SPECIAL WEB EXCLUSIVE!

20 ANTENNA GPS
11 SURVEY WORLD

CLICK HERE TO
DOWNLOAD THE 2011
ANTENNA SURVEY

The only authoritative industry resource for GPS

manufacturing provides detailed design and
performance specifications for nearly 350
antennas from more than 30 companies.

www.gpsworld.com/antennasurvey
March 2011
Vol. 22, Number 3
gpsworld.com

» cover storY
transportation

Road Talk  36
Interoperability Considerations for V2X GNSS Receivers
The presence of different types of devices, spanning multiple GNSS
receiver types, configurations, hardware, software, and consequent
widely varying capabilites, among a user mix of vehicles, cyclists, and
pedestrians, poses several engineering challenges for a V2X scheme
in which all road users share data with each other and with the road
infrastructure.
By Chaminda Basnayake

Opinions & transportation

Departments
Out in Front  4
Act Now to Protect GPS Signal
Guest Editorial by Joseph Paiva
EXPERT ADvice
Positioning Protocol
for Next-Gen Cell Phones
By Lauri Wirola
The system  14
Test Data Predicts Disastrous
GPS Jamming by FCC-Authorized
Broadcaster; Galileo’s GATE Opened;
Next-Generation GLONASS; Galileo
IOV August Launch; JAVAD Receivers
Track Compass B1 Signal
Demands of the Road  28
An Assisted-GNSS Solution Uses the EGNOS Data Access Service
For use in billing drivers in road-user charging schemes, onboard
units employing GNSS must meet stringent reliability and availability
requirements, and at the same time, be based on low-cost equipment
systems. The SIGNATURE unit includes an assistance service which provides
ephemeris data and corrections from EDAS, optimized for user location.
By Kevin Sheridan, Tomas Dyjas, Cyril Botteron, Jérôme Leclère, Fabrizio Dominici,
8 and Gianluca Marucco
innovation
Realistic
Randomization  43
New Way to Test GNSS Receivers
Alexander Mitelman

on the edge
the business  17 Application Challenge
ST-Ericsson, Broadcom GPS +
GLONASS Receivers; Delorme Iraq on the Map  49
Downloadable World Base Map; By Anas Malkawi
Navteq LocationPoint Ad Network;
Trimble Railway Track Maintenance
and Modernization; NovAtel’s
SMART-MR15 for Agriculture;
Department of Transportation
Vehicle-Connectivity Challenge;
Events; Online Webinars

www.gpsworld.com February 2011 | GPS World 3

out in front
Act Now to Protect GPS Signal
Joseph Paiva
G
PS has become a key
component of the U.S.
national infrastructure, the
driver of a significant part of the
civilian economies of the world, and
the enabler of millions of professional
precision uses and consumer benefits.
The viability of the GPS signal is now
threatened — ironically by what appears
to be a misguided attempt to increase
accessibility to broadband by creating a
needless zero-sum result for customers
who want both services.
The threat is real and immediate.
The U.S. Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) has issued a
conditional waiver to LightSquared, a
company engaged in developing
For many GPS users, theoretical fixes to the interference
are not likely to prove viable.
4G-LTE (long-term evolution) cellular
networks for wholesale-only basis
commerce with its business partners.
LightSquared Scheme. LightSquared
acquired a company providing a
combined space-based and ancillary
land-based service using the L-band
radiofrequency. The FCC conditional
waiver, granted to LightSquared
on January 26 of this year, allows
it to broadcast a new terrestrial
broadband service from 1,500-watt
terrestrial transmitters — 40,000 of
which will eventually be installed
by LightSquared — in the portion
of L Band (1525 MHz–1559 MHz)
immediately adjacent to the 1559–1610
MHz band used by GPS.
Instead of offering dual-mode
handsets exclusively as required by their
FCC license, retailers purchasing this
combined service can choose to offer
terrestrial mobile phones only, which
was the change in license terms that
LightSquared was seeking via wavier.
4 GPS World | March 2011 www.gpsworld.com
This change amounts to a de facto
reallocation of Lightsquared’s spectrum
use from space to terrestrial wireless.
In fact, the new broadband service is
planned to operate in urban areas, and
the space service will operate outside
these areas.
The LightSquared terrestrial
broadband signal is about 1 billion times
the received power of the GPS signal
on Earth. Members of the GPS industry
have been conducting experiments
and analyses, and these figures come
from those very early studies. Soon, we
may experience GPS interference —
jamming — on an almost unimaginable
scale and to a geographical extent that
could create widespread havoc.
Threats. The GPS system works so
well that we often forget the complexity
behind it and take for granted the service
we use daily. One reason GPS works
so well and is seldom defeated is that
the signals broadcast by the satellites
can be received under a wide variety
of conditions on Earth. Historically,
the FCC and the International
Telecommunications Union,
understanding potential interference
issues, intentionally planned uses of
adjacent swaths of the L-band so that
satellite-based transmissions, relatively
low-power, would be natural neighbors,
so as to cause as little disturbance as
possible to radio-navigation uses. This
dedicated purposing of the bands and
the resulting environment of negligible
interference is one reason that GPS has
become reliable and its use ubiquitous.
Long-time observers of the GPS
scene will remember how civilians, and
especially potential international users,
initially had uncertainty about the U.S.
This guest editorial addresses a
subject of paramount importance
to the GNSS industry, to the U.S.
national infrastructure, and to the
global GNSS community.
I urge you to take immediate
action by contacting U.S.
government representatives,
indicated at the end of this article.
— Alan Cameron, editor-in-chief
Department of Defense’s statements that
the service would be free and not subject
to any restrictions in one’s ability to
receive and use the broadcast signals.
This uncertainty was due primarily
to the implementation of Selective
Availability (SA), which intentionally
degraded the available accuracy of
the GPS signal. SA was permanently
removed in 2000 by President Clinton’s
1996 Presidential Decision Directive.
Many factors have enabled users and
potential users to see GPS as a reliable,
consistent technology that provides
significant increases in productivity,
efficiency, precision, continuing
innovation, and many other benefits.
These factors include the reliability
of the overall GPS technology,
improvements in receivers and in
successive next-generation satellites,
advances in differential and relative
positioning, dynamic applications, and
real-time kinematic solutions. And, just
as importantly: stable, predictable U.S.
policy.
Investments. Now, by virtue of this
unusual FCC action, uncertainty has
been thrown into the viability of the
hundreds of millions of GPS receivers
in use today. Much research and
development work is being done on
improving receiver performance and
taking advantage of improvements
planned for the satellites. The most
dollars go towards devising new
applications, products, and services

that improve the quality life of millions
of Americans, create new companies,
markets, and jobs. These dollars are also
being spent by government agencies,
not just the Department of Defense, but
very visibly by Agriculture, Commerce,
Interior, Energy, Homeland Security
and Transportation. More than likely,
the remaining departments either
have active programs that are using or
considering using GPS or are positively
affected by others’ use of GPS.
That’s just the executive branch.
Other parts of the federal government,
as well as state and local governments,
do research on GPS technology and
applications and actively use GPS to
improve the lives of citizens, increasing
work and recreation, efficiency, and
safety. In many local government
settings, there is active cooperation to
improve delivery of services by having
governmental and non-governmental
organizations collaborate around the
simple fact of accurate position being
available through GPS, with significant
cost savings in current lean budgets.
It is inexplicable that another part of
the government would be so cavalier in
rapidly and uncharacteristically granting
a waiver that clearly endangers the
whole system. And only after granting
the waiver, which must act at least
as a yellow light for LightSquared’s
mobilization plans, comes the
Obvious impacts are loss of operational viability of businesses
involved in aviation, surveying, agriculture, engineering and
construction, vehicle navigation, mariners, transportation, public
safety and homeland security, disaster management, utilities,
mapping, and scientific research.
requirement for a study — to be headed
by LightSquared — to determine
impacts and mitigation of interference
with the GPS signals.
Why Fast Track? The FCC grant of a
reallocation of spectrum use from space
to terrestrial on a fast-track waiver
did not follow the standard FCC rule-
www.gpsworld.com March 2011 | GPS World
making process for reallocation of
spectrum use. The standard regulatory
approach allows sufficient time for
robust public comment by all potentially
affected parties, including the conduct of
interference studies and the introduction
of comments on interference results in
the public record. Instead, the FCC order
granting the waver to LightSquared has
mandated what appears to be fast-track
GPS interference research.
Currently, the proposed LightSquared
terrestrial broadband service does not
have an installed user base. In contrast,
the installed GPS user base represents
a broad and diverse range of use
representing hundreds of millions of
users established over 30 years.
The final Working Group report is
due to the FCC on June 15, 2011. The
FCC order requires the GPS community
to participate “in good faith” in this
study effort. In response, the U.S. GPS
Industry Council and others are working
on this interference study to protect GPS
operations under these extraordinary
regulatory conditions.
A further problem created by
the FCC conditional waiver is that
LightSquared is able to move ahead
with its infrastructure development,
assuming that viable solutions to the
jamming issue will be found. For many
GPS users, theoretical fixes are not
likely to prove viable.
Negative Impacts. Preliminary research
done by member companies of the
USGIC already has been reported in
GPS World. The research indicates that
LightSquared’s 1,500-watt terrestrial
transmitters will result in a signal 90 dB
stronger than GPS over the coverage
area; this amounts to signal strength
out in front
1 billion times stronger than GPS. There
is more to the research, all done with
GPS simulators and signal generators
(see news story on page 14 and www.
gpsworld.com/data for test results).
Clearly the jamming level will vary
with geography. We don’t yet know
LightSquared’s broadcast-tower siting
plan. But it is clear that if LightSquared
is allowed to broadcast terrestrially
High-Precision Users
High-performance L1 receivers (sub-
meter) have a wide-bandwidth RF
front-end to improve performance,
about 20 MHz, compared to a
consumer receiver that typically has a
front-end bandwidth of 2 MHz.
GPS World contributing editor
for survey and GIS Eric Gakstatter
discusses this aspect of the issue in his
recent e-mail newsletter column at
www.gpsworld.com/l2high.
on the mobile satellite system (MSS)
band, dedicated until now to signals
compatible with satellite transmissions,
there is a substantial danger that millions
of GPS receivers will be adversely
affected.
Some obvious impacts are loss of
operational viability of businesses
involved in aviation, surveying,
agriculture, engineering and
construction, vehicle navigation,
mariners, transportation, public safety
and homeland security, disaster
management, utilities, mapping, and
scientific research. Several of these
involve safety-of -life issues, which are
at risk of being jammed.
Keep in mind that GPS was
envisioned as a system for space
and time. Its longest life as a useful
contributor to society has been as a time
standard. Countless networks, whether
for computing, broadcasting, power
generation — even, ironically, cell
phones — are synchronized using the
most precise signal practically available.
Fixed GPS receiving stations for time
reference may be able to be designed
5
out in front
to withstand some interference from
high-power broadcasting on adjacent
frequencies, but nobody has tried so far.
Any hypothetical fixes for GPS beg
a more fundamental question: Why
should Lightsquared, a new entrant with
no existing business, be allowed to shift
the burden of mitigating interference
created by its operations to millions of
consumers, government agencies, and
businesses who have invested in GPS
over the last 30 years?
Keep in mind that other users of the
MSS band will also be affected. Many
commercial and governmental uses of
the very band that LightSquared will
occupy with its terrestrial transmitters
may also be jeopardized.
We must also remember that the
FCC has its own agenda, to implement
its National Broadband Plan. What is
truly difficult to comprehend is that
broadband and GPS will serve the same
Large-scale disruption of the
GPS service must not be on our
hands, due to inaction.
mobile user.
Action Needed. Please act now.
◾ Write to your representatives in
Congress, and to your professional
and trade associations.
◾ If you are an expert on radio or
spectrum or GPS or whatever else
is pertinent, make your comments,
do your research if possible, and
publish your results with all due
speed.
◾ Petition the FCC to turn the yellow
light to red, while other paths to
achieving LightSquared’s and the
FCC’s goals are investigated.
◾ Do not forget the Administration:
the National Telecommunica-
tions Information Administration
(NTIA) represents the president
and the Administration as official
co-regulator with the FCC of the
spectrum where GPS operates. In
6 GPS World | March 2011 www.gpsworld.com
the recent FCC Order, NTIA must
review the report on results of the
FCC-mandated interference study.
◾ Specifically, ask Congress to de-
mand that the FCC include specific
language to protect GPS use in the
final FCC Order to LightSquared
after the interference study is com-
pleted.
◾ Ask the Secretary of Commerce
and the White House Office of Sci-
ence and Technology Policy (OSTP)
to inform the NTIA Administrator
to urge the FCC chairman to take
this same action to protect GPS in
the final FCC Order.
◾ Contact the FCC chairman directly
and urge this same action.
◾ Finally, help develop user and
beneficiary awareness of the grave
danger being posed to GPS and
make your elected and congres-
sional representatives aware of the
impact that interference with GPS
would have on your work.
The large-scale disruption of the GPS
service mustn’t be on our hands due to
inaction.
Joseph Paiva is a consultant to the geomatics
industry, with background in private
engineering, surveying and mapping consulting,
and as developer and general manager for two
geomatics products corporations.
Points of Contact
Send messages to FCC chairman,
commissioners, and NTIA:
Edward.Lazarus at fcc.gov (Chairman
Genachowski’s office); John.Giusti
at fcc.gov (Comm. Copps’ office);
Angela.Giancarlo at fcc.gov (Comm.
McDowell’s office); Louis.Peraertz at
fcc.gov (Comm. Clyburn’s office);
Charles.Mathias at fcc.gov (Comm.
Baker’s office); lstrickling at ntia.doc.gov
(asst. secretary for communications
and information, NTIA).
International readers may
contact the U.S. State Department,
clorere at state.gov. For further contacts,
see www.gpsworld.com/actnow.
www.gpsworld.com
editorial
Editor in Chief Alan Cameron | acameron@questex.com
Managing Editor Tracy Cozzens | tcozzens@questex.com
Art Director RJ Pooch | rpooch@questex.com
EDITORIAL OFFICES
201 Sandpointe Avenue, Suite 500,
Santa Ana, CA 92707-8716 USA
714-338-6700 | Fax 714-338-6717
www.gpsworld.com | info@gpsworld.com
COntRibuting editors
Innovation Richard Langley | lang@unb.ca
Defense PNT Don Jewell | djewell@questex.com
LBS Insider Kevin Dennehy | kdennehy@questex.com
Professional OEM Tony Murfin | tmurfin@questex.com
Survey Eric Gakstatter | egakstatter@questex.com
Transportation Bill Thompson | bthompson@questex.com
Wireless Pulse Janice Partyka | jpartyka@questex.com
advertising
Publisher George Casey
george.casey@questex.com | 216-706-3752
Eastern Region/International Account Manager
Michael Eager | meager@questex.com | 913-254-9622
Western/Northern Regional Account Manager
Jeannie Hortness | jhortness@questex.com | 714-338-6732
Marketing Manager Sarah Joy Obaña
sobana@questex.com | 714-338-6763
Vice President, Industrial & Specialty Group
Kevin Stoltman | kstoltman@questex.com | 216-706-3740
publishing services
Production Manager Sue Gigliotti | sgigliotti@questex.com
Audience Development Manager Deborah Gullian
dgullian@questex.com
Production OFFICE 306 West Michigan St., Suite 200,
Duluth, MN 55802, USA; 218-279-8840
Circulation/Subscriber Services
gpsworld@halldata.com | USA: 866-344-1315 (toll free) International:
1-847-763-9594
QUESTEX MEDIA GROUP, LLC.
President & CEO: Kerry C. Gumas
EVP & CFO: Tom Caridi
EVP: Tony D’Avino
EVP: Gideon Dean
Questex Worldwide Headquarters
275 Grove Street, Newton, MA 02466, USA
617-219-8300 | Toll-Free 888-552-4346 | Fax 617-219-8310
MANUSCRIPTS: GPS World welcomes unsolicited articles but cannot be held responsible for
their safekeeping or return. Send to: 201 Sandpointe Avenue, Suite 500, Santa Ana, CA 92707-8716
USA. Every precaution is taken to ensure accuracy, but publishers cannot accept responsibility for
the accuracy of information supplied herein or for any opinion expressed. REPRINTS: Reprints
of all articles are available (500 minimum). Contact 800-290-5460, ext. 100, e-mail GPSWorld@
theygsgroup.com. DIRECT MAIL LIST RENTAL: Ilene Schwartz, Kroll Direct, 216-371-1667,
fax 216-371-1669 e-mail Ilene@krolldirect.com. SUBSCRIBER SERVICES: To subscribe,
change your address, and all other services, e-mail gpsworld@halldata.com or call 866-344-1315
(1-847-763-9594 outside the U.S.). PERMISSIONS: Contact 800-494-9051 ext. 100 or
questexpermissions@theygsgroup.com. INTERNATIONAL LICENSING: Contact e-mail
info@gpsworld.com. ACCOUNTING OFFICE and OFFICE OF PUBLICATION: 306
West Michigan St., Ste 200, Duluth, MN 55802, USA.
GPS WORLD does not verify any claims or other information appearing in any of the
advertisements contained in the publication and cannot take any responsibility for any losses or other
damages incurred by readers in reliance on such content.
Published monthly
View from GTS 5 (Kehlsteinhaus) on GATE Test Area

