Startseite Effect of PCV and attitude on the precise orbit determination of Jason-3 satellite
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

Effect of PCV and attitude on the precise orbit determination of Jason-3 satellite

  • Kai Li , Xuhua Zhou , Nannan Guo EMAIL logo und Shanshi Zhou
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 26. Januar 2022
Veröffentlichen auch Sie bei De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

Satellite attitude modes and antenna phase center variations have a great influence on the Precise Orbit Determination (POD) of Low Earth Orbit satellites (LEOs). Inaccurate information about spacecraft attitude, phase center offsets and variations in the POD leads to orbital error. The Jason-3 satellite experienced complex attitude modes which are fixed, sinusoidal, ramp-up/down and yaw-flip. Therefore, it is necessary to properly construct the attitude model in the process of POD especially when there is no external attitude data. For the antenna phase center correction, the PCO which is the deviation between Antenna Reference Point (ARP) and Mean Antenna Phase Center (MAPC) usually can be calibrated on the ground accurately, but the PCV which is the deviation between Instantaneous Antenna Phase Center (IAPC) and Mean Antenna Phase Center (MAPC) will change greatly with the change of space environment. Residual approach can be used to estimate the receiver PCV map. In this paper, we collected the on-board GPS data of Jason-3 satellite from January 2019 and analyzed the impacts of PCV and spacecraft attitude on the orbit accuracy by performing the reduced-dynamic POD. Compared with the reference orbit released by the Centre National d’Études Spatiales (CNES), using the PCV map can reduce the Root Mean Square (RMS) of orbit differences in the Radial (R), Along-track (T), Cross-track (N) and 3D direction about 0.3, 1.0, 0.9, and 1.4 mm. Based on the estimated PCV map, the orbit accuracy in R, T, N and 3D direction is 1.24, 2.81, 1.17, and 3.29 cm respectively by using the measured attitude data. When using the attitude model, the orbit accuracy in R, T, N and 3D directions is 1.60, 3.54, 1.33, and 4.13 cm, respectively. The results showed that the combination of measured attitude data and modeled PCV map can obtain the better orbit solution. It is essential to build a corresponding model in high-precision orbit determination, when there is no attitude data and PCV map.

Award Identifier / Grant number: 11803032

Award Identifier / Grant number: 12103077

Award Identifier / Grant number: 12173072

Funding statement: This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 11803032, 12103077, 12173072).

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank CNES for providing the on-board GPS observation data of the Jason-3 satellite and its precise orbit, and CODE for providing the GPS precise orbit and clock products. Additionally, the authors extend their appreciation to the editors and anonymous reviewers for their constructive suggestions that helped to enhance the original manuscript.

References

[1] Dumont J P, Rosmorduc V, Carrere L. et al. Jason-3 Products HandBook, [online] Available: https://www.ospo.noaa.gov/Products/documents/hdbk_j3.pdf.Suche in Google Scholar

[2] https://directory.eoportal.org/web/eoportal/satellite-missions/j/jason-3.Suche in Google Scholar

[3] Cerri L, Berthias J P, Bertiger W I, et al. Precision orbit determination standards for the Jason series of altimeter missions. Marine Geodesy, 2010, 33(S1): 379–418.10.1080/01490419.2010.488966Suche in Google Scholar

[4] Cerri L, Lemoine J M, Mercier F, et al. DORIS-based point mascons for the long term stability of precise orbit solutions. Advances in Space Research, 2013, 52(3): 466–476.10.1016/j.asr.2013.03.023Suche in Google Scholar

[5] Kang Z, Tapley B, Bettadpur S, et al. Precise orbit determination for the GRACE mission using only GPS data. Journal of Geodesy, 2006, 80(6): 322–331.10.1007/s00190-006-0073-5Suche in Google Scholar

[6] Jäggi A, Hugentobler U, Bock H, et al. Precise orbit determination for GRACE using undifferenced or doubly differenced GPS data. Advances in Space Research, 2007, 39(10): 1612–1619.10.1016/j.asr.2007.03.012Suche in Google Scholar

[7] Tapley B D, Ries J C, Davis G W, et al. Precision orbit determination for TOPEX/POSEIDON. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 1994, 99(C12): 24383–24404.10.1029/94JC01645Suche in Google Scholar

[8] Mao X, Visser P, Van den IJssel J. Impact of GPS antenna phase center and code residual variation maps on orbit and baseline determination of GRACE. Advances in Space Research, 2017, 59(12): 2987–3002.10.1016/j.asr.2017.03.019Suche in Google Scholar

[9] Gu D, Lai Y, Liu J, et al. Spaceborne GPS receiver antenna phase center offset and variation estimation for the Shiyan 3 satellite. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 2016, 29(5): 1335–1344.10.1016/j.cja.2016.08.016Suche in Google Scholar

[10] Bock H, Jäggi A, Meyer U, et al. Impact of GPS antenna phase center variations on precise orbits of the GOCE satellite. Advances in space research, 2011, 47(11): 1885–1893.10.1016/j.asr.2011.01.017Suche in Google Scholar

[11] Montenbruck O, Garcia-Fernandez M, Yoon Y, et al. Antenna phase center calibration for precise positioning of LEO satellites. GPS solutions, 2009, 13(1): 23.10.1007/s10291-008-0094-zSuche in Google Scholar

[12] Zhang Q. Research on the key technologies of precise orbit determination for low earth orbit satellites and their formation using GPS and BDS. Wuhan University, 2018.Suche in Google Scholar

[13] Wu S C, Yunck T P, Thornton C L. Reduced-dynamic technique for precise orbit determination of low earth satellites. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 1991, 14(1): 24–30.10.2514/3.20600Suche in Google Scholar

[14] Švehla D, Rothacher M. Kinematic and reduced-dynamic precise orbit determination of low earth orbiters. Advances in Geosciences, 2003, 1: 47–56.10.5194/adgeo-1-47-2003Suche in Google Scholar

[15] Švehla D, Rothacher M. Kinematic precise orbit determination for gravity field determination // A Window on the Future of Geodesy. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2005: 181–188.10.1007/3-540-27432-4_32Suche in Google Scholar

[16] Jäggi A, Dach R, Montenbruck O, et al. Phase center modeling for LEO GPS receiver antennas and its impact on precise orbit determination. Journal of Geodesy, 2009, 83(12): 1145.10.1007/s00190-009-0333-2Suche in Google Scholar

[17] Inácio P, Ditmar P, Klees R, et al. Analysis of star camera errors in GRACE data and their impact on monthly gravity field models. Journal of Geodesy, 2015, 89(6): 551–571.10.1007/s00190-015-0797-1Suche in Google Scholar

[18] Bloßfeld M, Zeitlhöfler J, Rudenko S, et al. Observation-Based Attitude Realization for Accurate Jason Satellite Orbits and Its Impact on Geodetic and Altimetry Results. Remote Sensing, 2020, 12(4): 682.10.3390/rs12040682Suche in Google Scholar

[19] Peter H, Jäggi A, Fernández J, et al. Sentinel-1A–First precise orbit determination results. Advances in space research, 2017, 60(5): 879–892.10.1016/j.asr.2017.05.034Suche in Google Scholar

[20] ftp://ftp.ids-doris.org/pub/ids/satellites/Jason-3_CharacteristicsForPODprocessing.pdf.Suche in Google Scholar

[21] Haines B, Bar-Sever Y, Bertiger W, et al. One-centimeter orbit determination for Jason-1: new GPS-based strategies. Marine Geodesy, 2004, 27(1-2): 299–318.10.1080/01490410490465300Suche in Google Scholar

[22] Haines B, Bar-Sever Y, Bertiger W, et al. Space-based satellite antenna maps, impact of different satellite antenna maps on LEO & terrestrial results // Proceedings of the IGS Workshop. 2008.Suche in Google Scholar

[23] Petit G, Luzum B. IERS conventions (2010). Bureau International des Poids et mesures sevres (france), 2010.Suche in Google Scholar

[24] Pavlis N K, Holmes S A, Kenyon S C, et al. The development and evaluation of the Earth Gravitational Model 2008 (EGM2008). Journal of geophysical research: solid earth, 2012, 117(B4).10.1029/2011JB008916Suche in Google Scholar

[25] Standish E M. JPL planetary and lunar ephemerides, DE405/LE405. JPL IOM 312. F-98_048, 1998.Suche in Google Scholar

[26] Lyard F, Lefevre F, Letellier T, et al. Modelling the global ocean tides: modern insights from FES2004. Ocean dynamics, 2006, 56(5-6): 394–415.10.1007/s10236-006-0086-xSuche in Google Scholar

[27] Dach R, Schaer S, Arnold D, et al. CODE final product series for the IGS. 2016.Suche in Google Scholar

[28] Rebischung P, Schmid R. IGS14/igs14. atx: a new framework for the IGS products // AGU Fall Meeting 2016. 2016.Suche in Google Scholar

Received: 2021-08-22
Accepted: 2021-12-26
Published Online: 2022-01-26
Published in Print: 2022-04-26

© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Heruntergeladen am 21.9.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/jag-2021-0052/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen