Operational deployment of GPS Dancer:
organisation, status and schedule
Henno Boomkamp
Jerôme Verstrynge, Jeff Daniels, Claus Randolph, Veronique Séjan, et al.
For list of all project volunteers please see GPSdancer.org  Project  Credits
IAG REFAG 2014
Luxembourg 13-17 October
GPS Dancer IN A NUTSHELL (1)
current situation
nr of receivers
baselines @ 2.8 mm RMS
PPP @ 10/20 mm H/V
RTK,
DGPS
IGS core network
400
hours
RT
ITRF densification
1,000
weeks
RT
Regional stations
25,000
never
RT
user
∞
never
RT
• Global network solutions (IGS) limited to ~250 stations each
• Result: layered densification to user level
– Too few stations included at NEQ level (…only EUREF, AFREF, SIGRAS etc)
– Each layer adds errors, latency, cost, regulations, …
• High accuracy of ITRF fails to reach regional sites & users
REFAG 2014 Luxembourg
2
GPS Dancer IN A NUTSHELL (2)
…
…
…
…
Rigorous LSQ solutions for all permanent GPS sites in the world
• Pile of computations is too large for one computer  …split in many piles
– Price to pay is data traffic and some repeated, parallel computations
• Most sites do not publish their data  …bring the process to the site
REFAG 2014 Luxembourg
3
GPS Dancer IN A NUTSHELL (3)
dancer approach
RTK,
DGPS
IGS core network
nr of receivers
baselines @ 2.8 mm RMS
DART ??? mm
ITRF densification
Regional stations
user
∞
∞
30 minutes or less
RT
maybe
RT
• IGS-like solutions via a peer-to-peer internet process
– Workload for one peer process per receiver: ~0.5 x IGS AC
– Data traffic grows as a logarithmic function of network size N
– Observations and local products remain private to the receiver!
• High accuracy can reach regional sites and users
REFAG 2014 Luxembourg
4
GPS Dancer project timeline
2005
2007
2006
2010
2009
2008
2011
2017
2016
2015
2014
2018
GGGF v1
IAG WG 1.1.1 active period
Preparatory discussions in Wg 1.1.1
analysis
2013
2012
Feasibility study & reconnaissance
MatLab prototyping
Software infrastructure
Parameter estimation
Models
GPS analysis 1
GPS Analysis 2
Distributed solver
JXTA & BD triangles
software implementation
releases
GGGF v2
GCCS
organization
Deploy
ICDs
CalVal
Certification
Pilot project
DART H2020 project
operations
Dancer fundraising
DART fundraising
GPS process 3
Dagger fundraising
System tests
PPP valid
SP3 fit valid
Redesign BD --> PC
On-line testing and E2C testing
IPR
1.0
0.9
0.7
Nominal service
fundraising
Prototype
Old project coordination website
web presence
Website remake 1&1
Joomla site goes on-line
GCCS web portal on-line
IGS WS 2012
IGS WS 2010
AGU 2012
REFAG 2010
AGU 2010
DA meeting
Berkeley WS
IAG 2013
REFAG 2014
key meetings
REFAG 2014 Luxembourg
now
5
Roadmap towards operational system
Step 1: Deployment
• Build up backbone network for ~100 ITRF sites
• Test runs on basis of one week of RINEX files
• Near real-time runs in parallel to IGS
•
•
•
24 arc length
Low data rate (5 min)
Low product rate (6 hrs)
18 hour arc overlaps
Step 2: Calibration / Validation
• Routine comparisons against IGS products
• Tune all models and standards to IGS repro-2 standard
Step 3: Pilot project
• Users can join with their own stations
• Alignment to ITRF via backbone network
• No guarantee of service
•
•
•
24 arc length
High data rate (30 sec)
High product rate (0.5 hrs)
23.5 hour arc overlaps
Step 4: Nominal operations
• Global products made available to IGS (if desired)
• Limited guarantee of service to users (e.g. 99% of time)
REFAG 2014 Luxembourg
6
Computing resources: options considered
Plan A: use the station computers
– but: modern receivers stream data directly
– inhomogeneous performance & bandwidth
Plan B: voluntary analysis campaign
– but: unreasonable processing load
– 100 peers equivalent to ~50 analysis centers
Plan C: cloud computing
200 MB
internal
1 MB
in
100 kB
out
REFAG 2014 Luxembourg
– unlimited capacity @ low cost to user
– highly homogeneous hardware & network
– no charge for incoming data or internal data
Funding needed for backbone networks
7
Dancer in the cloud = smart receiver!
