Next Article in Journal
The Solar-Induced Chlorophyll Fluorescence Imaging Spectrometer (SIFIS) Onboard the First Terrestrial Ecosystem Carbon Inventory Satellite (TECIS-1): Specifications and Prospects
Next Article in Special Issue
The Application of Robust Least Squares Method in Frequency Lock Loop Fusion for Global Navigation Satellite System Receivers
Previous Article in Journal
Immunosensor Based on Long-Period Fiber Gratings for Detection of Viruses Causing Gastroenteritis
Previous Article in Special Issue
Helmert Variance Component Estimation for Multi-GNSS Relative Positioning
Article

Evaluating the Vulnerability of Several Geodetic GNSS Receivers under Chirp Signal L1/E1 Jamming

1
Faculty of Maritime studies and Transport, University of Ljubljana, Cesta pomorščakov 4, 6320 Portorož, Slovenia
2
Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering, University of Ljubljana, Jamova cesta 2, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sensors 2020, 20(3), 814; https://doi.org/10.3390/s20030814
Received: 31 December 2019 / Revised: 28 January 2020 / Accepted: 30 January 2020 / Published: 3 February 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue GNSS Data Processing and Navigation)
Understanding the factors that might intentionally influence the reception of global navigation satellite system (GNSS) signals can be a challenging topic today. The focus of this research is to evaluate the vulnerability of geodetic GNSS receivers under the use of a low-cost L1/E1 frequency jammer. A suitable area for testing was established in Slovenia. Nine receivers from different manufacturers were under consideration in this study. While positioning, intentional 3-minute jammings were performed by a jammer that was located statically at different distances from receivers. Furthermore, kinematic disturbances were performed using a jammer placed in a vehicle that passed the testing area at various speeds. An analysis of different scenarios indicated that despite the use of an L1/E1 jammer, the GLONASS (Russian: Globalnaya Navigatsionnaya Sputnikovaya Sistema) and Galileo signals were also affected, either due to the increased carrier-to-noise-ratio (C/N0) or, in the worst cases, by a loss-of-signal. A jammer could substantially affect the position, either with a lack of any practical solution or even with a wrong position. Maximal errors in the carrier-phase positions, which should be considered a concern for geodesy, differed by a few metres from the exact solution. The factor that completely disabled the signal reception was the proximity of a jammer, regardless of its static or kinematic mode. View Full-Text
Keywords: GNSS jammer; geodetic GNSS receivers; signal loss; carrier-to-noise-ratio GNSS jammer; geodetic GNSS receivers; signal loss; carrier-to-noise-ratio
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Bažec, M.; Dimc, F.; Pavlovčič-Prešeren, P. Evaluating the Vulnerability of Several Geodetic GNSS Receivers under Chirp Signal L1/E1 Jamming. Sensors 2020, 20, 814. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20030814

AMA Style

Bažec M, Dimc F, Pavlovčič-Prešeren P. Evaluating the Vulnerability of Several Geodetic GNSS Receivers under Chirp Signal L1/E1 Jamming. Sensors. 2020; 20(3):814. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20030814

Chicago/Turabian Style

Bažec, Matej, Franc Dimc, and Polona Pavlovčič-Prešeren. 2020. "Evaluating the Vulnerability of Several Geodetic GNSS Receivers under Chirp Signal L1/E1 Jamming" Sensors 20, no. 3: 814. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20030814

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop