基于多星最差故障搜索的RAIM完好性风险估计方法

doi:10.7527/S1000-6893.2023.28684

Abstract

Abstract:

As the core function of Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring （RAIM）， strict integrity risk estimation is the key to accurately measure navigation and positioning integrity. The interoperation of global navigation satellite systems increases the probability of multi-satellite faults dramatically， which reduces the rigor of the traditional integrity risk estimation based on the worst fault bias of a single satellite. In this paper， an integrity risk estimation method considering multi-satellite faults is proposed. As the rigorous estimation of multi-satellite fault integrity risk is limited by the accurate determination of the multi-satellite worst fault bias， a two-step method for determining the worst fault bias is established by determining the worst-case fault unit vector and search interval of the worst-case fault magnitude. The conservative estimation of the integrity risk of navigation and positioning is realized. Constellation simulation software is used to simulate satellite fault scenarios to test the rigor of the integrity risk estimation method. Experimental results show that compared with the traditional integrity risk estimation method， the proposed method can significantly reduce the rate of missed detection in multi-constellation scenarios. In addition， when compared to advanced RAIM method that consider multi-constellation and multi-satellite faults， the proposed method can improve the proportion meeting a global availability of 99.5% by 9.42% at most.

Key words: Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring (RAIM), integrity, Global Navigation Satellite System, multi-satellite fault, availability

CLC Number:

V249.3

Ruijie LI, Liang LI, Jiachang JIANG, Li CHENG, Liuqi WANG. RAIM integrity risk estimation method based on worst multi⁃satellite faults searching[J]. Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica, 2024, 45(2): 328684-328684.

Figures/Tables 11

Fig.1

Table 1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Table 2

Fig.4

Fig.5

Fig.6

Fig.7

Fig.8

Table 3

References 25

1	LI L， WANG H， JIA C， et al. Integrity and continuity allocation for the RAIM with multiple constellations［J］. GPS Solutions， 2017， 21（4）： 1503-1513.
2	CHIN G Y， KRAEMER J H， BROWN R G. GPS RAIM： Screening out bad geometries under worst-case bias conditions［J］. Navigation， 1992， 39（4）： 407-427.
3	ANGUS J E. RAIM with multiple faults［J］. Navigation， 2006， 53（4）： 249-257.
4	赵昂，杨元喜，许扬胤，等. GNSS单系统及多系统组合完好性分析［J］. 武汉大学学报（信息科学版）， 2020， 45（1）： 72-80.
	ZHAO A， YANG Y X， XU Y Y， et al. Integrity analysis of GNSS single system and multi-system combination［J］. Geomatics and Information Science of Wuhan University， 2020， 45（1）： 72-80 （in Chinese）.
5	BLANCH J， WALTER T， MILNER C， et al. Baseline advanced RAIM user algorithm： Proposed updates［C］∥ Proceedings of the 2022 International Technical Meeting of The Institute of Navigation. Institute of Navigation， 2022： 229-251.
6	MILNER C， OCHIENG W. Weighted RAIM for APV： The ideal protection level［J］. Journal of Navigation， 2010， 64： 61-73.
7	MILNER C， PERVAN B， BLANCH J， et al. Evaluating integrity and continuity over time in advanced RAIM［C］∥ 2020 IEEE/ION Position， Location and Navigation Symposium （PLANS）. Piscataway： IEEE Press， 2020： 502-514.
8	JOERGER M， STEVANOVIC S， LANGEL S， et al. Integrity risk minimisation in RAIM part 1： Optimal detector design［J］. Journal of Navigation， 2016， 69（3）： 449-467.
9	JOERGER M， CHAN F C， PERVAN B. Solution separation versus residual-based RAIM［J］. Navigation， 2014， 61（4）： 273-291.
10	BANG E， MILNER C， MACABIAU C， et al. Preliminary integrity assessment for GPS/GLONASS RAIM with multiple faults［C］∥ 2018 IEEE/ION Position， Location and Navigation Symposium （PLANS）. Piscataway： IEEE Press， 2018： 327-335.
11	BLANCH J， WALKER T， ENGE P， et al. Baseline advanced RAIM user algorithm and possible improvements［J］. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems， 2015， 51（1）： 713-732.
12	程春，赵玉新，李亮，等. BDS空间信号异常实时检测与排除方法［J］. 中国科学：信息科学， 2020， 50（4）： 603-616.
	CHENG C， ZHAO Y X， LI L， et al. Real-time detection and elimination method for BDS signal-in-space anomalies［J］. Scientia Sinica （Informationis）， 2020， 50（4）： 603-616 （in Chinese）.
13	ZHAI Y， JOERGER M， PERVAN B. Continuity and availability in dual-frequency multi-constellation ARAIM［C］∥ Proceedings of ION GNSS+ 2015 Institute of Navigation， 2015.
14	BLANCH J， WALTER T， ENGE P. RAIM with optimal integrity and continuity allocations under multiple failures［J］. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems， 2010， 46（3）： 1235-1247.
15	ZHAO P， JOERGER M， LIANG X， et al. A new method to bound the integrity risk for residual-based ARAIM［J］. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems， 2021， 57（2）： 1378-1385.
16	ZHAI Y W. Ensuring navigation integrity and continuity using multi-constellation GNSS［D］. Chicago： Illinois Institute of Technology， 2018： 29-30.
17	BLANCH J， WALTER T. Stress testing advanced RAIM airborne algorithms［C］∥ Proceedings of ION ITM 2020， Institute of Navigation， 2020.
18	YOON M， LEE J Y， PULLEN S. Integrity risk evaluation of impact of ionospheric anomalies on GAST D GBAS［J］. NAVIGATION， 2020， 67（2）： 223-234.
19	DUENAS ARANA G， ABDUL HAFEZ O， JOERGER M， et al. Integrity monitoring for Kalman filter-based localization［J］. The International Journal of Robotics Research， 2020， 39（13）： 1503-1524.
20	RTCA. Minimum operational performance standards for GPS/WAAS airborne equipment： RTCA DO-229D ［S］. 2006.
21	OBER PB. Integrity prediction and monitoring of navigation systems［D］. The Netherlands： Delft University of Technology， 2003： 1-146.
22	ZHAO Y X， CHENG C， LI L， et al. BDS signal-in-space anomaly probability analysis over the last 6 years［J］. GPS Solutions， 2021， 25（2）： 1-12.
23	SU X L， ZHAN X Q， NIU M C， et al. Receiver autonomous integrity monitoring availability and fault detection capability comparison between BeiDou and GPS［J］. Journal of Shanghai Jiaotong University （Science）， 2014， 19（3）： 313-324.
24	BLANCH J， WALTER T， ENGE P， et al. A simple position estimator that improves advanced RAIM performance［J］. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems， 2015， 51（3）： 2485-2489.
25	ZHAI Y W， ZHAN X Q， PERVAN B. Bounding integrity risk and false alert probability over exposure time intervals［J］. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems， 2020， 56（3）： 1873-1885.

参数	取值
星历和钟差误差标准差σ_URA/m	2.4^［22］
对流层延迟误差标准差σ_trop/m	0.12×1.001/（0.002 001+sin²（（πθ）/180））^1/2［5］
多径标准差σ_MP/m	0.13+0.53exp（-θ/10）^［5］
接收机噪声标准差σ_Noise/m	0.15+0.43exp（-θ/6.9）^［5］
完好性风险指标 I_REQ	1×10^-7
连续性风险指标 C_REQ	4×10^-6
卫星故障先验概率 P_sat	GPS： 10^-5； Galileo： 3×10^-5； BDS： 10^-5［14］
星座级故障先验概率 P_const	GPS： 10^-8； Galileo： 2×10^-4； BDS： 6×10^-5［14］
P_NM的阈值	6×10^-8

测站点	方法	性能/%	场景1	场景2		场景3
测站点	方法	性能/%	GPS	GPS/Galileo	GPS/BDS	GPS/Galileo/BDS
北京（40°N， 116°E）	传统方法	单故障漏检比率	0	0	0	0
		多故障漏检比率	0	3.29	3.97	3.47×10^-2
		可用性	99.16	98.26	98.90	99.98
	ARAIM	漏检比率	0	0	0	0
	ARAIM	可用性	99.16	59.65	63.03	99.31
	所提方法	漏检比率	0	0	0	0
	所提方法	可用性	99.16	63.34	69.85	99.49
新德里（28°N， 77°E）	传统方法	单故障漏检比率	0	0	0	0
		多故障漏检比率	0.000	2.23	2.98	0
		可用性	99.83	99.09	99.19	99.99
	ARAIM	漏检比率	0	0	0	0
	ARAIM	可用性	99.83	64.90	69.41	99.51
	所提方法	漏检比率	0	0	0	0
	所提方法	可用性	99.83	67.69	72.48	99.70
纽约（40°N， 74°W）	传统方法	单故障漏检比率	0	0	0	0
		多故障漏检比率	0	2.16	1.47	0
		可用性	99.39	98.89	99.57	99.99
	ARAIM	漏检比率	0	0	0	0
	ARAIM	可用性	99.37	65.35	69.99	99.97
	所提方法	漏检比率	0	0	0	0
	所提方法	可用性	99.36	67.68	74.32	99.97
开普敦（33°S， 18°E）	传统方法	单故障漏检比率	0	0	0	0
		多故障漏检比率	0	1.42	1.54	0
		可用性	99.58	99.29	99.57	99.99
	ARAIM	漏检比率	0	0	0	0
	ARAIM	可用性	99.58	64.42	70.93	99.66
	所提方法	漏检比率	0	0	0	0
	所提方法	可用性	99.58	68.31	77.11	99.67
伦敦（51°N， 0.1°E）	传统方法	单故障漏检比率	0	0	0	0
		多故障漏检比率	0	2.13	2.40	0
		可用性	100	99.06	99.35	99.98
	ARAIM	漏检比率	0	0	0	0
	ARAIM	可用性	99.99	66.46	72.05	99.72
	所提方法	漏检比率	0	0	0	0
	所提方法	可用性	100	69.53	78.08	99.97

