Jim Ray & Jake Griffiths, NOAA/National Geodetic Survey Xavier Collilieux & Paul Rebischung, IGN/LAREG S UBSEASONAL GNSS P OSITIONING E RRORS Linear rate.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Stratospheric Measurements: Microwave Sounders I. Current Methods – MSU4/AMSU9 Diurnal Adjustment Merging II. Problems and Limitations III. Other AMSU.
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.
Reference Frames for GPS Applications and Research
The Role of GNSS in Modern Reference Frames
3. Geocentre and scale Comparison of weekly and daily IGS reference frames: the first year Peter J Clarke, School of Civil Engineering and Geosciences,
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.
Jim Ray & Jake Griffiths, NOAA/National Geodetic Survey Xavier Collilieux & Paul Rebischung, IGN/LAREG S UBSEASONAL GNSS P OSITIONING E RRORS Linear rate.
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.
Effects of azimuthal multipath heterogeneity and hardware changes on GPS coordinate time series Sibylle Goebell, Matt King
Limits of static processing in a dynamic environment Matt King, Newcastle University, UK.
The IGS contribution to ITRF2014 Paul Rebischung, Bruno Garayt, Zuheir Altamimi, Xavier Collilieux 26th IUGG General Assembly, Prague, 28 June.
Principles of the Global Positioning System Lecture 14 Prof. Thomas Herring Room A;
Jim Ray & Jake Griffiths NOAA/National Geodetic Survey STATUS OF IGS ORBIT MODELING & AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT Earth radiation pressure (albedo) accelerations.
2013 AGU Fall Meeting – 9 December 2013 – San Francisco, CA – Poster #G13B-0933 Status of IGS Core Products J. Griffiths NOAA,
Principles of the Global Positioning System Lecture 11 Prof. Thomas Herring Room A;
GNSS Observations of Earth Orientation Jim Ray, NOAA/NGS 1. Polar motion observability using GNSS – concepts, complications, & error sources – subdaily.
GNSS Observations of Earth Orientation Jim Ray, NOAA/NGS 1. Polar motion observability using GNSS – concepts, complications, & error sources – subdaily.
Jim Ray, NOAA/National Geodetic Survey Xavier Collilieux & Paul Rebischung, IGN/LAREG Tonie van Dam, University of Luxembourg Zuheir Altamimi, IGN/LAREG.
NGS GPS ORBIT DETERMINATION Positioning America for the Future NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION National Ocean Service National Geodetic.
Chapter 8: The future geodetic reference frames Thomas Herring, Hans-Peter Plag, Jim Ray, Zuheir Altamimi.
1/17 REFAG Symposium 6 October 2010 – Marne-la-Vallée, France Recent Results from the IGS Terrestrial Frame Combinations __________________________________________________________________________________________________.
IGS Analysis Center Workshop, 2-6 June 2008, Florida, USA GPS in the ITRF Combination D. Angermann, H. Drewes, M. Krügel, B. Meisel Deutsches Geodätisches.
The IGS contribution to ITRF2013 – Preliminary results from the IGS repro2 SINEX combinations Paul Rebischung, Bruno Garayt, Xavier Collilieux, Zuheir.
Modern Navigation Thomas Herring
IGS Workshop, June 02, Validation of GNSS Satellite Orbits C. Flohrer, G. Beutler, R. Dach, W. Gurtner, U. Hugentobler 1, S. Schaer, T. Springer.
Matt A. King 1, Christopher S. Watson 2 1 School of Civil Engineering and Geosciences, Newcastle University, UK 2 School of Geography.
AGU Fall meeting Quality assessment of GPS reprocessed Terrestrial Reference Frame 1 IGN/LAREG and GRGS 2 University of Luxembourg X Collilieux.
SNARF: Theory and Practice, and Implications Thomas Herring Department of Earth Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, MIT
Calibration of geodetic (dual frequency) GPS receivers Implications for TAI and for the IGS G. Petit.
Making good from bad: Can we use GPS multipath to measure soil moisture? Kristine M. Larson Department of Aerospace Engineering Sciences University of.
ESOC Navigation Support Office IGS Workshop 2008 Miami ESOC IGS Reprocessing T.A. Springer, F. Dilssner, E. Schoenemann, I. Romero, J. Tegedor, F. Pereira,
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.
Issues in GPS Error Analysis What are the sources of the errors ? How much of the error can we remove by better modeling ? Do we have enough information.
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.
Are thermal effects responsible for micron-level motions recorded at deep- and shallow-braced monuments in a short-baseline network at Yucca Mountain,
Workshop, Miami, June 2008 IGS Contribution to ITRF Zuheir Altamimi & Xavier Collilieux IGN, France.
Inherent Length Scales and Apparent Frequencies of Periodic Solar Wind Number Density Structures Nicholeen Viall 1, Larry Kepko 2 and Harlan Spence 1 1.
Vertical velocities at tide gauges from a completely reprocessed global GPS network of stations: How well do they work? G. Wöppelmann 1, M-N. Bouin 2,
12/12/01Fall AGU Vertical Reference Frames for Sea Level Monitoring Thomas Herring Department of Earth, Atmosphere and Planetary Sciences
Rotational Errors in IGS Orbit & ERP Products Jim Ray, Jake Griffiths NOAA/NGS P. Rebischung IGN/LAREG J. Kouba NRCanada W. Chen Shanghai Astronomical.
OSTST Meeting, Hobart, Australia, March 12-15, 2007 On the use of temporal gravity field models derived from GRACE for altimeter satellite orbit determination.
1/16 35th IGS Governing Board Meeting December 13, 2009 – San Francisco TRANSITION OF THE IGS REFERENCE FRAME COORDINATION FROM NRCAN TO IGN - STATUS AND.
Importance of SLR in the Determination of the ITRF Zuheir Altamimi IGN, France Geoscience Australia, Canberra, August 29, 2005 SLR Strength: its contribution.
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.
Errors in Positioning Matt King, Newcastle University, UK.
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.
Aurore Sibois and Shailen Desai
Thomas Herring, IERS ACC, MIT
Consistency of Crustal Loading Signals Derived from Models & GPS: Inferences for GPS Positioning Errors Quantify error budget for weekly dNEU GPS positions.
Systematic errors in IGS terrestrial frame products Paul Rebischung, Zuheir Altamimi (with contributions from Ralf Schmid, Jim Ray & Wei Chen)
Geodesy & Crustal Deformation
Reference Frame Representations: The ITRF from the user perspective
How to constrain the origin, orientation and scale
Reference Frame Working Group
ESOC IGS Reprocessing T. Springer, F. Dilssner, E. Schoenemann,
WHY DOES THE IGS CARE ABOUT EOPs?
Principles of the Global Positioning System Lecture 14
Principles of the Global Positioning System Lecture 11
Motivation Time Series Analysis Spectra and Results Conclusions
Diurnal and Semi-Diurnal Earth Rotation from 37 Years of VLBI Data
Combination of reprocessed orbit, clock and ERP products
Presentation transcript:

