Live data from Hacker News

Homemade GPS Receiver

holmea.demon.co.uk

61–67 of 67 posts

Re: Homemade GPS Receiver

#61
post #7

I have to join in to say that this page (which exists since some time, only has recently be updated) is really impressive, and a very good educational material for everyone wanting to really understand the workings of GPS. Nevertheless it's not the only attempt, bug a very good one, at "open source GPS" projects. There's at least http://www.gnss-sdr.org/ which is a more software-centric approach being able to work wi…

There is some sort of international agreement, originally intended to prevent the use of off-the-shelf GPS components in building cheap missiles. The agreement prevents all GPS receivers from providing data when their altitude is higher than some number (10 km I think), and their speed is above some number (hundreds of km/h IIRC). Some GPS vendors read the above in terms of an OR function, instead of an AND function.…

You can certainly ignore both limits in your homemade-receivers, but if you ever want to ride faster than 1900km/h you will have to account for an increased doppler shift (I hope I'll not help any terrorists by explaining that ;-) ), and even though I (in the end) realized that this is not as dramatic as thought at first, just let me write down some calculations:

Doppler shift is the change of the percieved frequency when either source or receiver move towards another, or away from another. Canonical example: Sound of a emergency vehicle's horn when passing by.

Normally you never see the satellites ride directly towards you (or away from you) but the path is pretty orthogonal to your line-of-sight. So you only account for a fraction of the 14'000 km/h speed of the GPS satellites to cause frequency shifts of the signal. (Max. example listed on the homepade-GPS page is ±5 KHz of doppler, which is relatively 3.3×10^−6 of the GPS frequency, even though the GPS satellite rides at 1.8×10^−5 the speed of light).

If you'd fly with 1900 km/s (1.8×10^−6 of the speed of light) directly towards the GPS bird, this movement will increase the frequency you receive by 1.8×10^−6 × 1,5 GHz = 2.7 kHz. So please increase your doppler search range from ±5 KHz to ±8 KHz to be able to successfully steer your homemade cruise missiles at that the COCOM limit speed, increase more if faster. This will slow down your time-to-first-fix, obviously.

The other limit of 10km is easier to ignore, though. It would only become relevant once you can no longer exclude some solutions to the formulae that lie outside of the GPS satellite's orbit (imagine four coplanar GPS birds used for calculation). And in practice proabably it's sane to assume a position that is not wider than 100km from the earth's surface, again, if you don't plan to ride your DIY receiver to the ISS, or maybe even geostationary orbit.

Re: Homemade GPS Receiver

#62
post #30
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Less than 100 years ago, GPS wasn't a nav tool until the mid 90s. Astro nav was the standard right up until then and is still taught to masters today. We have calculators for atmospheric diffraction but the long hand method is still used.

Fun fact, the Boeing 747 features a sextant port for convenient celestial navigation in flight.

Funner fact, the Trident II D5 ICBM shoots up to low altitude orbit and then fixes its location with a star sight! GPS is assumed missing in the global thermonuclear war scenario.

Re: Homemade GPS Receiver

#64
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Sagnac skew would still occur in a non-relativistic universe. All that's needed is a finite speed for light. However, yes, relativity further complicates it.

It's interesting to consider that GPS as a concept simply wouldn't work at all if the speed of light were infinite.

I think you'll find a whole lot more wouldn't work if the speed of light were infinite. Life, for example.

"Were there an infinite value for the speed of light, light itself would not exist at all."

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-isnt-th...

Re: Homemade GPS Receiver

#65
post #64
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting to consider that GPS as a concept simply wouldn't work at all if the speed of light were infinite.

I think you'll find a whole lot more wouldn't work if the speed of light were infinite. Life, for example. "Were there an infinite value for the speed of light, light itself would not exist at all." http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-isnt-th...

These paragraphs are very deep, and quite revelatory as to the nature of relativity and the Universe itself:

The speed of light is strange in that it has the same value independent of the relative velocity between the source and the observer. This fact is an experimental one that can only make sense if relative motion changes the relationship between space and time intervals to keep the distance covered by light per unit time the same for all observers.

The fact that space and time must get mixed up to keep the speed of light constant implies that, in some sense, space and time must be the same, despite our habit of measuring space in meters and time in seconds. But if time and space are similar to the extent that they can be converted one into the other, then one needs some quantity to convert the units--namely, something measured in meters per second that can be used to multiply seconds of time to get meters of space. That something, the universal conversion factor, is the speed of light. The reason that it is limited is simply the fact that a finite amount of space is equivalent to a finite amount of time.

Re: Homemade GPS Receiver

#66
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that could get still a position fix on the ground in the middle of the day What! Surely the sky would outshine the stars... did it use light outside of the visual spectrum?

Check out fancyketchup's sibling comment to yours, which shows far more knowledge than I have. Short version: infrared.

The IR filter helps, but (this is sort-of speculation because I don't have any knowledge of the system outside of reading the patents), I think the major processing gain comes from the shutters. In fact, I think the patents said that it could work (albeit much less effectively) without the IR pass filter.

The basic idea is a form of synchronous detection or lock-in amplification: The shutters are arranged so that a point source is occluded at a fixed frequency, while an area source will be only partially occluded at any given time. Due to the way it is designed, area sources should add little to the time-varying component of the photodetector signal. The lock-in amplifier is essentially a very narrow notch filter (centered at the "star occlusion frequency"), so it completely rejects the DC component from the sky.

There is a little more to it than what I'm writing, mainly because you need to not just detect the point source, but also estimate the star's position within the field of view (which IIRC is done by comparing the phase of the time-varying star signal to a reference point on the shutters).

Re: Homemade GPS Receiver

#67
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check out fancyketchup's sibling comment to yours, which shows far more knowledge than I have. Short version: infrared.

The IR filter helps, but (this is sort-of speculation because I don't have any knowledge of the system outside of reading the patents), I think the major processing gain comes from the shutters. In fact, I think the patents said that it could work (albeit much less effectively) without the IR pass filter. The basic idea is a form of synchronous detection or lock-in amplification: The shutters are arranged so that a p…

You're right, that is by far the more interesting part of the system. Thanks for elaborating, that's really cool.
Post reply on HN