1. Field of the Invention
The invention relates generally to methods for processing signals received from satellites within a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) for example, Global Positioning System (GPS) receivers, and more particularly to a method for computing precise relative locations using differential GNSS/GPS techniques for all observations measured by a rover GNSS receiver, and not just those observations that are common to base and rover GNSS receivers.
2. Description of the Related Art
Evolution of GPS-only systems to a multi-constellation Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) employing GPS, GLONASS, Galileo, Compass and others has become a reality. This has a number of implications when it comes to differential-based positioning (commonly called DGPS or DGNSS), particularly when it comes to mixing legacy equipment with newer equipment, or when equipment is not compatible with respect to the types of GNSS signals measured and processed.
Differential GPS/GNSS techniques have been successfully applied for a number of years. These techniques, for example, enable accurate real-time positioning of a rover receiver relative to a base receiver. This positioning includes code-only or carrier-smoothed-code differential techniques that result in sub-meter accuracy, such as those employed while operating with older RTCM 104 messages. They include carrier phase based techniques that facilitate centimeter-level real-time kinematic (RTK) positioning and employ single- or double- or even triple-differencing. Differential GPS is also the underlying technology behind Satellite-Based-Augmentation-Systems (SBAS) such as the FAA's Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) system as well as commercial Wide Area Differential (WADGPS) services such as those provided by OmniStar.
Differential GNSS (DGNSS), as its name implies, requires that data be differenced. One of the most useful differences in DGNSS, and therefore a widely used difference, is that of differencing two similar observations of a satellite ranging signal where one observation is made at a base GNSS receiver and another is made at a rover GNSS receiver. This type of difference, commonly referred to as the single-difference, removes common-mode errors (i.e. errors seen by both base and rover receivers) such as satellite orbit errors, satellite clock errors, and atmospheric errors that arise as the signal passes through the ionosphere and the troposphere. The remaining sources of error that result when employing single-difference techniques are those that are unique to the receiver, such as receiver noise and multipath. These remaining errors are often small in comparison to the common-mode errors, especially when carrier-phase observations are employed.
As is commonly understood, the use of a “differential corrector” is really just a form of single differencing where differencing happens implicitly as the differential correction is applied at the rover. In the case of WADGPS, data from a multitude of base receivers are processed together to form differential corrections, or constituents thereof, tailored to a particular rover location. The WADGPS SBAS systems that are prevalent today send data that are used to construct differential correctors, rather than the correctors themselves.
It is well known that there are advantages to processing signals from multiple constellations of a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS), including GLONASS, Galileo, and Compass signals, as opposed to processing GPS-only signals. The advantages are particularly related to increased numbers of observations which improve robustness, accuracy, and speed of ambiguity convergence. As such, the gradual migration from GPS-only to multi-GNSS capability has created a need for dealing with the wide variety of signals arriving from different satellite constellations. Different types of receivers will have different capabilities as far as their ability to track and process the multitude of GNSS signals. In a differential GNSS application, variations in receiver capability between base and rover may result in the inability to use all signals available for lack of appropriate matching pairs of observations. This situation is more likely when mixing different grades of receivers, receivers from different manufacturers, or older GPS-only receivers with newer GNSS receivers.
Take, for example, a system comprising a dual-frequency GPS base receiver that sends RTCM Version 3 code and carrier observations for the L1 and L2 GPS ranging signals to a rover GPS/GLONASS receiver. The rover measures code and carrier phase not only from GPS L1 and L2, but also GLONASS L1 and L2 signals. Prior to this invention, the rover, when performing differential positioning, could only use its GPS observations since GLONASS observations are of little use without matching observations from the base. This is actually a common problem since many RTK base stations are GPS-only, having been deployed before the recent shift towards GLONASS capability that has transpired as a result of the Soviet Union restoring GLONASS to full operational capability. And the net result is that the advantages that the added GLONASS satellites offer towards computing a robust, cycle-slip free location or solving RTK ambiguities cannot be realized.
Another example would be the use of a dual-frequency (L1/L2) GPS rover receiver with a single-frequency (L1) GPS base station. It is well known that dual-frequency RTK methods result in much quicker integer ambiguity resolution than single-frequency methods and are thus more desirable. A farmer, for example, using a GPS guided vehicle for precise planting of crops does not want to wait five to ten minutes after driving the vehicle under a tree to re-acquire RTK and continue planting. But this is often the case with single-frequency RTK. If the GPS base deployed in this scenario transmits only single-frequency L1 observations (or corrections), the dual-frequency rover on the tractor must, prior to this invention, rely only on single frequency RTK methods and essentially discard its L2 observations and its ability to do quick (or instant) ambiguity solutions.
Another situation is that of mixing GLONASS observations from different manufacturers' equipment, including receivers and antennas. It is well known that the Frequency Division Multiple Access (FDMA) methods of GLONASS are subject to frequency-dependent group delays and that these group-delays vary for different types of receivers and antennas due to variations in circuit design and design components. In RTK, these group-delays cannot be ignored, as they cause carrier phase errors at the centimeter-level or more. Group delays are not an issue when processing CDMA signals such as those from the GPS, Galileo or Compass systems since these signals are grouped into sets that share a common frequency and therefore exhibit a common group-delay. The common group-delay appears simply as receiver clock error for a given frequency of signal. Thus, to overcome the receiver and satellite-dependent group delay problem of GLONASS, one manufacturer's rover GNSS receiver may choose to ignore the GLONASS observations from a different manufacturer's base GNSS receiver, resulting in the same disadvantages as if the base did not provide GLONASS observations at all.
Yet another example occurs with a WADGPS system, such as the FAA's Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS), when a receiver operates partially outside the coverage area. In this situation, differential correctors may be available for some satellites in view, but not all satellites. Using only satellites for which differential is available results in a higher Dilution of Precision (DOP). Consequently, the solution is more likely to suffer sudden loss of accuracy if one of the satellites critical to maintaining a lower DOP is suddenly blocked. Clearly, it is desirable to form a solution having the mathematical strength of all satellites in view when operating around objects that might block satellite signal reception as opposed to a solution that utilizes only the satellites for which differential is available.
To make the aforementioned problems worse, some GNSS receivers will mirror the use of velocity observations with the use of code or carrier phase ranging observations. That is, if the rover lacks base range observations to perform differencing on a particular channel, it ignores all observations on that channel, including velocity-related observations such as Doppler and delta-carrier phase. By ignoring velocity observations, the GNSS receiver is essentially penalizing itself twice for the lack of matching base-rover observation sets.
The methods of U.S. Pat. No. 6,397,147, which is assigned to a common assignee and is incorporated herein by reference, provide a unique and useful approach to compute differential corrections when there is no base station present. Briefly, the GNSS receiver first operates as a base station, computing differential correction terms, and then acts as a rover, using these correction terms. The problem with the approach, however, is that the user is forced to return occasionally to a place of calibration to re-calibrate the differential corrections; or else the user must be willing to live with a drift in the computed location estimate that arises when differential is not re-calibrated, or is calibrated using a non-precisely known location, such as its current location.
What is needed then is a system and method designed to take advantage of having a partial set of differential correction terms available rather than a complete lack of differential correction terms. Specifically, it is desired to have a method to take full advantage of the well-known differential GNSS approaches deployed today, but then gain the added benefit of the DGNSS methods disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,397,147 when dealing with observations for which differences cannot be formed, as for example when experiencing a lack of commonality for some, but not all, base and rover observations.
An object of this invention is to provide such a method. This method allows all observations to be incorporated into a differential GNSS solution, not just those common to the base and the rover. A further object is to provide additional differentially corrected observations that can potentially reduce the time required to solve integer ambiguities, especially when recovering from a momentary loss of RTK. It is further object to provide extra observations so as to improve the performance of methods that use redundancy of observations to detect cycle slips in GNSS carrier phase observations. Yet another object of this invention is to provide a set of differential correctors that is locally generated in the rover receiver using the rover's own phase observations, with the correctors being referenced to the rover's, rather than the base', location. Such differential is effectively zero-baseline differential and is thus insensitive to atmospheric variations seen across long baselines when used for such purposes as re-acquiring ambiguity lock. It is a further object of the invention to provide differential that can bypass the effects of receiver-dependent, group-delay variations.
In the practice of the present invention, a rover receiver first utilizes data from a base receiver, a DGNSS reference network, or some other differential source to compute a differentially corrected location. Then, using this location and data observed only at the rover, the rover computes an internal set of differential corrections, which set is stored in computer memory, updated as necessary, and applied in future times to correct observations taken by the rover. The possibly mobile rover receiver, therefore, corrects its own observations with differential corrections computed from its own past observations; relying on external differential for the sole purpose of establishing a reference location.
In prior art DGPS/DGNSS, a stationary base receiver uses its known location as a reference for computing differential corrections that correct errors in its own phase observations, and these corrections are then supplied over a communication link to a rover to correct similar errors seen at the rover. Alternatively, the base supplies, over the communication link to the rover, its reference location and phase observations so that the rover can compute the differential corrections itself, or take a mathematically equivalent approach of forming single-differences between base and rover observations.
In this invention, the rover actually acts like a base, using its own dynamic location rather than the base's static location to compute differential corrections for its own ranging code and/or carrier observations. The rover's dynamic location is updated continuously using differential from the base and is effectively “tied” to the base's location—having been established using base differentially-corrected observables. For example, an offset in the base' location estimate will cause a similar offset in the rover's location estimate and both rover and base will agree on the same location when placed on top of one another. Differential computed using the rover's own observations and location estimate will have agreement with differential computed using the base' observations as far as positioning is concerned. That is, differential should be nearly identical other than some minor effects due to inaccuracies of location and atmospheric differences over the baseline. One advantage, however, of using the rover location and rover observations is that the set of differential corrections can be extended to include all satellites seen at the rover, not just those that are common to the base and rover.
This means that integer ambiguity solutions are possible using all satellites in view of the rover receiver, not just the satellites which are seen at the base station. For example, with the present invention, a rover receiver can perform an RTK ambiguity solution using GLONASS carrier phase without external carrier phase correctors supplied for GLONASS satellites by the base. Instead, the GLONASS carrier phase corrections are calculated internally by the rover using its own GLONASS data.
Corrections generated at the rover using the rover's own observations and dynamic location will be referred to as “internal corrections.” These internal corrections are computed at one instant of time and utilized at a future instant of time as the need arises. Such needs include compensating for loss of satellites, solving integer ambiguities, detecting cycle slips, removing atmospheric or group-delay biases, or generally improving robustness.
Corrections generated using conventional differential techniques where rover observations are corrected using observations from the base will be referred to as “standard corrections.” The invention allows for a use of a mixture of both standard and internal corrections.
The internal corrections are not over-utilized, and in non-critical times, the method falls back to performing the navigation solution primarily using observations that can be corrected with the standard base corrections. Advantageously, when conditions are such that suitable performance is achieved using the standard base corrections, the internal observations are de-weighted so that the standard base-corrected observations dominate the least-squares or Kalman filter solution. This avoids a positive-feedback scenario where errors in location propagate into errors in internal differential, which then propagate into future errors in location. Although the internally corrected observations are de-weighted during normal operation, the weighting may be increased as the need arises, such as during times of signal blockages, particularly when those blockages result in loss of observations. Without preventive measures such as de-weighting from the solution, using only as needed, or using in a manner that does not affect location accuracy, it is possible that any error that enters into the system will remain in the system and potentially grow cumulatively as additional errors are accrued later on.
In a preferred embodiment, the internally generated corrections are used without restriction in situations for which the additional observations give added advantage, but for which their use is not directly coupled to rover location accuracy and thus, no potential exists for feedback of location error into the correction generation process. In particular, such uses include RAIM-like cycle slip monitoring and ambiguity resolution.
The internally generated corrections are computed only when certain conditions are met. At a minimum, the rovers' location estimate should have reached a desired level of accuracy. In an RTK application, this typically means that the rover is in true RTK mode with integers fixed. Another condition is that of stable signal tracking, (e.g., no recent cycle-slips) for any observation for which a correction is to be generated. When the above conditions are not met, the existing internally generated corrections are kept valid for a period of time by performing updates to account for changes in modeled atmospheric induced delays, changes in broadcast orbit and clock models, and changes in other predictable components of the corrections. The approach of keeping corrections updated over a period of time is referred to here as “coasting.” The ability to coast is important since the internal corrections will most likely be needed during times that are not ripe for their generation. Useful life can be extended only so long since coasting takes into account only the predictable nature of change. Unpredictable effects, such as un-modeled atmospheric errors and un-modeled satellite clock errors limit useful life. How long corrections will last depends on the required accuracy of the application. In RTK applications, useful life is typically 15 to 60 seconds.
In summary, the invention provides a means to use all observations available at a rover in a differential GNSS solution by internally correcting these observations relative to a rover location that is itself relative to a base location. By doing so, all observations can be used, not just those that are common to both base and rover. Standard base-rover differential positioning of the rover is still needed to produce a location that serves as a reference when computing the internal corrections. A reference location computed as such will result in consistency of the internal corrections with the standard corrections in that they both agree on the same location in a differential solution.
It must be pointed out that a base GNSS receiver is one source of standard differential corrections, or more generally, differential enabling data. However, there are other sources of differential enabling data that fit this application. These include data that are available through use of Wide Area DGNSS networks, SBAS satellite broadcast and subscription-based differential services.
In the most common form, Differential GNSS (DGNSS) requires two GNSS receivers, a rover and a base receiver. The base is typically stationary at a known location and sends to a rover GNSS receiver phase (or pseudo-range) observations plus its known location, or in lieu of this, differential correctors or other differential enabling data. The rover takes the data from the base, and uses it to correct its own observations to increase their accuracy. The result is that the rover can provide a more accurate location using corrected observations, even to the centimeter level or less when carrier phase is used in an RTK solution.
The observables 108 and the Nay Location 109 are transmitted from the base to the rover 107 over a communication link 133. In another embodiment, it may be differential correctors or differential enabling data, rather than observables that are transmitted. The rover receives the transmitted observables 112 and location 113 and delivers them to a differential computation engine 114. Within this engine, well known techniques are used to compute differential corrections, where an observed range is differenced with a “truth” range to compute a differential correction that, when added back to the observed range, will correct any measurement errors. The “truth” range is computed as the distance between a “known” location (the reference location) of the base and the satellite's location determined from orbit model parameters. Such corrections will correct not only the observables measured at the base, but the rover as well when sufficiently close to the base (typically within the 10 to 100 mile range). When close, the rover will see errors similar to those seen at the base and hence the differential corrections are valid at the rover as well. Such base-transmitted differential correction data is generally designated “standard corrections” or “standard correctors.”
Similar to the base, the rover GNSS receiver 107 also makes observations of code and carrier phase for signals arriving from satellite Set 1. Unlike the base 106, the rover 107 has the added ability to make observations for satellite Set 2. For example, it may have capability of tracking Set 2 whereas the base may not. Or, the base may actually track Set 2, but choose not to send observations for Set 2 over the communication link 133. The observations 110 and 111 corresponding to Set 1 and Set 2 signals are denoted “Obs Set 1” and “Obs Set 2” respectively. Since the rover has differential correctors available only for the Set 1 observations, it may correct only to the Set 1 observations. The “standard” corrections 115 are added to the Set 1 observations 110 at summer 116. The corrected Set 1 observations 117 are then fed into the Navigation Solution Computational Engine 118, where a location is computed. This location computation may involve RTK ambiguity resolution, double differencing, single differencing, Kalman filtering, and other well known methods of GNSS location determination. Since the base does not make observations for the Set 2 satellites, differential correctors are not available for these satellites. Hence the observations 111 from Obs Set 2 in the rover cannot be used and are rejected (or ignored) as indicated at 122 since they are not corrected and will thus degrade performance or accuracy when used in a DGNSS application.
The Diff Set 2 differential 125 is then added back to the Obs Set 2 observations at summer 126, and the corrected Obs Set 2 observations 127 are fed into the Navigation Solution Engine 118, along with the corrected Obs Set 1 observations 117. Hence, with the inclusion of Obs Set 2, there are more observations available, giving well known advantages in RTK ambiguity resolution, cycle slip detection, and general robustness.
In a preferred embodiment, the corrected Obs Set 2 observations are de-weighted from the location estimate computation (by Kalman Filter, Weighted Least Squares or other means) during times when there is good availability of Obs Set 1 observations. Or they may not even be used at all for location computations during such times. This practice avoids a positive-feedback scenario where errors in the rover's location estimate propagate into errors in the Set 2 differential correctors, which then cause an additional increase in the rover's location estimation error, and so on.
Also, in a preferred embodiment, the differential correctors for Obs Set 2 are computed only during times of high availability of Obs Set 1 observations (and good satellite geometry) and hence times of high estimation accuracy in the rover's location. In an RTK application, Obs Set 2 corrections are computed only after RTK lock has been established to assure that they are accurate to near centimeter level and thus can be applied in future RTK computations. The Obs Set 1 differential correctors are computed following the completion of the location estimation process to assure that location has been estimated to the best accuracy possible for the epoch.
The Diff Set 2 differential corrections are applied after their time-of-computation; up to several minutes if proper care is taken. What this means is that if portions of the Set 1 observations are suddenly not available, or otherwise compromised, perhaps due to blockages of signals while driving under a tree, differentially corrected Set 2 observations can be utilized to help maintain the integrity of the location estimation. The addition of Obs Set 2 observations in the DGNSS application can help: 1) make up for losses in Dilution of Precision (DOP); 2) aid in cycle slip detection; 3) aid in ambiguity resolution should ambiguities need to be reacquired; and, more generically, 4) be applied whenever it is advantageous to have additional observations. Thus, even though the Obs Set 2 observations are not corrected by conventional DGNSS means, they are still corrected and can be applied as if they are conventional DGNSS corrected observations in some of the more crucial situations, such as reacquiring ambiguities.
In step 203, the rover's location is computed, using the Set 1 differentially corrected observations 117 and possibly de-weighted Set 2 differentially corrected observations 127. The Set 2 observations are de-weighted or not used to avoid accumulation of errors that may arise when repeatedly computing a location using differential corrections based on a previously computed location (the positive-feedback scenario mentioned previously).
Using the location from Step 203, the geometric ranges to the Set 2 satellites are computed in step 204. It is important to have sufficient accuracy of the location of the rover relative to the base. The level of accuracy is dictated by the application. A location quality check is found in step 205. In an RTK application, the location should be of RTK quality (cm level accuracy) before proceeding to compute Set 2 differential. In other words, the Set 1 ambiguities should be fixed to their integer values and the receiver location should be estimated based upon the ambiguity-corrected carrier phase. There is little point in computing differential (Diff Set 2) for Obs Set 2 observables if this differential cannot be made to the accuracy of RTK since this differential (Diff Set 2) will ultimately be used to supplement RTK positioning or to help reestablish ambiguities after drop from RTK due to blockages.
In addition to the check on accuracy of location, the individual quality of each Obs Set 2 observation is also checked in step 205. Obs Set 2 observation quality is monitored for possible cycle slips and other problems that would impact the quality of the Set 2 differentially corrected data 127. A branch based on the quality check is made at decision point 206. If either location accuracy or observation quality fails the test, the process skips to step 209
In step 207, the Diff Set 2 differential is computed for each Obs Set 2 observation that passes the quality check. In step 208, the differential corrections 125 from the Diff Set 2 engine 124 are time-tagged, and stored in computer memory for future use.
In step 209, differential correctors are kept updated to account for various changes that can occur as the differential ages. This step is particularly important when the differential has not been recently computed due to a quality failure at 206. There are three adjustments shown that may be necessary. The first adjustment 210 is an adjustment to account for changes in atmosphere-induced delays that have occurred since the differential was last computed. Methods of accounting for such atmospheric effects are disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,397,147. The discussion on the magnitude of such errors as they relate to satellite elevation is found later on in this disclosure.
The second possible adjustment 211, which may occur while keeping the differential updated, is accounting for parameter changes in the broadcast Orbit model (or Ephemeris) and the broadcast satellite clock model. Changes in parameters occur on a periodic basis as the GNSS satellite updates its navigation message content with new prediction data. Differential correctors compensate for errors in the orbit and clock broadcast models. When the broadcast models change, the differential corrections must change accordingly.
A third adjustment 212, that may or may not take place depending on the nature of the Diff Set 1 differential 115, is to assure that the Diff Set 2 differential 125 stays consistent with any common-mode clock variation seen in the Diff Set 1 differential 115. When computing Diff Set 1 differential, errors in estimating the base' clock will translate into a common-mode error seen in all Diff Set 1 differential 115. If a clock-induced wander exists in the Set 1 differential 115, a similar wander should be imposed on the Set 2 differential 125 to extend its useful life without forcing the navigation solution 118 to estimate additional clock components. This task is not necessary, or is trivial, if proper care is taken when computing the Set 1 differential 115 so as to remove any significant receiver clock contributions. For example, a double-difference approach to eliminating receiver clock dependence can be deployed where one reference observation from Set 1 is used to difference away clock errors in other observations. More details on all three types of adjustments to the Set 2 differential will follow in later paragraphs.
Due to the fact that there are some components in differential that drift over time in a manner that is not fully predictable, it is necessary to impose a limit on the life of the differential as shown in step 213. The age at which differential times-out may depend on multiple factors, but a significant indicator as to useful life is the satellite elevation angle. Satellites at lower elevation angle have: 1) higher levels of multipath noise which may change rapidly over time and thus not cancel in future application of the differential; and 2) higher levels of atmospheric effects that may be difficult to reliably predict. Hence, in a preferred embodiment, the timeout will be a function of satellite elevation angle. Also, the level of accuracy that the differential is to provide when applied to correct observations will also contribute to the choice of timeout period. Levels of accuracy below several centimeters may dictate a maximum timeout of 30 seconds whereas decimeter-level accuracy may allow several minutes to elapse before timeout. The timeout conditions should be derived by observing accuracy versus age-of-differential while processing real signals in scenarios typical of the planned GNSS receiver usage.
The final step, 216, is to actually use the Diff Set 2 differential corrections 125 to correct the Obs Set 2 observations 122. The Diff Set 2 differential corrections are applied at an epoch that is in the future relative to the epoch in which the corrections are computed. As mentioned, differentially corrected Obs Set 2 observations may aid navigation algorithms in a number of ways, including reacquiring ambiguities after momentary signal blockage or for improving robustness by compensating for occasional loss of Obs Set 1 observations.
At a subsequent Time 2 epoch 321 the process of delivering Diff Set 1 differentially corrected observations 323 repeats in a similar manner to that of the first epoch. The utilization of the Diff Set 1 differential corrections is shown by blocks 322, 323 and 324. In the Time 1 first epoch 301 the Diff Set 2 differential is stored at 308, and in the Time 2 later epoch 321 the Diff Set 2 differential 328 is available for use. An update to differential takes place as outlined in block 209 of
To better understand the nature of differential as it applies to this invention, it is necessary to provide some background derivations. Additional information can be found in the literature and in U.S. Pat. No. 6,397,147. For a given GNSS satellite, the differential correctors may be computed from the following (or similar) equations:
Differential(tk)=└Rgeometric,est(tk)+Tsv,est(tk)+Trcvr,est(tk)┘−Rmeasured(tk) (1)
Rgeometric,est(tk)=∥{right arrow over (r)}sv,est(tk)−{right arrow over (r)}rcvr,est(tk)∥ (2)
Where
tk is the instant of time at which the differential corrections are computed Rmeasured(tk) is the measured code or carrier phase range at time tk
Tsv(tk) is the satellite's clock error at time tk
Trcvr(tk) is the receiver's clock error at time tk
{right arrow over (r)}sv(tk) is the location vector of the GNSS satellite time tk
{right arrow over (r)}rcvr(tk) is the location vector of the receiver at time tk
and the subscript “est” means estimated, the subscript “sv” applies to the GNSS satellite and the subscript “rcvr” applies to the GNSS receiver. We keep in mind that tk is adjusted for signal propagation delays when computing quantities associated with the satellite. Note that the terms in equation (1) within square brackets are all estimates that, when taken together; yield an estimate of the measured range less any sources of error. The difference between this estimate and the measured range is the differential correction which contains the errors in the measured range.
Ignoring noise terms and other less-significant effects, the measured range can be expressed as
Rmeasured(tk)=Rgeometric,true(tk)−Tsv,true(tk)+Trcvr,true(tk)+τiono,true(tk)+τtropo,true(tk)+N(tk)−Bsv (3)
Rgeometric,true(tk)=∥{right arrow over (r)}sv,true(tk)−{right arrow over (r)}rcvr,true(tk)∥
Where
τiono(tk) is the ionospheric delay at time tk
τtropo(tk) is the tropospheric delay at time tk
N(tk) is an ambiguity term that exists only when Rmeasured(tk) is measured carrier phase.
It is not present for code phase measurements.
Bsv is an inter-frequency, inter-channel, inter-constellation clock bias, or combination of these. It represents biases in the broadcast hardware, such as group-delay, or biases in the time-reference of the GNSS constellation.
The subscript “true” means that these are actual measured quantities and are not estimated from models.
Equation (1) can be rewritten with simplified notation as:
Differential(tk)=ΔR−ΔTsv+ΔTrcvr−Atmos−N−Bsv (4)
The following definitions have been made:
ΔR=Rgeometric,est(tk)−Rgeometric,true(tk)
ΔTsv=Tsv,est(tk)−Tsv,true(tk)
ΔTrcvr=Trcvr,est(tk)−Trcvr,true(tk)
Inspection of equation (4) gives some insight as to how differential may vary over time. It is important to minimize time-variation for the differential in Set 2 since this differential may be coasted for minutes at a time while the rover undergoes a temporary blockage, or while ambiguities are reestablished following a blockage. The table below summarizes the reasons for variation, over time, of the various components of differential.
Of the above terms, only ΔTrcvr is common to all differential corrections. In conventional DGNSS, it is usually not a concern since it appears common to all observations that have been corrected by the Set 1 differential corrections. Because it is common, it is fully recovered and is removed as part of the estimate of the rover's own clock. It does not cause any loss of location accuracy, but does effect time estimation. In the methods disclosed here, however, it is advantageous to insure that the Diff Set 2 differential corrections also share this common clock term and maintain the trajectory of this term during times of coasting between updates. If they do not, a separate clock estimate will need to be formed in the navigation solution for the Obs Set 2 observables that do not maintain the trajectory of the Set 1 common clock. This would add unknowns to the navigation solution and reduce the mathematical strength of the solution.
It is relatively easy to keep the Set 2 clock aligned with the Set 1 clock as the Set 2 correctors are computed (and not coasted). The clock component within the Diff Set 1 differential will be absorbed as part of the navigation clock estimate, Trcvr,est since this estimate is based upon solving location and time using observations corrected with Diff Set 1 differential. Thus, if the clock estimate Trcvr,est from the navigation solution is used to compute the Diff Set 2 differential (see equation 1), the Diff Set 1 clock will automatically appear in the Diff Set 2 differential corrections.
The Diff Set 2 differential may not be computed every epoch.
In
In
Another approach is shown in
The curves 401, 402 and 403 are shown considerably flattened as a result of eliminating most of the receiver clock induced wander. Due to this lack of wander, the assumption that the Set 2 differential correction is constant after point 405 has more validity. It can be seen that the constant curve 406 is much closer to the true trajectory 404 than it was in
Atmospheric effects are one of the largest contributors to changes in the value of the differential corrections.
This phenomenon of rapid changes at low elevation angle is mainly due to an obliquity factor (see “The Global Positioning System” by Bradford W. Parkinson, James J. Spilker, p. 148). Ionosphere-induced delay is roughly three times larger for satellites viewed near the horizon than it is for satellites viewed near the zenith. The troposphere obliquity can be even larger since signals traveling horizontally to a receiver on the ground travel a much greater distance through the troposphere than do signals traveling vertically. The troposphere obliquity (or slant factor) is roughly the reciprocal of the sine of the elevation angle and can exceed a ratio of 20:1.
As the satellite traverses the sky, the elevation angle changes and so do the ionosphere and troposphere obliquity factors. The change is most rapid when the satellite is low. Two ways to deal with this are: 1) time-out the differential sooner for low elevation satellites, and 2) use a model of the ionosphere and the troposphere to predict the change and update the differential accordingly. The model method can include information provided in a satellite broadcast message such as the GPS ionosphere model or an ionosphere grid model provided by an SBAS system. The model may also include predictions based on past observations, or observations of the ionosphere-induced code and carrier phase divergence. A combination of early time-out and atmospheric model can be utilized, especially if the atmospheric model does a poor job of predicting reality. A time-out decision is shown in
In propagating differential forward, it is necessary to account for the jumps that result from satellite orbit or clock model changes by re-computing using the new model; otherwise the differential is not valid after a model parameter crossover.
Diffclock=Diffclock+α1+α2, (a one-time adjustment as the new parameters are applied) (22)
α1=∥{right arrow over (r)}sv,est,new(tn)−{right arrow over (r)}rcvr,est(tn)∥−∥{right arrow over (r)}sv,est,old(tn)−{right arrow over (r)}rcvr,est(tn)∥
α2=Tsv,est,old(tn)−Tsv,est,new(tn)
tn is the time at which the new ephemeris and clock parameters are applied
{right arrow over (r)}rcvr,est(tn) is the estimate of the receiver's position at time tn
{right arrow over (r)}sv,est,old(tn) is the satellite's position at time tn computed from the old set of parameters
{right arrow over (r)}sv,est,new(tn) is the satellite's position at time tn computed from the new set of parameters
Tsv,est,old(tn) is the satellite's clock error at time tn computed from the old set of parameters
Tsv,est,new(tn) is the satellite's clock error at time tn computed from the new set of parameters
There are numerous advantages to using the invention disclosed here. Some are evident such as the clear advantages of additional DGNSS-corrected observations at critical times. One advantage is that of a faster RTK ambiguity fix (resolution) after a momentary loss of RTK. For example, a L1-only (single frequency) base transmits only L1 observations. A multi frequency (e.g., L1, L2, L5, etc.) rover could, after determining an initial RTK fix using only the L1 observations, use its L2, L5 or other frequency observations in subsequent RTK fixes in accordance with this invention. It is well known that ambiguity resolution using dual frequency L1/L2 (or other multi frequency) observables are significantly quicker than when using L1-only data.
In long-baseline RTK, the initial RTK fix may be difficult due to large differential atmospheric errors between base and rover. Once an RTK fix is obtained, however, subsequent RTK fixes can occur much more quickly; taking advantage of the fact that Diff Set 2 differential can absorb some of the atmospheric errors. The more accurate the rover's location estimate, the better the errors are absorbed. In this application, Diff Set 2 may actually be expanded to include all observables used by the rover since this may best reduce subsequent ambiguity search times (for example, searching after a blockage-induced loss of ambiguities). Even if rover location is not perfect, use of the disclosed method will still assure that all differentially corrected observables agree on a common location and that their residual error is small relative to this location. Agreement of residual error is critical for rapid ambiguity fixing. If all observables agree on a common location, this location will dictate a clear minimum for residual error in an integer ambiguity search. Again, this agreement is due to the fact that differential is computed at the rover rather than the base bypassing atmospheric effects that may occur over long base-rover baselines.
Cycle slip detection is another advantage of the disclosed invention since the method provides, when needed, Obs Set 2 observations that would not otherwise be available. Algorithms such as Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring (RAIM) have been shown to work better as the number of observations is increased.
Another application of the invention is dealing with GLONASS frequency-dependent group-delay biases. Such biases occur, for example, when mixing base and rover receivers from different manufacturers. If GLONASS observations are used as the Obs Set 2 observations, and GPS is used for Obs Set 1, the biases are eliminated since both the differential and the observations for Set 2 are from the same receiver (the rover), and the biases cancel as the differential is applied to the observations. Without the disclosed method, it may be necessary to account for the frequency-dependent biases using more complicated approaches, such as adding a frequency-dependent slope to the GLONASS clock estimate. Of course, combinations of approaches could be utilized. In a GPS/GLONASS RTK application, for example, the initial ambiguity resolution could take place by assuming a frequency-dependent GLONASS clock, but after that, the methods of this invention could be deployed.
In a preferred embodiment, every observation is used, regardless of whether or not a differential pair can be formed using data from an external differential source. Locally generated range corrections are formed as needed per this invention. Velocity-related observations such as Doppler and Delta-Carrier Phase are used as well. Velocity related observations may, in many situations, be used without differencing with a corresponding base velocity observation since the velocity observations from the stationary base are usually near zero and can be assumed as such. Use of velocity to aid a Kalman Filter location solution adds smoothness and robustness.
Although the present invention has been described in terms of the presently preferred embodiments, it is to be understood that the disclosure is not to be interpreted as limiting. Various alterations and modifications will no doubt become apparent to those skilled in the art after having read the above disclosure. Accordingly, it is intended that the appended claims be interpreted as covering all alterations and modifications as fall within the true spirit and scope of the invention.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3585537 | Rennick et al. | Jun 1971 | A |
3596228 | Reed, Jr. et al. | Jul 1971 | A |
3727710 | Sanders et al. | Apr 1973 | A |
3815272 | Marleau | Jun 1974 | A |
3899028 | Morris et al. | Aug 1975 | A |
3987456 | Gelin | Oct 1976 | A |
4132272 | Holloway et al. | Jan 1979 | A |
4170776 | MacDoran | Oct 1979 | A |
4180133 | Collogan et al. | Dec 1979 | A |
4398162 | Nagai | Aug 1983 | A |
4453614 | Allen et al. | Jun 1984 | A |
4529990 | Brunner | Jul 1985 | A |
4637474 | Leonard | Jan 1987 | A |
4667203 | Counselman, III | May 1987 | A |
4689556 | Cedrone | Aug 1987 | A |
4694264 | Owens et al. | Sep 1987 | A |
4710775 | Coe | Dec 1987 | A |
4714435 | Stipanuk et al. | Dec 1987 | A |
4739448 | Rowe et al. | Apr 1988 | A |
4751512 | Longaker | Jun 1988 | A |
4769700 | Pryor | Sep 1988 | A |
4785463 | Janc et al. | Nov 1988 | A |
4802545 | Nystuen et al. | Feb 1989 | A |
4812991 | Hatch | Mar 1989 | A |
4813991 | Hale | Mar 1989 | A |
4858132 | Holmquist | Aug 1989 | A |
4864320 | Munson et al. | Sep 1989 | A |
4894662 | Counselman | Jan 1990 | A |
4916577 | Dawkins | Apr 1990 | A |
4918607 | Wible | Apr 1990 | A |
4963889 | Hatch | Oct 1990 | A |
5031704 | Fleischer et al. | Jul 1991 | A |
5100229 | Lundberg et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5134407 | Lorenz et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5148179 | Allison | Sep 1992 | A |
5152347 | Miller | Oct 1992 | A |
5155490 | Spradley et al. | Oct 1992 | A |
5155493 | Thursby et al. | Oct 1992 | A |
5156219 | Schmidt et al. | Oct 1992 | A |
5165109 | Han et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
5173715 | Rodal et al. | Dec 1992 | A |
5177489 | Hatch | Jan 1993 | A |
5185610 | Ward et al. | Feb 1993 | A |
5191351 | Hofer et al. | Mar 1993 | A |
5202829 | Geier | Apr 1993 | A |
5207239 | Schwitalia | May 1993 | A |
5239669 | Mason et al. | Aug 1993 | A |
5255756 | Follmer et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
5268695 | Dentinger et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5293170 | Lorenz et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5294970 | Dornbusch et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5296861 | Knight | Mar 1994 | A |
5311149 | Wagner et al. | May 1994 | A |
5323322 | Mueller et al. | Jun 1994 | A |
5334987 | Teach | Aug 1994 | A |
5343209 | Sennott et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5345245 | Ishikawa et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
5359332 | Allison et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5361212 | Class et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5364093 | Huston et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5365447 | Dennis | Nov 1994 | A |
5369589 | Steiner | Nov 1994 | A |
5375059 | Kyrtsos et al. | Dec 1994 | A |
5390124 | Kyrtsos | Feb 1995 | A |
5390125 | Sennott et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
5390207 | Fenton et al. | Feb 1995 | A |
5416712 | Geier et al. | May 1995 | A |
5442363 | Remondi | Aug 1995 | A |
5444453 | Lalezari | Aug 1995 | A |
5451964 | Babu | Sep 1995 | A |
5467282 | Dennis | Nov 1995 | A |
5471217 | Hatch et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
5476147 | Fixemer | Dec 1995 | A |
5477228 | Tiwari et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
5477458 | Loomis | Dec 1995 | A |
5490073 | Kyrtsos | Feb 1996 | A |
5491636 | Robertson | Feb 1996 | A |
5495257 | Loomis | Feb 1996 | A |
5504482 | Schreder | Apr 1996 | A |
5511623 | Frasier | Apr 1996 | A |
5519620 | Talbot et al. | May 1996 | A |
5521610 | Rodal | May 1996 | A |
5523761 | Gildea | Jun 1996 | A |
5534875 | Diefes et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5543804 | Buchler et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5546093 | Gudat et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5548293 | Cohen et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5561432 | Knight | Oct 1996 | A |
5563786 | Torii | Oct 1996 | A |
5568152 | Janky et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5568162 | Samsel et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5583513 | Cohen | Dec 1996 | A |
5589835 | Gildea et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5592382 | Colley | Jan 1997 | A |
5596328 | Stangeland et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5600670 | Turney | Feb 1997 | A |
5604506 | Rodal | Feb 1997 | A |
5608393 | Hartman | Mar 1997 | A |
5610522 | Locatelli et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5610616 | Vallot et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5610845 | Slabinski | Mar 1997 | A |
5612883 | Shaffer et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5615116 | Gudat et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5617100 | Akiyoshi et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5617317 | Ignagni | Apr 1997 | A |
5621646 | Enge et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5638077 | Martin | Jun 1997 | A |
5644139 | Allen et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5664632 | Frasier | Sep 1997 | A |
5673491 | Brenna et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5680140 | Loomis | Oct 1997 | A |
5684696 | Rao et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5706015 | Chen et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5717593 | Gvili | Feb 1998 | A |
5725230 | Walkup | Mar 1998 | A |
5731786 | Abraham et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5739785 | Allison et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5757316 | Buchler | May 1998 | A |
5765123 | Nimura et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5777578 | Chang et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5810095 | Orbach et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5828336 | Yunck et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5838562 | Gudat et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5854987 | Sekine et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5862501 | Talbot et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5864315 | Welles et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5864318 | Cosenza et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5875408 | Bendett et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5877725 | Kalafus | Mar 1999 | A |
5890091 | Talbot et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5899957 | Loomis | May 1999 | A |
5906645 | Kagawa et al. | May 1999 | A |
5912798 | Chu | Jun 1999 | A |
5914685 | Kozlov et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5917448 | Mickelson | Jun 1999 | A |
5918558 | Susag | Jul 1999 | A |
5919242 | Greatline et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5923270 | Sampo et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5926079 | Heine et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5927603 | McNabb | Jul 1999 | A |
5928309 | Korver et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5929721 | Munn et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5933110 | Tang | Aug 1999 | A |
5935183 | Sahm et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5936573 | Smith | Aug 1999 | A |
5940026 | Popeck | Aug 1999 | A |
5941317 | Mansur | Aug 1999 | A |
5943008 | Van Dusseldorp | Aug 1999 | A |
5944770 | Enge et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5945917 | Harry | Aug 1999 | A |
5949371 | Nichols | Sep 1999 | A |
5955973 | Anderson | Sep 1999 | A |
5956250 | Gudat et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5969670 | Kalafus et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5987383 | Keller et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6014101 | Loomis | Jan 2000 | A |
6014608 | Seo | Jan 2000 | A |
6018313 | Engelmayer et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6023239 | Kovach | Feb 2000 | A |
6052647 | Parkinson et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6055477 | McBurney et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6057800 | Yang et al. | May 2000 | A |
6061390 | Meehan et al. | May 2000 | A |
6061632 | Dreier | May 2000 | A |
6062317 | Gharsalli | May 2000 | A |
6069583 | Silvestrin et al. | May 2000 | A |
6076612 | Carr et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6081171 | Ella | Jun 2000 | A |
6100842 | Dreier et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6122595 | Varley et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6128574 | Diekhans | Oct 2000 | A |
6144335 | Rogers | Nov 2000 | A |
6191730 | Nelson, Jr. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6191733 | Dizchavez | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6198430 | Hwang et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6198992 | Winslow | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6199000 | Keller et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6205401 | Pickhard et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6215828 | Signell et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6229479 | Kozlov et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6230097 | Dance et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6233511 | Berger et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6236916 | Staub et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6236924 | Motz | May 2001 | B1 |
6253160 | Hanseder | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6256583 | Sutton | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6259398 | Riley | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6266595 | Greatline et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6285320 | Olster et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6292132 | Wilson | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6307505 | Green | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6313788 | Wilson | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6314348 | Winslow | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6325684 | Knight | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6336066 | Pellenc et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6345231 | Quincke | Feb 2002 | B2 |
6356602 | Rodal et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6377889 | Soest | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6380888 | Kucik | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6389345 | Phelps | May 2002 | B2 |
6392589 | Rogers et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6397147 | Whitehead | May 2002 | B1 |
6415229 | Diekhans | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6418031 | Archambeault | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6421003 | Riley et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6424915 | Fukuda et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6431576 | Viaud et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6434462 | Bevly et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6445983 | Dickson et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6445990 | Manring | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6449558 | Small | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6463091 | Zhodzicshsky et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6463374 | Keller et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6466871 | Reisman et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6469663 | Whitehead et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6484097 | Fuchs et al. | Nov 2002 | B2 |
6501422 | Nichols | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6515619 | McKay, Jr. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6516271 | Upadhyaya et al. | Feb 2003 | B2 |
6539303 | McClure et al. | Mar 2003 | B2 |
6542077 | Joao | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6549835 | Deguchi | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6553299 | Keller et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6553300 | Ma et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6553311 | Aheam et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6570534 | Cohen et al. | May 2003 | B2 |
6577952 | Geier et al. | Jun 2003 | B2 |
6587761 | Kumar | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6606542 | Hauwiller et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6611228 | Toda et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6611754 | Klein | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6611755 | Coffee et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6622091 | Perlmutter et al. | Sep 2003 | B2 |