GATE Transmit Station 1 GATE Virtual Satellite Mode GATE Test Vehicle

Galileo Application Test Range

operated by IFEN

Fully compliant to  Operational Galileo test range with eight “virtual” Galileo satellites
Galileo OS ICD
 Transmitted signals are fully compliant to Galileo OS SIS ICD

 Test your Multi-GNSS receiver under real environmental conditions

Test & verify your
GNSS applications
 Test your applications with other real sensors integrated

 Verify your positioning and integrity performance

Galileo
system validation  Combine GATE and Galileo IOV satellites for a full constellation

 Test you RAIM algorithm performance under feared events

For further information contact:
email: info@gate-testbed.com
web: www.gate-testbed.com

N 47° 36’37” IFEN GmbH

E 12° 58’42” Alte Gruber Str. 6
85586 Poing
Germany
expert advice
Positioning Protocol for Next-Gen Cell Phones
Lauri Wirola, Nokia Services Location
A
s cell phones move into the
next generation called Long-
Term Evolution (LTE), also
sometimes called 4G, and the methods
of wireless transmission change, so
too must the methods of providing
location information over those new
wireless interfaces. LTE Positioning
Protocol (LPP) and Secure User Plane
Location (SUPL) 2.0 and 3.0 are the
key players in this new picture.
Cellular industry location standards
first appeared in the late 1990s, with
the 3rd Generation Partnership (3GPP)
Radio Resource Location Services
Protocol (RRLP) Technical Specifica-
tion (TS) 44.031 positioning protocol
LTE Positioning Protocol
extensions in the A-GNSS
domain include local
atmospheric models, for more
accurate delay compensation.
for GSM networks. Today RRLP is the
de facto standardized protocol to carry,
for instance, GNSS assistance data to
GNSS-enabled mobile devices.
A major update of RRLP began in
2007, when RRLP Release 7 added
support for assisted-Galileo, and
Release 8 for the rest of the GNSS
including GLONASS, modernized
GPS, QZSS, and the various SBASs.
RRLP Releases 7/8 set high
expectations in terms of performance
improvements. The initial idea was
8 GPS World | March 2011 www.gpsworld.com
to go beyond the native capabilities
of GNSSs to achieve tangible
accuracy, time-to-first-fix (TTFF),
and availability improvements.
Contributors proposed introducing
local ionosphere and troposphere
models as well as carrier-phase-based
relative positioning — in cell phones!
However, legacy implementations,
architecture limitations, and the
lack of a business case hindered
this development. In the end, RRLP
support was limited more or less to
the native assistance data types such
as global Klobuchar and NeQuick
models for the ionosphere. The same
approach was also mapped to 3GPP
TS 25.331 Radio Resource Control
(RRC) protocol, which defines the
positioning procedures and assistance
data delivery for Universal Mobile
Telecommunications System
Terrestrial Radio Access (UTRA) —
that is, wideband code-division
multiple-access (WCDMA) and
time-division synchronous CDMA
networks.
Long-Term Evolution Networks
A fresh push for location services in
3GPP started in 2009 for LTE Release 9
technologies. LTE is sometimes called
4G, but to be precise only a further evo-
lution of LTE, called LTE Advanced
(LTE-A), will be 4G, together with
WiMAX evolution 802.16m.
The starting point for LTE location
services work was to enable similar
positioning capabilities in the LTE
▲ FIGURE 1 Long-Term Evolution (LTE) location architecture.
networks as are present in GSM,
UTRA, and CDMA networks. This
meant that there was a need to define
assisted-GNSS positioning as well
as introduce positioning methods,
such as enhanced cell ID (ECID) and
hyperbolic time-difference-of-arrival
(TDOA) methods for non-GNSS
devices, hybrid use, and for GNSS-
denied environments. The underlying
driver of all this work was the U.S.
Federal Communications Commision
(FCC) Wireless E911 mandate.
LTE Location Architecture
LTE location architecture is shown in
Figure 1. The evolved serving mobile
location center (E-SMLC) is the server
component in charge of positioning ac-
tivities. The mobility management entity
(MME) gives the positioning request to
E-SMLC, which then controls the user
equipment (UE, the LTE device to be
positioned) and, possibly, LTE base sta-
tions (eNodeBs), to perform positioning.
LTE Positioning Protocol. The actual
positioning and assistance protocol
between E-SMLC and UE is called
LTE Positioning Protocol (LPP).
In overview, LPP consists of three
independent elementary procedures:
capability exchange, assistance data
exchange, and location information
exchange, which refers to both
measurement and position. The
associated messaging is shown in
Figure 2. In addition to the six message
types shown, there are LPP Error
and LPP Abort messages to handle
Navx -NCS Standard
Multi-GNSS GPS L1, Galileo E1, GLONASS L1, QZSS L1 and SBAS

SW-Licensing Extend your GNSS capabilities by simple SW licensing

HW-Modularity Scalable from 12 to 36 signal channels according to your needs

Galileo signal quality and signal characteristics are now certified

phone: +49.8121.2238.30 IFEN GmbH In co-operation with

email: sales@ifen.com Alte Gruber Str. 6
web: www.ifen.com 85586 Poing
Germany
Expert advice
▲ FIGURE 2 LPP elementary procedures and messages. In LPP terminology, “target” is the end
user device to be positioned.
▲ FIGURE 3 Example of a typical LPP positioning session.
abnormal situations.
Figure 3 shows a sample positioning session using all
the procedures. Assume that the server has received a
location request for a given target (UE) and that the server
can exchange messages with the UE — that is, lower
protocol layers can provide the transport for the LPP-level
messages. The first transaction of the location session is the
capability exchange (LPP Request/Provide Capabilities).
This information exchange makes the server aware of the
UE positioning capabilities (GNSS support, supported
cellular network measurements). Based on this information, emergency-call positioning capability. However, there is
the server can make a decision on the positioning method
to be used, based on both UE capabilities and the requested
quality-of-position (response time, accuracy).
The actual location information request is carried in LPP
Request Location Information message: whether position
or measurements are requested and/or allowed and, for
instance, which GNSSs are allowed to be used. It also
carries other reporting instructions such as periodicity and
required response time.
Having received this message, the target begins its
positioning activities. In a typical scenario, this activity
triggers a request for the assistance data. For instance,
if the server requests the GNSS-based position, and the
target does not have the latest ephemerides, the target will
request those with the LPP Request/Provide Assistance
Data mechanism (transaction 3). Having received the
ephemerides, the target can position itself quickly, without
needing the data broadcasts from the satellites, and
report the location information back to the server in LPP
Provide Location Information message. Other supporting
information, such as reference location, reference time
10 GPS World | March 2011 www.gpsworld.com
and ionosphere model, may also be
provided to the target.
Figures 4 and 6 summarize the contents
of LPP Provide Location Information
and LPP Provide Assistance Data
messages, respectively, in the gray
boxes. The LPP Provide Location
Information contents can be roughly divided into four
categories: one category for each positioning method
(assisted GNSS, observed TDOA, and ECID) and one
category for providing the location estimate. In the
A-GNSS category, the UE, based on the server commands,
either reports the raw code and carrier-phase measurements
(UE-assisted mode) or information regarding the provided
PVT estimate (OTDOA and ECID function only in UE-
assisted mode in LPP).
The LPP Provide Assistance Data reflects the same
structure and categorization. Similarly, to Provide Location
Information message, one can see in the assistance data
message GNSS-specific assistance as well as OTDOA-
specific assistance. However, there is no ECID-specific
assistance due to it being available only in UE-assisted
fashion. For OTDOA there is assistance, but only to assist
the UE in the measurement process, not for positioning
purposes — for instance, eNodeB positions cannot be
transferred in the assistance data.
User Plane and Applications. RRLP, RRC, and LPP are
natively control-plane positioning protocols. This means
that they are transported in the inner workings of cellular
networks and are practically invisible to end users. In the
control plane, their main purpose is to reliably provide the
obviously demand for positioning services for location-
based end-user applications. To address this, in 2003 the
Open Mobile Alliance started to work with Secure User
Plane Location (SUPL) 1.0 protocol that brings the same
location capabilities to user plane (application domain)
over IP-networks as RRLP/RRC/LPP bring to control
plane. One design principle of SUPL was not to re-invent
the wheel; thus RRLP/RRC/LPP are being re-used in the
user plane domain for positioning. OMA SUPL specifies
a bearer protocol that carries a 3GPP-defined positioning
protocol and provides security, authentication, privacy, and
charging mechanisms. SUPL 1.0 is already commercially
deployed, and SUPL 2.0 is now being deployed globally.
Figure 5 shows the OMA SUPL 2.0 protocol stack, which
illustrates the re-use of 3GPP positioning protocols over
IP networks. The security is provided by the standard
transport layer security (TLS), and the user plane location
protocol (ULP) is the wrapper for the 3GPP positioning
protocols. The vast majority of SUPL 2.0 deployments will
use RRLP as the positioning protocol. SUPL 3.0, currently
being defined, will no longer support RRLP/RRC; LPP

▲ FIGURE 4 LPP/LPPe Provide Location Information content.
3GPP LPP shown in gray; OMA LPP Extensions shown in green.
will gradually replace RRLP as the dominant standardized
positioning protocol.
LPP Extensions
From the beginning, it was clear that the contents of the LPP
would largely reflect that of the RRLP and would be limited
to the native capabilities in the GNSS domain, and in other
positioning methods to the methods strictly needed to fulfill
the emergency-call positioning requirements. For example,
in the GNSS domain the ionosphere models are limited to the
(global) broadcast models as obtained from GPS, QZSS, and
Galileo; there is no support for local ionosphere models. Other
potential performance improvements including troposphere
models and pressure-based altitude assistance are not in the
scope of the 3GPP LPP work. Furthermore, a plethora of other
positioning methods ranging from GSM- and WCDMA-based
positioning (ECID, hyperbolic TDOA methods) to utilizing
WLAN and short-range nodes such as Bluetooth are beyond
the scope of current LPP development.
During the LPP Release 9 work, the industry was at a
crossroads. On one hand, it was known that the 3GPP-
defined LPP would become the de facto standardized
www.gpsworld.com March 2011 | GPS World
expert advice
▲ FIGURE 5 OMA SUPL 2.0 and 3.0 protocol stacks. TIA-801 is the
3GPP2-defined positioning protocol for the CDMA networks. Note
that ULP 1.0 (not shown) supports RRLP, RRC, and TIA-801.
protocol to do basic positioning not only in the LTE control
plane, but also in IP networks over SUPL 2.0 and 3.0. On
the other hand, it was also known that it would lack some
key features including WLAN-based positioning, which
would essentially force vendors to introduce proprietary
protocols to augment LPP. Further, a serious drawback
for use of LPP in the IP-network domain is that it does not
support GSM- and UTRA-specific positioning methods
(ECID, OTDOA). Thus, LPP could not completely replace
legacy positioning protocols, including RRLP.
These considerations led to discussion of introducing
extension hooks in LPP messages, so that the bodies
external to 3GPP could extend the LPP feature set. In 2009,
Qualcomm contributed extension containers to the LPP
messages, and the way was open to start work on OMA
LPP Extensions Release 1.0 in 2010.
The mandate of the OMA LPP Extensions (LPPe) is to
build on top of the 3GPP LPP, re-using its procedures and
data types as far as possible. This means that the message
types are fixed; new messages cannot be defined, only
extensions to existing ones can be formulated. Whenever
possible, OMA should re-use information elements from
3GPP LPP to avoid duplicate definitions, compatibility, and
maintenance issues. LPPe is supported in SUPL 3.0, which
will be the primary transport protocol of LPPe.
Procedure Extensions. OMA LPP Extensions Release 1.0
not only defines new positioning methods and assistance
data types, but also defines new procedures for improved
performance. These include the following:
◾ Capability exchange and location-information exchange re-
11
Expert advice

versed mode, illustrated in Figure 7, with

the LPPe Request/Provide Capabilities/
Location Information messages flowing
in the opposite directions as compared
to Figure 2. This reversed mode is only
allowed in the context of LPPe. In the
context of assistance data support, capa-
bilities in the reversed case refer to the
assistance data that the server can pro-
vide, as opposed to the assistance data
the target can utilize in normal mode-
capability exchange.
The interpretation of reversed mode
for location information exchange is
somewhat more delicate. When the
UE sends LPPe Request Location
Information to the server, the UE does
not request the server position, but
the UE position. In the request the UE
may define the quality-of-position,
which then guides the positioning
method selection by the server.
◾ Periodic assistance data is a com-
pletely new feature to the assistance-
▲ FIGURE 6 Assistance data content of LPP and LPP Extension.
data protocols. Periodic assistance can 3GPP LPP shown in gray; OMA LPP Extensions shown in green.
be used with selected assistance-data
types that require updates at short inter- continuous carrier-phase measure- ◾ Segmented assistance-data transfer
vals. Such data types include short-term ments for high-accuracy purposes. procedure allows for partitioning a
real-time ionosphere correction from The 3GPP LPP does specify periodic large assistance-data delivery into
GNSS networks and carrier phase — measurements, but in such a way smaller segments as well as resuming
assistance for high-accuracy relative that, say, the GNSS measurement such a segmented session after an ac-
positioning. The periodic assistance engine can be powered off between tive-inactive-active cycle in the LPPe
procedure also includes the possibility measurement deliveries, which is session. This control is carried in the
for the target and server to update the obviously unacceptable in the view common part of the LPPe Request/
periodic session-control parameters of carrier-phase-based relative high- Provide Assistance Data message as
(duration, rate of delivery) intra-session. accuracy GNSS. The periodic location shown in Figure 6.
This control is carried in the common information procedure also includes ◾ Measurement scheduling/win-
part of the LPPe Request/Provide As- the possibility for the target and server dowing allows the server to request
sistance Data message (Figure 6). to update the periodic session-control measurements (GNSS, ECID, TDOA)
◾ Periodic location information re- parameters (duration, rate of delivery) to be made within a certain time win-
porting is included in 3GPP LPP, but intra-session. This control is carried in dow that can be expressed in terms of
the similar capability in the OMA the common part of the LPPe Request/ GNSS time or cellular network time.
LPPe is specifically designed for Provide Location Information mes- This control is carried in the common
continuous measurements including sage as shown in Figure 4. part of the LPPe Request/Provide Lo-
12 GPS World | March 2011 www.gpsworld.com