星座	平均可用性/%				满足99.5%指标的覆盖范围/%
星座	L_BC	L_WE	L_ARAIM	L_IR	L_BC	L_WE	L_ARAIM	L_IR
GPS/BDS	25.95	68.11	70.37	75.50	0	0.31	0.31	0.62
GPS/BDS/GAL	53.94	67.14	90.06	95.55	0	0	21.91	31.33

[1]	Jiaxiang LI, Jianhua CHENG, Liang LI, Zhibo NA, Chun JIA. Troposphere anomaly integrity monitoring parameters for GBAS [J]. Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica, 2024, 45(7): 328817-328817.
[2]	Yanyan LUO, Shuo YANG, Xiaosong PAN, Xuhuai ZHAO, Li ZHANG. Signal reflection suppression and optimized design of high⁃speed connectors for aerospace applications [J]. Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica, 2024, 45(7): 328937-328937.
[3]	Jing ZHAO, Dan SONG. Integrity monitoring method for GNSS/IMU integrated navigation system of UAV [J]. Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica, 2024, 45(7): 328943-328943.
[4]	Jie ZHANG, Lin ZHAO, Fuxin YANG, Zhiguo SUN, Liang LI. PPP integrity monitoring algorithm for general-purpose navigation applications [J]. Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica, 2023, 44(13): 327904-327904.
[5]	YU Dalei, CUI Xining, LI Chengwen, LIU Tingting, ZHOU Yong. Multi-core computing and processing platform based on CPCIe high speed bus in airborne applications [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2022, 43(5): 325238-325238.
[6]	PENG Zhenlong, ZHANG Xiangyu, ZHANG Deyuan. High-speed ultrasonic vibration cutting for difficult-to-machine materials in aerospace field [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2022, 43(4): 525587-525587.
[7]	CUI Degang, BAO Rui, ZHANG Rui, LIU Binchao, OUYANG Tian. Development of aircraft structural fatigue and structural integrity: Review [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2021, 42(5): 524394-524394.
[8]	SUN Xiasheng, SU Shaopu, SUN Hanbin, DONG Dengke. Current status and prospect of overseas research on aeronautical fatigue [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2021, 42(5): 524791-524791.
[9]	GONG Fengxun, LI Lihuan, MA Yanqiu. Statistics and required surveillance performance of ADS-B message parameters [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2020, 41(4): 323378-323378.
[10]	ZHAO Bo, JIANG Yan, BIE Wenbo. Ultrasonic rolling technology in surface strengthening: Progress in research and applications [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2020, 41(10): 23685-023685.
[11]	HUANG Yun, XIAO Guijian, ZOU Lai. Current situation and development trend of robot precise belt grinding for aero-engine blade [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2019, 40(3): 22508-022508.
[12]	YU Siqi, ZHANG Xiaohong, GUO Fei, LI Xin, PAN Lin, MA Fujian. Recent advances in precision approach based on GNSS [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2019, 40(3): 22200-022200.
[13]	LI Fang, HE Youchen, DI Peng, CHEN Tong, YIN Dongliang. Reliability analysis of fuzzy k-out-of-n system considering maintenance influence and dynamic load distribution mechanism [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2018, 39(4): 221718-221718.
[14]	MENG Qian, LIU Jianye, ZENG Qinghua, FENG Shaojun, LI Rongbing. BeiDou navigation receiver weak signal acquisition aided by block improved DBZP [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2017, 38(8): 320833-320833.
[15]	ZHANG Honglun, BA Xiaohui, CHEN Jie, ZHOU Hang. Unambiguous acquisition technique for BOC(m, n) modulated signals [J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2017, 38(4): 320394-320394.

RAIM integrity risk estimation method based on worst multi⁃satellite faults searching

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 11

References 25

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments