Precise GNSS Positioning in Arctic Regions

Abstract

For precise positioning in arctic regions with Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS), such as GPS and Glonass, there are a number of issues to be resolved or taken into account. The most important ones are satellite geometry, ionospheric effects and distribution of correction data. Precise Point Positioning (PPP) is currently the standard for precise offshore positioning. PPP requires a sparse global network of GNSS reference stations to estimate precise satellite orbit and clock parameters in real-time. These parameters are transmitted to users, who can compute their position with an accuracy of 0.1 m using code and carrier observations. The main disadvantage of PPP is that in general it takes a long time to converge to this accuracy, about 30–45 minutes. GNSS carrier observations are similar to pseudo ranges, but have an additional bias which needs to be estimated. Under certain conditions, these biases are integer. This property is used in what is generally referred to as Real-Time Kinematic (RTK) positioning, a technique which uses corrections generated at reference stations to make sure these ambiguities are integer. Integer Ambiguity Resolution (IAR) results in RTK accuracies of 0.01–0.03 m or better and short convergence times, ranging from instantaneous to several minutes for long inter-station distances. The disadvantage is the limited area of applicability, because RTK in general does not use precise orbits and clocks. Current research focuses on the combination of PPP and RTK techniques. The main goal is to achieve cm accuracy with a sparse network of reference stations. Another goal is to reduce convergence time. Applications are in the field of precise real-time offshore positioning in general, and subsidence monitoring and tidal estimation in particular. Results will be presented from standard PPP and PPP combined with IAR for arctic regions and from a test bed in the Gulf of Mexico. These results, although preliminary, indicate centimeter level accuracy is indeed possible, also in the arctic. We will also look at further improvements, mainly in convergence time, using all operational satellites and signals from current and future navigation systems.

Positioning in the Arctic Region: State-of-the-Art and Future Perspectives

“…This method provides an accuracy of 0.01-0.03 meters. However, this method's applicability area is limited since the reference station should be close to the receiver to provide support [17], [18].…”

Design of a Configurable Monitoring Station for Scintillations by Means of a GNSS Software Radio Receiver

“…The receiver measurements can thus be heavily corrupted, resulting in positioning errors of tens of meters or, in the most severe cases, in complete outages due to Loss of Lock (LOL). Such a threat has disruptive impact on sub-meter navigation and precise positioning, which are needed for several critical applications [17]- [19]. If on one hand the ionosphere is a threat for the GNSS signals, by converse GNSS received signals can be exploited to infer important information on the ionosphere behavior.…”

Assessment of Galileo E6B Data Demodulation Performance at High Latitudes: A Norwegian Vessel Case Study

“…Challenges of GNSS-based navigation at high latitude are also discussed in [15], where a survey of navigation limits in the Arctic region is presented. Augmentation system coverage and control station distribution are two limiting factors for the accuracy of GNSS-based navigation at high latitudes [16,17]. Finally, Galileo opportunities and challenges for Arctic navigation are summarized in [18].…”