See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/301864059

NULL-STEERING ANTENNAS

Chapter · February 2016

CITATION READS
1 4,034

3 authors, including:

James T. Curran Joaquim Fortuny

72 PUBLICATIONS 784 CITATIONS

European Commission
175 PUBLICATIONS 3,419 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by James T. Curran on 04 May 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 WITH RICHARD B. LANGLEY

NULL-STEERING ANTENNAS
Assessing the Performance of Multi-Antenna Interference-Rejection Techniques

FIGURE 1 Geometry of antenna array consisting of seven dual-frequency (L1, L2), dual polarized (RHCP, LHCP) elements arranged on a
circular ground plane.

BY James T. Curran, Michele Bavaro and

Joaquim Fortuny-Guasch A number of different factors can influence the
achievable levels of signal rejection using antenna

D
irectional antennas offer a powerful means arrays. These factors include: the gain and phase
of achieving signal selectivity when various stability of the analog radio-frequency (RF) and
signal sources observed by a receiver are intermediate-frequency (IF) stages, the linearity
separated spatially. In the context of GNSS, of the active analog stages, and the fidelity of the
which must accommodate a mobile receiver observing signal-combining stages. Seeking to identify the
many moving transmitters, adaptive antennas — bound imposed by each of these limiting factors,
or controlled radiation pattern antennas—are an we have carefully examined the signal rejection
attractive option. The benefits of antenna arrays have capability of an antenna array in our work. The study
been demonstrated both for signal rejection, such as considers a circular antenna array, consisting of
interference and multipath mitigation or anti-spoofing; seven passive dual-polarized (right-hand circularly
and for the purposes of gain enhancement, angle-of- polarized [RHCP] and left-hand circularly polarized
arrival, or attitude estimation. [LHCP]) L1-L2 elements. Although signal rejection

62 G P S W O R L D WWW.GPSWORLD.COM FEBRUARY 2016

|
can be performed both in the analog and in the
digital domain, this article focuses only on the INNOVATION
analog combination of signals at RF, using a bank
of controllable phase shifters and attenuators. INSIGHTS RICHARD B. LANGLEY BY
We conducted broadcast experiments in a large- IT’S ALL PHYSICS. How things work, that is. Well, maybe a little chemistry
diameter anechoic chamber, housing a rotatable too in some cases. But I might be a little biased in my opinion given that I’m an
central pillar upon which the array is mounted, and applied physicist by training. Radio? Satellite navigation? Yes, the principles of
two broadcast antennas mounted on movable sleds. their operation are all governed by physics. Many physicists of my generation
The results presented here include a precise started out as radio tinkerers. I’ve recounted in this column before that I built
three-dimensional phase and gain calibration of the my first radio (from a kit) when I was 14 (not counting the crystal radio that my
antenna array using a network analyzer to explore father helped me to put together when I was 9). Built a few more during high
the properties of antenna elements when placed in school, got into radio astronomy as an undergraduate, and did a Ph.D. in the
close proximity on a common ground plane. Further application of very long baseline (radio) interferometry to geodesy.
results include an investigation of the nulling depth The great American physicist Richard Feynman was also a radio tinkerer
achievable by the array via the synchronous broadcast in his youth. He recounts in one of his autobiographical books how he used
of two GNSS-like code-division multiple access to fix radios. And because he would approach the task of repairing each
(CDMA) signals from different broadcast antennas. non-functioning set by first contemplating why it wasn’t working, he got the
We then extrapolated these results to infer the relative reputation of fixing radios by thinking!
degradation in nulling capability when the receiver’s One of Feynman’s special abilities was in explaining how things worked. In
estimate of the amplitude and phase of the signal to be fact, he has been called “The Great Explainer.” He authored what is arguably
rejected is poor. Finally, a comparison of analog and the best physics textbooks ever produced: The Feynman Lectures on Physics.
digital element combining is explored, with emphasis The three-volume set, developed from his Caltech lectures to undergraduates
on the rejection of strong jamming signals. between 1961 and 1964, covers mechanics, radiation, electromagnetism,
This experiment sought to illustrate and quantify matter and quantum mechanics. Many students and practicing physicists
the unique benefits and limitations of each technique. have learned or re-learned aspects of physics from the famous “red books.”
In particular, we note that analog combining Many more will now thanks to Caltech, which recently put the Lectures on line
enjoys high linearity and can accommodate high for anyone to read (feynmanlectures.caltech.edu).
interference power, but is typically restricted to In this month’s column, we are going to learn about the development of a
the use of coarse phase and gain coefficients when microprocessor-controlled multi-element GNSS antenna array for interfer-
combining elements. In contrast, digital combining ence rejection. While there are many textbooks that describe how multi-
can offer notably higher gain and phase resolution, element antennas work, Feynman explains their operation in his Lectures from
but is limited by the dynamic range of the digitizer. first principles — from the principles of physics.
The phenomenon governing the behavior of antennas with multiple ele-
ANTENNA CHARACTERIZATION ments is called interference. If we combine two electromagnetic waves, they
The work reported in this article has focused on will interfere with each other with a result that depends on the phase differ-
the use of a seven-element circular antenna array, ence of the waves. The waves might reinforce each other leading to a larger
consisting of dual-polarized (RHCP and LHCP), net amplitude, called constructive interference, or partially or fully null each
dual-frequency (L1 and L2) elements. The antenna other out, called destructive interference. When we apply this concept to the
elements are mounted on a single circular aluminum signals received by a pair of antennas making up an array, we find that the
ground plane 2 millimeters thick and 50 centimeters array has directionality and we can have a null in the reception pattern in the
in diameter, and placed in a hexagonal arrangement directions parallel to the antenna baseline and will be insensitive to signals ar-
at a spacing of 12.5 centimeters, as depicted in riving from those directions. And as Feynman describes in his Lectures, by add-
FIGURE 1. Because the antennas are passive, and can ing more antennas to the array and “some cleverness in spacing and phasing
be used both for transmission and for reception, our antennas,” we can have a fairly narrow pattern null in a chosen direction.
characterization tests were performed in broadcast In the case of a GNSS antenna array, that direction might be that of a jamming
mode while the typical receive-mode operation of signal and so we can null out the jammer and maintain a positioning capability.
the array is performed using an in-line low-noise Several factors affect the levels of signal rejection using antenna arrays. In
amplifier (LNA) after the antenna. this article, our authors describe these factors and the experiments they con-
The experiments described here were conducted ducted with their microprocessor-controlled array to assess the bounds the
in an anechoic chamber, hemispherical in shape factors impose on its signal rejection capability.

