Recent Advances in Realizing the Terrestrial Reference System from GPS

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
RESULTS Time Scale Stability Time Scale Stability The instability of the new time scale compared to the old was calculated using the Hadamard deviation.
Advertisements

2006 AGU Fall Meeting. 14 Dec. 2006, San Francisco – Poster #G43A-0985 Jim Ray (NOAA/NGS), Tonie van Dam (U. Luxembourg), Zuheir Altamimi (IGN), Xavier.
Principles of the Global Positioning System Lecture 19 Prof. Thomas Herring Room A;
Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences Massachusetts Institute of Technology 77 Massachusetts Avenue | A | Cambridge MA V F.
04/22/02EGS G STABILITY OF GLOBAL GEODETIC RESULTS Prof. Thomas Herring Room ;
POD/Geoid splinter March 14, 2007 J.P. Berthias Ocean Topography Science Team Meeting - Hobart, Australia – March 2007.
Use of Kalman filters in time and frequency analysis John Davis 1st May 2011.
Seasonal Position Variations and Regional Reference Frame Realization Jeff Freymueller Geophysical Institute University of Alaska Fairbanks.
Effect of Surface Loading on Regional Reference Frame Realization Hans-Peter Plag Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology and Seismological Laboratory University.
Jake Griffiths & Jim Ray NOAA/National Geodetic Survey Acknowledgement: Kevin Choi SUBDAILY ALIAS AND DRACONITIC ERRORS IN THE IGS ORBITS Harmonics of.
POD/Geoid Splinter Summary OSTS Meeting, Hobart 2007.
2-3 November 2009NASA Sea Level Workshop1 The Terrestrial Reference Frame and its Impact on Sea Level Change Studies GPS VLBI John Ries Center for Space.
Limits of static processing in a dynamic environment Matt King, Newcastle University, UK.
Excess phase computation S. Casotto, A. Nardo, P. Zoccarato, M. Bardella CISAS, University of Padova.
Sea Level Change Observation Status on the elements of the puzzle Christian Le Provost LEGOS / CNRS Toulouse, France.
Monitoring Jason-1 and TOPEX/POSEIDON from a California Offshore Platform: Latest Results from the Harvest Experiment Bruce Haines and Shailen Desai Jet.
Laser Ranging Contributions to Earth Rotation Studies Richard S. Gross Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Pasadena, CA 91109–8099,
IGS Analysis Center Workshop, Miami Beach, 2-6 June 2008 M. Fritsche, R. Dietrich, A. Rülke Institut für Planetare Geodäsie (IPG), Technische Universität.
Space-Based Satellite Antenna Maps; Impact of Different Satellite Antenna Maps on LEO & Terrestrial Results Bruce Haines, Yoaz Bar-Sever, Willy Bertiger,
GNSS Observations of Earth Orientation Jim Ray, NOAA/NGS 1. Polar motion observability using GNSS – concepts, complications, & error sources – subdaily.
Don P. Chambers Center for Space Research The University of Texas at Austin Understanding Sea-Level Rise and Variability 6-9 June, 2006 Paris, France The.
SVY 207: Lecture 4 GPS Description and Signal Structure
NGS GPS ORBIT DETERMINATION Positioning America for the Future NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION National Ocean Service National Geodetic.
Regional and Global Measurements: The Reference Frame for Understanding Observations Geoff Blewitt University of Nevada, Reno, USA Zuheir Altamimi IGN,
