Effects of Topside Ionosphere Modeling Parameters on Differential Code Bias (DCB) Estimation Using LEO Satellite Observations
Given the potential of low-earth orbit (LEO) satellites in terms of navigation enhancement, accurately estimating the differential code bias (DCB) of GNSS satellites and LEO satellites is an important research topic. In this study, to obtain accurate DCB estimates, the effects of vertical total elec...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Remote sensing (Basel, Switzerland) Switzerland), 2023-11, Vol.15 (22), p.5335 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Given the potential of low-earth orbit (LEO) satellites in terms of navigation enhancement, accurately estimating the differential code bias (DCB) of GNSS satellites and LEO satellites is an important research topic. In this study, to obtain accurate DCB estimates, the effects of vertical total electron content (VTEC) modeling parameters of the topside ionosphere on DCB estimation were investigated using LEO observations for the first time. Different modeling parameters were set in the DCB estimations, encompassing modeling spacing in the dynamic temporal mode and degree and order (D&O) in spherical harmonic modeling. The DCB precisions were then evaluated, and the impacts were analyzed. Thus, a number of crucial and beneficial conclusions are drawn: (1) The maximum differences in the GPS DCB estimates after adopting different modeling spacings and different D&Os exhibit that the different modeling spacings or D&Os both affect the GPS DCB estimates and their root-mean square (RMS), and the effects of the two are at the same level. (2) The maximum differences in receiver DCBs using different modeling spacings indicate that the modeling spacing has a significant impact on the receiver DCBs, compared with GPS DCBs. Whereas, the maximum differences in receiver DCBs with different modeling D&Os are inferior to the differences in the GPS DCBs. That is, the modeling spacing has a greater impact on the LEO DCBs than those of the modeling D&O. (3) The experimental results indicate that the GPS DCB estimates using a modeling spacing of 12H have higher precisions than the others, whereas LEO receiver DCBs using a spacing of 4H or 6H obtain optimal STD. In terms of modeling D&O, adopting 8D&O in the LEO-based VTEC modeling can attain superior estimates and precisions for both GPS and LEO DCBs. The research conclusions can provide references for LEO-augmented DCB estimation. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2072-4292 2072-4292 |
DOI: | 10.3390/rs15225335 |