4.5 Article

Assessment of vertical TEC mapping functions for space-based GNSS observations

Journal

GPS SOLUTIONS
Volume 20, Issue 3, Pages 353-362

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s10291-015-0444-6

Keywords

TEC; Mapping function; Ionospheric effective height; LEO satellites; GNSS

Categories

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41325017, 41274157, 41174139, 41121003]
  2. Project of Chinese Academy of Sciences [KZZD-EW-01]
  3. National Key Basic Research Program of China [2012CB825605]
  4. Thousand Young Talents Program of China

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The mapping function is commonly used to convert slant to vertical total electron content (TEC) based on the assumption that the ionospheric electrons concentrate in a layer. The height of the layer is called ionospheric effective height (IEH) or shell height. The mapping function and IEH are generally well understood for ground-based global navigation satellite system (GNSS) observations, but they are rarely studied for the low earth orbit (LEO) satellite-based TEC conversion. This study is to examine the applicability of three mapping functions for LEO-based GNSS observations. Two IEH calculating methods, namely the centroid method based on the definition of the centroid and the integral method based on one half of the total integral, are discussed. It is found that the IEHs increase linearly with the orbit altitudes ranging from 400 to 1400 km. Model simulations are used to compare the vertical TEC converted by these mapping functions and the vertical TEC directly calculated by the model. Our results illustrate that the F&K (Foelsche and Kirchengast) geometric mapping function together with the IEH from the centroid method is more suitable for the LEO-based TEC conversion, though the thin layer model along with the IEH of the integral method is more appropriate for the ground-based vertical TEC retrieval.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available