internal signal may not provide the tester with enough control tovary the dynamics under which the test is done or to interpretthe measurements in units relevant to GPS navigation fixes. Ourproposed solution to this problem is to use external aiding inputsto transform a dynamic signal environment into a staticenvironment for which the receiver contribution to measurementerror is well characterized.This paper is organized into the following sections:(1) An abstract GPS simulator architecture and proposedstandardized specification sheet.(2) User accuracy as a function of simulator specifications.(3) Measuring simulator specifications.(4) A summary simulator test capability matrix indexedby user mission interests.(5) Conclusions.An Abstract GPSSimulator Architectureand Proposed StandardizedSpecification SheetSimulation ProblemA GPS simulator generates a facsimile of the GPS signals in spaceas they would be presented to the phase center of each userantenna. This entails many considerations. The simulator mustcreate all the 50-Hz navigation message databits and orbitalinformation available from the Operational Control Segment. Itmust determine the Line Of Sight (LOS) range from each satelliteto each user antenna phase center. It must calculate thedeparture and arrival angles of the LOS vectors relative to thesatellites’ and user’s antenna gain patterns. Given these anglesand the LOS range from a satellite to user, it can then calculateor look up the amplitude, phase, and group delay effects of thesatellites’ and user’s antenna for each LOS path (Refs. [1]-[3]).Finally, it must generate additional propagation effects caused bythe ionosphere, troposphere, terrain or body shading, andmultipath. If interference or jamming is to be simulated, it mustalso generate the LOS signals from each of these sources. Forantennas that have more than one element, all these calculationsmust be repeated for each element of the antenna that isindependently processed by the receiver. The simulator maygenerate all signals in real time or it may read a preprocessedscenario file from which the appropriate RF commands areexecuted. For closed-loop operation, real-time calculation andgeneration of all signals is mandatory. Figure 1 summarizes thechallenges of providing simulated signals to a GPS receiver.Abstract Simulator ArchitectureFigure 2 shows an abstract model for a generic simulator.Starting at the bottom left of the figure are the software modelsthat generate the 50-Hz navigation message from the OperationalControl Segment and satellite orbits. (In order to simulateanomalies in GPS operation, the orbital location and ephemerisdata do not have to be consistent.) The switch at the bottomcenter represents the ability to select either a predefinedtrajectory user motion file or an on-the-fly live trajectorydetermination (for closed-loop real-time operation). Thesoftware will then take the trajectory information, add lever armsand antenna locations, and create LOS geometries for eachvisible satellite (SV). Next, given the ranges and arrival angles, itadds appropriate antenna, troposphere, and ionosphere models.The software models calculate propagation errors that eithermatch the databits or match the actual environments. Finally, itLine of sight: for jth SV,calculate the effects ofSV - user + environment+ antenna (look_angles)on range, carrier, amplitudeTo all SVsionoGround control segment:almanac, ephemeris, databituploads plus actual orbit locationstropoterrainAzi, dep=90-elv lookangles in antennaframe for jth SVUser dynamicspos, vel, acc, jerk,attitude, attituderatesRepeat all neededcalculation for2nd and other antennasNote: Vehicle travels either a known user trajectory orhas an option for on-board Nav system to use GPS + otherdata that can then change the trajectory on-the-flybased on Nav system updates. True closed real-time processingis needed for this case.Figure 1. Physical GPS simulation problem.Validating the Validating Tool: Defining and Measuring GPS Simulator Specifications3