6631916 | Miller | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6643576 | O'Connor et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6646603 | Dooley et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6657875 | Zeng et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6671587 | Hrovat et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6688403 | Bernhardt et al. | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6703973 | Nichols | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6704652 | Yi | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6711501 | McClure et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6721638 | Zeitler | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6732024 | Rekow et al. | May 2004 | B2 |
6744404 | Whitehead et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6754584 | Pinto et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6774843 | Takahashi | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6792380 | Toda | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6819269 | Flick | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6822314 | Beasom | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6865465 | McClure | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6865484 | Miyasaka et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6900992 | Kelly et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6922635 | Rorabaugh | Jul 2005 | B2 |
6931233 | Tso et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6967538 | Woo | Nov 2005 | B2 |
6990399 | Hrazdera et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7006032 | King et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7026982 | Toda et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7027918 | Zimmerman et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7031725 | Rorabaugh | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7089099 | Shostak et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7142956 | Heiniger et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7162348 | McClure et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7191061 | McKay et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7231290 | Steichen et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7248211 | Hatch et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7271766 | Zimmerman et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7277784 | Weiss | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7292186 | Miller et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7324915 | Altman et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7358896 | Gradincic et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7373231 | McClure et al. | May 2008 | B2 |
7388539 | Whitehead et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7395769 | Jensen | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7428259 | Wang et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7437230 | McClure et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7451030 | Eglington et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7479900 | Horstemeyer | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7505848 | Flann et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7522100 | Yang et al. | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7571029 | Dai et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7576690 | Vollath | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7689354 | Heiniger et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
20030014171 | Ma et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030187560 | Keller et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030208319 | Ell et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040039514 | Steichen et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040212533 | Whitehead et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20050080559 | Ishibashi et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050225955 | Grebenkemper et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050265494 | Goodings | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060167600 | Nelson et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060215739 | Williamson et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20070078570 | Dai et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070088447 | Stothert et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070121708 | Simpson | May 2007 | A1 |
20070205940 | Yang et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070285308 | Bauregger et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080129586 | Martin | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080204312 | Euler | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20090171583 | DiEsposti | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090174597 | DiLellio et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090174622 | Kanou | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090177395 | Stelpstra | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090177399 | Park et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20090259397 | Stanton | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090259707 | Martin et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090262014 | Diesposti | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090262018 | Vasilyev et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090262974 | Lithopoulos | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090265054 | Basnayake | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090265101 | Jow | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090265104 | Shroff | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090273372 | Brenner | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090273513 | Huang | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090274079 | Bhatia et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090274113 | Katz | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090276155 | Jeerage et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090295633 | Pinto et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090295634 | Yu et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090299550 | Baker | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090322597 | Medina Herrero et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090322598 | Fly et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090322600 | Whitehead et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090322601 | Ladd et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090322606 | Gronemeyer | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090326809 | Colley et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100013703 | Tekawy et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
20100026569 | Amidi | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100030470 | Wang et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100039316 | Gronemeyer et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100039318 | Kmiecik | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100039320 | Boyer et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100039321 | Abraham | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100060518 | Bar-Sever et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100063649 | Wu | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100084147 | Aral | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100085249 | Ferguson et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100085253 | Ferguson et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100103033 | Roh | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100103034 | Tobe et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100103038 | Yeh et al. | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100103040 | Broadbent | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100106414 | Whitehead | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100106445 | Kondoh | Apr 2010 | A1 |
20100109944 | Whitehead et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100109945 | Roh | May 2010 | A1 |
20100109947 | Rintanen | May 2010 | A1 |
20100109948 | Razoumov et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100109950 | Roh | May 2010 | A1 |
20100111372 | Zheng et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100114483 | Heo et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100117894 | Velde et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
07244150 | Sep 1995 | JP |
11072549 | Mar 1999 | JP |
WO9836288 | Aug 1998 | WO |
WO0024239 | May 2000 | WO |
WO03019430 | Mar 2003 | WO |
WO2005119386 | Dec 2005 | WO |
WO2009066183 | May 2009 | WO |
WO2009126587 | Oct 2009 | WO |
WO2009148638 | Dec 2009 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20110025555 A1 | Feb 2011 | US |