Jim Ray & Jake Griffiths, NOAA/National Geodetic Survey Xavier Collilieux & Paul Rebischung, IGN/LAREG S UBSEASONAL GNSS P OSITIONING E RRORS Linear rate & annual GPS position errors are well studied – flicker phase noise (time-correlated) dominates velocity errors – crustal pressure load models explain only part of annual signals – many other effects contribute to annual signals GPS draconitic errors are pervasive – probably driven by subdaily EOP tide model errors in orbits IGS switched from weekly to daily terrestrial frames – allows subseasonal performance studies, since 19 Aug 2012 New subseasonal periodic errors found: – most ACs show ~14 & ~9 d peaks from tidal errors – but not yet able to resolve direct from aliased tides – GLONASS ACs have 8 & 4 d signals of ground repeat period – JPL & GRGS possess other unique, short-period errors 97 th Journées Luxembourgeoises de Géodynamique, ECGS, Luxembourg, 2-4 Oct 2013

Background: Long-term GPS Position Spectra Periodic spectral peaks at: –annual + semi-annual periods –harmonics of GPS year (N * 1.04 cpy) Surface crustal fluid loads explain only part of annual signals –~50% for dU, ~20% for dN, ~10% for dE –other effects: GPS draconitic harmonics, thermal expansion & tilting, IERS model deficiencies, antenna & receiver effects, analysis effects, etc Raw IGS Stacked Spectra dU dE dN flicker noise (slope = -1) 3 rd, 4 th, 5 th, 6 th draconitics annual + 1 st draconitic semi-annual + 2 nd draconitic From IGS weekly combined frame residuals, Background spectra obey flicker phase noise process –position errors time-correlated –some white noise at highest frequencies White Noise Flicker Phase Random Walk Flicker Frequency Integrated Random Walk Integer Power-Law Noise Types ( time domain) 02

