GPS Reflections for ice and oceanic surface

@2004
A Haider Research Fellow Telecomm Research Lab Canada

adnanscientist@yahoo.com Research Drive Regina Sask Canada

 Outline
Reflection Concept and Brief History
Reflected Signal Characteristics
Rough Surface Scattering
Leading and Trailing Edge of Cross-Correlation
How is it affected by the ocean?
More Mature Applications
Ocean Altimetry and Scatterometry
Considerations for a Space-based Mission
Less Mature Applications
Ice Topography and Soil Moisture
 GPS Reflection Concept
Reflections possible from
ocean, ice and land
surfaces
Received signal is
“affected” by surface type
and traversed atmosphere

Assess the possibility to use the reflected signal for sea

surface topography, wind vector (or “roughness”), ice
topography/thickness, soil moisture, etc.
 Brief History
Low-elevation GPS reflections observed experimentally as
multi-path in occultation experiments at Mauna Kea, and also
reported in the Russian literature in the early ‘90s
Martin-Neira (ESA) publishes the PARIS concept in 1993
Katzberg and Garrison (NASA Langley) fly the DMR on
airplane in 1997
Lowe detects fortuitous GPS reflection from space, as “noise”
in SIR-C data in 1998
Lowe and LaBrecque (JPL) perform first altimetry proof-of-
concept airplane flight in 1998
In 1998 NASA awards IIP to JPL and funds other NASA
centers and universities to assess usefulness of GPS
reflections …
 Received Direct Signal
For the direct signal, a receiver performs a cross correlation of
the incoming PRN-modulated carrier and a replica, varying the
delay and Doppler values around model values, and yielding the
familiar output Λ(τ-τm) (in the delay space)

1.0
Rp
Tp is the period corresponding to the
code “chip”, i.e. the frequency of
probable bit transition, and is ~ 1 µsec
0.5

-Tp 0 Tp τ−τ m
for C/A and ~ 0.1 µsec for P-code
The time of occurrence of the maximum is mapped to a range
measurement
For a reflected signal we examine the “equivalent” correlator
output to understand how it can be mapped to a range or other
measurements
Coherent vs Incoherent Processes
The direct GPS signal travels through the
atmosphere/ionosphere preserving phase coherence, the very
mechanism exploited in occultations for atmospheric science

When an electromagnetic wave impinges on a perfectly

smooth plane, it is reflected according to Snell’s law
and preserves phase coherence
When the direct GPS signal impinges on the Earth
surface, due to its roughness a large portion of such
surface (the glistening zone) becomes an active
scattering region

The extent of the glistening zone depends on the surface

properties and the reflection geometry (Beckman and
Spizzichino, 1987)
 Glistening Zone and Annuli
Z GPS TRANS
GPS REC
R2
Reflection phasefronts, also called
equirange surfaces, are spheroids
having the transmitter and
receiver as foci and progressively
increasing radii

R1
The smallest spheroid corresponds
to the range formed by the
Y
transmitter the specular reflection
P(x,y; ρ, φ) point and the receiver, and has one
X
point of contact with the surface
Glistening zone over ocean

Intersections of spheroids with reflecting surface are to first

approximation ellipses, generating a series of annuli. Each
annulus contributes to cross-correlation output at time δτ
 Cross-correlation
Model delay parameter τm (or range equivalent) for the cross-
correlation is chosen around the value corresponding to the
specular reflection point, i.e. the shortest delay τsp at which the
transmitted and then reflected signal phasefront arrives at the
receiver
At τsp the intersection between the equirange surface and the
spherical Earth is a point, the specular reflection point. At τ > τsp
this intersection is a curved ellipse, indicating that more than just
one phasefront contributes to the received signal at a given time
For each annulus one must account for field variations due to
surface, and phase coherence is lost. Cross-correlation is
summation of all contributions
∞
R p (τ m ) = ∑α k e i (ϕ k −ϕ m )
Λ (τ k − τ m )
k =1
 Received Reflected Signal - 1
Transmitted GPS signal is quasi-monocromatic PRN-
modulated spherical wave u(P,t)=1/R2a(t − R2 /c)exp(iKt)

