mitigation of unmodelled non–tidal atmospheric pressure ... 2012 - p06 dach pr37.pdfmitigation of...

52
Mitigation of unmodelled non–tidal atmospheric pressure loading into parameters of a global GNSS solution R. Dach 1 , P. Steigenberger 2 , S. Lutz 1 , J. B¨ ohm 3 , and A. J¨ aggi 1 1 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern, Switzerland 2 Institut f¨ ur Astronomische und Physikalische Geod¨ asie, TU M¨ unchen, Germany 3 Institute of Geodesy and Geophysics, TU Vienna, Austria IGS workshop 23.–27. July 2012, Olsztyn, Poland Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

Upload: truongdieu

Post on 08-Mar-2019

215 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Mitigation of unmodelled non–tidal

atmospheric pressure loading into

parameters of a global GNSS solution

R. Dach1, P. Steigenberger2, S. Lutz1, J. Bohm3, and A. Jaggi1

1 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern, Switzerland2 Institut fur Astronomische und Physikalische Geodasie,

TU Munchen, Germany3 Institute of Geodesy and Geophysics, TU Vienna, Austria

IGS workshop23.–27. July 2012, Olsztyn, Poland

Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

Motivation

• Atmospheric pressure loading (APL) can clearly be detect inspace–geodetic solutions and needs to be corrected.

• With the global coverage of the tracking network and thecontinuous tracking capability, GNSS is in a comfortablesituation among the space–geodetic techniques.

• In the frame of the series of Unified Analysis Workshops adiscussion was initiated on how to correct for the APL effect:

• correcting each individual observation• correcting station coordinates with the mean value

Slide 2 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

Outline

Motivation

Description of the experiment

APL and GNSS–derived coordinates

APL and GNSS–derived troposphere

APL and GNSS–orbits

Conclusion

Slide 3 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

Description of the experiment

• CODE reprocessing effort from 2011:• Time interval:January 1996 to May 2003 GPS–only solutionMay 2003 to December 2010 GPS+GLONASS solution

• fully consistent with IGS08.ATX and IGS08.SNX• following the IERS 2010 conventions

Slide 4 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

Description of the experiment

• CODE reprocessing effort from 2011:• Time interval:January 1996 to May 2003 GPS–only solutionMay 2003 to December 2010 GPS+GLONASS solution

• fully consistent with IGS08.ATX and IGS08.SNX• following the IERS 2010 conventions

• The CODE reprocessing has included the Vienna APL model(Wijaya et al. 2011) with scaling factors allowing to

• validate the model from GNSS data,• easily compute two consistent solutions with/without APLcorrections.

Slide 4 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

Description of the experiment

• CODE reprocessing effort from 2011:• Time interval:January 1996 to May 2003 GPS–only solutionMay 2003 to December 2010 GPS+GLONASS solution

• fully consistent with IGS08.ATX and IGS08.SNX• following the IERS 2010 conventions

• The CODE reprocessing has included the Vienna APL model(Wijaya et al. 2011) with scaling factors allowing to

• validate the model from GNSS data,• easily compute two consistent solutions with/without APLcorrections.

• This dataset is used to support the “IERS Call for atm-loadcorrected solution” .

• We focus here on the solutions from the year 2010.

Slide 4 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL Effect from Vienna APL model

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Num

ber

of d

ays

in 2

010

1 2 3 4 5 6

RMS(APL) in mm

• Inland stations may havean effect up to a few cm,whereas coastal stationsare almost not affected.

• RMS(APL):RMS of the APL effectover all stations for eachday

Slide 5 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL Effect from Vienna APL model

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Num

ber

of d

ays

in 2

010

1 2 3 4 5 6

RMS(APL) in mm

• Inland stations may havean effect up to a few cm,whereas coastal stationsare almost not affected.

• RMS(APL):RMS of the APL effectover all stations for eachday

21. January: most pronounced APL for all stations of the network

01. July: moderate APL in all stations of the network

29. May: smallest APL in all stations of the network

Slide 5 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–derived coordinates

Mean APL corrections for each stationextracted from Vienna model during data processing

−20 −10 0 10 20

APL correction in mmvertical component 21. January 2010

Slide 6 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–derived coordinates

Coordinate difference between solutionsapplying/not applying APL corrections

−20 −10 0 10 20

Coordinate difference in mmvertical component 21. January 2010

Slide 6 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–derived coordinates

Coordinate difference between solutionsapplying/not applying but correcting for APL effect

−2.0 −1.5 −1.0 −0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

Coordinate difference in mmvertical component 21. January 2010

Slide 6 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–derived coordinates

Residuals of a Helmert–transformation between solutionsapplying/not applying but correcting for APL effect

−2.0 −1.5 −1.0 −0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

Coordinate difference in mmvertical component 21. January 2010

Slide 6 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–derived coordinates

RMS of coordinate comparison

Slide 7 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–derived coordinates

RMS of coordinate comparison• Difference of the solution without applying APL corrections. . .

21. January 2010 01. July 2010RMSN RMSE RMSU RMSN RMSE RMSU1.1mm 1.4mm 5.3mm 0.4mm 0.4mm 2.3mm

. . . with respect to the solution applying the APL corrections onobservation level.

Slide 7 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–derived coordinates

RMS of coordinate comparison• Difference of the solution without applying APL corrections. . .

21. January 2010 01. July 2010RMSN RMSE RMSU RMSN RMSE RMSU1.1mm 1.4mm 5.3mm 0.4mm 0.4mm 2.3mm

• Difference of the solution without applying but correcting for the APLeffect. . .

21. January 2010 01. July 2010RMSN RMSE RMSU RMSN RMSE RMSU1.8mm 2.5mm 1.7mm 0.6mm 0.9mm 0.6mm

. . . with respect to the solution applying the APL corrections onobservation level.

Slide 7 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–derived coordinates

RMS of coordinate comparison• Difference of the solution without applying APL corrections. . .

21. January 2010 01. July 2010RMSN RMSE RMSU RMSN RMSE RMSU1.1mm 1.4mm 5.3mm 0.4mm 0.4mm 2.3mm

• Difference of the solution without applying but correcting for the APLeffect. . .

21. January 2010 01. July 2010RMSN RMSE RMSU RMSN RMSE RMSU1.8mm 2.5mm 1.7mm 0.6mm 0.9mm 0.6mm

• Residuals of a Helmert–transformation of the solution without applyingbut correcting for the APL effect. . .

21. January 2010 01. July 2010RMSN RMSE RMSU RMSN RMSE RMSU0.1mm 0.1mm 0.2mm 0.1mm 0.1mm 0.1mm

. . . with respect to the solution applying the APL corrections onobservation level.

Slide 7 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

Summary

• The station coordinates between the solution without applyingbut correcting after the processing for the APL effect agrees onthe 0.1 mm RMS–level with the solution applying APLcorrections on observation level.

• This includes differences of up to ±0.5 mm for individual stationseven on days with a moderate magnitude of the APL effect.

Slide 8 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

Summary

• The station coordinates between the solution without applyingbut correcting after the processing for the APL effect agrees onthe 0.1 mm RMS–level with the solution applying APLcorrections on observation level.

• This includes differences of up to ±0.5 mm for individual stationseven on days with a moderate magnitude of the APL effect.

• Such a correction can be done on 1-day SINEX level.

Slide 8 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

Summary

• The station coordinates between the solution without applyingbut correcting after the processing for the APL effect agrees onthe 0.1 mm RMS–level with the solution applying APLcorrections on observation level.

• This includes differences of up to ±0.5 mm for individual stationseven on days with a moderate magnitude of the APL effect.

• Such a correction can be done on 1-day SINEX level.

• But what about other GNSS–derived parameters that are not inthe SINEX files?

Slide 8 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–derived troposphere

Differences between troposphere estimates from solutionsapplying/not applying APL corrections

−1.0

−0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

ZIM

M

00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00

−1.0

−0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

WU

HN

00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00

−1.0

−0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

YA

R2

00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00

2010−JAN−21units: mm

red: difference of troposphere estimates, green: APL effect 21. January 2010

Slide 9 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–derived troposphere

Differences between troposphere estimates from solutionsapplying/not applying APL corrections

−1.0

−0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

ZIM

M

00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00

−1.0

−0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

WU

HN

00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00

−1.0

−0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

YA

R2

00:00 06:00 12:00 18:00 00:00

2010−MAY−29units: mm

red: difference of troposphere estimates, green: APL effect 29. May 2010

Slide 9 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–derived troposphere

Differences between troposphere estimates from solutionsapplying/not applying APL corrections

versus APL correction

−1.0

−0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

∆ tr

opos

pher

e in

mm

−3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3

APL correction in mm

21. January 2010

−1.0

−0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

∆ tr

opos

pher

e in

mm

−3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3

APL correction in mm

29. May 2010

Slide 10 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–derived troposphere

Differences between troposphere estimates from solutionsapplying/not applying APL corrections

versus APL correction

−1.0

−0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

∆ tr

opos

pher

e in

mm

−3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3

APL correction in mm

21. January 2010

−1.0

−0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

∆ tr

opos

pher

e in

mm

−3 −2 −1 0 1 2 3

APL correction in mm

27. January 2010

Slide 10 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–derived troposphere

Differences between troposphere estimates from solutionsapplying/not applying APL corrections

versus APL correction

0

10

20

30

Per

cent

age

of p

aram

eter

s

0 1 2 3 4 5

ABS of ∆tropo in mm21. January 2010

0

10

20

30

Per

cent

age

of p

aram

eter

s

0 1 2 3 4 5

ABS of ∆tropo in mm27. January 2010

Slide 11 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–derived troposphere

Differences between troposphere estimates from solutionsapplying/not applying APL corrections

versus APL correction

0

10

20

30

Per

cent

age

of p

aram

eter

s

0 1 2 3 4 5

ABS of ∆tropo in mm01. July 2010

0

10

20

30

Per

cent

age

of p

aram

eter

s

0 1 2 3 4 5

ABS of ∆tropo in mm29. May 2010

Slide 11 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

Summary

APL and GNSS–derived troposphere

1

10

100

1000

10000

100000

1000000

0 1 2 3 4 5

ABS of ∆tropo in mmAll days of 2010

Slide 12 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

Summary

APL and GNSS–derived troposphere

1

10

100

1000

10000

100000

1000000

0 1 2 3 4 5

ABS of ∆tropo in mmAll days of 2010

• Vertical APL corrections arecorrelated with a factor of1/3 with the estimatedtroposphere parameters.

Slide 12 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

Summary

APL and GNSS–derived troposphere

1

10

100

1000

10000

100000

1000000

0 1 2 3 4 5

ABS of ∆tropo in mmAll days of 2010

• Vertical APL corrections arecorrelated with a factor of1/3 with the estimatedtroposphere parameters.

• Only the variation of theAPL effect during one day(processing batch length) isrelevant — the influenceexceeds 1mm only inextremely rare cases.

Slide 12 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–orbits

RMS of Earth-fixed satellite positions

• Difference of the solution without applying APL corrections. . .21. January 2010 29. May 2010

RMSX RMSY RMSZ RMSX RMSY RMSZ5.5mm 14.7mm 14.2mm 2.6mm 2.2mm 2.7mm

. . . with respect to the solution applying the APL corrections onobservation level.

Slide 13 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–orbits

RMS of Earth-fixed satellite positions

• Difference of the solution without applying APL corrections. . .21. January 2010 29. May 2010

RMSX RMSY RMSZ RMSX RMSY RMSZ5.5mm 14.7mm 14.2mm 2.6mm 2.2mm 2.7mm

• Residuals of a Helmert–transformation of the solution without applyingAPL corrections. . .

21. January 2010 29. May 2010RMSX RMSY RMSZ RMSX RMSY RMSZ5.2mm 14.5mm 13.9mm 2.0mm 2.1mm 2.1mm

. . . with respect to the solution applying the APL corrections onobservation level.

Slide 13 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–orbits

RMS of Earth-fixed satellite positions

• Difference of the solution without applying APL corrections. . .21. January 2010 01. July 2010

RMSX RMSY RMSZ RMSX RMSY RMSZ5.5mm 14.7mm 14.2mm 1.6mm 1.8mm 1.6mm

• Residuals of a Helmert–transformation of the solution without applyingAPL corrections. . .

21. January 2010 01. July 2010RMSX RMSY RMSZ RMSX RMSY RMSZ5.2mm 14.5mm 13.9mm 1.5mm 1.6mm 1.5mm

. . . with respect to the solution applying the APL corrections onobservation level.

Slide 13 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–orbits

Differences in the satellite positions between solutionswith and without correcting for APL

0 10 20

Orbit difference in mm21. January 2010

Slide 14 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–orbits

Number of observations per satellites

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

Num

ber

of o

bser

vatio

ns

GPS Satellites

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

Num

ber

of o

bser

vatio

nsGLONASS Satellites

• Satellite R01 has only 1000 observations causing a very weaklydetermined orbit from a one–day solution.

