4.2 Article

A simplification of rigorous atmospheric raytracing based on judicious rectilinear paths for near-surface GNSS reflectometry

期刊

EARTH PLANETS AND SPACE
卷 72, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1186/s40623-020-01206-1

关键词

GPS; GNSS; GNSS-R; Reflectometry; Atmospheric delay; Atmospheric refraction; Ray-tracing; Radio wave propagation

资金

  1. CNPq (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico) [457530/2014-6, 433099/2018-6]
  2. Fapergs (Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul)
  3. Mitacs [IT11988]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Atmospheric delays are known to cause biases in Global Navigation Satellite System Reflectometry (GNSS-R) altimetry applications, such as for sea-level monitoring. The main quantity of interest is the reflection-minus-direct or interferometric atmospheric delay. Recently, we have presented a rigorous raytracing procedure to account for linear and angular refraction in conjunction with reflection as observed from near-surface platforms. Here, we demonstrate the feasibility of simplifying the ray trajectory by imposing a rectilinear wave propagation model. Two variants were assessed, based on the apparent or refracted satellite direction on the one hand and the geometric or vacuum conditions on the other hand. The former was shown to agree with rigorous results in terms of interferometric radio length while the latter agreed in terms of the interferometric vacuum distance. Upon a judicious combination of the best aspects of the two rectilinear cases, we have defined a mixed variant with excellent agreement with rigorous raytracing in terms of interferometric atmospheric delay. We further showed that mapping functions developed for GNSS positioning cannot be reused for GNSS-R purposes without adaptations. Otherwise, the total atmospheric delay may be underestimated by up to 50% at low elevation angles. The present work facilitates the adaptation of existing atmospheric raytracing software for GNSS-R purposes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据