As this reaches the (spherical) Earth surface it scatters

according to the surface properties and reaches the receiver as

uS(t,rec)= ∫ G(ξ,t)B(u(ξ,t))d2ξ

Here ξ is a (space) variable over the scattering surface, B is an

operator to obtain the scattered field, and G accounts for the
receiving antenna directivity
The received signal is given by the cross-correlation between
this field and a code replica
T
i
V(τ )= ∫ a(t)uS(t+ τ )exp(iω t)dt
0 D
 Received Reflected Signal - 2
Since Ti is short enough that the surface can be considered frozen,
the order of integration can be exchanged (perform time integration
first) yielding a function separable in the delay and Doppler
variables, eventually leading to the average received power
Λ2m (τ − (R1(ξ ) + R2 (ξ )) /c) 2ξ
< P(τ ) >= A ∫ G(ξ ) σ 0 (wind _ speed, ξ ) F(∆f (ξ )) d
R12 (ξ )R22 (ξ )

Spatial Doppler
Modified correlator function, filtering, w.r.t. a
accounts for height distribution reference Doppler

Scattering cross-section,
accounts for surface roughness

Zavorotny and Voronovich, 2000;Hajj and Zuffada, 2003

 Received Reflected Signal - 3
For -Tp < τ < 0 contributions Z GPS TRANS

for inner ellipse are relevant GPS REC

R2

For τ > Tp contributions from R1

outgoing annuli are relevant Y

Inner ellipse and first annuli X

P(x,y; ρ, φ)

determine the spatial resolution

Scattering cross-section
GPS REC
GPS TRANS
depends on local geometry of
VEL
incidence and surface features
Y
Away for specular reflection
point, contributions other than
X
forward scattering must be
ISODOPPLER CURVES

F(∆f (ξ ))=[sin(2π∆f (ξ )/T )/(2π∆f (ξ )/T )]2

considered
i i
Reflected Signal Leading Edge
Assuming a smooth surface
and that all the terms in the
integrand are constants,
except for the correlator Λ2,
the contributions from the
ellipse corresponding to a
delay of ~1 or 2 code chips
determine the rise time of ~
1.5 code chip
Note that the shape of the
leading edge depends on Λ2
and in particular exhibits an
inflection point. Its
derivative resembles the top
curve
 Leading Edge for Oceans - 1
A rough ocean surface has a distribution of heights of the
scattering centers, and the correlator function is modified by the
convolution with the pdf of heights (Barrick and Lipa, 1985;
Srokosz, 1986)
+∞
C ∫ dzf sp (z) ∫ dxdy Λ2 (τ m − τ (x, y,z))= C ∫ dxdyΛ2R (τ m − τ (x, y,0))
−∞

1 ⎛ − z 2 ⎞⎧⎪ z ⎡ ⎛⎛ z ⎞
2 ⎞ ⎤⎫⎪
fsp (z ) = exp⎜ 2 ⎟⎨1+ ⎢λsp ⎜⎜⎜ ⎟ − 3⎟⎟ − 3γ sp ⎥⎬
σ 2π ⎝ 2σ ⎠⎪⎩ 6σ ⎢⎣ ⎝⎝ σ ⎠ ⎠ ⎥⎦⎪⎭

z is the surface height, σ is the height standard deviation,

λsp is the ocean surface skewness, and γsp describes the
deviation of the mean of the pdf from the plane z = 0 and thus
contributes to the description of the EM bias (Rodriguez,
1988). The significant wave height is conventionally defined
as SWH = 4σ.
 Leading Edge for Oceans - 2

The parameter σeq = σ sin(ε) has been introduced, where ε is the

elevation angle in the reflecting geometry, indicating that we are
sensitive to a projection of the height std along the direction of
propagation.
The skewness parameters for the red curve are λsp=0.4, γsp=0.2.
 Leading Edge for Oceans - 3
The derivative of the leading edge of the reflected signal
with respect to time delay is sensitive to the parameters
describing the ocean. In fact:
the delay between the occurrence of its peak and the peak
of the direct signal can be used to derive the mean sea
height
the width of this function indicates the ocean significant
wave height
the height of this function indicates the ocean roughness,
related to the surface wind
 Trailing Edge for Oceans - 1
The impact of surface roughness on the received signal is
manifested by the bistatic scattering cross section σ0
Defined as ratio of the power scattered in a given direction
(θs,φs) to that incident from the direction (θi,φi), per unit area
The ocean has many scales of roughness, not all of which
impact the L-band GPS signal. To first order, L1 and L2 are
sensitive to the large scale roughness, which suggests to use the
simplest approach at calculating σ0, the geometric optics limit
of the Kirchhoff (tangent plane) approximation
This consists in the evaluation of an integral containing the
surface characteristic function of elevations, and a phase term,
both Taylor expanded to include the first term only. Scattering
is incoherent, except for very low elevation angles
 Trailing Edge for Oceans - 2
σ 0 = πR2q4 /qz4 P(−q⊥ /qz )

R = R =1/2(R +R ) q = (q ,qz )= k •(m − n )

RR LL HH VV ⊥
R = R = −1/2(R −R )
RL LR HH VV
q is scattering vector - m is
sin(θ )− εr − cos2(θ )
R = unit vector in incidence
HH
sin(θ )+ εr − cos2(θ ) direction, n is unit vector
εr sin(θ )− εr − cos2(θ ) in scattering direction
R =
VV
εr sin(θ )+ εr − cos2(θ ) P(s) is the probability
density function of slopes,
Fresnel reflection and is maximum at s=0,
coefficients R for linear i.e. the most probable
vertical/horizontal (V/H) orientation of slopes is z=0
and circular right-hand and plane
left-hand (R/L)
P(s) depends on wind
 Trailing Edge for Oceans - 3
Accounts for anisotropic distribution of slopes due to wind direction
Variances and correlations are functions of the wind driven surface
elevations spectrum W, dependent on wind speed at 10 m height,
inverse wave age and fetch (Elfouhaily et al., 1997)

s 2 s s s 2
P(s )= 1 exp[ 1 ( x − 2bx,y σ σ + y )]
x y
2πσ s σ s 1− bx,y
2 2 ) σ2
2(1− bx,y sx sy σ 2
x y sx sy

σ 2s =< s2x,y >= ∫ κ 2x,yW(κ )d 2κ

x,y
< sx sy >
bx,y = σ σ
sx sy

< sx sy >= ∫ κ x κ yW(κ )d 2κ )

 Trailing Edge for Oceans - 4
Effect of ocean wind is manifested through slope variances,
i.e. moments of the spectrum
The L-band GPS signal is not sensitive to all spectral wave-
numbers (like any remote sensing radar instruments), but
rather to κ values up to κ∗, defined by the GPS carrier
frequencies and the reflection geometry
Hence, the GPS reflections are more correctly sensitive to a
truncated slope variance
One must be careful about inverting for wind speed from
retrieved variances because of the sensitivity on the
truncation point aliases into wind speed values
 Spatial Selectivity - 1
Plane of incidence
GPS TRANS
contains transmitter,
Z
receiver and specular
R2

θsloc
GPS REC
reflection point
R1

θiloc θiloc Local scattering plane

θsloc Y
may span many
φ sloc

X
P(x,y; ρ, φ) scattering directions,
including back-scattering
For increasing time,
centers of isorange
ellipses move towards
transmitter projection
onto surface
 Spatial Selectivity - 2
Annuli contributing to reflected signal are asymmetrically
distributed on the scattering surface relative to location of
specular reflection point

This asymmetry indicates that the portion of ocean surface

which is sensed in the reflection process, extends preferentially
along the direction in the plane of incidence towards the
transmitter
Even though the receiver performs an azimuthal integration
while constructing the waveforms, at low elevations most of the
contribution is coming effectively from only one direction
defined by the major axis of the iso-range ellipses
The implication for a wind-driven ocean is as follows -->
 Wind Dependence on Scattering

Left: wind direction along horizontal axis; Right: wind direction

along vertical axis (Zuffada et al., 2004)
 Wind Dependence on
Received Power
o
The higher the wind
altitude = 10 Km, elevation = 45
-155 speed U10, the lower the
peak and the smaller
received power (dB)

-160

U
10
the tail spread with
-165
wind direction
12 m/sec
-170
Values of U10 between
-175
7m/sec 7 and 12 m/sec fit in
-180 between, yielding
-2 0 2 4 6 8 10
code chips ambiguity between
value and direction

Continuous line corresponds to wind along ellipse minor axis,

broken line corresponds to wind along ellipse major axis, i.e. the
plane of incidence
 Doppler Selectivity

