Geodesy and Geodynamics 10 (2019) 235e240

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Geodesy and Geodynamics

journal homepage: http://www.keaipublishing.com/geog

Ionospheric time delay corrections based on the extended single layer

model over low latitude region
Sahithi Karanam, D. Venkata Ratnam*, J.R.K. Kumar Dabbakuti
Department of Electronics and Communications Engineering, Koneru Lakshmaiah University, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, 522502, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Ionospheric delay error is considered to be one of the most prominent factors impacting the Global
Received 9 February 2018 Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS) positioning and navigation accuracies. Due to dispersive nature and
Received in revised form anisotropic of the ionosphere above certain regions, the positioning accuracy is seriously affected when
28 January 2019
using a precision-limited model. In this paper, an attempt has been taken to estimate ionosphere-delays
Accepted 25 February 2019
based on Planar Fit (PF) and Spherical Harmonic Function (SHF) models by applying the commonly used
Available online 8 April 2019
single layer Model (SLM) and an extended single layer model (ESLM) which has been explored sparsely
over the region. The results show that ESLM of PF and SHF techniques performed better in estimating
Keywords:
Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS)
ionospheric delay compared to the existing SLM model. Although the performance of the ESLM approach
Planar fit (PF) is almost comparable to the SLM results during the quiet ionospheric conditions, the ESLM-PF and ESLM-
Spherical Harmonic Function (SHF) SHF models led to respective improvements of 4.66% and 7.14% over the classically used SLM model
Extended single layer model (ESLM) under the disturbed ionospheric conditions. In view of the uneven variability of equatorial/low latitude
ionosphere above the Indian subcontinental region, the suitability of ESLM-PF and ESLM-SHF models has
been emphasized and suggested for assessing its completeness and reliableness across other parts of the
globe. The output of this work may be useful for high precession GNSS positioning through mitigating
the ionospheric delays under quiet as well as varied ionospheric conditions across the low/equatorial
latitude regions.
© 2019 Institute of Seismology, China Earthquake Administration, etc. Production and hosting by Elsevier
B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co., Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

1. Introduction
Global Navigation Satellite Systems (GNSS), Satellite Based
Augmentation Systems (SBAS) and Regional Navigation Satellite
Systems (RNSS) have been proposed/established in the past three
decades, along with the modern technological improvements in the
radio wave propagation, space-based navigation and satellite
communication requirements. In the commencement, the main goal
of the navigation satellite system was relative position, time transfers
and the accurate navigation relative positioning [1]. Nevertheless,
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: dvratnam@kluniversity.in (D. Venkata Ratnam).
Peer review under responsibility of Institute of Seismology, China Earthquake
Administration.
Production and Hosting by Elsevier on behalf of KeAi
there is a certain amount of time delay in the signal as the signal
travels through the ionosphere. This is a major concern of scientific
development community that ultimately degrades the performance
of the navigation system [2]. Further, the equatorial/low latitude
region encounters significantly large ionospheric gradients and
range delays due to uncertainty in the day-to-day variability asso-
ciated with localized electrodynamic and wind parameters.
Usually, dual-frequency GNSS receivers meet most requirements
by eliminating up to 99.9% of ionospheric error with a linear com-
bination of frequencies. However, a single-frequency GNSS receiver
use the most commonly used Klobuchar model (about 55% iono-
spheric error correction), regional vertical ionospheric TEC map,
terrestrial/satellite-based augmentation systems, or other empirical
ionospheric delay error models are the best choice for ionospheric
error mitigation. But, the height component of the positioning so-
lution can only be achieved reliably if a proper ionosphere mitigation
method is applied. Whichever be the source for mitigating iono-
spheric delay in single/dual frequency GNSS receivers, an appropriate
choice of model mapping function and ionospheric shell height are

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geog.2019.02.002
1674-9847/© 2019 Institute of Seismology, China Earthquake Administration, etc. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co., Ltd. This is
an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
236 S. Karanam et al. / Geodesy and Geodynamics 10 (2019) 235e240

the essential aspects to portray and mitigate the associated delay

error for relatively precise positioning [3]. In fact, the ionospheric
time delays due to each GNSS signal is usually determined from the
TEC by assuming a layer of maximum electron density and its cor-
responding ionospheric pierce point (IPP) height. Moreover, the
reliability of the TEC in two-dimensional (2-D) representation de-
pends primarily on the source GNSS stations distribution and the
spatiotemporal gradient modeling of TEC over a region. For the 2-D
approaches, the two types of errors usually limit the accuracy of
the normal selection of the single-layer model (SLM), i.e., a) error
relating to model mapping function (or mapping function errors) and
b) error caused by ignoring the horizontal gradients of electron
density along the ray path [4].
In order to evaluate the improvement of the accuracy with respect
to the standard models such as Inverse-Distance-Weight (IDW),
Bilinear model, Kriging Model (KRM), Modified planar fit model
(MPFM), Minimum Mean Square Model (MMSE), Spherical Harmonic
Analysis (SHA) and Adjusted spherical harmonic analysis (ASHA), it
seems one can inspect how precisely the mapping function (MF) is
modeled, that denotes, the unknown height variation of the electron
density profile is converted into a predetermined form. In the recent
years, many researchers have been put their efforts in estimating and
mitigating the ionospheric time delays based ionospheric modeling
techniques with standard models [5e10]. These studies have been
carried out mainly in place of the model performance analysis of the
SBAS services over the region. Their results confirm that these models
provide different model accuracies under different ionospheric con-
ditions based on the SLM method [11]. However, the major challenge
for any ionospheric model is the irregular distribution of ionospheric
electron density, where any Single Layer Model (SLM) missing the
detection of ionospheric irregularity. Fig. 1. Flowchart for estimating the ionospheric time delays.
Following the aforesaid gaps in the regular SLM approach, the Jet
Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) proposed an Extended Single Layer Model
(ESLM) mapping function that has been successfully used in the
Centre for Orbit Determination in Europe (CODE) Global Ionosphere
" " #2 #1
Maps (GIM) to represent the global VTEC distribution in the time cosðel:aÞ
2

domain [12]. In addition, studies of Sparks et al. (2000) demonstrated
that the ionospheric correction based on the ESLM model provides
better results than the single layer model [4]. In the present paper, an
attempt was made to estimate the ionospheric time delays from
regional network of TEC data through using ESLM with the planar fit
(PF) and the Spherical Harmonics Function (SHF) techniques over the
equatorial/low latitude Indian Sub-continental region.
2. Data and methodology
Mðh; elÞ ¼ 1  h
1þ Re
Iv; IPPðx; yÞ is the ionospheric delay xeast and ynorth determine the
user locations in the east direction and north direction coordinates
and ao ; a1 ; a2 are the planar fit coefficients. Mðh; elÞ is the extended
single-layer model (ESLM). The hs ,Re , el are referred to the thin-
shell height (506.7 km), earth radius (6378 km) and satellite
elevation angle respectively. Additionally, the parameter ‘a’ is the
constant term with a value of 0.9782.

In the current study, GPS-TEC data from 17 GNSS stations are

considered during July 2004, which are operating under the GAGAN- 2.2. SHF model
TEC network in the Indian region. The position of GNSS stations
covers a stretch between geomagnetic equator to the equatorial The ionospheric single-shell approximation depending on the
anomaly crest and beyond with a ð5ο x 5ο Þ grid spacing in latitude SHF is illustrated as follows [13].
and longitude. Initially, retrieved TEC data from all stations is pre-
processed, followed by the PF and SHF techniques. A brief outline X
n X
m
of the methodology followed has been presented in Fig. 1. STECðq; lÞ ¼ P nm ½cosðqÞfCnm cosðmlÞ þ Snm sinðmlÞg
n¼0 m¼0
(2)
2.1. Planar fit model