Today
Smart receiver 1
Dancer in the cloud
expensive
new hardware
existing
hardware
GNSS
observations
(RINEX,
RTCM)
Smart Receiver 2
Hardware
GNSS
products
Smart receiver 3
Software
cheap
new hardware
HF signals
GNSS
products
REFAG 2014 Luxembourg
8
Backbone network budget
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
GGGF v1
GGGF v2
GCCS
Deploy
ICDs
100 ITRF sites
CalVal
250 ITRF sites
Certification
Pilot project
DART H2020 project
Dancer fundraising
DART fundraising
PS process 3
1000 sites
(>100 ITRF)
Nominal service
• Required start-up budget
– Step 1: deployment E2C …........ ~20 k
– Step 2: CalVal / ITRF low rate … ~30 k
– Step 3: Pilot project …………….. ~50 k
 Total ~100 k
• DART development by means of EU H2020 project
REFAG 2014 Luxembourg
9
Funding options and their pitfalls
public funding (ESA)
• Full funding imposes
political constraints
single private investor
• Scientific control is lost
many private investors
• Weak governance
• Difficult to involve other • Available public funding
manufacturers
• Development only: ESA
is not exploited
is no service operator
• Reference frame should not be commercialized,
scientific supervision (IAG, IGS) is important
REFAG 2014 Luxembourg
10
GPS Dancer operational organization
(1) Global Geodetic Grid Foundation
(2) Geodetic Cloud Computing Service
Governance:
• 5 (or 7) representatives from the
scientific community
Assets:
• IPR of the GPS Dancer software
(…released via Apache 2 license)
• Run time start-up passwords
• IPR global estimation products
orbits, satellite clocks, ERP
• 50% of the GCCS
Governance:
• 50% GGGF (…board votes as one)
• Proportional vote by shareholders
Start-up funding
G
G
G
F
(3) Users of the service
Assets:
• IPR of GNSS observation data
• IPR local estimation products
position, station clocks, tropo
REFAG 2014 Luxembourg
Operational ownership
Smart
Receiver
Manufacturers
50% “virtual vote”
for each co-funder !
11
Fundraising status Oct 2014
First choice: receiver manufacturers
(…have been / will be contacted)
Yes
Maybe
No
*
…yet to be
contacted
Second choice: GNSS / geodesy SME
• Known contacts via IGS / IAG
• ESA contractor firms
• …etc.
Yes
Start of fundraising
Decision deadline
May 2014
Jan 2015
Target # for go-ahead
8 … 10
Third choice: any private investor
REFAG 2014 Luxembourg
12
Schedule 2015
Week 7: TEB
Week 25
AGU 2015 / IGS 2016
GGGF v1
GGGF v2
GCCS GmbH
Step 1: deployment
ICDs with manufacturers
Step 2: CalVal
Certification of cloud service Step 3: Pilot project
Dart implementation
• ESA BIC Evaluation Board  Feb 2015
– Dancer moves from IAG voluntary project to paid service
– Not aimed at profit, but cost must be carried by the users
IAG 2013 Postdam
13
Conclusions
• Dancer wants to bridge the accuracy gap from ITRF core to
all regional sites, and then to the user
• Progress 2014
– Operational organization developed in detail
• Cloud service (GCCS) under scientific supervision (GGGF)
• Realistic funding devised and being consolidated
• Target for start of public pilot project is now AGU 2015
• DART (Dancer-RT) project now also under preparation
– Aiming for a H2020 project over 2016-2018 period
• 2018: 2.8 mm ITRF anywhere on Earth, in real time?
IAG 2013 Postdam
14
…why do we need GPS Dancer?
All regional sites at high ITRF accuracy
roof top GPS
base station
local offset
surveyed
W1
street level
pseudolites
Guarantee
of service
IAG 2013 Postdam
N
W2
Densifications
to 1 km or less
15