Troposphere anomaly integrity monitoring parameters for GBAS

Jiaxiang LI; Jianhua CHENG; Liang LI; Zhibo NA; Chun JIA

doi:10.7527/S1000-6893.2023.28817

ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA >

2024 , Vol. 45 >Issue 7: 328817 - 328817

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7527/S1000-6893.2023.28817

Electronics and Electrical Engineering and Control

Troposphere anomaly integrity monitoring parameters for GBAS

Jiaxiang LI ,
Jianhua CHENG ,
Liang LI ,
Zhibo NA ,
Chun JIA

Expand

College of Intelligent Systems Science and Engineering，Harbin Engineering University，Harbin 150001，China

E-mail： liliang@hrbeu.edu.cn

Received date: 2023-04-04

Revised date: 2023-05-05

Accepted date: 2023-05-30

Online published: 2023-05-31

Supported by

National Key Research and Development Program(2021YFB3901300);National Natural Science Foundation of China(61773132)

Fold

Abstract

Troposphere anomaly must be monitored to ensure navigation accuracy and integrity when the Ground-Based Augmentation System （GBAS） provides services for safety-critical applications. The maximum tolerable troposphere delay in measurement domain and the troposphere anomaly probability are the critical parameters for GBAS troposphere anomaly integrity monitors. In this paper， the required navigation performance in the position domain is translated into the required integrity monitoring performance in the measurement domain from an airworthiness perspective. The maximum tolerable troposphere delay in the measurement domain is quantified based on the worst protection principle. The probabilities of troposphere duct anomaly and non-nominal troposphere delay are evaluated using the meteorological data from European Center for Medium-range Weather Forecasts （ECMWF） during 2010-2019. Real BDS data and meteorological data are used to carry out simulation. The experimental results show that to ensure the integrity and availability of precise approach and landing services supported by GBAS， the maximum tolerable troposphere delay in the measurement domain ranges from 0.57 to 0.92 m （corresponding glide angle $θ$ =2.5°- 3.5°）. The prior probability of troposphere duct anomaly is between 10% - 50% in most coastal areas， but its impact on the integrity of GBAS is negligible. The prior probability of non-nominal troposphere delay can be conservatively set as 5.3×10 ^-3 to improve the integrity of GBAS. The results can provide an important reference for the design of troposphere anomaly integrity monitor and the improvement of GBAS integrity monitoring system.

Key words： troposphere duct anomaly; non-nominal troposphere delay; integrity; ground-based augmentation system (GBAS); global navigation satellite system (GNSS)

Cite this article

Jiaxiang LI , Jianhua CHENG , Liang LI , Zhibo NA , Chun JIA . Troposphere anomaly integrity monitoring parameters for GBAS[J]. ACTA AERONAUTICAET ASTRONAUTICA SINICA, 2024 , 45(7) : 328817 -328817 . DOI: 10.7527/S1000-6893.2023.28817

References

1	谢钢. GPS原理与接收机设计［M］. 北京：电子工业出版社， 2009.
	XIE G. Principles of GPS and receiver design［M］. Beijing： Publishing House of Electronics Industry， 2009 （in Chinese）.
2	DENG Z G， BENDER M， ZUS F， et al. Validation of tropospheric slant path delays derived from single and dual frequency GPS receivers［J］. Radio Science， 2011， 46（ 6）： RS6007.
3	姚宜斌，何畅勇，张豹，等. 一种新的全球对流层天顶延迟模型GZTD［J］. 地球物理学报， 2013， 56（ 7）： 2218- 2227.
	YAO Y B， HE C Y， ZHANG B， et al. A new global zenith tropospheric delay model GZTD［J］. Chinese Journal of Geophysics， 2013， 56（ 7）： 2218- 2227 （in Chinese）.
4	章迪. GNSS对流层天顶延迟模型及映射函数研究［J］. 测绘学报， 2022， 51（ 9）： 1984.
	ZHANG D. The study of the GNSS tropospheric zenith delay model and mapping function［J］. Acta Geodaetica et Cartographica Sinica， 2022， 51（ 9）： 1984 （in Chinese）.
5	Konno H. Design of an aircraft landing system using dual-frequency GNSS ［D］. Stanford： Stanford University， 2008， 13- 15.
6	喻思琪，张小红，郭斐，等. 卫星导航进近技术进展［J］. 航空学报， 2019， 40（ 3）： 022200.
	YU S Q， ZHANG X H， GUO F， et al. Recent advances in precision approach based on GNSS［J］. Acta Aeronautica et Astronautica Sinica， 2019， 40（ 3）： 022200 （in Chinese）.
7	CHENG J H， LI J X， LI L， et al. Carrier phase-based ionospheric gradient monitor under the mixed Gaussian distribution［J］. Remote Sensing， 2020， 12（ 23）： 3915.
8	高利春，高铭阳，陈晓芳，等. 基于SINS/GBAS组合导航的高精度进近着陆导航技术［J］. 系统工程与电子技术， 2023， 45（ 1）： 210- 220.
	GAO L C， GAO M Y， CHEN X F， et al. High precision approach-and-landing navigation technology based on SINS/GBAS integrated navigation［J］. Systems Engineering and Electronics， 2023， 45（ 1）： 210- 220 （in Chinese）.
9	MCGRAW G A. Tropospheric error modeling for high integrity airborne GNSS navigation［C］∥ Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE/ION Position， Location and Navigation Symposium. Piscataway： IEEE Press， 2012： 158- 166.
10	KHANAFSEH S， VON ENGELN A， PERVAN B， et al. Tropospheric duct anomaly threat model for high integrity and high accuracy navigation［C］∥ Proceedings of the 29th International Technical Meeting of The Satellite Division of the Institute of Navigation （ION GNSS+2016）， ION GNSS+， The International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation. Manassas： ION， 2016： 1609- 1616.
11	刘黎军，夏俊明，白伟华，等. 蒸发波导对GNSS海面反射信号有效散射区域的影响［J］. 地球物理学报， 2019， 62（ 2）： 499- 507.
	LIU L J， XIA J M， BAI W H， et al. Influence of evaporation duct on the effective scattering region of GNSS reflected signals on the sea surface［J］. Chinese Journal of Geophysics， 2019， 62（ 2）： 499- 507 （in Chinese）.
12	CHEN B Y， LIU Z Z， WONG W K， et al. Detecting water vapor variability during heavy precipitation events in Hong Kong using the GPS tomographic technique［J］. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology， 2017， 34（ 5）： 1001- 1019.
13	TUNAL? E， ?ZLüDEMIR M T. GNSS PPP with different troposphere models during severe weather conditions［J］. GPS Solutions， 2019， 23（ 3）： 82.
14	辛蒲敏，王志鹏. 非标称对流层误差对GBAS完好性的影响［J］. 北京航空航天大学学报， 2017， 43（ 9）： 1882- 1890.
	XIN P M， WANG Z P. Impact of non-nominal troposphere error on GBAS integrity［J］. Journal of Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics， 2017， 43（ 9）： 1882- 1890 （in Chinese）.
15	GUILBERT A， MILNER C， MACABIAU C. Characterization of tropospheric gradients for the ground-based augmentation system through the use of numerical weather models［J］. Navigation， 2017， 64（ 4）： 475- 493.
16	于耕，王寒，赵龙. 非标称对流层误差对地基增强系统完好性的影响［J］. 科学技术与工程， 2018， 18（ 31）： 235- 240.
	YU G， WANG H， ZHAO L. The impact of non-nominal troposphere error on ground-based augmentation systems integrity［J］. Science Technology and Engineering， 2018， 18（ 31）： 235- 240 （in Chinese）.
17	GUILBERT A， MILNER C， MACABIAU C. Troposphere Reassessment in the scope of MC/MF Ground Based Augmentation System （GBAS）［C］∥ Proceedings of the ION 2015 Pacific PNT Meeting. Manassas： ION， 2015： 763- 772.
18	WANG Z P， XIN P M， LI R， et al. A method to reduce non-nominal troposphere error［J］. Sensors， 2017， 17（ 8）： 1751.
19	YEH S J， JAN S S. GBAS airport availability simulation tool［J］. GPS Solutions， 2016， 20（ 2）： 283- 288.