FEBRUARY 2016 WWW.GPSWORLD.COM G P S W O R L D 63

|
 element. By performing the scan for each
antenna element, for a range of positions
of Sled A, and repeating this for different
rotations of the central pillar, a precise
frequency response could be calculated
for a large set of points across the entire
upper hemisphere of the antenna. The
scan was computed on signals received by
both the horizontal and vertical elements
on Sled A, such that both the RHCP and
LHCP response could be computed. The
vertical cuts of this gain pattern were
measured with resolution of 2°, while
the horizontal cuts were measured with
a resolution of 5°.
The average gain response, calculated
across the 20-MHz band, for each of the
seven elements is depicted in FIGURE 3. The
elevation cut of the peripheral element is
taken such that the -90° direction of the
cut aligns with a radial line pointing away
FIGURE 2 Antenna array and digitizing front end in the anechoic chamber during broadcast from the center of the array. The azimuth
tests. cuts are oriented such that the 0° direction
aligns with a radial line extending from
with a diameter of 20 meters, as depicted in FIGURE 2. The the center of element number 1 to the center of element
array was mounted on a surveyor’s tripod and placed at number 2.
a known position on a rotatable pillar at the center of the It is interesting to note that the gain pattern exhibited
chamber. The chamber contains two sleds, Sled A and B, by each element is sensitive to its position on the ground
which can be precisely positioned along an arc through plane and its position relative to other elements. Because
the zenith at positions between ±115° either side of the of the rotational symmetry of the array, the gain patterns
vertical. These antennas include 1.0 to 6.0 GHz vertically of all of the peripheral elements are similar, differing
and horizontally polarized standard-gain horn antennas. only in orientation, each one exhibiting a deflection of
Because the characteristics of the antenna array itself the maximum gain towards the center of the array. The
are central to the ultimate performance of beamforming central element is circularly symmetric with a single lobe
or null-steering techniques, a thorough characterization of in the direction of the zenith, while gain of the peripheral
the gain and phase properties of each of the seven antenna elements is deflected inwards, having lower gain away
elements was conducted. To do so, a network analyzer from the center of the array and an increased gain for
was used to observe the gain and phase response of the high elevation angles from the center of the array. The
antenna under test from a range of observation angles. difference in gain pattern across elements is stark and
The array was operated in transmit mode, broadcasting should, perhaps, influence the choice of elements to be
a signal sourced from Port A of the network analyzer, used when forming a beam or null in a given direction.
which was received by an antenna mounted on one of the One or other of the signals should be scaled to compensate
movable sleds, and fed to Port B of the network analyzer. for this gain difference.
The network analyzer was configured to broadcast a series
of 201 equally spaced tones spanning 20 MHz centered at MEASURING SIGNAL REJECTION
1575.42 MHz at a power of -7 dBm from the antenna array. Before exploring factors that influence signal rejection,
A mechanical RF multiplexer was used to implement a this section details the figure of merit, which might
time-division multiplexing of this broadcast measurement quantify the achievable performance of the array. We
signal across each of the seven elements, such that examined the nulling performance of the system in
the series of tones were transmitted once per antenna terms of its rejection capability: assessed as the relative

64 G P S W O R L D WWW.GPSWORLD.COM FEBRUARY 2016

|
 (a)
15° 0° ï$ (b)
15° 0° ï$
30° ï$ 30° ï$
received power of the signal of interest, b(t), that is to 45° ï$ 45° ï$

be preserved, and an unwanted signal, a(t), which is to 60° ï$ 60° ï$

be rejected, before and after the nulling combination. If 75° ï$ 75° ï$

sj(t) denotes some signal as received at antenna j, then 90° ï$ 90° ï$

the combination of signals received at antennas j and k 105°

ï
ï$ 105°
ï
ï$

can be denoted by: 120°

ï
ï$ 120°
ï
ï$
ï ï
135° ï$ 135° ï$
ï ï

(1) 150°
165° 0 ±180° ï$
ï$ 150°
165° 0 ±180° ï$
ï$

where κ and ϕ, respectively, represent a unitless scaling gain FIGURE 3 The measured gain pattern of the central element, number 1,
and a phase rotation in radians applied in the combination. (blue lines) and one of the peripheral elements, number 2, (red lines).
When intending to form a beam in the direction of the The gain of the peripheral element is deflected inwards toward the
source of s(t), then this phase might be chosen to bring sk(t) center of the array because of the asymmetry of its positioning on the
into alignment with sj(t), and the gain may be determined ground plane. (a) Elevation angle cut at an azimuth of 0°; (b) Azimuth
as a function of the signal-to-noise ratio at each antenna, cut at an elevation angle of 40°.
or simply set to unity. In contrast, when it is intended to
reject s(t) then eiϕ must be chosen to place sk(t) in antiphase
with sj(t) and must be chosen to scale the amplitude of sk(t)
to be exactly equal to that of sj(t). Phase shifter
and attenuator
In this case, we consider the problem of placing a null Controller and interface

in the direction of signal a(t) while preserving signal b(t). Combiner

If the relative received power of a(t) and b(t) at antenna
Power detector
j is taken as a reference, then the rejection of a(t) with
To antenna array
respect to b(t), denoted Ra,b, can be assessed by examining
the change in relative power after the null has been placed:

(2)

FIGURE 4 A custom-built programmable analog phase shifter and

where x denotes the expected value of x. Note also that attenuator pair used for the analog null-steering configuration.
this convention implies that a value of Ra,b greater than
unity corresponds to signal rejection.
a microcontroller board, which also sampled the output
ANALOG NULL STEERING AT RF of the power detector. The attenuators accept a 6-bit
This section explores some of the receiver-side factors control, providing a dynamic range of 30 dB in steps of
that can limit nulling performance. The performance of approximately 0.5 dB, while the phase shifters accept a
an analog RF-combining circuit is examined, wherein the 4-bit control traversing the unit circle in steps of 22.5°.
combining function was implemented using controllable A simplified example of the finite resolution achievable
analog attenuators and phase shifters. using such a phase and gain shifter is shown by the steering
The received signal from each of two antennas, j constellation depicted in FIGURE 5, taking the case of 3-bit
and k, was fed to a custom RF circuit board hosting a gain and phase control and assuming a gain step size of 1
controllable phase shifter and attenuator chips. The dB. Note that the gain is displayed on a logarithmic scale.
output of two of these boards was then combined using Each of the circular markers represents a possible gain
a passive power combiner, filtered by an analog RF and phase coefficient for a received signal, which would
filter, limiting the band to the range 1530–1620 MHz, be used to steer one signal, a, to be approximately equal in
and finally fed to a power detector, which produced a amplitude and in anti-phase with the second signal, b. The
signal voltage that was proportional to the total observed residual misalignment between the signals stems from the
power. The experimental setup is depicted in FIGURE 4. The finite constellation of steering points and results in a reduced
attenuators and phase shifters were controlled digitally via nulling performance, whereby a portion of the interference