GPS-sun geometry repeat period –“draconitic” year = d –1 st & 2 nd harmonics overlap seasonal signals IGS station coordinates (2006) –in all dNEU components –harmonics up to at least 6 th Later found in all IGS products: –“geocenter” variations –polar motion rates (esp 5 th & 7 th ) –LOD (esp 6 th ) –orbit day-boundary jumps (esp 3 rd ) Strong fortnightly signals also common, but Nyquist limited for past IGS station coordinates Periodic signals clearer in reprocessed results Harmonics of GPS Draconitic Year are Pervasive 03 % of GPS Stations Frequency (cycles per year) dE dN dU (from X. Collilieux et al., 2011)

1) Local multipath effect at stations –station-satellite geometry repeats every sidereal day, approximately –2 GPS orbital periods during 1 Earth inertial revolution actual GPS repeat period = (1 solar day - ~245 s) sidereal period (K1) = (1 solar day s) –for 24-hr sampling (e.g., data analysis), alias period → GPS draconitic year 2) Mismodelling effect in satellite orbits –empirical solar radiation parameters intrinsically linked to orbital period –implies large-scale spatial correlations of station draconitics Hypothesis: errors in a priori IERS model for subdaily EOP tidal variations absorbed into GPS orbits –EOP tide errors resonate with GPS orbital period & efficiently absorbed –GPS ground repeat period (near K1) aliases errors to draconitic year –6 GPS orbital planes cause beating and overtone harmonics –IERS model is known to have errors at the 10 to 20% level, equivalent to about 2 GPS altitude –errors also alias into EOP estimates & presumably station coordinates Possible Origins of Draconitic Signals 04

IGS Repro1 time series residuals –these are weekly GPS positions –remove model loads (red dots) –fit harmonic model of ann + semi- ann + 1 st thru 6 th draconitics (turquoise line) Beating of ann/semi-ann with 1 st /2 nd draconitics can explain inter-annual amp variations –esp for dN & dE –fits are often quite significant (for stations with ≥ 250 weeks) Post-fit residuals often approach previously inferred noise floors: –0.65 mm WRMS for weekly dN –0.7 mm WRMS for weekly dE –2.2 mm WRMS for weekly dU Example of Harmonic Fit: AMC2 (Colorado, USA) 05 local temperature annual fit

Raw GPS GPS minus Load Raw GPS GPS minus Load 1 st Draconitic Annual >10 years of weekly data annual & draconitic estimated simultaneously units = mm Compare Annual & 1 st Draconitic Amplitudes 06

Strong spatially correlated patterns –not consistent with a local origin –implies draconitic errors involve orbits GPS constellation: –inclination = 55° –RA longitudes = 17°, 77°, 137°, …, 317° Global Distribution of 4 th dN & dU Draconitics 07

1) Aliases in IGS polar motion rate discontinuity spectra –compute midnight discontinuities in IGS polar motion time series –IGS Repro1 data (10 Mar 2005 – 29 Dec 2007) –most spectral peaks match subdaily alias lines (Kouba, 2003) –demonstrated with comparison between IERS2013 model & HFEOP VLBI (from J. Gipson) –also some odd draconitics (via orbits) Evidence for Subdaily EOP Tide Model Errors 08 daily noon PM offset & rate estimates midnight PM discontinuities subdaily EOP alias lines HFEOP-IERS2003 model diffs 2) Differences among subdaily EOP models –EOP tide models based on GOT4.7 & TPXO7.1 also differ from IERS2013 by 10 to 20% –courtesy of R. Ray (2009)

Spectrum of IGS midnight orbit discontinuities Compare to simulation using subdaily EOPs with ~20% errors Effects on station coordinates not studied 09 Frequency (cycles per day) Power Density (mm 2 / cpd) Impact of Subdaily EOP Tide Errors on GPS Orbits subdaily EOP tide errors alias into orbits in bands near 14, 9, & 7 d periods other major features at near-annual & 3 rd draconitic periods IGS orbits EOP error impact simulation