Doppler filter
5 msec

No Doppler filter corresponds to very short integration time

Sensitivity to wind direction is improved by increased
integration time, causing enhanced spread of tails
 Choice of Integration Time - 1
Fixing the coherent integration time Ti is equivalent to setting a
bandwidth in the receiver - oscillations (Doppler shifts) higher than
the threshold set by the reciprocal of the integration time are not
resolved
This process amounts to a spatial filtering, described by
F(∆f)=[sin(2π∗∆f∗Ti)/(2π∗∆f∗Ti)]2. ∆f indicates the difference
between the compensation value, normally the Doppler at the specular
reflection point, and that of any given point on the ocean surface
nearby
During the coherent integration it is assumed that the ‘active’ surface
being observed is frozen and that its far field contributions to the
received signal have phase coherence [Born and Wolf, 1980]. The
coherence time is then a measure of the width of the power spectrum
(Fourier transform of the cross-correlation) [ Goodman, 1985]
Choice of Integration Time - 2
Coherence time depends on receiver altitude h and velocity vel,
reflection geometry elevation angle γ and size of the active area Lc
h
*λ
sin γ
Tc = (Zuffada et al., 2003)
2 2L * vel
c

Tc decreases with increased area, and elevation angle; and for

increased receiver altitude and corresponding velocity
Integration time should be consistent with coherence time,
perhaps a bit larger. Choosing integration time much shorter
than coherence time sacrifices signal SNR
Establishing the number M = T /τ coh of uncorrelated samples is
important in a statistical averaging to obtain a specified
achievable accuracy of the oceanographic measurements
 Applications
Sea Surface Topography -
GPS 4 Altimetry
GPS 3 GPS 2
From the relative delay ∆
between the peak of the direct
D2 signal and the inflection point
GPS 1 D1 REC
ρ2 (contribution from the
ρ1 specular reflection point) on
the leading edge
h1 h2 ∆= 2H sin(ε)+ error terms

Wind Speed/Vector - Scatterometry

From the peak value and the trailing edge decay,
retrieving the components of the mean square slope
variances and correlation
 Sources of Error on
Measurements
The path length is between the GPS transmitter phase center to the
specular point as defined by the mean sea surface and then to the
receiver’s phase center. This term is determined by the position of
the transmitter and the receiver and the mean sea surface height.
The delay measurement contains the following error terms
Ionospheric delay
Clock errors in the transmitter and the receiver
Neutral atmospheric delay
Ionospheric delay can be solved for and removed from measurement
of the dual GPS frequencies
Clock errors are eliminated by differencing
Neutral atmospheric delay can be calibrated to ~10 cm, or can be
solved for (Hajj and Zuffada, 2003)
 Experimental Results -
350
Altimetry
300
RELATIVE DELAY Example cross-correlation
250 output obtained in post-
Received signal (VSNR)

200
processing of raw recorded
DIRECT
150
data (20.456 MHz sampling
100
REFLECTED FROM

50
OCEAN rate)during an airplane flight
0 in 2000-2001 campaign.
-50
500 520 540 560 580 600 620 640 660
Airplane altitude was ~1.5 km,
Observation time lags

speed ~50 m/sec, reflection

elevation 50o
Relative delay ∆ is
converted into surface Coherent integration time was
height H with use of a 20 msec, and the correlations
model, such as the WGS 84 were incoherently summed
over 10 sec, to reduce speckle
effects
 Experimental Results - Altimetry
5 cm precision from airplane using
two highest elevation satellites,
corresponding to 7 km spatial
resolution, averaging for 3-5 minutes
(Lowe et al, 2002)
Flights over Harvest Platform will
yield accuracy against Topex
Distribution of retrieved calibration site, in progress
heights: colors correspond
to different satellites in Demonstrated precision and spatial
view at the time, breaks resolution are suitable to measure
correspond to airplane mesoscale eddies
turns to realign
 Experimental Results - Altimetry
Crater Lake, OR - Oct 1999
2 cm precision in 1 sec using
phase delay, highest precision
GPS
GPS altimetry achieved to
CLIFF
2ε date (Treuhaft et al., 2001)
H ~ 500 m
Limiting case: low-elevation
ε
LAKE SURFACE
over smooth lake results in
D ~ 450 m
coherent scattering where
PATH DIFFERENCE = 2 H sin (ε) + F(curvature)
phase can be tracked
Troposphere likely the main
source of residual error
Limiting case of occultation
measurement
 Experimental Results - Altimetry
350