Slide 15 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–orbits

Differences in the satellite positions between solutionswith and without correcting for APL

0 10 20

Orbit difference in mm23. December 2010

Slide 16 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

How APL may mitigate into GNSS orbits?

Slide 17 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

How APL may mitigate into GNSS orbits?

Slide 17 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

How APL may mitigate into GNSS orbits?

Slide 17 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

How APL may mitigate into GNSS orbits?

Slide 17 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

How APL may mitigate into GNSS orbits?

Slide 17 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

How APL may mitigate into GNSS orbits?

Slide 17 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–orbits

Differences in the satellite positions between solutionswith and without correcting for APL

0

10

20

30

40

50

Num

ber

of d

ays

1 2 5 10 20 50 100

RMS in mm

>10 mm: 25 days> 7 mm: 68 days> 5 mm: 153 days

considering all satellites

Slide 18 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

APL and GNSS–orbits

Differences in the satellite positions between solutionswith and without correcting for APL

0

10

20

30

40

50

Num

ber

of d

ays

1 2 5 10 20 50 100

RMS in mm

>10 mm: 25 days> 7 mm: 68 days> 5 mm: 153 days

considering all satellites

0

10

20

30

40

50

Num

ber

of d

ays

1 2 5 10 20 50 100

RMS in mm

>10 mm: 7 days> 7 mm: 38 days> 5 mm: 126 days

considering all satellites except of that

one with the biggest RMS of orbit

differences

Slide 18 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

Summary

• Unmodeled APL–effect can mitigate into GNSS satellite orbits ifa large area is affected by APL deformation.

Slide 19 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

Summary

• Unmodeled APL–effect can mitigate into GNSS satellite orbits ifa large area is affected by APL deformation.

• Weakly observed satellites can easily be shifted by fewcentimeters (depending on the start and end point of theirtrajectory with respect to the deformed area).

Slide 19 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

Summary

• Unmodeled APL–effect can mitigate into GNSS satellite orbits ifa large area is affected by APL deformation.

• Weakly observed satellites can easily be shifted by fewcentimeters (depending on the start and end point of theirtrajectory with respect to the deformed area).

• For all other satellites the difference between applying APL ornot may exceed 5mm RMS over all satellites for a reasonablenumber of days.

Slide 19 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

Conclusion

• Correcting APL on observation level is the only approach withoutany compromises.

Slide 20 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

Conclusion

• Correcting APL on observation level is the only approach withoutany compromises.

• When applying mean APL corrections to station coordinatesafter the processing, the variation in time of the APL effect isabsorbed by the troposphere parameters (one third of the effect— typically very small)

Slide 20 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

Conclusion

• Correcting APL on observation level is the only approach withoutany compromises.

• When applying mean APL corrections to station coordinatesafter the processing, the variation in time of the APL effect isabsorbed by the troposphere parameters (one third of the effect— typically very small)

• An new realization of the geodetic datum is required afterapplying mean APL corrections to the station coordinates. Thishas to be done as long as all relevant parameters are accessible,e.g., in a software–internal normal equation.In case of SINEX the orbit parameters are missing, which mayabsorb a part of the unmodeled APL effect.

Slide 20 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

Conclusion

• . . .

• With such approach the station coordinates deviate from theconsequent correction on observation level by 0.1mm RMS; whattypically includes differences for individual stations of up to0.5mm.

Slide 21 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

Conclusion

• . . .

• With such approach the station coordinates deviate from theconsequent correction on observation level by 0.1mm RMS; whattypically includes differences for individual stations of up to0.5mm.

Everybody has to decide by its own which level of compromises

can be accepted to get the benefit of exchangeable APL

models after the processing.

Slide 21 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

Final Remark

The results can also be interpreted as a general errormitigation study that act in the same way for com-parable (unmodeled) effects in the GNSS analysis:

1. Atmospheric pressure loading

2. Ocean non–tidal loading

3. Hydrologically induced deformations

Slide 22 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB

R.Dachetal.:MitigationofAPLinto

parameters

ofaglobalGNSSsolution

IGSworkshop,23.–27.July

2012,Olsztyn,Poland

THANK YOUfor your attention

Publications of the satellite geodesy research group:

http://www.bernese.unibe.ch/publist

Slide 23 of 23 Astronomical Institute, University of Bern AIUB