Microsoft Word - 17-3578_s_ETASR_V10_N5_pp6237-6241


Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 10, No. 5, 2020, 6237-6241 6237 
 

www.etasr.com Mubarak: Effect of Carrier Phase on GPS Multipath Tracking Error  

 

The Effect of Carrier Phase on GPS Multipath 

Tracking Error  
 

Omer Mohsin Mubarak 

Department of Electrical Engineering 
Jouf University 
Saudi Arabia 

ommubarak@ju.edu.sa  
 

 

Abstract—Multipath is one of the main sources of tracking error 

in GPS receivers. This tracking error has previously been 

analyzed against the relative delay of the Line of Sight (LOS) and 

reflected signals. However, only carrier phase differences of 0 

and π were used, since they give tracking error with maximum 

magnitude. This paper shows that tracking error does not change 
linearly with changing carrier phase difference. Tracking error 

plots against relative carrier phase difference of the LOS and 

reflected signals have been used to analyze the relationship 

between the two in various scenarios. While maximum positive 

and negative errors are found at carrier phase difference of 0 and 

π, a sharp increase in tracking error is found around the phase 

difference of π. There is a zero crossing in all plots but that point 

is dependent on relative amplitude, delay, and carrier phase 

difference of the two signals. The analysis has also been extended 

to narrow correlators receiver. Tracking error is significantly 

reduced in this case, however, similar characteristics have been 

observed when the tracking error is analyzed against the relative 

carrier phase difference. Moreover, the tracking error was found 
to be less dependent on the relative delay between the two signals 

when correlators spacing is reduced. 

Keywords-multipath; global navigation satellite system; global 

positioning system; carrier phase; tracking error  

I. INTRODUCTION  

The reflection of the Line of Sight (LOS) satellite signal 
from nearby objects, also known as multipath, causes tracking 
errors in the Global Positioning System (GPS) receivers [1-3]. 
Tracking errors caused by multipath can be positive or negative 
and depend on relative amplitude, carrier phase, and code delay 
of the reflected signal with respect to the LOS signal [4]. A plot 
of maximum positive and maximum negative code tracking 
errors against relative delay of a reflected signal is called as the 
multipath error envelope and is generally used to represent 
error characteristics [5-7] and effects of mitigation techniques 
[8-9]. It shows the maximum deviation in tracking error that 
can be caused by variations of carrier phase difference between 
the LOS and the reflected signals for a given relative amplitude 
and code delay between the two signals. Two maximums are 
obtained for relative carrier phase differences of 0 and π 
radians. However, the error envelope does not provide details 
of how tracking error is changed when the carrier phase 
difference between the two signals changes from 0 to π or vice 

versa. This paper analyzes the effect of carrier phase difference 
between the LOS and the reflected signals on multipath 
tracking error. 

II. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP 

In a GPS receiver, correlators are placed on the correlation 
function to track the code phase of a received GPS signal. 
Typically, three correlators are used, one at the prompt or on 
time correlation position and other two (early and late) 
symmetrically placed on either side [7, 10]. Early and late 
correlators use equally advanced and delayed versions of 
prompt code respectively, such that for a triangular correlation 
function their equal energy implies that prompt correlator 
tracks the peak. Equal energy is ensured using a discriminator 
function, which in simplest form is the difference in energy of 
the two. Tracking loops adjust local code and carrier, aiming to 
maintain discriminator output to zero. In the presence of a 
reflected signal, the correlation function shape is distorted. In 
this case, even with zero output of discriminator function, 
prompt correlator code is not aligned with received signal, 
resulting in tracking error [2]. In this paper, a perfect triangular 
function v(t) is used as an autocorrelation function for 
determining tracking error. The counterfeit signal is given as 
scaled, phased and delayed version of v(t). The received signal 
g(t) is then given as the sum of the LOS and counterfeit signal 
by: 

���� = ���� + 		
����� − ��    (1) 

where 	, � and � are respectively the relative amplitude, the 
carrier phase difference, and the delay of the counterfeit signal 
with respect to LOS. The discriminator function is given by: 


��� = �������
∗��� − �������

∗���    (2) 

where Dl and De are given by (3) and (4) respectively. 

����� = 	��� + ��+ 	

����� + � − ��    (3) 

����� = 	��� − �� + 	

����� −� − ��    (4) 

where � is the correlator spacing between early and prompt, or 
prompt and late correlators. Wide correlators, i.e. with 1 chip 
spacing between early and late correlators (�=0.5 chips), are 
used in this paper, except in Section V. 

Corresponding author: Omer Mohsin Mubarak



Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 10, No. 5, 2020, 6237-6241 6238 
 

www.etasr.com Mubarak: Effect of Carrier Phase on GPS Multipath Tracking Error  

 

III. MOTIVATION 

Figure 1 shows the tracking error for a multipath signal 
with relative amplitude of 0.5 and carrier phase offsets (φ) of 0, 
π/4, π/2, 3π/4, and π, with respect to the LOS signal. Relative 
amplitude of 0.5 implies that reflected signal is of half 
amplitude than the LOS signal and φ=0 implies that the 
reflected signal is in-phase with the LOS signal. The tracking 
error is zero in all cases for reflected signal delay of over 1.5 
chips. Plots confirm that maximum error magnitude is obtained 
when the reflected signal is in-phase or completely out of phase 
(φ=π) with the LOS signal. However, it can also be noted that 
plots are not uniformly spaced as phase difference is increased 
by π/4. For example, plots for φ=0 and φ=π/4 are much closer 
as compared to the plots for φ=π/4 and φ=π/2, although in both 
cases the difference in phase is π/4. 

 
Fig. 1.  Tracking error plot against signal’s relative delay for a multipath 

signal with relative amplitude of 0.5 and varying carrier phase offsets (φ) with 
respect to the LOS signal. 

Similar patterns are observed for other relative amplitudes 
of multipath signal with respect to the LOS signal. Figures 2 
and 3 show the tracking errors for a multipath signal with 
relative amplitude of 0.3 and 0.8 respectively. It can be 
observed that the overall error magnitude is smaller for relative 
amplitude of 0.3 and higher for relative amplitude of 0.8, as 
compared to Figure 1. However, similar to Figure 1, the plots 
in both figures are not uniformly spaced as phase difference is 
increased by π/4.  

 
Fig. 2.  Tracking error plot against signal’s relative delay for a multipath 

signal with relative amplitude of 0.3 and varying carrier phase offsets (φ) with 

respect to the LOS signal. 

Non-linear change in tracking error with changing carrier 
phase difference provided motivation to explore the effect of 
phase difference between the LOS and reflected signals on 
tracking error. 

 
Fig. 3.  Tracking error plot against signal’s relative delay for a multipath 

signal with relative amplitude of 0.8 and varying carrier phase offsets (φ) with 

respect to the LOS signal. 

IV. TRACKING ERROR ANALYSIS 

This section analyzes the changes in tracking error with 
changing carrier phase difference between the LOS and 
reflected signals. Figures 4-6 show the tracking error plots 
against relative carrier phase difference of the LOS and 
reflected signals, with relative amplitudes of 0.3, 0.5, and 0.8. 
respectively. 

 
Fig. 4.  Tracking error plot against signal’s relative phase difference for a 

multipath signal with relative amplitude of 0.3 and varying multipath signal 
delay (d) with respect to the LOS signal. 

 
Fig. 5.  Tracking error plot against signal’s relative phase difference for a 

multipath signal with relative amplitude of 0.5 and varying multipath signal 
delay (d) with respect to the LOS signal. 

The following can be observed from these plots: 

• It is confirmed that for a given relative amplitude and delay 
between signals, the maximum positive error is obtained for 
φ=0 and the maximum negative error is obtained for φ=π, in 
all cases.  



Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 10, No. 5, 2020, 6237-6241 6239 
 

www.etasr.com Mubarak: Effect of Carrier Phase on GPS Multipath Tracking Error  

 

• The change in tracking error with increasing carrier phase 
difference is non-linear for all cases. 

• There is a sharp increase in tracking error around φ=π for 
all cases.  