300
Observed first GPS reflection
modeled
250
measured
from 1994 space shuttle - SIR-C
200
radar experiment - operating at
VSNR

150

100
L-band encompassing L2 (Lowe
50 et al., 2002)
0

-50
0 1 2 3 4 5
4 sec of cal data, sampling rate
microsec
400
was 89.994 MHz
Derivative of VSNR

300
modeled
measured
The zero on the abscissa axis is
200
estimated based on the inflection
100
point and corresponds to the
0 specular reflection point. Points
-100
-0.2 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
spacing in the model derivative
microsec is much smaller than available
Estimated wind speed was 4 data
m/sec
 Experimental Results -
Scatterometry
Hurricane Michael:
October 18, 2000, east of Hurricane Michael
Florida 10/18/00
16:54 UTC

high winds ranging between 3 -

30 m/s ERS TOPEX
Fig. 3
TOPEX, ERS, NBDC buoy,
SFMR, flight level winds Fig. 5

Michael Center
wind speed retrieval GPS Data-take
Data-take
segment
Hurricane Keith:
October 1, 2000, west of Florida
high winds ranging between 6 -
10 m/s
QuikSCAT wind field available
wind direction retrieval
 Experimental Results -
Scatterometry 2
14

12

10
Satellite by Satellite
WS in m/s

6
GPS Wind Speed
4 (WS) Solution for
2

0
TOPEX Pass
15:44 15:45 15:46 15:47 15:48 15:49 15:50 15:51 15:52 15:53 15:54 15:55
Time in UT

PRN21 PRN15 PRN23 PRN29 PRN30 TOPEX Mean

14

12
Multiple Satellite
10
GPS Wind Speed
WS in m/s

6 (WS) Solution for

4

2
TOPEX Pass
0
15:44 15:45 15:46 15:47 15:48 15:49 15:50
Time in UT
15:51 15:52 15:53 15:54 15:55 Komjathy et al.,
PRN21-15-23 TOPEX
2004
 Experimental Results -
Scatterometry 3
40 5000
Aircraft altitude 4500
35
4000
30
3500

Altitude in meters
25
WS in m/s

3000
20 2500
15 2000
1500
10
1000
5
Bouy: 7 m/s 500
ERS: 5.2 m/s TOPEX: 7.9 m/s; Buoy: 7.0 m/s
0 0
14:10 14:20 14:30 14:40 14:50 15:00 15:10 15:20 15:30 15:40 15:50 16:00 16:10 16:20 16:30 16:40 16:50 17:00 17:10 17:20 17:30

Time in UT
GPS Estimates FLWS (1 min) SFMR

GPS Wind Speed (WS) Estimates Along the Flight Path for
Hurricane Michael of October 18, 2000
FLWS - Flight Level Wind Speed
SFMR - Step Frequency Microwave Radiometer
 Experimental Results -
Scatterometry 4
5500
D E
5000

4500

4000

3500

3000

A B C
2500

2000

1500
22.8 23.0 23.2 23.4 23.6 23.8 24.0 24.2 24.4

Time (hours UTC)

GPS-Derived Wind
Vector Estimates
for the Vicinity of Hurricane Keith of
October 1, Overlaid on QuikSCAT data
Initialization needed with meteorological
data, to eliminate ambiguity
Towards a GPS Altimetry Mission
Loci of daily specular reflection points for an example
receiver at 400 km, assuming an antenna system can capture
all available reflections

High-level design of such system should start with science

needs, i.e. resolving mesoscale ocean eddies, and estimate
requirements for measurement accuracy
 Resolution and Accuracy (C/A)
Footprint (km2): airplane (10 km) 6 x 4 @ 45o
space (400 km) 32 x 24 @ 45o

Accuracy fundamentally limited by:

available GPS signal level (-157 dBw for C/A)
ocean bistatic scattering at L-band( 14 dB < σ0 < 18 dB,
depending on wind speed)
ocean coherence time at L-band( 1 msec < t < 10 msec)

High-level requirements:
high gain, multi-beam antenna systems (~ 30 dB in space)
long incoherent averages and combinations of colocated
measurements over several days
constellation of satellites carrying GPS receivers
 Height Accuracy Estimate