20	LI L， SHI H D， JIA C， et al. Position-domain integrity risk-based ambiguity validation for the integer bootstrap estimator［J］. GPS Solutions， 2018， 22（ 2）： 39.
21	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.
22	FELUX M， LEE J Y， HOLZAPFEL F. GBAS ground monitoring requirements from an airworthiness perspective［J］. GPS Solutions， 2015， 19（ 3）： 393- 401.
23	RIFE J H， PULLEN S P. The impact of measurement biases on availability for category Ⅲ LAAS［J］. Navigation， 2005， 52（ 4）： 215- 228.
24	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）： 49.
25	韩清清，王利，罗思龙，等. ARAIM算法的风险概率优化分配［J］. 测绘学报， 2021， 50（ 12）： 1751- 1761.
	HAN Q Q， WANG L， LUO S L， et al. Optimal allocation of risk probability based on ARAIM algorithm［J］. Acta Geodaetica et Cartographica Sinica， 2021， 50（ 12）： 1751- 1761 （in Chinese）.
26	KHANAFSEH S， JOERGER M， PERVAN B， et al. Accounting for tropospheric anomalies in high integrity and high accuracy positioning applications［C］∥ Proceedings of the 24th International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation （ION GNSS 2011）， Manassas： ION， 2011： 513- 522.
27	HUANG J D， VAN GRAAS F. Comparison of tropospheric decorrelation errors in the presence of severe weather conditions in different areas and over different baseline lengths［J］. Navigation， 2007， 54（ 3）： 207- 226.
28	YU S W， LIU Z Z. Tropical cyclone-induced periodical positioning disturbances during the 2017 Hato in the Hong Kong region［J］. GPS Solutions， 2021， 25（ 3）： 109.
29	HUANG J D， VAN GRAAS F， COHENOUR C. Characterization of tropospheric spatial decorrelation errors over a 5-km baseline［J］. Navigation， 2008， 55（ 1）： 39- 53.
30	Lacey L N. Criteria for approval of category III weather minima for take-off， landing， and rollout： AC 120-28D［R］. Washington， D.C.： FAA， 2009.
31	European Aviation Safety Agency （EASA）. Certification specifications for all weather operations， Subpart 1， automatic landing systems （CS-AWO 131）［S］. Brussels： European Aviation Safety Agency， 2003.
32	International Civil Aviation Organization. Ⅱ/Ⅲ development baseline SARPs—draft proposed changes to Annex 10， Volume Ⅰ ［S］. Montreal： International Civil Aviation Organization， 2010.
33	SCHUSTER W， OCHIENG W. Harmonisation of category-III precision approach navigation system performance requirements［J］. Journal of Navigation， 2010， 63（ 4）： 569- 589.
34	Felux M. Total system performance of GBAS-based automatic landings［D］. München： Technische Universit?t München， 2018， 37- 40.
35	Boeing. Determining the vertical alert limit requirements for a level of GBAS service that is appropriate to support CAT Ⅱ/Ⅲ Operations： D6-83447-4［R］. Chicago： Boeing， 2005.
36	Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics （RTCA）. Minimum operational performance standards for GPS local area augmentation system airborne equipment： RTCA DO-253C［R］. Washington， D.C.： RTCA， 2008.
37	Clark B， Decleene B. Alert limits： Do we need them for CAT Ⅲ？ Deriving GBAS requirements for consistency with CAT III operations［C］∥ Proceedings of ION GNSS 2006. Manassas： ION， 2006： 3070– 3081.
38	陈钦明，宋淑丽，朱文耀. 亚洲地区ECMWF/NCEP资料计算ZTD的精度分析［J］. 地球物理学报， 2012， 55（ 5）： 1541- 1548.
	CHEN Q M， SONG S L， ZHU W Y. An analysis of the accuracy of zenith tropospheric delay calculated from ECMWF/NCEP data over Asian area［J］. Chinese Journal of Geophysics， 2012， 55（ 5）： 1541- 1548 （in Chinese）.
39	陈权亮，任景轩，卞建春，等. ECMWF和HALOE平流层温度资料对比［J］. 地球物理学报， 2009， 52（ 11）： 2698- 2703.
	CHEN Q L， REN J X， BIAN J C， et al. Comparison study on ECMWF and HALOE temperature data in the stratosphere［J］. Chinese Journal of Geophysics， 2009， 52（ 11）： 2698- 2703 （in Chinese）.
40	Chen Q M， Song S L， Heise S， et al. Assessment of ZTD derived from ECMWF/NCEP data with GPS ZTD over China［J］. GPS Solut， 15： 415– 425.
41	ZHANG Y， WANG Z P. The impact of tropospheric anomalies on sea-based JPALS integrity［J］. Sensors， 2018， 18（ 8）： 2579.
42	GREGORIUS T， BLEWITT G. The effect of weather fronts on GPS measurements［J］. GPS World， 1998， 9： 52- 60.

Options

Outlines

模态框（Modal）标题

Abstract

Cite this article

References