Stack spectra of 306 daily stations from 20 Aug Jul 2013 Unsmoothed FFTs use ≥ 256 days per station Continuum noise very close to flicker process down to ~2.6 d White noise floor below ~2.6 d 10 First Look at Daily IGS Position Spectra Tidal lines visible near: –~13.5 ± 0.8 d –~9.7 ± 0.35 d Cannot yet resolve: –direct tide errors 13.63/13.66 d & 9.12/9.13 d not expected but reported by others –subdaily EOP aliases 14.19/14.77 d & 9.6/9.37 d expected Possible additional peak at ~8.0 d IGS Daily Combined Coordinates

GLONASS Repeat Period Seen in GNSS AC Spectra GLONASS ground repeat period is 8 d (17 orbits, each 11 h 15 m ) 8.0 d peak visible in spectra of GPS+GLO ACs (CODE + ESA + GFZ = 474 AC stations) Possible harmonics too: –2 nd at 4.0 d –3 rd at 2.67 d No such peaks seen in spectra of GPS-only ACs (MIT + NGS + EMR = 419 AC stations) But these ACs also have more high-frequency noise GLONASS data previously found to degrade EOPs 11 COD + ESA + GFZ (GPS + GLO) MIT + NGS + EMR (GPS only)

Similar processing as for other ACs, for 114 daily stations Likely tidal peak at ~13.5 d; perhaps also at ~9.7 d GRGS includes GLONASS data but no peak near 8.0 d –probably heavily deweight GLONASS data compared to GPS 12 Unexplained 3.7 d Peak for GRGS GRGS uniquely shows strong, sharp peak at ~3.7 d –seen in all components –no corresponding peak seen in GRG vs IGS orbit differences No explanation yet for this feature –but peak is close to half of GRGS analysis week = 3 hr + 7 d + 3 hr = 7.25 d –perhaps a bug or subtle constraint effect GRG only (GPS + GLO)

Unlike other ACs, JPL’s daily frames not usable to assess subseasonal performance because of disjoint network design So instead use daily time series at JPL’s sideshow website –stack periodograms for 183 station time series, each with ≥80% days during – (annual + semi-annual terms removed) Find unique broad band of power around ~5.5 d –signal visible in 2-yr subsets –some stations stronger than others –previously reported by Amiri-Simkooei (2013) who suggested quasi- periodic effects –more likely to be aliased ~24-hr EOP tide errors beating with JPL 30-hr arc –other ACs use 24-hr arcs (except GRGS) –if so, aliases of ~12-hr EOP tide expected at 2.5 to ~3 d 13 Unexplained ~5.5 d Band for JPL JPL only (GPS) ? ~5.5 d

Direct (13.63 d) & subdaily aliased (14.76 d) tidal lines both seen –but, unlike other ACs, only in dN & dE, not dU –Amiri-Simkooei (2013) found lines at 13.63, 14.2, 14.6, & 14.8 d but did not discuss –Amiri-Simkooei used multivariate method that does not distinguish position components, so missing dU lines were not seen –JPL’s fortnightly behavior is distinct from other ACs & difficult to explain –but could be sensitive only to rotational errors if EOPs use 24 hr arcs Unique sharp line at ~7.38 d –only in dE, not dN & dU –perhaps related to JPL orbit week, 7.25 d –or maybe alias of µ2 tide errors –by why dE only? 14 JPL has Direct & Aliased Fortnightly Tide Lines JPL only (GPS) d d 7.38 d

IGS now producing daily combined & AC terrestrial frames –permits subseasonal error analysis, since 19 Aug 2012 Most ACs show fortnightly signals in all components –~9 d signals also likely, at least for some ACs –JPL is unique with only dN & dE fortnightly signals, not dU –direct vs aliased subdaily tidal sources not yet resolvable –subdaily EOP tidal aliases expected from polar motion rate analysis Errors in IERS subdaily EOP tide model also likely to generate pervasive GPS draconitics –due to efficient coupling into orbits, then aliasing to longer periods GPS+GLONASS ACs show ~8 d signals in all components –~4 d signals also likely –probably effect of GLONASS ground repeat period GRGS & JPL show unique short-period features –strong 3.7 d line for GRGS & 7.38 d line for JPL unexplained –broad 5.5 d band for JPL probably alias due to 30-hr arcs Conclusions 15

Thank You !