Formal error in height determination

Λ CHIP
σ H ∝ 0.1 27 cm / 4 sec
VSNR

VSNR for incoherent averaging

VSNR = π < A >+< N > − < N >

4− π < A > /m +< N > /m 109 / 4 sec
A N

PSNR for coherent integration

< A > = Ptr ∫ Λ2 ( t − τ )σ (τ )Dop(τ )G(τ ) dτ 90 (30 dB antenna)

< N > kTB CHIP
 RMS Height Error Tradeoffs
1 receiving satellite
cell size 2 days 10 days
50 km x 50 km 18 cm 8 cm

2 receiving satellites
2 days 10 days
50 km x 50 km 13 cm 6 cm

8 receiving satellites
2 days 10 days
25 km x 25 km 13 cm 6 cm

~1 daily 4-sec measurement in every 50 km x 50 km cell per

receiving satellite; satellite coverage up to +/- 65o lat; 10 GPS
satellites visible at any given time (Zuffada et al., 2003)
 Low Elevation Reflections
Rayleigh criterion used to define the onset of incoherent
scattering is λ
h=
8sinε
It implies that when the wave heights exceed h, reflections
from the crest and the trough are different by more than λ/4

At the GPS frequencies, we note that the ocean scatters

incoherently when h ≈ 2 cm for normal incidence and when
h ≈ 1 m for (ε ≈ 2o)

The former condition is nearly never satisfied while the

latter condition is satisfied most of the time
 Low Elevation Reflections
For coherent scattering, the ratio between received and incident
power is given by
Pr 1 R2
= RF2 = (RRF2 sinε 2d)
Pi 4 ⎛ R sinε ⎞⎛ R ⎞
⎜ + d ⎟⎜ + d⎟
⎝ 2 ⎠⎝ 2sinε ⎠

Where R is the Earth radius, RF is the Fresnel reflection

coefficient and d is ε
the→altitude
0 of the receiver, and the rightmost
term applies when

The reflected signal is predominantly RCP and is ~10 dB down

from the direct signal. Therefore, with a modest antenna gain,
the phase of the signal can be tracked by a phase-locked loop
with centimeter level accuracy. A coherent GPS reflected signal
has been observed from CHAMP at grazing angles as reported
by Beyerle and Hocke, 2001.
Ice Altimetry - 1
Distribution of 3783 CHAMP
occultations collected during
May-14 to June-10, 2001

Blue dots indicate the average

location of each of 2571
occultations without a clear
reflection signatures; 1212
occultations show clear
indication of reflection, their
average location is indicated in
red circles. Circle diameter is
proportional to the reflected
intensity. Beyerle et al., 2002

Hajj et al., 2004

 Ice Altimetry - 2
Cardellach et al., 2004,
showed that it is possible
to convert biased phase
delay into unbiased delay
to the sub-centimeter level
and to obtain a height
precision of 0.7 meter
after 0.2 second of
integration.

(Top) Recorded signal-to-noise (SNR) ratio for the last 13 seconds of a

CHAMP occultation. The sub-second oscillation before 61 seconds is due to
the interference of the direct and the reflected signal. (Middle) The black
curve indicates the phase SNR after being normalized by a low-pass-filtered
SNR; the red curve shows the detrended recorded phase. (Bottom) Inferred
extra phase delay of the reflected signal relative to the direct.
 Soil Moisture - 1

BAO
Tower
One mi Zavorotny et
le
al., 2004

A receiver, provided by the NASA Langley Research Center,

tracked the direct line of sight satellites using a low-gain zenith-
oriented right hand circularly polarized (RHCP) antenna and
recorded the cross correlation function of the reflected signals
using an alternating series of surface-oriented antennas
 Soil Moisture - 2
Cross correlation waveforms for single GPS satellites were
continuously recorded in 21 quarter-chip bins for one satellite at a
time
Accumulation of signals was performed in hardware for fundamental
sampling intervals of 1 ms. Batches of length 0.1 s of the sum-square
of the in-phase and quadrature waveform components were averaged
prior to archival
Signals from the surface-looking antennas were sequentially selected
using a microwave PIN switch which provided an 8 s total
integration period for the low-gain LHCP antenna and a 2 s total
integration period for the other antennas
To suppress high-frequency Rayleigh fading due to rough surface
scattering an additional averaging of the reflected waveforms (after
subtracting the noise floor) was performed over a 100-s moving
window
Soil Moisture - 3
Variations in the signal are uniquely
related to changes in the dielectric
permittivity, and therefore, to soil
moisture because roughness of the area
with low grass remains constant
Reflected signals were recorded only for
satellites with reflection ground tracks
passing through the high-gain antenna
footprint of size ~ 400 m x 350 m
The gravimetric wetness of the soil was
estimated at 6.0 cm depth using a
Campbell Scientific CS-615 time-domain
reflectometer. The soil in the uppermost
1.0 m layer at the BAO is heavy clay
 Soil Moisture - 4
25 150
LHCP
H-pol
V-pol After rainfall
20 RHCP
LHCP (Low-Gain)
100
15

SNR
SNR

10
50
5
Before rainfall

0 0
220 230 240 250 260 270 280 230 240 250 260 270 280
Azimuth (degree) Satellite Azimuth Angle (deg)

Intercomparison Between Comparison between two

Reflected Signals Obtained reflected signals for GPS
with All Antennas PRN#18 obtained with the
LHCP high-gain antenna on
Highest sensitivity for LHCP July 10, 2002 before rainfall,
signal and on July 11, 2002 after
rainfall
 Soil Moisture - 5
50
The SNR data do not show
40
significant sensitivity to the
30 measured wetness at the
SNR

lowest levels of moisture.

20

10
The probe SM measurements
0 at 6 cm only are not
0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35
Soil Wetness
representative for depths
important for L-band radio
Reflected Signal Power (PRN#18 wave propagation
High-Gain LHCP Antenna)
versus in situ Measured Soil Complete vertical profile
Wetness (SW) for different days, needed to retrieve moisture
showing effect of surface variation
 Volumetric Moisture, %

30
Soil Moisture - 6
25
3 Rain produces saturated soil
20 4

15
6
5
down to 6-10 cm, creating
10
8 12 16 23
37 strong reflecting layer, due to
5 high gradient of dielectric
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 constant
Depth, cm

Representative soil moisture profiles from In dry periods the gradient is

Njoku&Entekhabi, J. Hydrology., vol. 184 (1996)
80 weaker, so signal penetrates
LHCP
70
deeper since it does not
Coherent Power SNR

60

50
HP encounter discontinuities
40

30

20
VP
Energy penetrates and is
10
RHCP
either dissipated due to losses
0
0 5 10 15 20
Volumetric Moisture at 6 cm Depth, %
25
or does not come back due to
Theoretical Modeling of GPS Reflections an impedance matching
(Power) from Soil with Realistic Moisture
Profiles
 References - 1
Beckman P. and A. Spizzichino, The scattering of electromagnetic waves from rough
surfaces, Artech House, Norwood, MA, 1987.

Beyerle G. and K. Hocke, Observation and simulation of direct and reflected GPS signals in
radio occultation experiment, Geophys. Res. Lett., 28(9), 1895-1898, 2001.

Elfouhaily T., B. Chapron, K. Katsaros and D. Vandemark, “ A unified directional spectrum

for long and short wind-driven waves,” J. Geophys. Res., vol. 102, pp. 15,781-15,796, 1997.

Elfouhaily T., D. Thompson, L. Linstrom, “ Delay-Doppler analysis of bistatically reflected

signals from the ocean surface: theory and application,” IEEE Transactions on Geoscience
and Remote Sensing, Vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 560-573, March 2002.

Fung, A. K, C. Zuffada and C.Y. Hsieh, Incoherent bistatic scattering from the sea surface at
L-band, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 39(5), 1006-1012, May
2001.

Garrison J.L., A. Komjathy, V. Zavorotny and S.J. Katzberg, “ Wind speed measurement
using forward scattered GPS signals, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing,
Vol. 40, No. 1, Jan. 2002.
 References - 2
Garrison J. L and S. J Katzberg, The Application of reflected GPS signals to
ocean remote sensing, Remote Sens. Environ. Vol 73, pp. 175-187, 2000.

Lin B., S.J. Katzberg, J.L. Garrison and B.A. Wielicki, “ Relationship between
GPS signals reflected from sea surfaces and surface winds: Modeling results and
comparisons with aircraft measurements,” J. Geophys. Res., Vol. 104, n. C9, pp.
20,713-20,727, Sept. 1999.

Lowe, S. T., C. Zuffada, Y. Chao, P. Kroger, J. L. LaBrecque, L. E. Young,

“Five-cm-Precision Aircraft Ocean Altimetry Using GPS Reflections,” Geophys.
Res. Lett., Vol. 29, No. 10, May 02.

Komjathy, A., V. Zavorotny, P. Axelrad, G. Born and J. Garrison, “ GPS signal

scattering from sea surface: wind speed retrieval using experimental data and
theoretical model,” Remote Sensing of Environment, Vol. 73, pp. 162-174, 2000.

Martin-Neira M., “A passive reflectometry and interferometry system (PARIS):

application to ocean altimetry,” ESA Journal, vol. 17, pp. 331-355, 1993.

Picardi G., R. Seu, S. G. Sorge and M. Martin-Neira, “ Bistatic model of ocean

scattering”, IEEE Transactions on antennas and propagation, Vol. 46, n. 10, pp.
1531-1541, Oct. 98.
 References - 3
Komjathy, A., M. Armatys, D. Masters, P. Axelrad, V.U. Zavorotny and S.J. Katzberg
(2004). “Retrieval of Ocean Surface Wind Speed and Wind Direction Using Reflected GPS
Signals.” Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, Vol. 21, March 2004, pp. 515-
526.

Komjathy, A., V. Zavorotny, P. Axelrad, G. Born, and J. Garrison (2000). “GPS Signal
Scattering from Sea Surface: Wind Speed Retrieval Using Experimental Data and
Theoretical Model.” Journal of Remote Sensing of Environment, Vol. 73, pp. 162-174.

Komjathy, A., V. Zavorotny, J. Garrison (1999) “GPS: A New Tool for Ocean Science”,
GPS World, Vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 50-56.

Masters, D., Axelrad, P., Katzberg, S. (2004), Initial Results of Land-Reflected GPS Bistatic
Radar Measurements in SMEX02, Rem. Sens. Env., in press.

Lowe, S. T., J. L. Labrecque, C. Zuffada, L. J. Romans, L. Young and G. A. Hajj, First

Spaceborne Observation of an Earth-Reflected GPS Signal, Radio Science, 37(1), art. no.
1007, Feb. 2002b.

Srokosz, M. A., on the joint distribution of surface elevation and slopes for a nonlinear
random sea, with applications to radar altimetry, J. Geophys. Res., vol. 91, n. C1, pp. 995-
1006, 1986.
 References - 4
Rodriguez, E., Altimetry for non-gaussian oceans: height biases and estimation parameters, J.
Geophys. Res., vol. 93, n. C11, pp. 14,107-14,120, Nov. 1988.

Treuhaft, R., S. Lowe, C. Zuffada, Y. Chao, “2-cm GPS altimetry over Crater Lake,” GRL,
Vol. 28, no. 23, pp. 4343-4346, Dec. 01.

Martín-Neira, M., M. Caparrini, J. Font-Rossello, S. Lannelongue, and C. Serra Vallmitjana,

“The PARIS concept: an experimental demonstration of sea surface altimetry using GPS
reflected signals”, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 39, 142-150, 2001.

Voronovich A. G. and V. U. Zavorotny, Theoretical model for scattering of radar signals in

Ku- and C-bands from a rough sea surface with breaking waves, Waves in Random Media,
vol. 11, pp. 247-269, 2001.

Zavorotny V.U., and A. G. Voronovich, “ Scattering of GPS signals from the ocean with wind
remote sensing application,” IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, Vol. 38,
No. 2, pp. 951-964, March 2000 .

Zuffada C., A. Fung, J. Parker, M. Okolicanyi, E. Huang, “Polarization properties of the GPS
signal scattered off a wind-driven ocean, IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation,
Jan 2004.
 References - 5
C. Zuffada, S. Lowe, Y. Chao and R. Treuhaft: “Oceanography with GPS”, in Satellite
Altimetry for Geodesy, Geophysics and Oceanography, C. Hwang, C. Shum and J. Li eds,
International Association of Geodesy Symposia, Volume 126, pp. 193-203, Springer-
Verlag 2004.

C. Zuffada, T. Elfouhaily and S. Lowe: “Sensitivity Analysis of Wind Vector

Measurements from Ocean reflected GPS Signals,” Remote Sensing of Environment,
5916, 2003.

G. A. Hajj, C. Zuffada, " Theoretical Description of a Bistatic System for Ocean Altimetry
Using the GPS Signal, " Radio Science, Vol. 38, No 5, Oct. 2003.