The ionospheric GPS-TEC measurements can be modeled with VTEC ¼ STEC  Mðh; elÞ (3)
the frequently utilized single layer approximation depending on l; q is the geographic longitude and latitude of the IPP.
the planar fit model is given as [8]. Cnm ; Snm is the unspecified Spherical Harmonic Coefficients of
h i order m and degree n.
east north
Iv; IPPðx; yÞ ¼ Mðh; elÞ  ao þ a1 x þ a2 y (1) P nm ½cosðqÞ is the normalized associated Legendre function.
Compute the PF and SHF model coefficients by using weighted
where least square method as suggested by Menke et al. [14].
 S. Karanam et al. / Geodesy and Geodynamics 10 (2019) 235e240
2.3. Truth data
At a specific location, for a certain epoch, the vertical Iono-
spheric delays and their latitudes and longitudes of Ionospheric
Pierce Point (IPP) due to the visible satellites are measured. Vertical
ionospheric delays are taken into account at the corresponding IPP
locations. Among them, the vertical ionospheric delay of the sat-
ellite with maximum elevation is considered a “truth data,” so that
the error of conversion to vertical bias is less. For example, to es-
timate the vertical ionosphere time delay at ð25+ N; 75o EÞ Iono-
spheric Grid Point (IGP), the IPP equivalent to the highest elevation
at each epoch is considered as an unknown point, and the
measured vertical delays of the same are considered as “truth data”
[15]. The vertical IGP delay is estimated at these IPPs using the data
from surrounding stations, namely, Jodhpur, Delhi, Ahmedabad and
Bhopal (Fig. 2).
Fig. 2. Locations of GPS-TEC stations (red triangle) of the GAGAN network, ionospheric
grid points (IGPs) (black circle) and consolidated IGPs (green dot) for evaluation of
models over Indian region.
Fig. 3. Estimation of ESLM-Planar fit vertical ionospheric delays at six IGP locations for quiet and disturbed days (July 05 and 25, 2004).
237
3. Results and discussions
The planar fit and SHF ionospheric models are employed by the
GPS-TEC data. To investigate the IGP delay variations over the Indian
region, we selected a typical quiet day (July 05, 2004) having the 3-
hourly Kp index in the range (0 ¼ Kp  2) and a disturbed day (July
23, 2004) with the 3-hourly Kp index (0 ¼ Kp < 9). The vertical
ionospheric time delays at six IGP location between 10o N to 30o E
latitude and 80o E to 90o E longitude are examined with a spacing of
10o . It is observed from the Fig. 3 that the IGP delays show an almost
similar diurnal pattern with the increase in magnitude at sunrise to
attain a peak around 12.00e15.00 hrs LT during quiet days and
14.00e17.00 hrs Lt during disturbed days and later declines to reach
the minimum value after midnight. The vertical delay is varied from
1.27 m to 5.88 m LT (Fig. 3a) for quiet day. The vertical delay is varied
from 1.44 m to 7.54 m LT (Fig. 3b) for disturbed day.
Fig. 4 shows the estimation of ESLM-SHF Vertical ionospheric
delays at six IGP locations for quiet and disturbed days (July 05 and
25, 2004). It is observed that the vertical delay is varied from 0.99 m
to 6.28 m (Fig. 4a) for quiet day. The vertical delay is varied from
1.21 m to 7.63 m (Fig. 4b) for disturbed day.
3.1. Performance evaluation of ESLM model
Fig. 5 depicts the vertical ionospheric delay corresponding to the
PF and SHF separately associated with SLM and ESLM at a selected
IGP location (25 N and 75 E) on a quiet day. It is observed from the
figure that the greatest vertical delay in the PF model is 5.97 m
(SLM), 6.11 m (ESLM) whereas the corresponding minimum values
are 1.11 m and 1.15. Similarly, the maximum vertical delays in SHF
model are 6.21 m (SLM), 6.38 m (ESLM) along with the respective
minimum values 0.66 m and 0.67 m.
In Fig. 6, we plotted the vertical ionospheric delay corre-
sponding to the PF and SHF by employing both SLM and ESLM at
the IGP location (25 N and 75 E) on the disturbed day
(February18, 2015). It is observed from the figure that the greatest
vertical delays in the PF model are 7.60 m (SLM), 7.75 m (ESLM)
and their minimum values are 1.33 m and 1.36 m. The corre-
sponding SHF model values are 7.72 m (SLM), 7.97 m (ESLM) with
238 S. Karanam et al. / Geodesy and Geodynamics 10 (2019) 235e240

Fig. 4. Estimation of ESLM-SHF Vertical ionospheric delays at six IGP locations for quiet and disturbed days (July 05 and 25, 2004).

Fig. 5. Vertical ionospheric delay variations at an IGP location (25 N and 75 E) on a typical quiet day July 05, 2004.

the respective minimum values remaining at the levels of 1.17 m
and 1.20 m. It is also proved that, at each IGP the vertical delays are
relatively higher during the disturbed days when compared to the
quiet days due to the improved EIA during the disturbed days
considering the involvement of external electric field at the
equatorial zone operating the pattern over the region and regular
electrojet strength [16].
To evaluate the performance of ESLM over the IGP region (25 N,
75 E) location is studied in this study. The performance accuracy
between the model vertical delays and the truth observation values
has been determined using Root Mean Square Error (RMSE). The
RMSE for both the models are determined from the considered two
days as show in Fig. 7.
For the quiet day, the planar fit residuals are 1.55 m (SLM) and
1.52 (ESLM). When using a SHF approach, the residuals are 1.48 m
(SLM) and 1.44 (ESLM). For the disturbed day, the planar fit re-
siduals are 1.93 m (SLM) and 1.84 (ESLM). Whereas the SHF ap-
proaches, the residuals are 1.82 m (SLM) and 1.69 (ESLM). Hence,
it is confirmed that the ESLM of PF and SHF models show better
performance in estimating the ionospheric delays relative to that
of the regular SLM models. The ESLM-PF improved the delay
estimation by 4.66% and the ESLM-SHF model improved by 7.14%
as compared to their counterparts using the SLM approach. Hence,
applicability of ESLM model has been emphasized in this study for
relatively better determining the ionospheric delay over the re-
gion. The performance could be further verified at different
 S. Karanam et al. / Geodesy and Geodynamics 10 (2019) 235e240
Fig. 6. Vertical ionospheric delay variations at an IGP location (25 N and 75 E) on a typical disturbed day July 25, 2004.
Fig. 7. RMSE of Ionospheric delay variations at an IGP location (25 N, 75 E) during
quiet and disturbed days.
latitudes and longitudes for improved positioning and employ-
ment towards air navigation.
4. Conclusions
In this study, the applicability of the new ESLM to estimate
the ionospheric time delays by PF and SHF models was
investigated. The current SLM and its modified version, the
ESLM model, evaluated during the quiet as well as disturbed
ionospheric conditions. The RMSE deviations in the SLM during
the quiet and disturbed days are higher in comparison to ESLM
for both PF and SHF models. The results show that the ESLM
performance during the quiet day is almost comparable to that
of the SLM model. However, during the disturbed day, ESLM-PF
has been improved by delay estimate improvement (4.66%) and
ESLM-SHF model (7.14%). Therefore, for disturbed ionospheric
conditions, ESLM is preferred over SLM. The day-to-day iono-
spheric variation in equatorial/low latitude region are uncertain
due to the governing local ionospheric and the wind dynamics
239
conditions, so the implementation of ESLM model for more
accurate monitoring of ionospheric delay error and their miti-
gations improving navigation and positioning precisions over
the low latitude region. The outcome of this work may com-
plement towards ionosphere time delay error modelling and
mitigation applications in the context of satellite navigation
systems.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that there is no conflicts of interest.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their thanks to the Depart-
ment of Science and Technology, New Delhi, India SR/FST/ESI-130/
2013 FIST program for Department of Atmospheric Sciences.
References
[1] S.V. Kibe, Indian plan for satellite-based navigation systems for civil aviation,
Curr. Sci. 84 (11) (2003) 1405e1411.
[2] S. Sunda, R. Sridharan, B.M. Vyas, P.V. Khekale, K.S. Parikh, A.S. Ganeshan,
C.R. Sudhir, S.V. Satish, Mala S. Bagiya, Satellite-based augmentation systems:
a novel and cost-effective tool for ionospheric and space weather studies,
Space Weather 13 (1) (2015) 6e15.
[3] S.K. Panda, S.S. Gedam, Evaluation of GPS standard point positioning with
various ionospheric error mitigation techniques, J. Appl. Geod. 10 (4) (2016)
211e221.
[4] L. Sparks, B.A. Lijima, A.J. Mannucci, X. Pi, B.D. Wilson, A new model for
retrieving slant TEC corrections for wide area differential GPS, in: 2000:
Navigating into the New Millennium, Technical Meeting, Anaheim, CA; United
States, 2000, pp. 464e473.
[5] A. De Santis, G. DeFranceschi, D.J. Kerridge, Regional spherical modeling of 2-D
functions: the case of the critical frequency of the F2 ionospheric layer,
Comput. Geosci. 20 (5) (1994) 849e871.
[6] R.S. Conker, M.B. El-Arini, T.W. Albertson, J.A. Klobuchar, P.H. Doherty,
Description and assessment of real-time algorithms to estimate the iono-
spheric error bounds forWAAS, J. Navig. 44 (1) (1997) 77e87.
[7] R. Lejeune, M.B. El-Arini, in: An Ionospheric Grid Algorithm for WAAS Based
on the Minimum Mean Square Error Estimator, Proc. IES, Alexandria, VA,
1999.
[8] T. Walter, A. Hansen, J. Blanch, P. Enge, T. Mannucci, X. Pi, L. Sparks, B. Iijma,
M.B. El-Arini, R. Lejeune, M. Hagen, E. ltshular, R. Fries, A. Chu, Robust
detection of ionosphere irregularities, in: Proc. Inst. Navig. Annu. Meeting, Salt
Lake City, UT, Sep. 2000, pp. 209e218.
240 S. Karanam et al. / Geodesy and Geodynamics 10 (2019) 235e240

[9] J. Blanch, T. Walter, P. Enge, Adapting kriging to the WAAS MOPS ionospheric D. Venkata Ratnam received the M.Tech. degree in radar
grid, in: Proc. NTM Inst. Navig., Anaheim, CA, Jan. 2003, pp. 848e853. and microwave engineering from the Department of
[10] J.R.K. Kumar Dabbakuti, D. VenkataRatnam, S. Sunda, Modelling of ionospheric Electronics and Communication Engineering, Andhra
time delays based on adjusted spherical harmonic analysis, Aviation 20 (1) University, Visakhapatnam, India, in 2003, and the Ph.D.
(2016) 1e7. degree in electronics and communication engineering
[11] D. VenkataRatnam, A.D. Sarma, Modelling of low-latitude ionosphere using from Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University Hyder-
GPS data with SHF model, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 50 (3) (2012) abad, Hyderabad, India, in 2011. From 2003 to 2011, he
972e980. worked as a Research Assistant, Junior Research Fellow,
[12] U. Hugentobler, S. Schaer, G. Beutler, H. Bock, R. Dach, A. Ja€ggi, M. Meindl, Senior Research Fellow, and Senior Research Assistant
C. Urschl, L. Mervart, M. Rothacher, U. Wild, A. Wiget, E. Brockmann, with the Research and Training Unit for Navigational
D. Ineichen, G. Weber, H. Habrich, C. Boucher, CODE IGS Analysis Center Electronics, Osmania University, Hyderabad, India. In 2011,
Technical Report 2002. Tech. rep., IGS 2001/2002 Technical Reports, 2002. he joined the Faculty of Department of Electronics and
[13] S. Schaer, G. Beutler, M. Rothacher, T.A. Springer, Daily global ionosphere Communications Engineering as an Associate Professor,
maps based on GPS carrier phase data routinely produced by the code analysis and is currently working as a Professor and Head of the
center, in: Proc. IGS AC Workshop, Silver Spring, MD, Mar, 1996, pp. 19e21. Centre for Atmospheric Sciences, KL University, Guntur,
[14] W. Menke, Geophysical Data Analysis: Discrete Inverse Theory, Academic, India. His research interests include navigational elec-
NewYork, NY, USA, 1984. tronics, global navigational satellite systems (GNSS), space
[15] V. SatyaSrinivas, A.D. Sarma, Hema K. Achanta, Modeling of ionospheric time science, and radio-wave propagation. Dr. Ratnam was the
delay using anisotropic IDW WithJackknife technique, IEEE Trans. Geosci. recipient of the Young Scientist Award (2012e2015) of
Remote Sens. 54 (1) (2016) 513e519. the Department of Science and Technology (DST), India,
[16] S. Basu, S. Basu, Effects of large magnetic storms on communication and GPS and the Research Award (2015e2017) of the University
navigation systems at middle and equatorial latitudes, in: Proc. URSI GA Int. Grants Commission (UGC), India.
Conf., Maastricht, The Netherlands, Aug, 2002, pp. 17e24.