Space Geodesy (1/3) Geodesy provides a foundation for all Earth observations Space geodesy is the use of precise measurements between space objects (e.g.,
GPS derived TEC Measurements for Plasmaspheric Studies: A Tutorial and Recent Results Mark Moldwin LD Zhang, G. Hajj, I. Harris, T. Mannucci, X. PI.
Sea Level Change Measurements: Estimates from Altimeters Understanding Sea Level Rise and Variability June 6-9, 2006 Paris, France R. S. Nerem, University.
The IGS contribution to ITRF2013 – Preliminary results from the IGS repro2 SINEX combinations Paul Rebischung, Bruno Garayt, Xavier Collilieux, Zuheir.
Determination of seasonal geocenter variations from DORIS, GPS and SLR data.
IGS Workshop, June 02, Validation of GNSS Satellite Orbits C. Flohrer, G. Beutler, R. Dach, W. Gurtner, U. Hugentobler 1, S. Schaer, T. Springer.
Case study for the IGS ultra-rapid orbit requirements Jan Douša Miami Beach, June 2-6, 2008.
1 Average time-variable gravity from GPS orbits of recent geodetic satellites VIII Hotine-Marussi Symposium, Rome, Italy, 17–21 June 2013 Aleš Bezděk 1.
01/0000 HEO and Daylight Ranging “Reality and Wishes” Ramesh Govind ILRS Fall Workshop, 4 th October 2005.
AGU Fall meeting Quality assessment of GPS reprocessed Terrestrial Reference Frame 1 IGN/LAREG and GRGS 2 University of Luxembourg X Collilieux.
The ICRF, ITRF and VLBA Chopo Ma NASA’s Goddard Spaceflight Center.
Earth Sciences Sector SLIDE 1 NAREF & CBN Velocity Solutions for a New Version of SNARF Mike Craymer Joe Henton Mike Piraszewski 8th SNARF Workshop AGU.
Wiesław Kosek 1,2, Agnieszka Wnęk 1, Maria Zbylut 1, Waldemar Popiński 3 1) Environmental Engineering and Land Surveying Department, University of Agriculture.
Geocenter motion estimates from the IGS Analysis Center solutions P. Rebischung, X. Collilieux, Z. Altamimi IGN/LAREG & GRGS 1 EGU General Assembly, Vienna,
Geocenter Variations Derived from GRACE Data Z. Kang, B. Tapley, J. Chen, J. Ries, S. Bettadpur Joint International GSTM and SPP Symposium GFZ Potsdam,
1/16 ITRF2008-P: Some evaluation elements and impact on IGS RF products Paul Rebischung, Bruno Garayt, 16 April 2010 ITRF2008-P: SOME EVALUATION ELEMENTS.
IGS Workshop 2008, June 2-6, Miami Beach First activities of the IGS Antenna Working Group — Comparison of ground- and space-based satellite antenna maps.
Do Annual Geopotential Variations Affect IGS Products ? J. Ray NOAA/NGS with major help from S. Bettadpur, J. Ries U. Texas/CSR T.-S. Bae Sejong U. X.
Earth Surface and Interior Focus Area Space Geodetic Networks for Maintaining the Reference Frame Geodesy's Critical Contributions to NASA (Earth Science)
What Makes a GNSS Signal the IGS Analysis Center Workshop 2-6 June 2008, Miami Beach Larry Young (not an expert, just a user) Jet Propulsion Lab.
Hobart Australia March 2007Willy Bertiger Ocean Surface Topography Science Team Meeting GPS-Based Precise Orbit Determination: Jason-1 Status Willy Bertiger,
AGU Fall MeetingDec 11-15, 2006San Francisco, CA Estimates of the precision of GPS radio occultations from the FORMOSAT-3/COSMIC mission Bill Schreiner,
GRACE Science Team Meeting October 15-17, 2007 Potsdam Germany Alternative Gravity Field Representations: Solutions, Characteristics, and Issues Michael.
1 SVY 207: Lecture 12 Modes of GPS Positioning Aim of this lecture: –To review and compare methods of static positioning, and introduce methods for kinematic.
Don Chambers Center for Space Research, The University of Texas at Austin Josh Willis Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology R.
(c) 2009 California Institute of Technology. Government sponsorship acknowledged. Improving Predictions of the Earth’s Rotation Using Oceanic Angular Momentum.
View on GPS and Galileo ‘From across the Atlantic…’ Ruth E. Neilan International GNSS Service (IGS) Central Bureau Jet Propulsion Laboratory/California.
Water vapour estimates over Antarctica from 12 years of globally reprocessed GPS solutions Ian Thomas, Matt King, Peter Clarke Newcastle University, UK.
Improving GPS RO Stratospheric Retrieval for Climate Benchmarking Chi O. Ao 1, Anthony J. Mannucci 1, E. Robert Kursinski 2 1 Jet Propulsion Laboratory,
Workshop, Miami, June 2008 IGS Contribution to ITRF Zuheir Altamimi & Xavier Collilieux IGN, France.
12/12/01Fall AGU Vertical Reference Frames for Sea Level Monitoring Thomas Herring Department of Earth, Atmosphere and Planetary Sciences
Validation of the TMR and JMR Wet Path delay Measurements using GPS, SSM/I, and TMI Shailen Desai Shannon Brown Bruce Haines Wenwen Lu Victor Zlotnicki.
OSTST Meeting, Hobart, Australia, March 12-15, 2007 On the use of temporal gravity field models derived from GRACE for altimeter satellite orbit determination.
Terrestrial Reference Frame Effects on Global Sea Level Rise determination from TOPEX/Poseidon altimetric data Laurent Morel a, Pascal Willis b,c a Ecole.
Jason-1 POD reprocessing at CNES Current status and further developments L. Cerri, S. Houry, P. Perrachon, F. Mercier. J.P. Berthias with entries from.
Insensitivity of GNSS to geocenter motion through the network shift approach Paul Rebischung, Zuheir Altamimi, Tim Springer AGU Fall Meeting 2013, San.
29 August 2005Geosciences Australia1 Space Geodesy, SLR and Global Sea Level Change John Ries Canberra, Australia August 29,,2005.
Formosat-3/COSMIC WorkshopNov 28 - Dec 1, 2006Taipei, Taiwan Estimates of the precision of LEO orbit determination and GPS radio occultations from the.
AXK/JPL SBAS Training at Stanford University, October 27-30, 2003 Satellite Based Augmentation Systems Brazilian Ionosphere Group Training at Stanford.
Limits of static processing in a dynamic environment Matt King, Newcastle University, UK.
Interminimum Changes in Global Total Electron Content and Neutral Mass Density John Emmert, Sarah McDonald Space Science Division, Naval Research Lab Anthony.
Astronomical Institute University of Bern 1 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern, Switzerland * now at PosiTim, Germany 5th International GOCE User.
Limits of static processing in a dynamic environment Matt King, Newcastle University, UK.
Aurore Sibois and Shailen Desai
Reference Frame Representations: The ITRF from the user perspective
X SERBIAN-BULGARIAN ASTRONOMICAL CONFERENCE 30 MAY - 3 JUNE, 2016, BELGRADE, SERBIA EARTH ORIENTATION PARAMETERS AND GRAVITY VARIATIONS DETERMINED FROM.
Presentation transcript:

Recent Advances in Realizing the Terrestrial Reference System from GPS Bruce Haines, Willy Bertiger, Shailen Desai, Nathaniel Harvey, Aurore Sibois and Jan Weiss Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology December 9, 2013 AGU Fall Meeting, San Francisco CA © 2013 California Institute of Technology. Government sponsorship acknowledged.

Motivation Realize the terrestrial reference frame (TRF) using GPS alone. What is the potential contribution of GNSS data in a multi-technique combination? What are the strengths and weaknesses of GPS? What are the uncertainties in current realizations of the ITRF? Foundation of a “GPS-only frame” is accurate modeling of antenna phase variations (APV). All participants in network, but especially the GPS transmit antennas. APV models should be independent of any extant TRF. December 9, 2013 Fall 2013 AGU Meeting BH- 2

Pre-launch LEO APV Calibration Estimated GPS Transmit Antenna APV Calibrating the GPS Transmit Antennas Using Data from Low Earth Orbiters (LEO) Treat LEO as “reference antenna in space” Choose candidate missions to minimize multipath TOPEX/POSEIDON (1992–2005) GRACE (2002–pr.) Use Precise Orbit Determination (POD) to provide constraints Scale constraint from dynamics (GM) No a-priori constraint to TRF (use fiducial-free GPS products) No troposphere Adopt pre-launch antenna APV calibrations of LEO antenna e.g., anechoic, antenna test range Point out Pre-launch LEO APV Calibration Estimated GPS Transmit Antenna APV December 9, 2013 Fall 2013 AGU Meeting BH- 3

Realizing the TRF from GPS: Nominal Longarc Network Solution Strategy Element Selection Time span 1995–2012 (~17 yrs.) Orbit Arc Length 9 days, centered on GPS week (2-d overlap) Number of Terrestrial GPS Stations 40 (selected from stations with choke rings to improve homogeneity) Transmitter Antenna Calibration Model TOPEX-referenced GPS APV model: Block averages for all five GPS s/c antenna types: I, II/IIA, IIR-A, IIR-B/M, IIF Ground Receiver Ant. Calibration Model IGS standard A priori uncertainty on station positions 1 km (“fiducial free”, Heflin et al., 1992) Tracking data 5-min decimated LC (1-cm s), smoothed PC (1 m s) GPS Satellite POD Strategy Two-tiered strategy: –For well modeled satellites: 1 cpr CL accelerations updated every ~36 hr as colored noise (t = 7 d); –For poorly modeled satellites: standard JPL ISGAC approach (more aggressive stochastics). Phase ambiguities Integer resolution Earth orientation parameters 2-hr (random-walk) updates to X, Y pole and UT1–UTC. Internal (GPS) TRF compared to ITRF2008IGb08 using 7-param. Helmert transform. Also called “network shift” approach. December 9, 2013 Fall 2013 AGU Meeting BH- 4

Long-arc Strategy Reduces Correlations Impacting TRF Parameters After 30 Hours with Real-Valued Phase Biases After 9 Days with Ambiguities Resolved 1.0 Ż GPS s/c Z GPS s/c Geocenter Higher Correlation 0.5 1 cpr GPS s/c Clocks Ground Clocks GPS s/c Troposphere 0.0 X Y Z X Y Z Formal Uncertainty 5 mm 5 mm 13 mm 1 mm 1 mm 1 mm Formal Uncertainty Geocenter Offset Geocenter Offset December 9, 2013 Fall 2013 AGU Meeting BH- 5

Correlation of Origin Shift? Orbit vs. Network Over 30 candidate solution strategies used to assess uncertainty of origin Based on single 9-d test solution (March 2011). Illustrates sensitivity to different troposphere, POD, antenna phase variation models. Fiducial-free longarc GPS orbit solutions well centered. Based on Helmert transforms to IGS combined orbit solution Sub-mm repeatability in equatorial (XY) plane (few mm along Earth spin axis) Ground network solutions show higher variance in origin shift. Based on Helmert transforms to IGS08 frame. Repeatability of 3–5 mm, despite large inflation of variance vs. orbit shift. December 9, 2013 Fall 2013 AGU Meeting BH- 6

DScale (vs. ITRF2008IGb08) Weekly repeatability of 1.4 mm Stability crucial for studies of global sea level change Drift of +0.1 mm/yr (0.02 ppb/yr) Scale bias of +14 mm (~2 ppb) Affected by choice of antenna models Ensemble local effects (e.g., multipath) also contribute Bias (2005) +14 mm Trend +0.1 mm/yr Annual 0.8 mm Semi Ann 0.6 mm RMS Res 1.4 mm December 9, 2013 Fall 2013 AGU Meeting BH- 7

DX Origin (vs. ITRF2008IGb08) Best determined component Offset of +4 mm at 2005.0 epoch Drift of 0.2 mm/yr Annual geocenter motion: In phase with independent estimate GPS amplitude 1-mm smaller Bias (2005) +4 mm Trend +0.2 mm/yr Annual 1.0 mm RMS Res 4.4 mm Wu, X., et al. (2013): Geocenter Motion and Degree-1 Surface Mass Variations – Reconciling Results from Direct SLR Determination and Inverse Estimation, GRACE Science Team Meeting. December 9, 2013 Fall 2013 AGU Meeting BH- 8

DY Origin (vs. ITRF2008IGb08) Offset of +3 mm at 2005.0 epoch Bias (2005) +3 mm Trend –0.2 mm/yr Annual 4.9 mm RMS Res Offset of +3 mm at 2005.0 epoch Drift of –0.2 mm/yr Annual geocenter motion: In phase with independent estimate GPS amplitude 2-mm larger December 9, 2013 Fall 2013 AGU Meeting BH- 9

DZ Origin (vs. ITRF2008IGb08) Current Strategy Add GRACE LEO to 40-Station Network (3-d Arcs) Add GRACE LEO to 40-Station Network (3-d Arcs) AGU 2012 (Haines et al.) Centering on spin (Z) axis more difficult. Prone to systematic GPS measurement errors (esp. draconitic + overtones). Despite larger periodic errors, long-term stability is excellent. Inclusion of LEO (i.e., GRACE) leads to dramatic improvement. Bias (2005) +17 mm Trend –0.1 mm/yr Annual 8.7 mm Draconitic 12.9 mm RMS Res 10.1 mm Bias (2005) +5 mm Trend –0.4 mm/yr Annual — Draconitic RMS Res 6.3 mm Bias (2005) +7 mm Trend +0.4 mm/yr Annual 3.2 mm Draconitic 6.4 mm RMS Res 10.9 mm December 9, 2013 Fall 2013 AGU Meeting BH- 10

Summary New TRF realization from GPS alone Spans nearly two decades (1995–2012) and includes all (5) GPS satellite blocks. Uses LEO-referenced GPS s/c APV models that are independent of frame. Uses long (9-d) arc solution strategy designed to reduce correlations in GPS data. Long-term stability of GPS origin and scale competitive with current ITRF Scale drift of 0.1 mm yr-1 vs. ITRF2008IGb08 (1995–2012) Offset ~2 ppb (~1 cm) sensitive to ant. calibrations & unmodeled multipath. Origin drift (3D) of 0.3 mm yr-1 vs. ITRF2008IGb08 (1995–2012) Offset of 5 mm in equatorial plane. Offset of 7–17 mm along spin axis, depending on strategy. Agreement of annual geocenter motion with independent estimate: Favorable in equatorial plane for both phase and amplitude Poor along spin axis (dominated by draconitic variations) Inclusion of GRACE in network significantly improves TRF origin (esp. Z) Origin offset (3D) of 6 mm vs. ITRF2008 (2003–2012) Origin drift (3D) of 0.4 mm yr-1 vs. ITRF2008 (2003–2012) Long-arc (9-d) GPS orbit solutions ~2 cm lower than IGS combined orbit Based on 2010–2012 comparisons May lead to further reduction in SLR bias (~2 cm) for GPS35/36 December 9, 2013 Fall 2013 AGU Meeting BH- 11

Next Steps: Additional LEO Data Main benefit of LEO data is improved Z geocenter. Inclusion of GRACE data significantly reduces GPS draconitic errors. Introduces signal at ~324 d (due to GRACE beta prime period?) Underscores importance of using multiple LEOs where possible. Processing of additional LEO data underway: Dual-frequency data TOPEX/Poseidon (1993) help to anchor TRF solutions, and overcome early station distribution problems. Beginning in 2000, CHAMP data are available. Jason-1 (2002–2006) and OSTM/Jason-2 (2008–pr.) provide data from orbits complementary to GRACE. December 9, 2013 Fall 2013 AGU Meeting BH- 12