▲ FIGURE 7 LPPe reversed mode for capability and location information exchange.
cation Information message as shown
in Figure 4.
Extensions. OMA LPPe introduces
several enhancements for various
positioning methods as well as
completely new methods:
◾ Additions in the A-GNSS domain
include local atmosphere models. In
3GPP LPP, the models are limited to
ionosphere ones and therein to the
broadcast types as in GPS, Galileo,
and QZSS broadcasts. The OMA
LPPe introduces a localized Klobuchar
model, which allows for presenting the
delay corrections in the well-known
Klobuchar model, but for a limited-
validity area and time for more accurate
delay compensation. In addition, iono-
sphere storm warnings can be carried
to the UE at the chosen resolution. This
information allows UE to deduce the
reason for high measurement residuals.
Troposphere models have not
previously been in the scope of the
standardized assistance protocols. The
troposphere model in LPPe carries the
hydrostatic and wet zenith delays, their
change rates in the height dimension
for approximating the zenith delays
at the UE altitude, Niel mapping
functions for hydrostatic and wet
components, and composite spatial
gradients. Alternatively, the surface
meteorological parameters (pressure,
temperature) can be carried to the UE,
and the calculation of the troposphere
delay is left for the UE.
Another troposphere model is the
altitude-pressure relationship for the
UEs with a barometer. This altitude
assistance increases availability by
introducing an independent source of
altitude information.
Whereas the 3GPP LPP carries
the ephemerides, almanacs, signals
supported by the satellites, and the
www.gpsworld.com March 2011 | GPS World
GLONASS frequency mappings, OMA
LPPe introduces satellite mechanical
informational, differential code biases,
and new navigation models. The
mechanical information consists of
mass, effective reflectivity-area, and
phase-center offsets for the in-UE orbit
prediction purposes. In the navigation
model domain, the additions include
SP3-type orbit representation and
the orbit/clock model degradation
models for improved error modeling.
Practically all the new assistance data
types support precise-point positioning
approaches for future GNSS services.
Lastly, one of the major LPPe
A-GNSS features is the continuous
carrier-phase (CCP) assistance for real-
time kinematic applications. The CCP
data format supports straightforward
mapping from RTCM 10403.1 to
ensure interoperability. The LPPe CCP
mechanism utilizes the LPPe-level
periodic assistance data procedure and
supports multiple reference stations as
well as mobility, that is, changes in the
set of active reference stations on-the-
fly.
◾ To enable the use of LPP/LPPe in
all the networks, the legacy hyperbolic
methods E-OTD and OTDOA-IPDL
for GSM and UTRA networks, re-
spectively, are supported, and the data
content are copy/pastes from RRLP and
RRC to ensure interoperability. Support
for UE-based LTE OTDOA is also in-
cluded.
◾ A major part of LPPe specification is
devoted to the various ECID methods.
These cover GSM, UTRA, LTE, and
WLAN networks both in UE-assisted
and UE-based modes.
◾ In LPPe terminology, the short-
range nodes (SRNs) refer to Bluetooth,
Bluetooth Low-Energy, and near-field
communication (NFC) tags, which are
expert advice
considered separately from the primary
communications networks (cellular
networks and WLAN). Similarly to the
ECID methods, the SRNs can be used
for positioning in either UE-assisted
or UE-based modes. In the UE-based
mode, in which the SRN locations need
to be carried to the UE, the philosophy
is that the SRNs are logically arranged
into groups – one group of SRNs can be
the set of SRNs in one building or in one
floor in the building. The assistance data
is considered in the units of these groups
in conjunction with the group data ver-
sion that allows for handling situations,
in which the arrangement of the SRNs
in the building changes, and the data in
the UE needs to be refreshed.
◾ Finally, no single positioning and as-
sistance protocol can address all needs.
Thus, both LPPe assistance data ex-
change and LPPe location information
exchange include black-box containers
for vendors and operators to carry their
own proprietary assistance data and
location information in a standardized
framework. The benefit of this approach
is that the same standardized protocol
framework used in commercial deploy-
ments can be used for rapid prototyping
and providing differentiating position-
ing performance, without the need for
defining proprietary protocols from
scratch.
Conclusion
The framework introduced by 3GPP
LPP and extended in LPPe brings long-
sought convergence in the control- and
user-plane positioning protocols. This
ensures that in the user-plane domain,
the dominant domain for positioning
services in consumer LBS, vendors can
utilize exactly the same protocol as in
the control plane. This reduces imple-
mentation, testing, and deployments
costs, and will make the LPP/LPPe the
de facto standardized positioning proto-
col in the mobile domain.
Lauri Wirola has a Ph.D. in electrophysics from
Tampere University of Technology in Finland. He
manages indoor positioning activities at Nokia
Services Location.
13
 System
the
Policy and system news and developments | GPS | Galileo | GLONASS
Test Data Predicts Disastrous GPS Jamming
by FCC-Authorized Broadcaster
R
epresentatives of the GPS
industry presented to
members of the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC)
laboratory evidence of interference
with the GPS signal by a proposed
new broadcaster on January 19
of this year. The meeting and
subsequent filing did not dissuade
FCC International Bureau Chief
Mindel De La Torre from authorizing
Lightsquared to proceed with ancillary
terrestrial component operations,
installing up to 40,000 high-power
transmitters close to the GPS
frequency, across the United States.
The document describing the
testing states that the Lightsquared
initiative “will have a severe impact
on the GPS band” and “will create a
disastrous interference problem for
GPS receiver operation to the point
where GPS receivers will cease to
operate (complete loss of fix) when in
the vicinity of these transmitters.”
On January 26, the FCC waived its
own rules and granted permission for
the potential interferer to broadcast
in the L Band 1 (1525 MHz–1559 MHz)
from powerful land-based transmitters.
This band lies adjacent to the band
(1559–1610 MHz) where GPS and other
GNSSs operate.
The FCC called for further testing to
be led by LightSquared and completed
by June 15.
Prior to the decision, representatives
of the U.S. GPS Industry Council and
GPS manufacturers Garmin and
Trimble presented “Experimental
Evidence of Wide Area GPS Jamming
That Will Result from LightSquared’s
Proposal to Convert Portions of
14 GPS World | March 2011 www.gpsworld.com
Effect
Jamming is detected
Loss of service in the urban canyon
Loss of fix in the open sky
▲ effects of jamming by a simulated LightSquared signal on a Garmin nüvi 265W consumer-
grade GPS receiver.
L Band 1 to High Power Terrestrial
Broadband,” to five members of
the FCC’s Office of Engineering and
Technology, including its chief, two
members of the FCC International
Bureau, one from the Public Safety and
Homeland Security Bureau, and two
from the Wireless Telecommunications
Bureau.
See www.gpsworld.com/jammed for a full
PDF of “Experimental Evidence of Wide
Area GPS Jamming.”
The document conveys results
of testing on a common portable
consumer automotive navigation
device and on a common general
aviation receiver. The consumer GPS
device began to be jammed at a
Effect
Jamming is detected
10 dB loss of sensitivity
Loss of fix in the open sky
▲▲ effects of jamming by a simulated LightSquared signal on a Garmin GNS 430W aviation-grade
GPS receiver.
Distance
3.57 miles (5756 meters)
1.79 miles (2884 meters)
0.66 miles (1059 meters)
power level representing a distance
of 3.6 miles (5.8 kilometers) from the
simulated LightSquared transmitter.
The consumer device lost a fix at
0.66 miles (1.1 kilometers) from the
transmitter.
The Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA)-certified aviation receiver
began to be jammed at a distance
of 13.8 miles (22.1 kilometers) and
experienced total loss of fix at 5.6 miles
(9.0 kilometers) from the transmitter.
During the laboratory testing, GPS
signals were simulated by a Spirent
GSS6560 GPS simulator, representing
a constellation of 31 GPS satellites, the
current configuration. LightSquared’s
signal was simulated using a Rhode
Distance
13.76 miles (22137 meters)
9.85 miles (15853 meters)
5.60 miles (9018 meters)
 THE SYSTEM

and Schwartz SMIQ-03S signal generator with digital

modulation, amplified to achieve the relevant signal
strengths. Full technical specifications and parameters are
described in the Experimental Evidence document linked
above.
The industry report concludes: “The proposed
LightSquared plan . . . will deny GPS service over vast areas
of the United States.”
In its decision document on January 26, the FCC not only
authorized LightSquared to proceed, it turned up its nose
at assertions that the entire process had been conducted in
near-stealth mode as well as on an accelerated track.
LightSquared was established in mid-2010 by “an
experienced team of global telecommunications executives
and investors.” From 2001 to 2005, Lightsquared executive
vice president Jeff Carlisle served as deputy chief and then
chief of the FCC’s Wireline Competition Bureau.
See also “Act Now to Protect GPS Signal” on page 4.

Galileo’s GATE Opened

The Galileo Test and Development Environment (GATE) in
Berchtesgaden, Germany, officially opened on February 4.
The system operator, IFEN GmbH of Poing, Germany, jointly
with the German Federal Minister of Transport, Building
and Urban Development, announced the opening for use
by commercial and organizational entities seeking to test
equipment with the coming Galileo signals. GATE was
developed on behalf of the German Aerospace Center (DLR)
with funding by the German Federal Ministry of Economics
and Technology.
The test area extends across a valley of approximately 65
square kilometers, southeast of Munich, where antennae
atop surrounding peaks broadcast the various Galileo
signals. Technical details and specifications of the test
environment are at www.gate-testbed.com.
The GATE infrastructure is capable of transmitting the
Galileo Open Service, the Safety-of-Life Service (functional,
with certification as a next step), the Commercial Service,
and a Public Regulated Service dummy signal.
The GATE system upgrade has been further extended to
also support user integrity testing, simulating simple alarm-
triggering events on the system/satellite level, supporting
GPS and GATE/Galileo dual-constellation receiver-
autonomous integrity monitoring (RAIM), individual user
integrity test scenarios, and tests of receivers with different
RAIM functionalities.

www.gpsworld.com March 2011 | GPS World 15

THE SYSTEM

Next-Generation GLONASS lost contact with a military satellite

As this magazine goes to press, a Soyuz
rocket carring a new GLONASS-K1
satellite has moved to the Plesetsk
Cosmodrome launch pad for a
scheduled blast-off on February 24.
Assuming all goes well, the satellite’s
eventual transmissions will include
Russia’s new CDMA signal on a
GLONASS L3 frequency. Further
information and photos will be posted
to www.gpsworld.com/glonassk.
In Other Developments. Roscosmos,
the Russian space agency, said it
launched on February 1, a painful
incident following the failed launch
of three GLONASS-M satellites in
December.
The Geo-IK-2 satellite, designed for
geodetic studies, remains in its transfer
orbit because the upper stage failed to
restart for its second circularizing burn.
Based on the GLONASS-M bus, Geo-IK-2
carries laser reflectors, GPS/GLONASS
receiving equipment, and an altimeter.
Communications with the satellite have
been re-established but it is not clear
how useful it will be in its current orbit.
Galileo IOV August Launch
The European Space Agency
announced that the first two Galileo
in-orbit validation (IOV) satellites
will rise on August 31. They will ride
aboard a Soyuz-ST-B rocket from
the Kouros, French Guiana, Space
Center. There was no word about the
third and fourth IOV satellites, which
had at one point been scheduled for
an October launch, at a time when
the first two were penciled for a June
launch.

JAVAD Receivers Track Compass B1 Signal

JAVAD GNSS has announced that, with modified firmware,
all of the company’s receivers can now track the Chinese
Compass B1 signal. The company states that Compass is the
sixth GNSS system that its receivers can track, joining GPS,
GLONASS, Galileo (the two GIOVE in-orbit validation experi-
mental satellites), SBAS (the European Geostationary Naviga-
tion Overlay Service or EGNOS), and Japan’s Quasi-Zenith
Satellite System (QZSS).
JAVAD GNSS made available several plots, a few of which
are shown here. One is a log file, collected on JAVAD’s TR_
G3TH board in Moscow during the last weekend in January,
reporting up to 26 satellites from the various systems, locked
simultaneously. Also provided below are several other plots
showing the new capability.
The company further stated that it will add Compass
tracking to almost all receivers in near future, as a firmware
upgrade. ▲ The Compass system consists of six satellites, four of them are visible
in Moscow. Their day track is shown here.

▲ Doppler, SNR, and “code-minus-phase” graphs for satellite 211, collected ▲ THIS Log file reported up to 26 satellites locked simultaneously (col-
during its pass. For additional satellite graphs, visit gpsworld.com/javad. lected on the TR_G3TH board in Moscow).

16 GPS World | March 2011 www.gpsworld.com

 » consumer oem
business
the

Industry news and developments | GPS | Galileo | GLONASS

ST-Ericsson, Broadcom Launch GPS + GLONASS Receivers

Two receiver makers are introducing when designing GPS into mobile de- BCM4751, will use less than 30 square
chips aimed at consumer devices to vices, Broadcom said. With real estate millimeters of board space, including
acquire both GPS and GLONASS satellite in mobile devices at a premium, a all of the necessary components for a
signals. Compared to GPS-only solutions, complete GPS solution, featuring the typical cellular phone implementation.
receiving signals from the additional
21 GLONASS satellites will dramatically GSG-55 GPS 16-CHAnnel SimulAtor
improve positioning accuracy in dense
urban canyons and increase time to first
fix, manufacturers say.
ST-Ericsson’s new CG1950 is a GPS/
GLONASS receiver built in 45 -nanome-
ter silicon, enabling manufacturers to
produce low-cost devices capable of
supporting highly accurate navigation,
mobile social networking, augmented
reality, and other location-based ser-
vices, the company said. The low-power
CG1950 is designed to be integrated
into mobile phones, camcorders, cam-
eras, and other mobile devices.
With backward GNSS software com-
patibility with ST-Ericsson CG2900 and
GNS7560 solutions, manufacturers will
be able to include GPS/GLONASS func-
tionality with relative ease for faster
time-to-market, the company said.
Broadcom announces two new
GPS
system-on-a-chip (SoC) solutions, what
the company says are cost-effective,
commercially available, single-die SoC
Constellation
solutions that support both GLONASS
and GPS simultaneously.
The BCM47511 is a stand-alone
in a Box
NEW 16-Channel GPS Test Devices for Manufacturing and Development
GPS SoC solution that adds GLONASS
functionality while remaining pin- Applications Functionality
compatible to the BCM4751 GPS SoC. • Fully controllable GPS simulation • Repeatable and reliable
The BCM2076 is a combination chip • Versatile GPS functionality testing • Easy to use
featuring GPS and GLONASS support, • Simulate positions, times • Fast/high throughput
as well as Bluetooth and FM tuner and user movements • Affordable
functionality. The chips are designed • Standards-based GPS tests • Portable and compact
for smartphones, mobile handsets, • SBAS simulation • White noise generation
personal digital assistants, portable
media players, and portable navigation
devices.
The BCM4751 integrates a number Synchronizing Critical Operations®
Test & Measurement by Spectracom
of external components that reduce
the overall system cost for manufactur-
ers and enables very small footprints +1.585.321.5800 (North America) +46 8 598 510 00 (Europe)
sales@spectracomcorp.com www.spectracomcorp.com
www.gpsworld.com March 2011 | GPS World 17
the business

» consumer oem

Delorme Offers Downloadable World Base Map

DeLorme has announced that its topo-
graphic World Base Map is now avail-
able for any DeLorme GPS and desktop
software customers to download
online.
Previously offered only as a world-
wide data set, the DeLorme World
Base Map now enables users to select
the scope of coverage they want, the
company said. For one penny per 100
square kilometers (minimum order
$10), the downloaded data can be dis-
played on Earthmate PN-Series GPS re-
ceivers and within Topo North America ▲▲ Topographical map of Geneva.
consumer software and the XMap suite
of GIS applications. company said. purchase via the DeLorme public data
The DeLorme World Base Map is The data and includes major roads Web portal at http://data.delorme.com.
seamless and horizontally accurate, and geographic features, inland bodies Topo North America and XMap also en-
with a consistent level of detail and a of water, shoreline hydrography, and able downloads (without previews) via
topographic view of the Earth. It has the latest agreed and disputed jurisdic- their Netlink Web access feature.
been used extensively in U.S. govern- tion boundaries. For PN-Series GPS users, the DeLo-
ment applications, oil and gas explo- The DeLorme World Base Map uses rme World Base Map can be layered
ration, and by geospatial industry the Shuttle Radar Terrain Model (SRTM) with high-resolution DigitalGlobe Sat-
customers including ESRI. With its new to display digital elevation and create ellite Imagery (available from DeLorme
pricing structure, small businesses and 3-D models on a computer. Down- via subscription, for locations around
consumers can also use the data, the loads are available for previewing and the world).

» location-based services
Navteq LocationPoint Ad Network Expands with New Publishers Worldwide
Global map provider Navteq has an- location content provider for handset ity to actively engage consumers near
nounced it has dramatically increased and auto makers — as a leading ag- points of purchase and route them to
the reach of its LocationPoint Advertis- gregator of ad inventory that spans advertised merchants, and metrics that
ing Network by forming partnerships devices, apps, and global regions. measure return on investment, the
with RIM and Samsung, in addition to Navteq LocationPoint is a location- company said. Navteq has conducted
an ongoing collaboration with Nokia. based mobile advertising network that trial and commercial campaigns on its
Also joining the Navteq LocationPoint delivers ads to smartphone users when LocationPoint Ad Network through
ad network are location-based applica- they’re in the proximity to go, buy, and 2010. A European effort for McDonald’s
tion providers Appello, CoPilot Live, shop at advertised merchants. The net- garnered 7 percent consumer click-
Navigon, NDrive, Poynt, and Telmap. work expansion paves the way for the through rates and won an EMMA for
According to the company, the ex- network to provide brand advertisers Europe’s most-effective location-based
pansion positions Navteq — map and with large-scale audience reach, abil- mobile ad campaign.
» transportation/rail
Trimble Introduces Railway Track Maintenance and Modernization Solution
Trimble has introduced a new addition and modernization. The system and data needed for railway lifecycle man-
to its Railway Solutions portfolio — software were acquired from Sinning agement — from the planning phase,
the Trimble GEDO CE Trolley System. Vermessungsbedarf GmbH of Wiesen- through design and construction, and
The new trolley system and software theid, Bavaria, Germany. now, with the addition of the Trimble
provide as-built survey and documen- Trimble says it offers users products GEDO CE Trolley System, the subse-
tation for railway track maintenance that quickly and accurately capture quent maintenance phase.
18 GPS World | March 2011 www.gpsworld.com
 the business

» machiine control/agriculture

NovAtel’s SMART-MR15 for Agriculture Eliminates Need for Base Stations

NovAtel, Inc., has launched the SMART- the Internet, eliminating the need to set
MR15, a GNSS receiver/antenna with up a local base station.
embedded cellular connectivity and The SMART-MR15 builds on last
NTRIP client year’s launch of NovAtel’s SMART-MR10
software. Ac- GNSS receiver/antenna. Ergonomically
cording to designed, the SMART-MR15 integrates
NovAtel, the an L1/L2 GPS+GLONASS receiver, an-
SMART-MR15 tenna, and cellular modem into a single
enables users compact enclosure, the company said,
to easily ob- claiming that with a rugged metal
tain RTK cor- housing and external cellular antenna,
rections via the product ensures high performance
even in the most challenging work en-
vironments and poor coverage areas.
By eliminating the need for a local
base-station, the SMART-MR15 pro-
vides precise positioning for on-ma-
chine applications requiring sub-inch
accuracy, according to NovAtel. No-
vAtel’s GL1DE algorithm is integrated
into every MR15, providing agricultural
users with ultra-smooth positions and
excellent pass-to-pass accuracy in non-
RTK applications, the company said.

» transportation
Department of Transportation Hosts Vehicle-Connectivity Challenge
The U.S. Department of Transportation’s
Research and Innovative Technology
Administration (RITA) has announced
the Connected Vehicle Technology
Challenge. The new competition seeks
industry ideas for using wireless con-
nectivity between vehicles.
RITA, through the competition, is
soliciting ideas for products or applica-
tions that use dedicated short-range
communications, which will be the
basis for a future system of connected
vehicles that will communicate with
each other as well as the surrounding
infrastructure, such as traffic signals,
work zones, and toll booths.
According to a National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration report,
wireless vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) and
vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) com-
munications can potentially address
81 percent of all unimpaired vehicle
crashes. Selected prize recipients will
be fully funded to present their ideas
for connected vehicle technology.
The competition, which runs
through May 1, is open to all compa-
nies, not just those involved in trans-
portation. More information can be
found at www.challenge.gov.

» EVENTs » Online webinars

GITA’s 2011 Geospatial Solutions Conference
April 10–13, Grapevine, Texas; www.gitaservices.org
GITA 2011 has been overhauled in response to feedback,
say organizers. It aims to address the leading issues and bring
together industry experts to deliver leading-edge informa-
tion to attendees.
IAG General Assembly at the IUGG 2011
June 28–July 7, 2011, Melbourne, Australia; www.iag-aig.org
The next IAG General Assembly will be held as part of the
major IUGG2011 international conference, Earth on the Edge:
Science for a Sustainable Planet, a multi-disciplinary confer-
ence on cutting-edge science, presented by the eight scien-
tific associations of the IUGG.
Esri International User Conference
July 11–15, San Diego, California; www.esri.com/events/
The conference offers to about 13,000 attendees as many
as 275 technical sessions and a large exhibit hall for exploring
the power of geospatial technology.
More events online: www.gpsworld.com/events
Upcoming and Live! —
A Closer Look at L5: The Future of High-Precision GNSS
Moderator: Eric Gakstatter, GPS World’s Survey Scene
In 2010, the first GPS IIF satellite was launched, broadcast-
ing the new L5 civilian signal. At 1176 MHz, it is separated
from L1 and L2 and in the protected Aeronautical Radionavi-
gation Services band, so there is no possibility of commercial
interference like we see today with the LightSquared con-
troversy. The availability of GPS L5 will usher in a new era of
inexpensive, accurate GNSS receivers and will be the future
of high-precision GNSS receivers, and quite possibly single
frequency receivers.
Available for download now —
◾ Location-Based Social Media: Upping the Value
Moderator: Janice Partyka, GPS World’s Wireless Pulse
Speakers: Brian Cho, Head of Business Development, Booyah!,
and Chad Reed, Director of Marketing and Sales, Pelago
◾ Location-Based Services in 2011
Moderator: Kevin Dennehy, GPS World’s LBS Insider
With guest speakers from Nokia and Verizon Wireless
All available free: www.gpsworld.com/webinar

www.gpsworld.com March 2011 | GPS World 27

 Transporation | Road

application. The Simple GNSS As-

sisted and Trusted Receiver (SIG-
NATURE) includes an assistance
service that provides ephemeris data
and corrections from the European
Geostationary Navigation Overlay
Service (EGNOS) Data Access Ser-
vice (EDAS), optimized for the user
location. Assistance messages are
sent to OBUs that can either host an
experimental receiver or a commer-
cial-off-the-shelf (COTS) receiver.
Data from the receiver is processed
with application-specific navigation
algorithms on the OBU that aim to
improve the integrity of the position
solution relative to standard solutions.
Field trials have assessed the con-
tribution that assistance can make to
positioning performance, and illus-
trate options for enhancing standard

Demands of the Road

assistance solutions. Enhancements
to assistance encompass modifica-
tions to the message content and al-

An Assisted-GNSS Solution Uses the ternative means of communications,

showing the benefits and feasibility of

EGNOS Data Access Service a broadcast service. The impact of in-

cluding EGNOS corrections through
a broadcast assistance service in ur-
For use in billing drivers in road-user charging schemes, onboard units employing ban areas is also under investigation.
GNSS must meet stringent reliability and availability requirements, and at the same
time, be based on low-cost equipment systems. The SIGNATURE unit GNSS Road-User Charging
includes an assistance service which provides ephemeris data and corrections from RUC has the potential to reduce con-
gestion, lower vehicle emissions, and
EDAS, optimized for user location. generate revenue streams for infra-
Kevin Sheridan, Tomas Dyjas, Cyril Botteron, Jérôme Leclère, Fabrizio Dominici, and Gianluca Marucco structure improvement. It can ensure
that revenues are based on actual road

A
s roads become more congest-
ed, governments and regional
authorities seek better ways
to manage their existing networks.
Road-user charging (RUC) is increas-
ingly promoted to tackle the conges-
tion challenge: charging drivers a fee,
perhaps on a monthly billing basis,
derived from the distance their vehi-
cles have traveled, time of travel, and
whether congested roads were used.
Recording trip information with
28 GPS World | March 2011 www.gpsworld.com
a GNSS receiver in an onboard unit
(OBU) provides a convenient and flex-
ible means to support automated fee
collection. For GNSS positioning to
be used as the basis for billing driv-
ers, however, it must meet stringent
reliability and availability require-
ments, and at the same time be based
on low-cost equipment.
We have developed a prototype to
provide both the positioning avail-
ability and integrity required for this
usage, creating a financial incentive for
changing driving behavior. This might
include lower overall use of private
cars and, in particular, reducing peak-
time travel levels in urban areas by
effectively spreading out the morning
and evening rush hour. RUC can also
encourage commuters to use alterna-
tive forms of public transport.
To automate the process of collect-
ing charges, electronic fee-collection
(EFC) systems have been developed

based largely on dedicated short-range
communications (DSRC). In a DSRC
solution, a simple tag on the vehicle
receives a signal when it passes a road-
side beacon and a charge is computed
accordingly. Cameras with automatic
number-plate recognition (ANPR)
technology are also widely used, main-
ly as an enforcement tool.
Both technologies rely on fixed
roadside infrastructure. As charging
schemes to date have focused on spe-
cific areas (individual cities) or road
infrastructure (major motorways, tun-
nels, and bridges) this type of technol-
ogy provides an adequate solution.
To meet future policy goals, howev-
er, this is not feasible. More extensive
charging schemes covering greater ar-
eas, more road types, more classes of
vehicle, and which will vary charges
depending on location and time of day
require a far more flexible solution.
Flexible schemes require the position-
ing element to be onboard the vehicle.
GNSS-based devices, possibly aug-
mented with other sensors, have been
identified as the best option to achieve
this.
Using GNSS, the OBU tracks the
location of the vehicle, and this is
matched against the road network to
calculate a charge. A GNSS solution
can support many different charging
strategies including time distance and
place (TDP) based charging for road
sections, geographic areas, and cordon
schemes. While GNSS offers great
potential, several operational and per-
formance limitations have prevented
more widespread adoption. Operation-
ally, OBUs are relatively expensive,
fraud prevention is potentially com-
plex, and charging schemes must also
accommodate infrequent users. GNSS
performance is limited in terms of the
ability to provide sufficiently accurate
positions with high availability and in-
tegrity in all operating conditions.
To be fully flexible and to target
congested areas, OBUs must work
in all environments including urban
areas. Urban-canyon problems, with
www.gpsworld.com March 2011 | GPS World
satellite signals blocked and reflected,
are well documented. In some cases,
not enough signals are available to
determine a position, and when there
are enough satellites, the ranges will
be prone to errors and the geometry
is likely to be poor. Signals are more
likely to be available in the longitu-
dinal direction of the street, but with
few or no satellites on either side of the
vehicle. Signal blockage is a particular
problem when the GNSS receiver is
started up, and it attempts to decode
satellite ephemeris data. This requires
around 30 seconds of uninterrupted
tracking with a relatively strong signal
for each satellite, and in an obstructed
urban environment it may take many
minutes to determine the first receiver
position.
Charging schemes typically aim to
charge for at least 99 percent of road
usage. If a typical journey length is 30
minutes, this means that only 18 sec-
onds with no usable position solution
can be tolerated and hence time to first
fix (TTFF) must be below 18 seconds,
and ideally much lower.
When positions can be determined,
they must be sufficiently accurate to
identify the correct road segment that
the vehicle was on, and they must be
reliable. Reliability, or integrity, be-
comes critical if road users are to be
charged on the basis of GNSS-derived
positions. Users must have confidence
that they are being charged correctly
for schemes to be effective and to gain
public acceptance.
Whilst GNSS-based solutions are
entering the market, for example in
Germany and Slovakia for heavy goods
vehicles, barriers to wider adoption re-
main. Many countries are considering
GNSS-based road pricing, and they all
face similar challenges in ensuring the
accuracy, integrity, and availability of
a GNSS-based solution for nationwide
deployment.
SIGNATURE Solution
The principal objective of the SIGNA-
TURE project is to prototype a GNSS-
Road | Transportation
based solution for flexible road-user
charging that can provide the required
high integrity and high availability in a
cost-effective and scalable manner.
This robust, high-availability, high-
integrity solution is delivered firstly
through providing reliable assistance
(A-GNSS) data from EDAS to opti-
mize receiver acquisition and track-
ing capabilities and reduce TTFF, and
secondly through implementation of
embedded GNSS reliability algorithms
into an OBU, providing assurance of
positioning information (Figure 1).
These features are intended to make
a positive contribution in terms of the
key RUC performance criteria, as de-
fined by the GNSS Metering Associa-
tion for Road User Charging:
◾ Accuracy: right cost per trip
◾ Integrity: probability and amount of
overcharging
◾ Availability: amount of charged us-
age.
Assistance Server. An assistance ser-
vice supplying suitably equipped
OBUs is one means to maintain rapid
TTFF and meet the requirement for
high positioning availability. The most
significant contribution assistance
can make to TTFF is to provide the
ephemeris data, which takes around 30
seconds to download from a satellite
signal. Assistance data can also reduce
the frequency search space when a re-
ceiver is acquiring signals, as the ex-
pected Doppler frequency can be com-
puted from the approximate receiver
and satellite positions.
The assistance server in SIGNA-
TURE is based on EDAS, currently
available as a beta version. EDAS al-
lows a user to plug into EGNOS to
receive the data collected by all the
current EGNOS Ranging and Integ-
rity Monitoring Stations (RIMS). This
makes it possible to access EGNOS
data when there is no clear sight to
the EGNOS geostationary satellites,
which can often be the case in urban
areas, particularly at higher latitudes.
As well as supplying EGNOS mes-
sages, EDAS also provides GPS obser-
29
 Transporation | Road
▲▲ FIGURE 2 Schematic of assistance solution.
vation and navigation (broadcast ephemeris) data, the key
component as far as an assistance service is concerned. By
recording the ephemeris data received at the extremities of
the monitoring network, it is possible to ensure that the cur-
rent ephemeris for any GPS satellite in view to users over
Europe is available and can be supplied in an assistance
message. Other data streams provided by EDAS can also be
used to enhance the assistance solution.
The main enhancement tested in SIGNATURE was the
use of EGNOS corrections within the assistance message.
EGNOS today consists of a space segment of three geo-
stationary satellites broadcasting correction and integrity
information in the L1 band. Three sets of corrections are
broadcast to users:
◾ Fast corrections: used to compensate short-term distur-
bances in GPS signals, generally attributable to satellite
clocks;
◾ Long-term corrections: used to compensate for the longer-
term drift in satellite clocks and the errors in the broadcast
satellite orbits
◾ Ionospheric corrections: broadcast as a grid of vertical de-
lays (GIVD) from which a user receiver can determine a
slant correction to be applied on each range measurement
to compensate for the delay experienced by the signal as it
passes through the ionosphere.
Fast and long-term corrections are added to the ephem-
eris data in the assistance message. Rather than relaying the
GIVD data to the OBU and letting the receiver reconstruct
the ionospheric grid and calculate slant corrections, this is
done within the assistance server. A slant correction is pro-
vided for each satellite that will be in view at the user loca-
tion. This approach is valid provided the OBU updates the
corrections regularly enough to take account of the changing
satellite elevations and ionospheric conditions. It provides a
significant saving in terms of processing and memory con-
30 GPS World | March 2011 www.gpsworld.com
▲▲ FIGURE 3 GNSS performance monitoring using EDAS.
sumption at the OBU, while still delivering the accuracy
benefit of the EGNOS ionospheric data. To correct for the
tropospheric delay, a zenith value (ZTD) determined from
the RTCA model is also included in the assistance message.
Mapping this zenith value to a slant correction to be applied
to satellite ranges is a straightforward process easily accom-
modated on the OBU.
Figure 2 shows how data from EGNOS RIMS is collected
at the assistance server at NSL in Nottingham, UK, and then
used to generate messages. In this case, the assistance data
was provided for trials conducted in Brussels. The figures
at the bottom of the plot are the EGNOS correction values
provided for all 10 GPS satellite in the positioning solution.
Further enhancements are also possible using the GPS
observation data provided through EDAS. Firstly, for areas
close to RIMS, a local differential solution can be applied
using standard DGPS techniques to provide pseudorange
corrections rather than wide-area EGNOS corrections. This
has the potential to give greater accuracy for certain areas
and is under investigation. By combining EDAS data sourc-
es, a GNSS performance monitoring and prediction service
has also been created (Figure 3). This provides an assessment
of GPS and GPS+EGNOS positioning performance (accura-
cy, availability of corrections, integrity) at known reference
stations as well as monitoring the availability of EDAS data
from its central server. Monitoring of this kind can be used
as a further tool to identify system-level problems that might
significantly degrade user positioning solution, perhaps to
a level at which charges could not confidently be applied. It
can also aid the enforcement process, as a diagnostic tool to
identify if missing or misleading data from an OBU could
be due to a system-wide fault or to a more localized source.
This approach relies on the approximate user position be-
ing known at the assistance server. To maintain the validity
of the corrections, it would also require a receiver to update
its assistance data at a much high rate than would usually be
the case. For a large-scale operation this would be unfeasi-
bly expensive using cellular communications (GSM/GPRS),
however it would be possible using a broadcast assistance
 Road | Transportation

▲▲ FIGURE 4 SIGNATURE Prototype Onboard Unit (OBU).

approach. Using a radio data service (RDS) broadcast for

example, ephemeris data and EGNOS corrections could be
provided on a continuous basis. RDS is an auxiliary signal
to the FM radio broadcast system and is used routinely for
supplying travel information to in-car navigation systems.
As data is broadcast from known locations and over a de-
finable coverage area, messages can be generated that are
applicable for all users receiving data from a given trans-
mitter. A drawback of RDS is that it has a relatively low
bandwidth, and it takes approximately 3.5 seconds to broad-
cast an ephemeris message for a single satellite. A further
argument against RDS as a long-term solution is that analog
radio signals are progressively being phased out in favour of
digital alternatives. With the far greater bandwidth of digital
audio bßroadcasting (DAB), ephemeris data for 12 satellites
could be broadcast in less than 1 second.
We are evaluating alternative message content and trans-
mission options to determine if real benefits can be gained
by providing additional content, other than the ephemerides,
in the assistance message.
Onboard Unit. The SIGNATURE OBU (Figure 4) is based
on a single-board computer (SBC) offering a high degree
of flexibility. Developed by ISMB, it can host alternative
receivers and positioning algorithms and manipulate differ-
ent assistance data with a high degree of configurability. It
is a powerful platform for developing and assessing OBU
devices and their component parts, particularly as it allows
lots of useful diagnostic data to be logged.
The OBU hosts a bespoke receiver which exploits the
continuous availability of assistance data available through
a high-speed data packet access connection and does not at-
tempt to decode navigation data directly from satellite sig-
nals. This allows its design to focus on rapid signal acquisi-
tion with high sensitivity and to achieve a rapid TTFF even
in areas where conventional receivers struggle. The SIGNA-
TURE prototype has been designed using the well known
SAT-SURF & SAT-SURFER platform.
The receiver, developed by the EPFL, implements mas-
sive parallelization by making use of the fast Fourier
www.gpsworld.com March 2011 | GPS World 31
 Transporation | Road
transform, leading to a processing power equivalent to ap-
proximately 650,000 equivalent correlators. The minimum
sensitivity in acquisition is –145 dBm, obtained using co-
herent and non-coherent integrations. Thanks to the massive
parallelization and the assistance, TTFF at –145 dBm is still
below 3 seconds.
Positioning Algorithms. The OBU hosts positioning algo-
rithms designed by NSL to provide high accuracy, avail-
ability, and integrity through exclusion of outlying measure-
ments and provision of quality metrics (horizontal protection
levels or HPLs). Numerous positioning algorithms and outli-
er detection strategies are being investigated. These include
consistency checks applied to raw measurements and com-
puted positions and receiver autonomous integrity monitor-
ing (RAIM). EGNOS corrections are applied to improve ac-
curacy and integrity indicators (user differential range error
indices) are used as coarse fault-detection barrier. Consis-
tency checks on measurements include differencing pseudo-
ranges between epochs and checking that this rate is below
a defined threshold. A RAIM algorithm is then applied to
detect and exclude outliers before measurements enter the
main navigation filter. Positions and velocities determined
by the filter are then checked again as a further fault barrier.
Checks at this stage identify if speeds are within expected
ranges for the application and whether height changes are
reasonable, for example.
The RAIM algorithm is based on the maximum normed
residual method. For the detection procedure, the test sta-
tistic is calculated based on weighted sum of the squares of
the residuals. This test statistic undergoes a globaltest (chi-
square distribution), and is tested against thresholds that are
computed based on the probability of false alarm (Pfa) and
degrees of freedom (number of measurements minus num-
ber of unknowns). The exclusion procedure is based on an
outlier detection technique also known as data-snooping,
which is based on normed residuals and applied within the
range domain. This technique uses measures of internal
and external reliability, where the internal reliability gives
estimates of how reliable the outlier detection procedure is,
while the external reliability gives estimations of the influ-
ence of an outlier.
In the final step of the exclusion procedure, the maximum
normed residual is tested against a critical value based on
the normal inverse cumulative distribution, which in turn
depends on the Pfa, and a decision is made on whether or
not to exclude measurements. Having performed fault detec-
tion and fault exclusion until no further outliers are found, an
HPL is calculated. This is the maximum horizontal position
error that is guaranteed by the algorithm not to be exceed-
ed, in accordance with the required probabilities of missed
detection and false alarm. HPL is a function of visible sat-
ellites, expected error characteristics, and user geometry.
Measurements which have been screened using the RAIM
32 GPS World | March 2011 www.gpsworld.com
▲▲ FIGURE 5 Journey record view from Nottingham test.
fault detection and exclusion are then processed in a Kalman
filter.
Within the project, many alternative algorithms and con-
figurations are being tested. As well as using RAIM in a
snapshot mode to screen measurements entering the Kal-
man filter, fault detection can also take place within the in-
novation sequence of the filter itself. Weighting strategies
that consider signal-to-noise ratios (SNR) as well as satellite
elevations are also being used. This combined weighting is
useful in reducing the impact of measurements affected by
multipath in urban areas where simple elevation dependent
models are often not applicable. The ultimate aim is to pro-
duce a robust GNSS positioning solution optimized for RUC
in urban areas that balances the requirements of providing
high availability with high integrity.
Test Methodology
The SIGNATURE end-to-end solution was tested in a series
of field trials in the UK and Italy between April and July
2010. Trials took place in a range of operating conditions
from rural areas with open skies to dense urban environ-
ments. In all trials, assistance data was provided from the
service center in Nottingham, with messages tailored for the
designated test area. The OBU recorded real-time position
solutions as well as logging all raw measurements. Journey
records can be sent back to the service center over a GPRS
connection or can be downloaded back at the office. This
allowed alternative solutions to be applied to the original da-
tasets in post processing.
The position solutions were assessed through compari-
sons with high-accuracy GNSS reference solutions provided
by additional onboard equipment and through processing
with a map matcher (NSL’s Matchbox). Each journey record
from a trial was compared against the known reference jour-
ney record to determine charging availability, accuracy, and
integrity.

Using this approach, it is possible
to assess whether improvements in the
OBU position output are significant in
terms of matching the vehicle location
correctly to more road segments and
with higher confidence. From direct
comparisons between OBU positions
and a high-accuracy reference solution
alone, it is not possible to determine
the significance of any changes in the
OBU output in terms of final charging
performance. Extensive trials of GNSS
OBUs in London, for example, did not
observe a relationship between location
error (from OBUs) and performance at
road segment level (map-matching)
as map-matching can compensate for
many errors. A strong relationship was
observed between data availability and
performance, though. Ultimately it is
important to consider how success-
fully vehicle position can be related
to charging objects, be they road seg-
ments, cordons or virtual toll-gates.
The objectives of the field tests were
to:
◾ Demonstrate that all elements of the
end-to-end solution work as expect-
ed.
◾ Assess the impact of assistance on
TTFF.
◾ Evaluate benefits of EGNOS data.
◾ Investigate alternative positioning
algorithms to optimize availability
and integrity.
◾ Demonstrate the feasibility of broad-
cast assistance using RDS.
Results
Field trials around Nottingham and
Torino tested all elements of the solu-
tion. The tests confirmed the success-
ful generation, transmission and use
of assistance data, including EGNOS
corrections. Position solutions deter-
mined onboard were transferred back
to the service centre and processed
with a map matcher. Figure 5 shows an
example from a test in Nottingham
city center, correctly identifying all the
road segments travelled on.
Assess Impact of Assistance on TTFF. To
examine the benefits of assistance, a
www.gpsworld.com March 2011 | GPS World
Road | Transportation
“Thanks to Septentrio
GPS technology,
we can run
series of trials were conducted to com- 24/7 operation
pare the TTFF of a consumer-grade with 0 misplaced
receiver typically used in road appli-
cations against the performance of the
containers.”
Stephan Gosiau,
SIGNATURE receiver that is assisted Technical Director
PSA HNN
in all cases. They assessed TTFF for
the COTS receiver in the following
modes:
◾ Hot Start: receiver has up-to-date
almanac and ephemeris information
so only needs to obtain timing/rang-
ing information from each satellite
to return its position fix;
◾ Warm Start: receiver has the al-
manac information stored in its
memory, but it does not have any
ephemeris information. It also has
approximate time and position
knowledge. It can use this informa-
tion to search for satellites but will
then need to demodulate the ephem-
eris data from acquired signals;
◾ Assisted: ephemeris provided over
OMA-SUPL standard channel.
Table 1 shows the results from test-
ing the receivers in open sky and ur-
ban conditions, specifically chosen to
assess an extreme acquisition envi-
ronment. In these tests when no valid A giant container terminal in the port of Antwerp.
ephemeris is available on a receiver at It’s hard to imagine a more complex day-to-day reality than that!
start-up, it takes an average of 28 sec- Around the clock, massive freights are shipped,
onds to determine a first position fix unshipped and moved around the terminal.
in open sky conditions. This increase What could well be a logistical nightmare, now runs smoothly
to an average of more than 2 minutes with the aid of Septentrio’s ultra-precise positioning techniques.
in the worst-case urban environment
as the receiver struggles to decode the Why?
navigation message on weak, noisy, Because we are reliable experts.
and intermittent signals. With as- Because we are ahead.
sistance, the SIGNATURE receiver
maintains a rapid TTFF, outperform-
ing the COTS receiver. The slower
TTFF in the assisted COTS case may
be partly due to the OMA-SUPL stan-
dard procedure which is based on a
more complex than the simple data
transfer used in the SIGNATURE
procedure. The COTS receiver is also
decoding navigation subframes to de-
termine signal transmission time. This
can take up to 6 seconds depending on
the point in the transmission cycle that Wfstbujmf!PFN!Sfdfjwfst!gps!Efnboejoh!Bqqmjdbujpot
acquisition begins.
Tests have also been carried out us-
www.septentrio.com
33
 Transporation | Road
Mean TTFF(s)
Open Sky Dense Urban
SIGNATURE 1 3
COTS - Warm 28 136
COTS - Hot 1 2
COTS - Assisted 8 9
▲▲ Table 1 Time-to-first-fix results.
▲▲ FIGURE 6 RAIM Impact (red = no RAIM, yellow = RAIM).
ing a signal generator to control the strength of the received
signal to assess acquisition and tracking sensitivity. At –145
dBm, the SIGNATURE receiver takes an average of 1.1 sec-
onds to acquire 4 satellites and determine a first fix, and 5.1
seconds to acquire 12 satellites.
Positioning Algorithms. A variety of configurations have
been investigated in the positioning algorithms, including
applying outlier-detection routines at different stages of the
solution and comparing snapshot and filtered approaches.
Figure 6 shows a simple example of how the RAIM algorithm
has been effective in detecting and excluding outlying mea-
surements contaminated by multipath. By removing these
meaurements and re-computing the OBU location, better
position estimates are obtained.
Figure 7 shows the accuracy and integrity of the SIGNA-
TURE solution assessed using a high-grade GNSS/INS ref-
erence in Nottingham city center. In this case, the horizontal
accuracy is 4.4 meters (95 percent), and the computed pro-
tection level is shown to bound the actual position error with
the required confidence.
In rural, semi-urban, and urban (Nottingham) conditions,
a positioning solution has been demonstrated that supports
all charging accuracy, integrity, and availability require-
34 GPS World | March 2011 www.gpsworld.com
▲▲ FIGURE 7 Position error and protection level, Nottingham city center.
▲▲ FIGURE 8 HPL GPS vs GPS + EGNOS.
ments.
Further tests were also conducted in the center of London,
in a worst-case obstruction environment. In this area the
current solution falls just short of the requirements defined
for this project. In such cases, better performance could be
obtained using a hybrid solution making use of additional
sensor inputs, but this will increase equipment costs and po-
tentially installation costs, too. A more practical approach
may be to simplify charging schemes in the densest urban
environments, using zones and cordons rather than using
more detailed approaches that require a continuous high-
performance positioning solution to be maintained in all
conditions.
Benefits of EGNOS Data. The SIGNATURE solution has the
ability to provide EGNOS data to positioning algorithms on
the OBU and to vary the rate at which this information is up-
dated and used. Field tests have assessed the potential ben-
efits of this source of data in various environments, starting
from the case in which EGNOS messages are continuously
available for the positioning solution and then investigating
how any beneficial effects lessen as the data is provided less
frequently. The greatest benefit from EGNOS was derived
by applying corrections prior to performing the RAIM FDE
algorithm. This led to more consistent measurements and
produced lower HPL values. Figure 8 shows a comparison for
a Nottingham test in which a GPS-only solution is compared
against an EGNOS solution in which a full set of corrections
is provided.
This reduction in HPL values through the application of
EGNOS corrections is clearer when the distribution of HPL
values falling into discrete bins is assessed (Figures 9 and
 Road | Transportation

not necessarily represent the EC.

Manufacturers
The SIGNATURE receiver is based on the Terasic Altera DE3
System with a high-density Stratix III FPGA (EP3S260),
and on the Rakon GRM8652 high-performance front end.

Kevin Sheridan is technical manager at Nottingham Scientific Limited

(NSL),where he works on development of robust GNSS positioning solutions
for urban applications. He has a Ph.D. from University College London.
Tomas Dyjas is a navigation engineer at NSL where he develops and tests
positioning algorithms for an experimental OBU for road-user-charging
▲▲ FIGURE 9 HPL distribution GPS. (RUC) and evaluating novel integrity approaches for aviation.
Cyril Botteron manages research and project activities of the GNSS and
UWB research subgroups at the Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale of Lausanne
(EPFL) in Switzerland. He received a Ph.D. from the University of Calgary.
Jérôme Leclère is a Ph.D. student at EPFL. His research focus is on acquisi-
tion and high-sensitivity GNSS receivers.
Fabrizio Dominici is the head of technologies for Galileo/EGNOS applica-
tions and embedded systems at Istituto Superiore Mario Boella (ISMB). He
received a master’s degree in communications engineering from Politecnico
di Torino.
Gianluca Marucco received a master’s degree in electronics engineering
from Politecnico di Torino. His research interests include multipath mitiga-
tion techniques for future Galileo receivers and real-time performance
monitoring services for EGNOS.

▲▲ FIGURE 10 HPL distribution GPS + EGNOS.

10). Similar levels of relative improvement have been found

through using this approach in all test datasets. The signifi- 7HFKQLFDO
cance of these improvements can only be judged against the
detailed specifications of a particular charging scheme. /HDGHUVKLS
Conclusions :HDUH7RN\R
Using an assistance service based on EDAS, it is possible 'HQSD7(:
to achieve a TTFF of a few seconds, which supports the WKHWHFKQRORJ\
high availability requirements of RUC. Field trials showed OHDGHUIRUFU\VWDOV
that providing EGNOS information over the assistance data DQG7&;2¶VIRU
link had an integrity benefit. Applying corrections prior to *36DSSOLFDWLRQV
a RAIM algorithm leads to more consistent measurements 2XURVFLOODWRUV
DUHWKHXOWLPDWH
and reduces HPLs. Robust positioning solutions have been
FRPELQDWLRQRI
developed and implemented on the OBU, and a test method-
VPDOOVL]HORZSKDVHQRLVHORZK\VWHUHVLV
ology has been put in place to assess the impact on charg-
DQGJUHDWVWDELOLW\RYHUWHPSHUDWXUH
ing availability, accuracy, and integrity. Results indicate
2XUSURGXFWVFDQEHIRXQGLQWKHOHDGLQJ
that GNSS-based road charging offers the performance and
VPDUWSKRQHVDURXQGWKHJOREH
flexibility to meet current and future requirements, provided
availability and integrity issues are properly taken into ac-
6KRXOGQ¶W\RXNQRZDERXWXV"
count.

Acknowledgments 7(:$PHULFD
The SIGNATURE project has received funding from the =DQNHU5RDG
European Community’s Framework Programme (FP7/2007- 6DQ-RVH&$
2013) under Grant Agreement No. 228237 and is supervised 
)$;
the European GNSS Supervisory Authority (GSA). Full de-
tails of the project can be found at www.gnsssignature.org. Any ZZZWHZDPHULFDFRP
views expressed here are entirely those of the authors and do
www.gpsworld.com March 2011 | GPS World 35
 V2X system users.
▲▲ FIGURE 1
Road Talk
Interoperability Considerations for V2X GNSS Receivers
The presence of different types of devices, spanning multiple GNSS receiver types, configurations, hardware, software, and conse-
quent widely varying capabilites, among a user mix of vehicles, cyclists, and pedestrians, poses several engineering challenges for
a V2X scheme in which all road users share data with each other and with the road infrastructure.
Chaminda Basnayake, General Motors Global Research and Development

T
he use of location awareness for transportation
safety, efficiency, and security — a major area of
research and development for academics, automotive
manufacturers, and organizations such as the U.S.
Department of Transportation — has focused attention on
enabling communication between vehicles and other road
user entities in a concept know as V2X, a term encompassing
both vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) and vehicle-to-infrastructure
(V2I) systems, so that they can share location and other
status information. As a result, any road user entity may see
all others around it. This capability is almost always built on
GNSS technology.
Future V2X systems will be able to include all road user
entities, ranging from vehicles to cyclists to pedestrians, in
this information-sharing system. While it sounds natural for
everyone to talk to each other and share data for collective
benefit, the presence of different types of devices among
this user mix poses several engineering challenges. As an
example, a V2X device in a vehicle may have a built-in
GNSS receiver with a roof-mounted antenna and another
vehicle may have a retrofitted V2X device with a passive
antenna and relatively limited accuracy capabilities. As
36 GPS World | March 2011 www.gpsworld.com
the GNSS technology further develops, some vehicles may
have multiple-frequency GNSS capability compared to
legacy single-frequency devices. In essence, all compatible
V2X devices will have to be carefully designed to ensure
their interoperability with the rest of the system.
This article investigates positioning challenges arising
from multiple GNSS receiver types, configurations,
hardware, and software in a V2X operational environment.
This produces a clear need to have minimum performance
standards for V2X-capable GNSS receivers. The article
further investigates the implications of land-based visibility
obstructions on relative positioning, and implications on
standalone position accuracy both as a result of limited
GNSS satellite visibility and WAAS satellite visibility.
V2X Background
V2X systems rely on two critical enabling technologies:
communications and positioning. Organizations and
industry collaborations have developed and demonstrated
various V2X systems over the last few years. These efforts
have produced interoperable prototype V2V and V2I
systems and over-the-air (OTA) messaging standards.

