Hostname: page-component-5d59c44645-mrcq8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-01T01:05:16.932Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

On the Availability of Fault Detection and Exclusion in GNSS Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2009

Jinling Wang
(The University of New South Wales)
Pieter B. Ober
(The University of New South Wales)


Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring (RAIM) is essential for safety-of-life and liability critical applications. This paper discusses two fundamentally different ways to assess the integrity risk of an operation with RAIM, based on a different amount of information available: the expected (or average) performance that is computed using the GNSS models only and the real-time (or actual) performance, which also uses information on the internal status of a GNSS receiver. It is shown both theoretically and by simulation that the real-time integrity risk significantly exceeds the expected risk after the detection and exclusion of a failing satellite. Therefore, while most published RAIM algorithms base their performance assessment on the expected performance only, this is only correct when the requirements allow the risk evaluation to be averaged over multiple operations. However, when the GNSS integrity requirement is to be applied on a ‘per operation’ basis, real-time integrity measures are more appropriate.

Research Article
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Navigation 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)



Beech, T.W., Martinez-Olague, M.A., Cosmen-Schortmann, J. (2005) Integrity: A key Enabler for Liability Critical Applications. Proceedings of the US ION 61 stAnnual Meeting, 27–29 June, Cambridge, MA, pp. 110.Google Scholar
Blanch, J., Ene, A., Walter, T., Enge, P. (2007) An Optimized Multiple Hypothesis RAIM Algorithm for Vertical Guidance, Proceedings of ION-GNSS 2007, pp. 29242933.Google Scholar
Brown, R.G. (1992) A baseline RAIM scheme and a note on the equivalence of three RAIM methods, Proceedings of the US ION National Technical Meeting, San Diego CA, January 27–29. 1992Google Scholar
DeCleene, B. (2005) Review of Continuity and Integrity Guidance Material, ICAO NSP WG1&2/WP29 Working Group Meeting, Montreal, Canada, 11–21 October 2005, Agenda Item 9Google Scholar
EASA (2003) AMC 20-4 Airworthiness Approval and Operational Criteria For the Use of Navigation Systems in European Airspace Designated For Basic RNAV Operations, 2003Google Scholar
Eurocae (2002) Eurocae WG62 working paper WG62-04-10, Thales Avionics, 4th Eurocae Working Group 62 meeting, 8–9 October 2002Google Scholar
FAA (2007) Advisory Circular 90–100A on U.S. Terminal and En Route Area Navigation (RNAV) Operations, 2007, Scholar
Hewitson, S., Lee, H.K. and Wang, J. (2004) Localizability analysis for GPS/Galileo Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring, The Journal of Navigation, 57, 249259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hewitson, S. & Wang, J. (2006) GNSS Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring (RAIM) performance analysis. GPS Solutions. 10(3): 155170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hewitson, S. and Wang, J. (2007) GNSS Receiver Autonomous Integrity Monitoring (RAIM) with a dynamic model, The Journal of Navigation, 60, 247263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ICAO (2006) International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Annex 10 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation – Aeronautical Telecommunications – Volume 1, Radio Navigation Aids., 6th edition, July 2006Google Scholar
Kinal, G.V., Nagle, J. & Lipke, D.W. (1992) INMARSAT integrity channels for Global Navigation Satellite Systems. Proceedings of the IEEE, No. 3, pp. 58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, Y.C. & Van Dyke, K.L. (2002) Analysis performed in support of the ad-hoc working group of RTCA SC-159 on RAIM/FDE issues, Proceedings of the ION's National Technical Meeting, San Diego CA, January 28–30, 2002Google Scholar
Lee, Y.C. (1999) Investigation of New Criteria for Fault Detection and Fault Detection and Exclusion Functions to Obtain Higher Availability, Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of The Institute Of Navigation, Cambridge, MA, June 1999, pp. 771778.Google Scholar
Ober, P.B. (2003) Integrity Prediction and Monitoring of Navigation Systems, Integricom Publishers, ISBN 90-77267-01-8, 2003Google Scholar
Ober, P.B. and Harriman, D. (2006) On the Use of Multiconstellation-RAIM for Aircraft Approaches, Proceedings of ION-GNSS 2006, pp. 25872596.Google Scholar
Ochieng, W.Y., Sauer, K., Walsh, D., Griffin, S., Denney, M. (2003) GPS Integrity and Potential Impact on Aviation Safety, The Journal of Navigation, 56, 115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
RTCA/DO-229D (2006), Minimum Operational Performance Standards for Global Positioning System/Wide Area Augmentation System Airborne Equipment, DO-229D.Google Scholar
Stansell, T. (2000) Current Issues in GPS: GPS after Selective Availability, (visited on 26/2/2007).Google Scholar
Van Dyke, K. (2001) Use of Standalone GPS for Approach with Vertical Guidance, Proceedings of the ION's National Technical Meeting, Long Beach, CA, January 22–24. pp. 301309.Google Scholar
Van Dyke, K. and Lee, Y.C. (2002) Analysis Performed in Support of the Ad-Hoc Working Group of RTCA SC-159 RAIM/FDE Issues, Proceedings of the ION's National Technical Meeting, San Diego, CA, January 28–30. pp. 639654.Google Scholar
Van Graas, F. (1996) Signals Integrity, NATO AGARD Lecture Series No. 207, System Implications and Innovative Application of Satellite Navigation, 12 July.Google Scholar
Van Graas, F. and Farrell, J. (1993) Baseline Fault Detection and Exclusion Algorithm, Proceedings of the 49th annual meeting of the Institute of Navigation, June 21–23, 1993, pp. 413420.Google Scholar