calculates miscellaneous terms, such as parameters that describethe L1/L2 dispersion in each SV’s antenna, and other errors.When the software models are done, there is a set of amplitude,code phase (for the pseudorange or prange), and carrier phase(for delta pseudorange) parameters for each sample point of theL1 and the L2 portions of the SV signal command that is sent toan RF signal generator (the top item in Figure 2). Because the L1and L2 signals usually travel through frequency dispersive mediasuch as the ionosphere, they will differ. Thus, separate hardwaremay actually be required for generating the L1 and L2contributions to a composite PPS (Precise Positioning Service(for military sets)) SV signal. Finally, the digital input samples ofcode phase, carrier phase, amplitude, and databit are then turnedinto the actual RF signals. (Note that vendors typically havenovel and proprietary ways of mechanizing the actual RF signaland invoking software models at the minimum possible samplerates. Because each vendor has subtle implementationdifferences, maximum simulated user dynamic ranges and ratesmay also have subtle performance differences, strengths, orlimitations.)Overview of Simulator ParametersThe first task is to describe how accurately the combination ofthe software models and hardware can generate a single SPS(Standard Positioning Service (for civilian GPS receivers)) or PPSsatellite signal. Then, the accuracy of simulating the entireconstellation is addressed. Unfortunately, there is currently littleconsistency used in describing simulator’s hardware.Most specification sheets jump right into channel specificationswithout defining their terms or how they relate to either singlesatellite accuracy or constellation accuracy. Some simulators aredescribed by the number of SPS or PPS SVs that can begenerated simultaneously; others are described by the number ofhardware channels installed. Thus, we start by formally definingan SPS exchange rating as the number of hardware channelsrequired to create a composite C/A and P SV signal on L1, and aPPS exchange rating for the number of channels required tocreate C/A and P(Y) on L1, as well as P(Y) on L2. For mostsimulators, the SPS exchange rating is one channel for one SPSSV, and the PPS exchange rating is two channels for one PPS SV.Next, each hardware channel is specified with respect todynamic range, dynamic rates, and accuracy. Then, interchannelspecifications are used to describe the maximum deviationsbetween all channels relative to a designated reference channel.If the simulator is made up of a number of separate RF elementsinstalled in separate chassis, interchassis specifications are usedto describe how well each chassis can be matched to a referencechannel. A final entry describes the spectral purity of thesignal-generating hardware.Qualitatively speaking, channel accuracies relate to the accuracyof a single SPS or PPS satellite. Interchannel specificationsdescribe the quality of the constellation. Spectral purity isrelated to how cleanly the system generates carrier phase (usedby many receivers to interpolate code phase pseudorangemeasurements) over the entire dynamic range of motion.Although many vendor specification sheets are starting toincorporate data for individual channels as well as interchannelerrors, none currently state whether the accuracy applies over theentire operating dynamics of the device, nor do they state theaveraging times underlying the specifications. Our proposedLow- and high-ratesampling frequenciesNCO clock frequeciesLow-rate models,interpolate,high-rate modelscodephasecarrierphasegainGPSsignalsynthesisandL1 & L2generationL1 or L2 line-of-sight signal. It maytake 2 channels to make a full CA & P(Y)L1 and P(Y) L2 PPS SVdata bitetc. ... for each L1 or L2 CA and/or P(Y) component+finalbandpassfiltersLine-of-sight dynamics: user-SV + environmentlook angles, group delay, phase, and data bitsUser Interface for Model Parameters & InputsSV dynamicsEphemerisAlmanac-User pos,vel, acc, jerk,attitude,attitude rates+ iono,tropo,terrain+Userantenna(s)bodyblockageSimulated GPS RF outputReceiver plusNAV systemunder testAiding inSchedule:uploads,databit/SV,errors,corruptionsvs event timeTrajectoryfileTraj-aid P,V,A, angles, timeor INS models, or LOS aid,or hooksClosed-loop trajectoryfrom guidance optionalFigure 2. Abstract simulator model.Simulatortruth loggingOutput fixesValidating the Validating Tool: Defining and Measuring GPS Simulator Specifications4
- Page 2 and 3:
Letter from thePresident and CEO,Vi
- Page 4 and 5:
Information TechnologyMilton AdamsE
- Page 6 and 7:
BiographyMilton Adams has been at D
- Page 9 and 10:
Figure 1 represents a functional de
- Page 11 and 12:
Programs. In effect, these controll
- Page 13 and 14:
Although the terminal area traffic
- Page 15 and 16:
Table 2. ATFM performance evaluatio
- Page 17 and 18:
In the experiments, a nominal capac
- Page 19 and 20:
[3] Wambsganss, Michael C. “Colla
- Page 21 and 22:
Guidance, Navigation, and Control A
- Page 23 and 24:
A Control Lyapunov FunctionApproach
- Page 25 and 26:
x( 0) ∈ X and w(t) ∈Wfor all t
- Page 27 and 28:
(b) Select a quadratic RCLF V i (x)
- Page 29 and 30:
at each grid point. In the case w 1
- Page 31 and 32:
References[1] Ball, J.A. and A.J. v
- Page 33 and 34:
Guidance, Navigation, and Control A
- Page 35 and 36:
Relative and Differential GPSData T
- Page 37 and 38:
The first term on the right in the
- Page 39 and 40:
H R# δρ R,GPS -H A# δρ A,GPSThi
- Page 41 and 42:
selection; and (3) shown that the a
- Page 43 and 44:
Guidance, Navigation, and Control A
- Page 45 and 46:
Segmentation of MR ImagesUsing Curv
- Page 47 and 48:
(3)where ν now represents a contin
- Page 49 and 50:
Experimental ResultsThe results of
- Page 51 and 52:
Table 1. A summary of segmentation
- Page 53 and 54:
Guidance, Navigation,and ControlJim
- Page 55 and 56:
BiographyGeorge SchmidtGeorge Schmi
- Page 57 and 58:
clock and ephemeris errors, as well
- Page 59 and 60:
maintained in a rigid structure, wh
- Page 61 and 62:
Table 5. “Typical” absolute GPS
- Page 63 and 64:
performed, then the target location
- Page 65 and 66: tightly-coupled system, however, ca
- Page 67 and 68: Concluding RemarksRecent progress i
- Page 69 and 70: As real-time systems evolve into th
- Page 71 and 72: Advanced Fault-TolerantComputing fo
- Page 73 and 74: The Viking and Voyager were both in
- Page 75 and 76: Containment Regions (FCRs). There a
- Page 77 and 78: well as reversing the whole process
- Page 79 and 80: As real-time systems evolve into th
- Page 81 and 82: Automated Station-Keepingfor Satell
- Page 83 and 84: Figure 2. Minimum elevation angles
- Page 85 and 86: anomaly M and/or the ascending node
- Page 87 and 88: However, since optimization and rec
- Page 89 and 90: is maintained in the Northern Hemis
- Page 91 and 92: autonomy. It must have the ability
- Page 93 and 94: [31] Neelon, Joseph G., Jr., Paul J
- Page 95 and 96: Draper’s primary goal is to Drape
- Page 97 and 98: )Rotordynamic Modelingof an Activel
- Page 99 and 100: Eq. (9) becomes:λ[ R ] { Φ } = [
- Page 101 and 102: chosen to be 24, for a total of 48
- Page 103 and 104: InertialInstruments/MechanicalDesig
- Page 105 and 106: BiographyJeffrey Borenstein is curr
- Page 107 and 108: process step. Process information i
- Page 109 and 110: Figure 4. Control chart for boron d
- Page 111 and 112: References[1] Barbour, N., J. Conne
- Page 113 and 114: Draper Laboratory continues to engi
- Page 115: Validating the Validating Tool:Defi
- Page 119 and 120: Table 1. Suggested specification sh
- Page 121 and 122: User Accuracy as aFunction of Simul
- Page 123 and 124: 20-min averaging, this clock lockin
- Page 125 and 126: Table 2. Sample high-level summary
- Page 127 and 128: AcknowledgmentR.L. Greenspan, J.A.
- Page 129 and 130: Systems IntegrationRich MartoranaPe
- Page 131 and 132: BiographyAnthony Kourepenis is an A
- Page 133 and 134: control is employed to maintain the
- Page 135 and 136: Table 1. Summary of automotive yaw
- Page 137 and 138: Resolution (60 Hz) deg/h10000000100
- Page 139 and 140: References[1] Greiff, P., B. Boxenh
- Page 141 and 142: Guidance, Navigation, and Control A
- Page 143 and 144: An Integrated Safety AnalysisMethod
- Page 145 and 146: Infrastructure ModelsSystemRequirem
- Page 147 and 148: Figures 6 and 7 illustrate the bloc
- Page 149 and 150: Notice that each flight track descr
- Page 151 and 152: Table 7. Safety statistics at 1700-
- Page 153 and 154: Guidance, Navigation, and Control A
- Page 155 and 156: An Optimal Guidance Law forPlanetar
- Page 157 and 158: Note that the states in the three d
- Page 159 and 160: Crossrange (Kft)10090807060504030Cl
- Page 161 and 162: The 1997 Charles StarkDraper PrizeT
- Page 163 and 164: The 1997 Charles StarkDraper Prize1
- Page 165 and 166: “Draper encourages its personnel
- Page 167 and 168:
Gimballed Vibrating GyroscopeHaving
- Page 169 and 170:
“Draper encourages its personnel
- Page 171 and 172:
Optical Source Isolator withPolariz
- Page 173 and 174:
“Draper encourages its personnel
- Page 175 and 176:
Hunting Suppressor forPolyphase Ele
- Page 177 and 178:
“Draper encourages its personnel
- Page 179 and 180:
Sensor Having an Off-Frequency Driv
- Page 181 and 182:
proof mass from transients and enha
- Page 183 and 184:
1997 Published PapersThe following
- Page 185 and 186:
monitoring of space structures and
- Page 187 and 188:
measured by kinematic degrees of fr
- Page 189 and 190:
i.e., what percent of the earth’s
- Page 191 and 192:
McConley, M. W.; Dahleh, M. A.; Fer
- Page 193 and 194:
unaffordable, or even misguided. Bu
- Page 195 and 196:
The Draper DistinguishedPerformance
- Page 197:
Educational Activitiesat Draper Lab