Figure 1 illustrates the general
concept of combined V2V and V2I,
or V2X. In a fully operational system,
all vehicles and other road users
carry short-range communication and
positioning technology. At present,
these technologies are expected to
be based on dedicated short-range
communication (DSRC) and GNSS,
respectively. This enables each user
to be location-aware and capable of
sharing their location with others.
Vehicles may use built-in systems,
retrofitted devices, or those based on
the occupant’s personal mobile device.
Infrastructure elements and other road
users such as pedestrians also form
part of the V2X user community.
V2X Relative Positioning. Relative
positioning of all communicating
entities with respect to a given user
is a required functional capability
of a V2X system. To enable this
functionality, positioning information
from all communicating entities must
be exchanged. For automotive V2X
applications, Society of Automotive
Engineers (SAE) J2735 DSRC
Message Set Dictionary serves as
the primary standard for message
definitions. Current version of the
messages consists of a basic safety
message (BSM) , an optional variable
rate message (VRM), and an option
for including proprietary messages.
With BSM and VRM, vehicle
position, speed, heading, and GNSS
measurements can be communicated
to others. GNSS relative positioning
techniques such as real-time kinematic
(RTK), code-based differential, or
individual position differing (that
is, distance between the positions
reported by individual vehicles) can
be used for relative positioning. The
latter method, also known as DPOS, is
a particular focus of this article.
Given the above, a system
developer may develop a V2X relative
positioning system that can operate
based on techniques that can be
broadly classified as position-based
techniques, which include DPOS,
www.gpsworld.com March 2011 | GPS World
and measurement-based differential
techniques, including RTK and others.
The Simpler Approach. The SAE J2735
BSM accommodates the simpler
approach of using the DPOS method,
as it enables the sharing of critical state
parameters. This approach is very
attractive as it requires minimal OTA
data volume compared to sending
GNSS measurements. Secondly,
DPOS relative position estimation
process requires only a fraction of
the processing resources required
compared to measurement-based
differential processing. Thirdly, any
GNSS receiver in the market today
is capable of outputting a position
solution and most of the critical GNSS
state parameters required for the V2X
BSM. In contrast, most low-cost
devices do not output measurements
required for other methods.
However, there are quite a few
challenges associated with DPOS. A
vehicle or any other road-user entity,
such as a location-enabled handheld
device, will share its location
information via BSM only. A relative
positioning engine in each entity will
use this information to provide lane-
level and road-level data (relative
distance, speed, and orientation) for
its V2X applications. The challenges
associated with DPOS method arise
from multiple stages in this process.
The presence of many road-user
types brings in the possibility of
thousands of GNSS receiver types,
models, hardware, and software in the
user group. Thus the system must be
interoperable with devices with a wide
range of performance characteristics.
Secondly, each entity will transmit
BSM only. This OTA information
offers no information about the
constellation the GNSS device sees or
how the solution was derived in terms
of filtering or applied constraints.
Thirdly, the position accuracy
reported by each entity is a GNSS
device-dependent variable,
estimate of the actual error as derived
by a user device.
Road | Transportation
▲▲ FIGURE 2 Vehicle test set-up.
Finally and most importantly,
V2X applications expect relative
positioning information for each
communicating entity classified in one
of three possible accuracy categories:
Which Road, Which Lane, or Where-
in-Lane (see “Is GNSS up to the V2X
Challenge?” GPS World, October
2010). The V2X system must be able
to reliably identify this accuracy
classification for each communicating
entity with the limited information
provided via the BSM.
Study Goals. To illustrate the impact of
these challenges, several GNSS receiver
types, configurations, and operational
scenarios were investigated.
◾ Between multiple receiver types: In a
V2X environment, vehicles and
other road user entities may have
different GNSS receiver types and
makes: dual-frequency, single-
frequency, and so on.
◾ Same receivers using different parts
of visible constellation: In an urban
canyon, it is possible for two adjacent
vehicles to see two different parts
of the GNSS constellation, due to
obstructions.
◾ WAAS-enabled and non-WAAS receivers.
Data Collection
This data is a combination of field-data
collections and a series of RF record
playbacks. The field vehicle-mounted
test setup included two GPS receivers,
a GNSS L1 RF data recording device,
and a high quality GPS/INS reference
system (Figure 2). Type A receiver is a
high-sensitivity enabled, automotive-
grade GPS L1 receiver using a patch
an antenna, WAAS-capable although
WAAS usage was disabled in the real-
time data collection. Type B receiver
37
 Transporation | Road
is a high-quality L1/L2 receiver using
a geodetic-grade antenna, used with
WAAS enabled. The GPS/INS system
was connected to the geodetic-grade
antenna. The RF recording system
was also connected to the automotive-
grade GPS L1 antenna.
The data was collected on a test
route in Detroit, Michigan that
included durations of urban and deep
urban canyon (40 miles per hour (mph)
or less), freeway (55–70 mph), and
suburban/local (30 mph) driving.
The RF data were subsequently
replayed to GNSS receivers that were
not a part of the field set-up. RF data
was also replayed to receivers with
forced sky-visibility obstructions
and various WAAS settings. For
limited sky-visibility tests, certain
satellites were removed from each
receiver’s view by receiver-specific
configuration software. The satellite
selection and restriction was done to
mimic typical sky-view obstructions
encountered in normal driving.
Type A receiver was chosen to
illustrate the impact of visibility
differences. A total of 13 satellites
were visible in the entire data set (Figure
4). To create obstructed sky-view
scenarios, two Type A receivers were
configured to not use certain satellites
in their position solutions. These
configurations were:
◾ Configuration 1 (C1): PRNs 7, 10,
and 13 blocked
◾ Configuration 2 (C2): PRNs 6, 16,
21, and 31 blocked
C1 mimics a vehicle/receiver with
no visibility in the Northwestern
part of the sky, whereas C2 mimics
a receiver without visibility in the
East/Northeastern part of the sky.
Sky visibility restrictions do not
vary with the heading changes of the
vehicle. For example, for C1 receiver,
Northwestern sky is always obstructed
regardless of the vehicle orientation.
Figure 5 shows an example RF data
replay setup. The record and replay
system was controlled through a PC
and the recorded data was also stored
in the controller PC. The output RF
38 GPS World | March 2011 www.gpsworld.com
signal was split into multiple outputs satellites used by each receiver in the
such that multiple receivers can be same environments as in Figure 6.
tested at the same time. For each Overall, Type A receiver tracks and
replay of the RF data, a benchmark uses on average 2–3 satellites more
receiver was also used to verify that compared to the Type B receiver, likely
there is no run-to-run difference as a due to its high-sensitivity capability.
result of the RF replay. Type A C1 and C2 receivers also track
Outputs from each GPS receiver and use 2–3 satellites fewer compared
from field and replay runs were logged to the all-in-view Type A receiver.
to PCs using receiver specific binary Freeway Data. The vehicle heading in
formats. The recorded output from this segment was predominantly north
each receiver included its position, or northwest. The sky view can be
position error estimate, velocity, considered a combination of urban and
satellite-specific measurements and open sky conditions. As highlighted in
indicators such as pseudorange, carrier Figure 7, all-in-view Type A receiver
phase, and signals-to-noise ratio. was able to use up to 11 GPS satellites
with an average of around 9 satellites.
Data Processing and Analysis Type A C1 and C2 receivers used, on
The data was first decoded from the average, about 3 satellites fewer than
receiver-specific formats to a common the all-in-view receiver. All three
format, then corrected for antenna receivers show satellite count drops
offsets. To simplify the process, the down to 4 at certain times in this
reference system position solution was segment.
translated to the position of the test The satellite count of the Type
antenna using the known between- B receiver shows the limitations of
antenna distance and orientation of the not using the high-sensitive tracking
vehicle as measured by the reference capability. The satellite count shows
system. As a result, all the receivers frequent drops below 4 satellites and
and the reference system are reporting
the location of the test antenna.
Then, data fields such as position and
velocity for each receiver were time-
matched with the reference solutions,
and the actual error was calculated.
For a limited dataset, additional
measurement-level differential
processing was done to show the
difference between a DPOS and an
RTK or a code-based differential
relative position solution.
Figure 6 shows a plot of the 2D
▲FIGURE 4 Sky view during the test.
position error observed from each
receiver during the test as a function
of driving environment. Overall, Type
B receiver shows better accuracy as
expected from a dual frequency high
quality receiver. However, it shows
spikes of large error increases at
times, mostly observed in the freeway
scenario with large error excursions.
With Type A receivers, relatively
larger errors are observed with the
limited-constellation receivers.
▲FIGURE 5 RF data replay set-up.
Figure 7 shows the number of

▲▲ FIGURE 6 Position
error (2D) of each receiver as a function of driving
environment.
on occasion down to no satellites used.
Although the satellite count difference between all-in-
view Type A and C1/C2 receivers was forced by means of
receiver configuration, short-term sky visibility restrictions
that resemble these conditions are in fact possible. Examples
include a passenger car driving next to a semi truck or the
side wall of the freeway in below-ground road sections.
Figure 8 shows the position outputs of all four receivers
on a satellite image of a short segment of the freeway. The
true location (reference) is shown in green. Type A, Type
B, Type A C1, and Type A C2 are shown in red, black,
purple, and blue, respectively. These colors identify the four
receiver types in all figures for the rest of this paper. While
biases can be seen in the outputs of all four receivers with
respect to the reference, the Type A C1 shows the largest
offset with the magnitude of more than a lane width.
Figure 9 illustrates a time series of the positioning error
components of all four receivers. It clearly shows error
ramp-ups from the Type B receiver at frequent intervals.
These coincide with the satellite count drops of Type B
shown in Figure 7. No such error ramp-ups are observed for
any of the Type A receivers, although relatively large biases
of the order of few meters can be seen. As anticipated,
larger errors are observed in the height direction.
Local Road, Eastbound. This segment includes data gathered
on an eastbound multi-lane local road with 40 mph posted
speeds. As shown in Figure 7, a relatively larger number
of satellites were continuously tracked in this segment
as compared to the freeway. Therefore, this segment is
considered to be an open-sky scenario with very limited
number of obstructions. As shown in Figure 7, Type B
receiver has used about 6 satellites on average, whereas the
Type A has used around 3 more satellites most of the time.
Type A C1 and C2 have also used around 3 satellites less
compared to the all-in-view Type A receiver.
Figure 10 shows the vehicle position as reported by all
three receivers and the reference system output for a short
www.gpsworld.com March 2011 | GPS World
Road | Transportation
▲FIGURE 7 GPS satellites used by receivers.
road segment in this drive. It clearly illustrates the lateral
offsets of both C1 and C2 solutions. The C2 receiver (Blue)
generated about a lane width offset towards north whereas
the C1 receiver output is biased by around two lane widths
to the south. Figure 11 presents a time series look of the
positioning biases evident in Figure 10. It clearly shows
large (more than 5 meter) biases in North and East position
error components for C1 and C2 receivers.
Local Road, Northbound. In roadway characteristics, this
resembles Local Eastbound. Figure 7 shows the sky view
remained almost unchanged for Type A receivers. For
Type A C1, the count remained at 6 throughout. C1 and
C2 receivers tracked 2–3 satellites fewer compared to
all-in-view Type A. Interestingly, Type B experienced two
dropouts of 4 or fewer satellites during the run. Figure 12
shows the position output of all receivers on a short road
segment. As in the case of Local (East), significant biases
can be readily observed in the output of C1 and C2.
Figure 13 shows the time series view of the positioning
error in this segment, confirming that the biases observed
in Figure 12 are not short-term biases, but are in fact vehicle
heading-dependent biases. The short-term biases seen in
the Type B receiver output coincide with the change in the
number of satellites used (shown in Figure 7). This illustrates
the implications of different estimation methods used in the
two receiver types. For instance, Type B receiver allows
stepwise changes in its position estimate whereas Type A
output tends to gradually converge to different states.
Urban Canyon. Results of the urban canyon segment of the
drive are shown in Figures 14 and 15. A statistical analysis
is not presented for this segment, as receiver type and
configuration dependent biases and errors are difficult to
isolate from the errors that are the result of multipath and
measurement noise. In Figure 15, much larger biases in the
order of 10 meters or more, can be seen for all three Type
A receivers. In comparison, Type B receiver tends to output
39
 Transporation | Road

▲▲ FIGURE 8 Freeway positioning accuracy. ▲▲ FIGURE 10 Local (east) positioning accuracy. ▲▲ FIGURE 12 Local (North) accuracy.

a relatively accurate position solution whenever it has B receiver were 58 percent of total driving time in urban
sufficient satellites visible. In the case of less than optimal canyon, 60 percent in the freeway scenario, 95 percent and
satellites availability, Type B receivers tend to show rapidly 99 percent in the local road scenarios.
degrading positioning accuracy, which may be reliably Velocity Domain Performance. For each test segment, velocity
detected using its quality indicators. estimates from each receiver were logged at the default data
rate of 4 Hz. For analysis purposes, North and East velocity
Position Error Distributions readings from each receiver were converted to 2D speed
Position error probability distribution functions were estimates. These were used with reference system speed
generated for the first three road segments using the estimates to generate 2D speed error statistics (Table 1).
time series data above. Figures 16–18 show these functions Based on Table 1, no significant biases or errors were
for Freeway, Local (East), and Local (North) segments, observed from any particular receiver or configuration.
respectively. They lead to these general conclusions: The only exception was the increased errors in the Urban
◾ Based on the mean and the spread of the distributions, Canyon segment, particular for C1 and C2. This is expected
Type B receiver has consistently provided the most
unbiased and accurate positioning performance out of all
the receivers considered. Overall, the output appears to
be unbiased, as should be the case for a high quality dual
frequency receiver with WAAS capability.
◾ Type A all-in-view receiver shows the next best overall
accuracy statistics with some biases in certain cases. These
biases can be time-of-day-dependent and may differ for
different times of the day or if observed over a longer time.
◾ Type A C1 and C2 receivers show very significant
vehicle-heading-dependent biases/errors. This is with very
limited sky view obstructions (that is, C1 only restricts less
than 1/8 of the entire sky view whereas C2 covers around
1/4) and with the same type of the receiver.
◾ Although enabling WAAS should theoretically help
minimize the biases observed in these tests, the availability ▲▲ FIGURE 9 Freeway positioning accuracy time series.
(open line-of-sight) of WAAS satellites for automotive
applications in these environments must be taken into
consideration for WAAS accuracy benefits to be applicable.
For these datasets, WAAS signals availabilities for a Type

▲▲ FIGURE 14 Urban canyon accuracy. ▲▲ FIGURe 11 Local (east) positioning accuracy time series.

40 GPS World | March 2011 www.gpsworld.com


▲▲ FIGURE 13 Local (North) positioning accuracy time series.
.to be a result of limited satellite availability in a challenging
environment with additional forced satellite eliminations.
Virtual Two-Vehicle Analysis. Assume that Type A and Type
A C1 receivers were located in two vehicles. Ideally, both
receivers should report the same location, as they were both
connected to the same antenna on a single vehicle, creating
a zero-baseline scenario. However, as shown in the previous
section, a meter-level separation was observed between the
two solutions.
In this virtual two-vehicle scenario, relative position
of one receiver (Type A) with respect to the other (Type
A C2) was estimated by three methods, using GNSS data
www.gpsworld.com March 2011 | GPS World
Road | Transportation
▲▲ FIGURE 15 Urban canyon positioning accuracy time series.
processing software in post-mission. The methods were:
◾ Differenced Positions (DPOS). Latitude and longitude reported
by each vehicle were time-matched; distance between
the two points was calculated.
◾ Code and Carrier. Single frequency (L1) GPS RTK
positioning with float ambiguity estimation.
◾ Code Only. GPS code measurements generated a relative
position solution.
The 2D receiver separation results of this processing are
shown in Figure 19 as three subplots for freeway (top), local/
east (middle), and local/north (bottom) scenarios. The 2D
separation results for local scenarios show clear performance
41
 Transporation | Road
▲▲ FIGURE 16
Freeway position error
distribution.
benefits for the GNSS measurements-
based methods. In both east and north
local scenarios, around a 5-meter bias
is observed in the DPOS solution
whereas this is reduced to around a
meter in both code-only and code and
carrier methods. The freeway scenario
shows relatively smaller difference
potentially due to measurement noise,
multipath, and frequent interruption of
sky view. Table 2 shows mean values of
these results.
Discussion
OTA transfer of certain GNSS
measurement data elements appears
to be a critical requirement for reliable
lane-level positioning capability.
However, the method must be
capable of supporting a certain level
of performance even in challenging
environments for GNSS. The solution
for such challenging environments is
likely to be GNSS integration methods
with vehicle-based sensors (that is,
GNSS/INS) for the foreseeable future.
Given these facts, a reliable and
accurate V2X relative position method
will require the OTA transfer of a
combination of critical vehicle states
which include the vehicle location,
a confidence measure, and certain
Type A Type A C1 Type A C2
Freeway -0.02 -0.01 -0.01
Local (East) 0.00 0.02 0.02
Local (North) -0.02 -0.01 -0.02
Urban Canyon 0.03 0.18 0.10
▲▲ TABLE 1
Receiver Velocity Error Statistics
(meters/second).
42 GPS World | March 2011 www.gpsworld.com
▲▲ FIGURE 17Local road (east) position error
distribution.
GNSS measurement data elements.
With its ability to support all of these
needs, the SAE J2735 provides a basic
framework for further refinement of
relative positioning technologies for
automotive applications.
A reliable position confidence
measure broadcast over-the-air is also
a critical need, particularly if GNSS
measurement data is not broadcasted
on a regular basis. This also holds
true for conditions under which a
vehicle may be operating in a GNSS
and vehicle sensor integrated mode
or with less than optimal number of
satellites in view. However, estimating
such a parameter that can be trusted
with high degree of confidence can
be challenging given the presence
of various biases that can depend
on the environment, vehicle, GNSS
receiver, and sensors and methods
used. Potential examples are time-
of-day, vehicle heading, vehicle
speed, GNSS receiver/sensor type,
model, and configuration. However,
developing a parameter similar to the
RTCA Horizontal Uncertainty Level
(HUL) for automotive applications is
an important consideration.
While there are many other candidate
DPOS Code Code & Carrier
Freeway 2.21 1.17 1.39
Local 5.26 1.40 1.52
(East)
Local 5.90 0.70 0.49
(North)
▲▲ TABLE 2
Mean Accuracy (meters) using
processing methods.
▲▲ FIGURE 18 Local road (north) position error
distribution.
▲▲ FIGURE 19 Position
separation for
processing methods.
receivers to be considered for a study
of this nature, only two receiver types
were used in this analysis. Analysis of
more receiver types can be beneficial to
identify the desired characteristics for
a certain applications. A consideration
could be achieving a desirable balance
between accuracy and the sensitivity
of the GNSS receivers, as increased
sensitivity often produces higher
solution availability at the cost of
degrading accuracy.
Another area to investigate in related
work is the benefits of using WAAS
under the test conditions given in this
paper. The general expectation is to see
less bias in the position solution with
WAAS as the ranging errors are likely
to be smaller as a result of WAAS
corrections. However, for automotive
applications in particular, availability
of WAAS signals to land vehicles need
to be investigated.
CHAMINDA BASNYAKE is a senior research
engineer at General Motors Global Research
and Development and GNSS technology expert
for GM OnStar. He leads GNSS-based vehicle
navigation technology R&D efforts at GM and
holds a Ph.D. in geomatics engineering from the
University of Calgary.
 Signal Processing | innovation

Realistic Randomization V
irtually all GNSS receiver test-
ing can be classified into one
of two broad categories: syn-
A New Way to Test GNSS Receivers thetic or realistic. The former typically
involves simulator-based trials, using
Alexander Mitelman a pre-defined collection of satellite
orbits, receiver positions, and signal
GNSS receiver testing should not be left to chance. Or should it? There are two propagation models (ionosphere, mul-
common approaches to testing GNSS receivers: synthetic and realistic. In syn- tipath, and so on). Examples of this
thetic testing, a signal simulator is programmed with specific satellite orbits, type of testing include the 3rd Genera-
receiver positions, and signal propagation conditions such as atmospheric tion Partnership Project (3GPP) mobile
effects, signal blockage, and multipath. A disadvantage of such testing is that phone performance specifications for
the models used to generate the synthetic signals are not always consistent assisted GPS, as well as the “apples-to-
with the behavior of receivers processing real GNSS signals. Realistic test- apples” methodology described in an
ing, on the other hand, endeavors to assess earlier GPS World article (see Further
receiver performance directly using the Reading).
signals actually transmitted by satellites. The The primary advantage of synthetic
signals may be recorded digitally and played testing is that it is tightly controllable
back to receivers any number of times. While and completely repeatable; where a
no modeling is used, the testing is specific high degree of statistical confidence is
to the particular observing scenario under required, the same scenario can be run
Innovation Insights which the data was recorded including the many times until sufficient data has
with Richard Langley satellite geometry, atmospheric conditions, been collected. Also, this type of test-
multipath behavior, and so on. To fully ing is inherently self-contained, and
The method can be examine the performance of a receiver using thus amenable to testing facilities with
data collected under a wide variety of sce- modest equipment and resources.
applied to any simulator narios would likely be prohibitive. So, neither Synthetic approaches have signifi-
cant limitations, however, particularly
scenario. testing approach is ideal. Is there a practical
alternative? The roulette tables in Monte when it comes to predicting receiver
Carlo suggest an answer. performance in challenging real-world
Both of the commonly used testing procedures lack a certain characteristic environments. Experience shows that
that would better assess receiver performance: randomness. What is needed tests in which signal levels are fixed
is an approach that would easily provide a random selection of realistic at predetermined levels are not always
observing conditions. Scientists and engineers often use repeated random predictive of actual receiver behavior.
samples when studying systems with a large number of inputs especially For example, a receiver’s coherent in-
when those inputs have a high degree of uncertainty or variability. And math- tegration time could in principle be
ematicians use such methods to obtain solutions when it is impossible or tuned to optimize acquisition at those
difficult to calculate an exact result as in the integration of some complicated levels, resulting in a device that passes
functions. The approach is called the Monte Carlo method after the principali- the required tests but whose perfor-
ty’s famous casino. Although the method had been used earlier, its name was mance may degrade in other cases.
introduced by physicists studying random neutron diffusion in fissile material More generally, it is useful to observe
at the Los Alamos National Laboratory during the Second World War. that the real world is full of random-
In this month’s article, we look at an approach to GNSS receiver testing ness, whereas apart from intentional
that uses realistic randomization of signal amplitudes based on histograms variations in receiver initialization, the
of carrier-to-noise-density ratios observed in real-world environments. It can primary source of randomness in most
be applied to any simulator scenario, independent of scenario details (posi- synthetic tests is simply thermal noise.
tion, date, time, motion trajectory, and so on), making it possible to control By comparison, most realistic test-
relevant parameters such as the number of satellites in view and the resulting ing approaches are designed to mea-
dilution of precision independent of signal-strength distribution. The method sure real-world performance directly.
is amenable to standardization and could help the industry to improve the Examples include conventional drive
testing methodology for positioning devices — to one that is more meaning- testing and so-called “RF playback”
fully related to real-world performance and user experience. systems, both of which have also been
described in recent literature (see Fur-
www.gpsworld.com March 2011 | GPS World 43
innovation | Signal Processing

↑ Center of mass = 35.63 dB-Hz

0.40 data storage or non-standard hardware, may yield realistic
0.20 results for a wide variety of signal conditions, but it may also
be impractically difficult to standardize.
With those constraints in mind, this article attempts to
Normalized bin count

0.15
bridge the gap between the two approaches described above.
It describes a novel method for generating synthetic sce-
0.10
narios in which the distribution of signal levels closely ap-
proximates that observed in real-world data sets, but with an
element of randomness that can be leveraged to significantly
0.05 expand testing coverage through Monte Carlo methods.
Also, the test setup requires only modest data storage and is
easily implemented on existing, widely deployed hardware,
0
B 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 making it attractive as a potential candidate for standardiza-
C/N0 (dB-Hz)
tion.
The approach consists of several steps. First, signal data
Center of mass = 22.48 dB-Hz
is gathered in an environment of interest and used to gen-
0.20 erate a histogram of carrier-to-noise-density (C/N0) ratios
as reported by a reference receiver, paying particular at-
tention to satellite masking to ensure that the probability
Normalized bin count

0.15
0.10
0.05
0
B 15 20 25 30 35 40
C/N0 (dB-Hz)
▲▲Figure 1 Example histograms (top: a real-world urban canyon, the
San Francisco financial district; bottom: 3GPP TS 34.171 “coarse-
time assistance” test case).
ther Reading). Here, no modeling or approximation is in-
volved; the receiver or recording instrument is physically
operated within the signal environment of interest, and its
performance in that environment is observed directly. The
accuracy and fidelity of such tests come with a price, how-
ever. All measurements of this type are inherently literal:
the results of a given test are inseparably linked to the spe-
cific multipath profile, satellite geometry, atmospheric con-
ditions, and antenna profile under which the raw data was
gathered. In this respect, the direct approach resembles the
synthetic methods outlined above — little randomness ex-
ists within the test setup to fully explore a given receiver’s
performance space.
Designing a practical alternative to the existing GNSS
tests, particularly one intended to be easy to standardize,
represents a challenging balancing act. If a proposed test is
too simple, it can be easily standardized, but it may fall well
short of capturing the complexities of real-world signals. On
the other hand, a test laden with many special corner cases,
or one that requires users to deploy significant additional
44 GPS World | March 2011 www.gpsworld.com
of signal blockage is calculated accurately. The histogram
is then combined with a randomized timing model to cre-
ate a synthetic scenario for a conventional GNSS simulator,
whose output is fed into the receiver(s) under test (RUTs).
The performance of the RUTs in response to live and simu-
lated signals is compared in order to validate the fidelity and
usefulness of the histogram-based simulation. This hybrid
approach combines the benefits of synthetic testing (repeat-
45 50 ability, full control, and compactness) with those of live test-
ing (realistic, non-static distribution of signal levels), while
avoiding many of the drawbacks of each.
Histograms
The method explored in this article relies on cumulative his-
tograms of C/N0 values reported by a receiver in a homoge-
neous signal environment. This representation is compact
and easy to implement with existing simulator-based test
setups, and provides information that can be particularly
useful in tuning acquisition algorithms.
Motivation and Theoretical Considerations. To motivate the
proposed approach, consider an example histogram con-
structed from real-world data, gathered in an environment
(urban canyon) where A-GPS would typically be required.
This is shown in FIGURE 1, together with a representative his-
togram of a standard “coarse-time assistance” test case (as
described in the 3GPP Technical Standard 34.171, Section
5.2.1) for comparison. (Note that the x-axis is actually discon-
tinuous toward the left side of each plot: the “B” column des-
ignates blocked signals, and thus corresponds to C/N0 = –∞.)
From the standpoint of signal distributions, it is evident that
existing test standards may not always model the real world
very accurately.
The histogram is useful in other ways as well. Since the
data set is normalized (the sum of all bin heights is 1.0), it

represents a proper probability mass
function (PMF) of signal levels for
the environment in question. As such,
several potentially useful parameters
can be extracted directly from the plot:
the probability of a given signal be-
ing blocked (simply the height of the
leftmost bin); upper and lower limits
of observed signal levels (the heights
of the leftmost and rightmost non-
zero bins, respectively, excluding the
“blocked” bin); and the center of mass,
defined here as
C = 10 log10 (y10 (x T /10)
) (1)
where y[n] is the height of the nth bin
(dimensionless), x[n] is the correspond-
ing C/N0 value (in dB-Hz), and x[“B”]
= –∞ by definition.
Finally, representing environmental
data as a PMF enables one additional
theoretical calculation. The design of
the 3GPP “coarse-time assistance” test
case illustrated above assumes that a
receiver will be able to acquire the one
relatively strong signal (the so-called
“lead space vehicle (SV)” at -142 dBm)
using only the assistance provided, and
will subsequently use information de-
rivable from the acquired signal (such
as the approximate local clock offset)
to find the rest of the satellites and
compute a fix. Suppose that for a given
receiver, the threshold for acquisition
of such a lead signal given coarse as-
sistance is Pi (expressed in dB-Hz).
Then the probability of finding a lead
satellite on a given acquisition attempt
can be estimated directly from the his-
togram:
Pr(lead SV) = Pr(at least 1 SV ≥ Pi )
= 1 − Pr(no SVs ≥ Pi )
[N ]
⎛ Pi −1 ⎞
≈ 1 − ⎜ ∑ y[n]⎟
⎝ n=B ⎠ (2)
where is the average number of sat-
ellites in view over the course of the
data set. A similar combinatorial cal-
culation can be made for the condition-
al probability of finding at least three
www.gpsworld.com March 2011 | GPS World
“follower” satellites (that is, those
whose signals are above the receiver’s
threshold for acquisition when a lead
satellite is already available).
The product of these two values
represents the approximate probability
that a receiver will be able to get a fix in
a given signal environment, expressed
solely as a function of the receiver’s
design parameters and the histogram
itself. When combined with empiri-
cal data on acquisition yield from a
large number of start attempts in an
environment of interest, this calcula-
tion provides a useful way of checking
whether a particular histogram prop-
erly captures the essential features of
that environment. This validation may
prove especially useful during future
standardization efforts.
Application to Acquisition Tuning. In
addition to the calculations based on
the parameters discussed above, histo-
grams also provide useful information
for designing acquisition algorithms,
as follows.
Conventionally, the acquisition
problem for GNSS is framed as a
search over a three-dimensional space:
SV pseudorandom noise code, Doppler
frequency offset, and code phase. But
in weak signal environments, a fourth
parameter, dwell time – the predetec-
tion integration period, plays a signifi-
cant role in determining acquisition
performance. Regardless of how a giv-
en receiver’s acquisition algorithm is
designed, dwell time (or, equivalently,
search depth) and the associated signal
detection threshold represent a com-
promise between acquisition speed and
performance (specifically, the prob-
abilities of false lock and missed detec-
tion on a given search). To this end, any
acquisition routine designed to adjust
its default search depth as a function of
extant environmental conditions may
be optimized by making use of the a
priori signal level PMF provided by
the corresponding histogram(s).
Data Collection
The hardware used to collect reference
Signal Processing | innovation
Antenna power and
signal splitter
Reference Rx Rx(s) under test
(Multiple TTFF
(continuous data,
e.g., NMEA or I/Q) measurements)
▲▲Figure 2 Data
collection setup with a refer-
ence receiver generating NMEA 0183 sen-
tences or in-phase and quadrature (I/Q)
raw data and one or more test receivers
performing multiple time-to-first-fix (TTFF)
measurements.
data for histogram generation is sim-
ple, but care must be taken to ensure
that the data is processed correctly.
The basic setup is shown in FIGURE 2.
It is important to note that the indi-
vidual components in the data-collec-
tion setup are deliberately drawn here
as generic receivers, to emphasize that
the procedure itself is fundamentally
generic. Indeed, as noted below, fu-
ture efforts toward standardizing this
testing methodology will require that
it generate sensible results for a wide
variety of RUTs, ideally from differ-
ent manufacturers. Thus, the intention
is that multiple receivers should even-
tually be used for the time-to-first-fix
(TTFF) measurements at bottom right
in the figure. For simplicity, however,
a single test receiver is considered in
this article.
Procedure. The experiment begins
with a test walk or drive through an
environment of interest. Since an open
sky environment is unlikely to present
a significant challenge to almost any
modern receiver, a moderately difficult
urban canyon route through the nar-
row alleyways of Stockholm’s Gamla
Stan (Old Town) was chosen for the
initial results presented in this article.
The route, approximately 5 kilometers
long, is shown in FIGURE 3 (top). For the
TTFF trials gathered along this route,
assisted starts with coarse-time aiding
(±2 seconds) were used to generate a
large number of start attempts during
the walk, ensuring reasonable statisti-
cal significance in the results (115 at-
tempts in approximately 60 minutes,
including randomized idle intervals
45
innovation | Signal Processing

domized timing model to create a simulator scenario, which

is used to re-test the same RUTs shown in Figure 2.
Reference Receiver Considerations. The accuracy of the data
collection described above is fundamentally limited by the
performance of the reference receiver in several ways.
First, the default output format for GNSS data in many
receivers is that of the National Marine Electronics Asso-
ciation (NMEA) 0183 standard (the histograms presented
in this article were derived from NMEA data). This is im-
perfect in that the NMEA standard non-proprietary GSV
sentence requires C/N0 values to be quantized to the nearest
whole dB-Hz, which introduces small rounding errors to the
bin heights in the histograms. (In this study, this effect was
addressed by applying a uniformly distributed ±0.5 dB-Hz
dither to all values in the corresponding simulated scenario,
0.10
↑
Center of mass = 38.69 dB-Hz as discussed below.) If finer-grained histogram plots are re-
0.17
0.09 quired, an alternative data format must be used instead.
0.08 Second, many receivers produce data outputs at 1 Hz,
limiting the ability to model temporal variations in C/N0 to
0.07
frequencies less than 0.5 Hz, owing to simple Nyquist con-
Normalized bin count

