A NAVIC Enabled Hardware Receiver for the Indian Mass Market

Grazia, Domenico Di; Cardineau, Damien; Pisoni, Fabio

doi:10.33012/2019.16979

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The ANF acts differently, and a bias is introduced on the pseudoranges. This result was expected since notch filters are known to introduce additional delays on the measurements (Di Grazia et al., 2019; Giordanengo, 2009; Qin, Troglia Gamba, et al., 2019; Raasakka & Orejas, 2014). The bias introduced by the ANF is time‐varying and depends on the jamming signal.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…Jamming is a form of Denial of Service (DoS) attack usually performed using low cost devices, called jammers, that transmit significant power in the GNSS bands preventing signal reception (Borio et al, 2016; Gao et al, 2016). In order to cope with interference and jamming, receiver manufacturers are improving receiver design and adopting detection and mitigation techniques, which can enable GNSS signal reception even in the presence of significant levels of interference (De Wilde et al, 2015; Di Grazia et al, 2019; Willems & De Wilde, 2013). There exist several algorithms for interference mitigation, and the most popular ones are probably Pulse Blanking (PB) (Gao et al., 2013, 2016) for reducing the impact of pulsed interference and notch filtering (Borio et al, 2006; Calmettes et al, 2001) for Continuous Wave (CW) removal.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, the use of filters and other interference mitigation techniques can introduce biases in the GNSS measurements. For example, a notch filter with fixed notch frequency can introduce biases that can be estimated and compensated (Di Grazia et al, 2019; Raasakka & Orejas, 2014; Qin, Troglia Gamba et al, 2019; Giordanengo, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

GNSS interference mitigation: A measurement and position domain assessment

Borio

Gioia

2020

Navigation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Modern Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) receivers have to withstand significant levels of interference in order to operate under harsh conditions, such as in the presence of jamming and of other Radio Frequency (RF) threats. A possibility is to implement pre‐correlation interference mitigation techniques that operate directly on the samples provided by the receiver front‐end. This paper provides an assessment of five interference mitigation techniques at the measurement and position level. The analysis focuses on the Adaptive Notch Filter (ANF) and on four Robust Interference Mitigation (RIM) techniques. Several data collections were performed in the presence of jamming, and the data collected were used for the analysis that shows that RIM techniques do not introduce biases at both the measurement and position level. While the ANF delays pseudorange measurements, the biases introduced are predominantly common to all the observations with a negligible impact on a Single Point Positioning (SPP) solution.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 83%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

GNSS interference mitigation: A measurement and position domain assessment

Borio

Gioia

2020

Navigation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…By using filters to reduce interference, receivers can introduce bias into measurements. Fixed-notch devices, for example, may introduce biases that can be estimated and compensated for [ 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ]. Adaptive notch filters are an effective solution for mitigating jamming [ 18 ], which are able to track the frequency variations of a jamming signal, pulse suppression or adaptive beamforming based on the multi-antenna solution [ 19 , 20 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Robustness against Chirp Signal Interference of On-Board Vehicle Geodetic and Low-Cost GNSS Receivers

Dimc

Pavlovčič-Prešeren

Bažec

2021

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Robust autonomous driving, as long as it relies on satellite-based positioning, requires carrier-phase-based algorithms, among other types of data sources, to obtain precise and true positions, which is also primarily true for the use of GNSS geodetic receivers, but also increasingly true for mass-market devices. The experiment was conducted under line-of-sight conditions on a straight road during a period of no traffic. The receivers were positioned on the roof of a car travelling at low speed in the presence of a static jammer, while kinematic relative positioning was performed with the static reference base receiver. Interference mitigation techniques in the GNSS receivers used, which were unknown to the authors, were compared using (a) the observed carrier-to-noise power spectral density ratio as an indication of the receivers’ ability to improve signal quality, and (b) the post-processed position solutions based on RINEX-formatted data. The observed carrier-to-noise density generally exerts the expected dependencies and leaves space for comparisons of applied processing abilities in the receivers, while conclusions on the output data results comparison are limited due to the non-synchronized clocks of the receivers. According to our current and previous results, none of the GNSS receivers used in the experiments employs an effective type of complete mitigation technique adapted to the chirp jammer.

show abstract

Interference mitigation: impact on GNSS timing

Borio

Gioia

2021

GPS Solut

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While interference mitigation techniques can significantly improve the performance of a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) receiver in the presence of jamming, they can also introduce distortions, biases and delays on the GNSS measurements and on the final receiver solution. We analyze the impact of five interference mitigation techniques on the solution provided by a GNSS timing receiver that operates in a known location and under static conditions. In this configuration, the receiver only estimates its clock bias and drift, which can be potentially affected by interference mitigation. The analysis has been performed considering a multiconstellation case, including GPS L1 Coarse Acquisition (C/A), Galileo E1b/c and Beidou B1c signals. Tests were also conducted on the wideband Galileo E5b modulation. In all cases, real jammers were used to challenge GNSS signal reception. The techniques analyzed are four Robust Interference Mitigation (RIM) approaches and the Adaptive Notch Filter (ANF). From the analysis, it emerges that RIM techniques do not affect the receiver clock bias and drift. On the other hand, the ANF introduces a modulation-dependent delay on the clock bias. This delay is difficult to predict and is common to signals adopting modulations with similar spectral characteristics. In this respect, interoperable signals such as the Galileo E1b/c and Beidou B1c components are affected in the same way by the ANF, which leaves the Galileo–Beidou intersystem bias unaltered. Stability analysis has also been performed: interference mitigation does not significantly increase the short-term characteristics of the estimated clock bias and drift for low jamming levels.

show abstract

A NAVIC Enabled Hardware Receiver for the Indian Mass Market

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

GNSS interference mitigation: A measurement and position domain assessment

GNSS interference mitigation: A measurement and position domain assessment

Robustness against Chirp Signal Interference of On-Board Vehicle Geodetic and Low-Cost GNSS Receivers

Interference mitigation: impact on GNSS timing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About