• There is no single phase difference which can give zero 
tracking error in all cases, since zero crossing for each plot 
is different. Zero crossing of a plot is dependent on all three 
parameters, i.e. relative amplitude, delay, and carrier phase 
difference between the LOS and reflected signals.  

• Figure 4 plots have the least variation in tracking error as 
phase difference is changed from 0 to π radians. This 
implies that the dependence of the tracking error on carrier 
phase difference is higher for higher relative amplitudes of 
the reflected signal. 

 
Fig. 6.  Tracking error plot against signal’s relative phase difference for a 

multipath signal with relative amplitude of 0.8 and varying multipath signal 

delay (d) with respect to the LOS signal. 

V. TRACKING ERROR WITH NARROW CORRELATOR 

The previous analysis has used wide correlators, i.e. 1 chip 
spacing between early and late correlator of a receiver. 
Reduced spacing of 0.1 chip between early and late correlators, 
termed as the narrow correlator, has been used for mitigating 
the tracking error caused by multipath for various global 
navigation satellite signals [8, 11-13]. This can be confirmed 
from Figure 7, which shows the tracking error with reflected 
signal relative amplitude of 0.5 using a narrow correlator. 

 
Fig. 7.  Tracking error plot against signal’s relative delay for a multipath 

signal with relative amplitude of 0.5 and varying carrier phase offsets (φ) with 
respect to the LOS signal, using narrow correlators in receiver. 

Comparing this with Figure 1, it can be seen that the 
tracking error has been significantly reduced. The tracking 
error is zero when separation between the LOS and reflected 

signals is more than 1.05 chips, instead of 1.5 chips in Figure 1. 
The maximum tracking error is 0.025 chips instead of 0.25 
chips obtained with wide correlators. Similarly, reduced error 
can be observed in Figures 8-9, as compared with similar 
relative amplitude plots in Figures 2-3 respectively. It can again 
be noted that the plots in Figures 7-9 are not uniformly spaced. 
Similar to wide correlators, plots for φ=0 and φ=π/4 are much 
closer than the plots for φ=π/4 and φ=π/2, although in both 
cases the difference in phase is π/4. Therefore, the change in 
tracking error against carrier phase difference is analysed in 
this section for a narrow correlator receiver.  

 
Fig. 8.  Tracking error plot against signal’s relative delay for a multipath 

signal with relative amplitude of 0.3 and varying carrier phase offsets (φ) with 
respect to the LOS signal, using narrow correlators in receiver. 

 
Fig. 9.  Tracking error plot against signal’s relative delay for a multipath 

signal with relative amplitude of 0.8 and varying carrier phase offsets (φ) with 
respect to the LOS signal, using narrow correlators in receiver. 

Figures 10-12 show tracking error plots against relative 
carrier phase difference of the LOS and reflected signals using 
narrow correlators in a receiver, with relative amplitudes of 0.3, 
0.5, and 0.8 respectively. All the 5 observations noted in the 
previous section for wide correlators, are also valid for these 
narrow correlator based plots. Moreover, out of delays of 0.25, 
0.5, 0.75, 1, and 1.25 chips, the 1.25 chips plot stays at zero in 
all the 3 Figures, as the reflected signal delay of over 1.05 chips 
gives zero tracking error irrespective of the relative amplitude 
and carrier phase difference of the reflected signal with respect 
to the LOS signal. It can also be noted that plots are much 
closer as compared to the plots obtained using wide correlators 
for the same relative amplitude. For example, the plots in 
Figure 10 are much closely spaced as compared to the plots in 
Figure 4, although both are obtained for relative amplitude of 
0.3 and the same set of relative delays. 

 



Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 10, No. 5, 2020, 6237-6241 6240 
 

www.etasr.com Mubarak: Effect of Carrier Phase on GPS Multipath Tracking Error  

 

 
Fig. 10.  Tracking error plot against signal’s relative phase difference for a 

multipath signal with relative amplitude of 0.3 and varying multipath signal 

delay (d) with respect to the LOS signal, using narrow correlators in receiver. 

 
Fig. 11.  Tracking error plot against signal’s relative phase difference for a 

multipath signal with relative amplitude of 0.5 and varying multipath signal 
delay (d) with respect to the LOS signal, using narrow correlators in receiver. 

 
Fig. 12.  Tracking error plot against signal’s relative phase difference for a 

multipath signal with relative amplitude of 0.8 and varying multipath signal 
delay (d) with respect to the LOS signal, using narrow correlators in receiver. 

VI. CONCLUSION 

Multipath is a source of tracking error in GPS receivers, 
which leads to positioning errors [3, 14-17]. Multipath error 
envelopes have been used to analyze tracking error caused by 
multipath [5-9]. However, they only provide maximum positive 
and negative error for a given relative amplitude and code 
delay between the two signals. Two maximums are obtained 
for relative carrier phase differences of 0 and π radians, 
whereas the tracking error for relative carrier phase differences 
between 0 and π radians has not been explored earlier. This 
paper has analyzed the tracking error caused by multipath and 
specifically the effect of carrier phase on error. Tracking error 
plots against relative carrier phase difference of the LOS and 
reflected signals have been used instead of conventional 

tracking error plots against relative delay of the two signals. 
This novel analysis confirmed that maximum positive and 
negative errors are obtained for φ=0 and φ=π respectively. It 
has also been observed that change in tracking error with 
increasing carrier phase difference is non-linear and the error 
increases sharply around φ=π. The zero crossing of a tracking 
error plot is found to be dependent on relative amplitude, delay 
and carrier phase difference between the LOS and the reflected 
signals, i.e. there is no single carrier phase difference between 
the two signals which gives zero tracking error. Moreover, the 
dependence of tracking error on carrier phase difference is 
found to be higher for higher relative amplitude of the reflected 
signal. 

Tracking error has also been analyzed for a receiver using 
narrow correlators, which are generally used to reduce the 
tracking error caused by multipath. The spacing between early 
and late correlators was reduced to 0.1 chip, instead of 1 chip in 
wide correlators. As a result, maximum tracking error reduced 
to 0.025 chips instead of 0.25 chips. Moreover, tracking error is 
zero when the separation between the LOS and reflected 
signals is more than 1.05 chips, instead of 1.5 chips for wide 
correlator receivers. Characteristics observed for tracking error 
using wide correlators are also found to be valid when narrow 
correlators were used. Moreover, the plots for different 
multipath signal delays are found to be much closer as 
compared to the plots obtained using wide correlators for the 
same set of signal parameters. This implies that the tracking 
error is less dependent on relative delay between the two 
signals when narrow correlators are used. 

These findings can be useful for finding better estimates of 
tracking error in a GPS receiver for multipath with given 
relative amplitude, carrier phase difference, and delay between 
the two signals.  

REFERENCES 

[1] X. Chen and F. Dovis, “Enhanced CADLL Structure for Multipath 
Mitigation in Urban Scenarios,” in Proceedings of the 2011 

International Technical Meeting of The Institute of Navigation, San 
Diego, CA, 2011,  pp. 678–686. 

[2] O. M. Mubarak and A. Dempster, “Carrier phase analysis to mitigate 

multipath effect,” presented at the IGNSS Symposium 2007, The 
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, Dec. 2007. 

[3] O. M. Mubarak and A. G. Dempster, “Exclusion of Multipath-Affected 

Satellites Using Early Late Phase,” Journal of Global Positioning 
Systems, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 145–155, 2010. 

[4] K. Yedukondalu, A. D. Sarma, and V. S. Srinivas, “Estimation and 
mitigation of GPS multipath interference using adaptive filtering,” 

Progress In Electromagnetics Research M, vol. 21, pp. 133–148, 2011, 
doi: 10.2528/PIERM11080811. 

[5] T. G. Ferreira and F. D. Nunes, “Advanced multipath mitigation 

techniques for GNSS receivers,” presented at the 1st Seminar of the 
Portuguese Committee, Lisbon, Portugal, Nov. 2007. 

[6] O. M. Mubarak and A. G. Dempster, “Analysis of early late phase in 

single-and dual-frequency GPS receivers for multipath detection,” GPS 
Solutions, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 381–388, Sep. 2010, doi: 10.1007/s10291-

010-0162-z. 

[7] A. Pirsiavash, A. Broumandan, and G. Lachapelle, “Characterization of 
Signal Quality Monitoring Techniques for Multipath Detection in GNSS 

Applications,” Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), vol. 17, no. 7, Jul. 2017, 
doi: 10.3390/s17071579. 



Engineering, Technology & Applied Science Research Vol. 10, No. 5, 2020, 6237-6241 6241 
 

www.etasr.com Mubarak: Effect of Carrier Phase on GPS Multipath Tracking Error  

 

[8] A. J. V. Dierendonck, P. Fenton, and T. Ford, “Theory and Performance 
of Narrow Correlator Spacing in a GPS Receiver,” NAVIGATION, vol. 

39, no. 3, pp. 265–283, 1992, doi: 10.1002/j.2161-4296.1992.tb02276.x. 

[9] A. Pirsiavash, A. Broumandan, and G. Lachapelle, “Performance 
Evaluation of Signal Quality Monitoring Techniques for GNSS 

Multipath Detection and Mitigation,” presented at the International 
Technical Symposium on Navigation and Timing (ITSNT), Toulouse, 

France, Nov. 2017. 

[10] E. D. Kaplan, Understanding GPS: Principles and Applications, Second 
Edition, 2nd edition. BS: Artech House, 2005. 

[11] M. E. Cannon, G. Lachapelle, W. Qiu, S. L. Frodge, and B. Remondi, 
“Performance analysis of a narrow correlator spacing receiver for precise 

static GPS positioning,” in Proceedings of 1994 IEEE Position, Location 
and Navigation Symposium - PLANS’94, Apr. 1994, pp. 355–360, doi: 

10.1109/PLANS.1994.303337. 

[12] Z. Xuefen, C. Xiyuan, and C. Xin, “Comparison between strobe 
correlator and narrow correlator on MBOC DLL tracking loop,” in 2011 

IEEE International Instrumentation and Measurement Technology 
Conference, May 2011, pp. 1–4, doi: 10.1109/IMTC.2011.5944083. 

[13] J. H. Lee et al., “A GPS multipath mitigation technique using correlators 

with variable chip spacing,” E3S Web of Conferences, vol. 94, 2019, doi: 
10.1051/e3sconf/20199403006, Art. No. 03006. 

[14] M. Orabi, J. Khalife, A. A. Abdallah, Z. M. Kassas, and S. S. Saab, “A 

Machine Learning Approach for GPS Code Phase Estimation in 
Multipath Environments,” in 2020 IEEE/ION Position, Location and 

Navigation Symposium (PLANS), Apr. 2020, pp. 1224–1229, doi: 
10.1109/PLANS46316.2020.9110155. 

[15] T. Kos, I. Markezic, and J. Pokrajcic, “Effects of multipath reception on 

GPS positioning performance,” presented at the ELMAR-2010, Zadar, 
Croatia, Sep. 2010. 

[16] I. Rumora, N. Sikirica, and R. Filjar, “An Experimental Identification of 

Multipath Effect in GPS Positioning Error,” TransNav, International 
Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety od Sea Transportation, vol. 

12, no. 1, pp. 29–32, Mar. 2018, doi: 10.12716/1001.12.01.02. 

[17]  T. L. Dammalage, “The Effect of Multipath on Single Frequency C/A 

Code Based GPS Positioning,” Engineering, Technology & Applied 
Science Research, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 3270–3275, Aug. 2018. 

 

AUTHOR’S PROFILE 

 

Omer Mohsin Mubarak received the B.S. in 

Electronics Engineering from the Ghulam Ishaq Khan 
Institute of Engineering Sciences & Technology, 

Pakistan, and the M.E. and Ph.D. degrees from the 
University of New South Wales, Australia in 2006 

and 2010 respectively. From 2013 to 2016, he was 
with Iqra University, Pakistan and during this period 

he served as Head of the Electronics Engineering 
department and Head of Computing & Technology department. He is 

currently working as an Assistant Professor at Jouf University, Saudi 
Arabia. His research interests include multipath mitigation, spoofing 

detection and other signal processing techniques for GNSS receivers. He 
is a senior member of IEEE, USA.