0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
B 10 20 30
C/N0 (dB-Hz)
▲▲Figure 3 Data collection, Gamla Stan (Old Town), Stockholm (top:
route and street view; bottom: cumulative histogram).
between successive starts).
Once the data collection is complete, the reference data
set is processed with a current almanac and an assumed el-
evation angle mask (typically 5 degrees) to produce an in-
dividual histogram for each satellite in view, along with a
cumulative histogram for the entire set, as shown in Figure
3 (bottom). The masking calculation is particularly impor-
tant in properly classifying which non-reported C/N0 values
should be ignored because the satellite in question is below
the elevation angle mask at that location and time, and which
should be counted as blocked signals.
In addition to proper accounting for satellite masking, the
raw source data should also be manually trimmed to ensure
that all data points used to build the histogram are taken ho-
mogeneously from the environment in question. Thus the
file used to generate the histogram in Figure 3 was truncated
to exclude the section of “open sky” conditions between the
start of the file and the southeast corner of the test area, and
similarly between the exit from the test area and the end of
the file.
Finally, the resulting histogram is combined with a ran-
46 GPS World | March 2011 www.gpsworld.com
siderations. While the raw data for this study was obtained at
walking speeds (1 to 2 meters per second), and thus unlikely
to significantly misrepresent rapid C/N0 fading, studies done
at higher speeds (such as test drives) may require a refer-
ence receiver capable of producing C/N0 measurements at
a higher rate.
A third limitation is the sensitivity of the reference re-
ceiver. Ideally, the reference device would be able to track
40 50
all signals present during data gathering regardless of signal
strength, and would instantaneously reacquire any blocked
signals as soon as they became visible again. Such a receiver
would fully explore the space of all available signals present
in the test environment. Unfortunately, no receiver is infi-
nitely sensitive, so a conventional commercial-grade high
sensitivity receiver was used in this context. Thus the result-
ing histogram is, at best, a reasonable but imperfect approxi-
mation of the true signal environment.
Finally, a potentially significant error source may be in-
troduced if the net effects of the reference receiver’s noise
figure plus implementation loss (NF+IL) are not properly
accounted for in preparing the histograms. (If an active an-
tenna is used, the NF of the antenna’s low-noise amplifier es-
sentially determines the first term.) The effect of incorrectly
modeling these losses is that the entire histogram, with the
exception of the “blocked” column, is shifted sideways by a
constant offset.
The correction applied to the histogram to account for this
effect must be verified prior to further acquisition testing.
This can be done by generating a simulator scenario from
the histogram of interest, as described below, and recording
a sufficiently long continuous data set using this scenario
and the reference receiver. A corresponding histogram is
then built from the reference receiver’s output, as before,

t1 t2 t3
Adjust PRNs 03, 09, 27
Adjust PRNs 08, 11, 12, 27, 29, 30, 32
Adjust PRN 16
PRN 03
PRN 08
PRN 09
t1 t2 t3
Aggregate
▲▲Figure 4 Fluctuation timing models (top:
“Multi SV” variant; bottom: “Indiv SV” vari-
ant).
and compared to the histogram of the
original source data. The amplitude of
the “blocked” column and the center of
mass are two simple metrics to check;
a more general way of comparing his-
tograms is the two-sided Kolmogorov-
Smirnov test (see “Results”).
Timing Models
The histograms described in the pre-
ceding section specify the amplitude
distribution of satellite signals in a
given environment, but they contain
no information about the temporal
characteristics of those signals. This
section briefly describes the timing
models used in the current study, as
well as alternatives that may merit fur-
ther investigation.
In real-world conditions, the tempo-
ral characteristics of a given satellite
signal depend on many factors, includ-
ing the physical features of the test
environment, multipath fading, and
the velocity of the user during data col-
lection. Various timing models can be
used to simulate those temporal char-
acteristics in laboratory scenarios.
Perhaps the simplest model is one in
which signal levels are changed at fixed
intervals. This is trivial to implement
on the simulator side, but it is clearly
unlikely to resemble the real-world
conditions mentioned above. A second
alternative would be to generate timing
intervals based on the Allan (or two-
www.gpsworld.com March 2011 | GPS World
tsim
t4
sample) variance of individual C/N0
tn ~ exp (λ)
readings observed during data collec-
tion as a measure of the stability of the
readings. While this is more physically
realistic than an arbitrarily chosen
Adjust PRNs 03, 08, 09, 11, 12,
16, 21, 24, 27, 29, 30, 32
interval as described above, it is still
a fixed interval. These observations
suggest that a timing model including
tni = exp (N λ) some measure of randomness may rep-
resent a more realistic approach.
One statistical function commonly
t4 t5 t6 t7
used for real-world modeling of dis-
tsi crete events (radioactive decay, cus-
tomers arriving at a restaurant, and so
on) is the Poisson arrival process. This
process is completely described with
a single non-negative parameter, λ,
which characterizes the rate at which
random events occur. Equivalently, the
time between successive events in such
a process is itself a random variable de-
scribed by the exponential probability
distribution function:
⎧⎪ λ e− λt , t ≥ 0
p(t, λ ) = ⎨
⎩⎪ 0, t<0 (3 )
The resulting inter-event timings
described by this function are strictly
non-negative, which is at least physi-
cally reasonable, and directly control-
lable by varying the timing parameter
λ. For simplicity, then, the Poisson/
exponential timing model was chosen
as an initial attempt at temporal mod-
eling, and used to generate the results
presented in this article.
Two variants of the Poisson/expo-
nential timing model are considered.
In the first, defined herein as the
“Multi SV” case, a single thread deter-
mines the timing of fluctuation events,
and the power levels of one or more
satellites are adjusted at each event.
In the second variant, defined as the
“Indiv SV” case, each simulator chan-
nel receives its own individual timing
thread, and all fluctuation events are
interleaved in constructing the tim-
ing file for the simulator. These two
variants are shown schematically in
FIGURE 4.
Signal Processing | innovation
Constructing Scenarios
Once a target histogram is available, it
is necessary to generate random signal
amplitudes for use with a simulator
scenario. This is done by means of a
technique known as the probability in-
tegral transform (PIT). This approach
uses the cumulative distribution func-
tion (or, in the discrete case considered
here, a modified formulation based
on the cumulative mass function) of a
probability distribution to transform a
sequence of uniformly distributed ran-
dom numbers into a sequence whose
distribution matches the target func-
tion.
Finally, the random signal levels
generated by the PIT process are as-
signed to individual simulator chan-
nels according to a set of timed events
as described in the preceding section,
completing the randomized scenario to
be used for testing.
Results
Given a simulator scenario construct-
ed as described above, the RUTs origi-
nally included in the data collection
campaign are again used to conduct
acquisition tests, this time driven from
the simulator.
To validate that a particular fluc-
tuating scenario properly represents
the live data, it is necessary to quan-
tify two things: how well a generated
histogram matches the source data,
and how well a receiver’s acquisition
performance under simulated signals
matches its behavior in the field. At
first these may appear to be two quali-
tatively different problems, but a math-
ematical tool known as the two-sided
Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) test can
be used for both tasks.
Validation of Experimental Setup. As
a first step toward validating that the
C/N0 profile of the simulated signals
matches that of the reference data,
TABLE 1 gives the values of the two-sided
K-S test statistic, D (a measure of the
greatest discrepancy between a sample
and the reference distribution), for his-
tograms generated with the reference
47
innovation | Signal Processing
receiver for the two timing-thread
models described above and several
values of the Poisson/exponential pa-
rameter, λ. The reference cumulative
mass function (CMF) for each test was
derived from the histogram generated
for the raw (empirically collected) data
set.
These results illustrate good agree-
ment (D < 0.05) between the overall
signal distribution profile in the empir-
ical data set and that in each of the six
simulated fluctuating scenarios.
As a further check, TABLE 2 shows the
same K-S statistic for the histogram
generated from the “Multi SV” timing
model as a function of several NF+IL
values. As before, the reference CMF
comes from the raw (empirically col-
lected) data set, and the same reference
receiver was used to generate data
from the simulator scenario. Evidently,
an NF+IL value of 4 dB gives good
agreement between empirical and sim-
ulated data sets.
Validation of Receiver Performance. Fi-
nally, TTFF tests with the simulated
scenarios described above are con-
ducted with the same receiver(s) used
in the original data gathering session.
Here, the K-S test is used to compare
the live and simulated TTFF results
rather than signal distributions. An
example result, illustrating cumula-
tive distribution functions of TTFF,
is shown in FIGURE 5 for the live data
set collected during the original data
gathering session, alongside three re-
sults from the “Multi SV” fluctuating
model, generated with NF+IL = 4 dB
and several different values of the Pois-
son/exponential timing parameter, λ.
While agreement with live data is not
exact for any of the simulated scenari-
os, the λ-1 = 3.0 seconds case appears to
correspond reasonably well (D < 0.10).
Conclusions and Future Work
This article has introduced a novel
approach to testing GNSS receivers
based on histograms of C/N0 values
observed in real-world environments.
Much additional work remains. For
48 GPS World | March 2011 www.gpsworld.com
the proposed method to be amenable
to standardization, it is obviously nec-
essary to gather data from many ad-
ditional environments. Indeed, it ap-
pears likely that no one histogram will
encapsulate all environments of a par-
ticular type (such as urban canyons), so
significant additional experimentation
and data collection will be required
here. Also, as mentioned at the begin-
ning of the article, the proposed meth-
od will need to be tested with multiple
receivers to verify that a particular re-
sult is not unique to any specific brand
or architecture. Finally, higher rate C/
N0 source data may also be necessary
to capture the rapid fades that may be
encountered in dynamic scenarios,
such as drive tests, and the fluctuation
timing models will need to be revisited
once such data becomes available.
Acknowledgments
The author gratefully acknowledges
the assistance of Jakob Almqvist, Da-
vid Karlsson, James Tidd, and Christer
Weinigel in conducting the experi-
ments described in this article. Thanks
also to Ronald Walken for valuable
insights on the accurate treatment of
the source environment in calculating
target histograms. This article is based
1.0
0.9
0.8
Cumulative probability of successful fix
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
▲▲Figure 5 Time-to-first-fix
(“Multi SV” variant with NF+IL = 4 dB).
λ-1 (s) D D
Indiv SV Multi SV
1.0 0.048 0.024
3.0 0.034 0.047
5.0 0.049 0.033
▲▲TABLE 1 K-S test statistics (NF+IL = 4 dB).
NF+IL (dB) D
0 0.214
4 0.024
8 0.106
▲▲ TABLE 2 Two-sided K-S test statistics for the
“Multi SV” model (λ-1 = 1.0 sec).
on the paper “Fluctuation: A Novel
Approach to GNSS Receiver Testing”
presented at ION GNSS 2010.
ALEXANDER MITELMAN is the GNSS research
manager at Cambridge Silicon Radio, head-
quartered in Cambridge, U.K. He earned his
S.B. degree from the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology and M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from
Stanford University, all in electrical engineer-
ing. His research interests include signal-quality
monitoring and the development of algorithms
and testing methodologies for GNSS.
MORE ONLINE
Further Reading
For references related to this article, go to gpsworld.com and click
on Richard Langley’s Innovation under Inside GPS
World in the left-hand navigation bar.
Live trial
Simulated (λ-1 = 1.0 s → D = 0.25)
Simulated (λ-1 = 3.0 s → D = 0.09)
Simulated (λ-1 = 5.0 s → D = 0.16)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Time to first fix (seconds)
cumulative distribution functions from live and simulated data
 Application Challenge | on the edge

Iraq on the Map

Installing Reference Stations for Accurate Engineering
Anas Malkawi

A
s a geodetic surveyor, I served in the U.S Army for
10 years. During that time, my team and I developed
a nationwide GPS infrastructure system called the
Iraqi Geospatial Reference System (IGRS). We installed
Continuously Operating Reference Stations (CORS) and High
Accuracy Reference Network Stations (HARNS), the first
Iraqi owned and maintained system of its type.
As a native Arabic speaker, my role was to train the Iraqi
engineers to install additional CORS, as well as update and
maintain the IGRS as a part of the International GNSS Service
(IGS) network to sustain the accuracy of engineering and map-
ping projects. The IGRS was critical to other major infrastruc-
ture projects in the effort of rebuilding the battered nation, such

▲▲ GPS equipment collecting

data on a reference benchmark used to
monitor the deformation of the Haditha Dam.

as telecommunications, public works, and natural resource

management to name a few.
Some of the CORS we installed have Virtual Reference
System (VRS) capability, a technology newly developed to
establish real-time corrections in the field by using CORS as a
base station for real-time kinematic (RTK) data collection.
Key coordinators for the installation included Wisam Al-
Hassani of the Iraq Ministry of Water Resources, Paul McK-
enzie of the Canadian Army, Linda Allen of the U.S. State
Department, and myself, representing the U.S. Army, in addi-
▲▲ Soldiers survey airport navigational aids that require high geodetic
accuracy.
tion to representatives from National Geodetic Survey (NGS),
National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), and Trimble
Navigation.
In addition to developing the IGRS, we performed several
critical projects to assist in the rebuilding efforts as well as
providing force protection, navigation, and mapping. My

▲▲ Malkawi discussesinstallation
of Iraqi operated and ▲▲ The resultof traveling in
▲▲ Soldiers establish geodetic control for an airport aeronautical maintained CORS with military vehicles over roads
survey. Al-Hassani. infested with IED.

www.gpsworld.com March 2011 | GPS World 49

on the edge | Application Challenge

topographic engineering unit was re-

sponsible for providing coalition forces
with GIS analysis, map production, and
geodetic surveys.
For my second tour in Iraq (2007–
2008), I was the platoon sergeant, which
is equivalent to a project manager in a
surveying firm. During the 15-month
deployment, my team performed vari-
ous survey projects including: 10 airport
obstruction surveys, a dam deformation
survey, more than 30 artillery and target-
acquisition radar surveys, base-camp
designs, site layouts, and ground-truth
data collection for photogrammetry
and remote sensing projects. We also
established a nationwide database of
all survey control stations in Iraq. The ▲▲ Key coordinators for the installation of the first Iraqi owned and maintained Continuously
CORS was installed using Trimble Operating Reference Station (CORS.) From left are Hussein, Malkawi, McKenzie, and Allen.
NetRS receivers and Zephyr geodetic
antennas. Trimble GPSNet and GPS- conducted using Trimble 5700 GPS through the dangerous roads of Iraq. In
Base software were used to process the equipment. one incident, we were building a bridge
continuous satellite data, for inclusion Traveling in Iraq was a major ob- in Baiji to help Iraqis and coalition
in the worldwide CORS network for stacle for survey operations. We had a forces cross the Tigris River after the
public use. Field survey operations were choice: either fly on helicopters or drive original bridge was destroyed during the
military vehicles. Flying in helicopters 2003 invasion. Our vehicle hit an impro-
with survey equipment was a challenge vised explosive device (IED). Some of
because we could never fit all our per- the survey equipment was damaged, but
sonnel and equipment. However, it was we went back the next day and eventu-
much safer than ground transportation ally built the bridge.

Anas Malkawi served 10 years in the Army as

a geodetic surveyor and senior technical engi-
neer. He is currently enrolled in Old Dominion
University’s Civil Engineering program while
working at Transocean International Corporation
as the Iraq program manager.

▲▲ The team installs a HARNS in the southern

province of Basra. Since 2005, Iraqi ▲▲ The 2005 U.S./British IGRS Team. Despite the
engineers have attempted to recover difficulties, the soldiers I am honored to
HARNS, but many were destroyed by ▲▲ The initial plan of
IGRS and placement have served with stayed motivated and
locals who thought they indicated buried of CORS/HARN through the Southern performed exceptionally every day by
treasure. provinces. providing accurate data that saved lives.

Copyright 2011 QUESTEX MEDIA GROUP llc All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including by photocopy, recording, or information storage and retrieval without permission in writing from the publisher,
Questex Media Group LLC. Authorization to photocopy items for internal/educational or personal use, or the internal/educational or personal use of specific clients is granted by Questex Media Group LLC for libraries and other users registered with the Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Dr., Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750-8400
fax 978-750-4470. For uses beyond those listed above, please direct your written request to questexpermissions@theygsgroup.com or 800-494-9051, Ext. 100.
privacy notice: Questex Media Group provides certain customer contact data (such as customers’ names, addresses, phone numbers and e-mail addresses) to third parties who wish to promote relevant products, services and other opportunities which may be of interest to you. If you do not want Questex Media Group to
make your contact information available to third parties for marketing purposes, simply call toll-free 866-344-1315 or 1-847-763-9594 (Outside the US) between the hours of 8:30 am and 5 pm (CT) and a customer service representative will assist to remove your name from Questex’s lists.
GPS WORLD (ISSN 1048-5104) is published monthly (12 issues/yr) by Questex Media Group LLC, 306 W Michigan St, Ste 200, Duluth, MN 55802. SUBSCRIPTION RATES: U.S. and possessions — 1 year (12 issues), $73.70; 2 years (24 issues), $128.70. Canada and Mexico — $95.70, 1 year; $150.70, 2 years. All other
countries — $139.70, 1 year; $255.20, 2 years. International pricing includes air-expedited service. Single copies (prepaid only): $7 in the United States, $9 all other countries. Back issues, if available, are $19 in the U.S. and possessions, $23 all other countries. Include $6.50 per order plus $2 per additional copy for U.S. postage
and handling. Periodicals postage paid at Duluth, MN 55806, and additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Please send address changes to GPS WORLD,
P.O. Box 1270, Skokie, IL 60076-8270, USA. Canadian G.S.T. number: 840 033 278 RT0001, Publications Mail Agreement Number 40017597. Printed in the U.S.A.

50 GPS World | March 2011 www.gpsworld.com

 What Can You Do
with One Box?
GPS, GLONASS, Galileo
66 Channel GNSS Receiver
Software Upgradeable Receiver
Over the Air StarFire™ Licensing

Imagine one box for any application.

Powered by the Sapphire™ GNSS engine, NavCom’s new SF-3050 receiver

is customized to meet your precise positioning needs. Through software
optioning alone, the SF-3050 GNSS receiver can transform from single
frequency to multi-frequency, eliminating the need for costly new hardware.
The introduction of Over the Air StarFire licensing provides the SF-3050 with
decimeter-level position accuracy, anywhere in the world and now truly at any time.
The new smaller, lighter form factor also incorporates high-speed I/O components,
A John Deere Company including Ethernet, Bluetooth and USB capability, making the SF-3050 the ideal choice
for many applications.
ZZZQDYFRPWHFKFRP
NavCom’s new SF-3050. One box, Any application.
To learn more, visit us at www.navcomtech.com
You have something
new to hide.
Success has a secret ingredient.
Size is everything. Our OEMV-1DF™ is one of the world’s
smallest dual-frequency RTK receivers. That’s pretty big
news for engineers. Smaller means it uses less power.
Smaller means it weighs less. Smaller means it can fit
in a lot more places. Smaller means it’s easier to hide
your advantage from competitors. And when your
advantage is NovAtel, that’s a big deal. To find out
more, visit novatel.com or call you-know-who.

Integrate success into your .