    image019

    Photos: Art Kalinski