FEBRUARY 2016 WWW.GPSWORLD.COM G P S W O R L D 65

|
 90°
signal remains. The relative magnitude of the remaining
interference signal is maximum when the true relative phase 135° 45°
and amplitude of the signals a and b lies equidistant from
the four nearest steering vectors. This is depicted in Figure
5, where the cross marker lies equidistant from the four 8 dB
7
vertices located at the corners of {0°,45°} and {7,8} dB. Note 6
that as the gain is depicted on a logarithmic scale, the relative 4 5
12 3
error is equal for points centered in any of the quadrants. 180° 0°
To investigate the performance of the system, we
broadcast a continuous-wave interference toward the
array, while the signal from one antenna was manipulated
by all possible gain and phase combinations, keeping the
signal from the second antenna at a fixed zero phase shift
and –15 dB attenuation. For each of the 1,024 possible gain 225° 315°
and phase combinations, the power detector was sampled
and logged. A trace of the measured signal rejection as 270°
a function of the gain and phase is depicted in FIGURE 6,
wherein a sharp peak is observable at approximately FIGURE 5 A simplified example of the steering constellation of an
{–15 dB, 210°}, corresponding to the point at which the analog gain and phase shifter, having 3-bit phase and gain control and
unwanted signal is most rejected — in this particular a gain step-size of ~1 dB.
case, to a level of approximately 29 dB.
Estimating the Achievable Rejection Level. In this particular where U denotes a uniform distribution, δϕ denotes the
experiment, because all 1,024 possible gain and phase step size of the phase shifter control and δA denotes the
combinations were examined in a brute-force search, attenuator step size. Note that as κ is in units of amplitude
the signal rejection was not limited by inaccuracies in and δA represents the discrete steps in power gain, which
the estimation of the steering variables κ and ϕ. Rather, corresponds to discrete steps of in amplitude,
it was limited by how accurately the steering variables then the residual error will be distributed over a region
can be applied. A residual error exists between the phase extending in either direction. In this case, if a B-bit
and gain that would perfectly align and null the signal phase shifter is used, then:
and the nearest values of phase and gain that the circuit
can produce. This error is a function of the distribution . (4)
of the true steering parameter and the resolution with
which it is rendered. In this case, as the range and angle From this model, the minimum expected rejection level
to the unwanted signal source is arbitrary and the distance can be estimated as a function of the phase and attenuator
between antenna elements is comparable to the carrier resolution. Considering first the rejection expression
wavelength, then it is reasonable, perhaps, to assume that given by Equation (2), we note that the variation of the
the residual error in the steering parameters is zero mean power signal of interest, b(t), is a function only of the
and uniform over the discrete control steps. To model relative angles between each of a(t) and b(t) and the
this effect, similar to the previous section, the combining antenna array. When the signals are well separated, a
function, inclusive of these errors, can be expressed as: gain of 3 dB is observed on b(t), and when a(t) and
b(t) are located nearby or in exact opposite directions,
then the rejection of a(t) will also reject b(t). As this
power variation is a function of geometry and not of the
particular nulling technique, for simplicity it is assumed
(3) that b(t) experiences no power variation. What remains
is the relative power variation of a(t) with respect to
and δϕ.
To find the minimum expected rejection level, we must
examine the following metric:

66 G P S W O R L D WWW.GPSWORLD.COM FEBRUARY 2016

|
 60

Mean rejection level (dB)

20 50

40
10
Rejection (dB)

30

0 20

10
ï 0
100 ) 0
es 0 12
35 200 gre 0.2 10
30 25 ( de 0.4 8
20 15 300 as e Gain
resolu
0.6 6 io n (bits)
10 5 Ph tion (d 0.8 4 resolu t
Attenuatio 0 B) 1 2 -shifter
n (d B) Phase

FIGURE 6 The measured interference rejection for a broadcast jamming FIGURE 7 Minimum achievable rejection of analog nulling-combiner as
scenario, where a brute-force search through all possible combinations a function of phase-shifter resolution (bits) and attenuator step size
of phase shift and attenuation was conducted. In this case, the (dB).
maximum rejection happens to occur at an attenuation of 16.5 dB and a
phase shift of 225°.

.
(9)
(5)
Inserting the specifications of the experimental setup
used here, we find that the minimum rejection that can
(6) be expected is equal to approximately 14 dB with an
average value equal to 18.8 dB. Further exploring this
where the two variables, eκ and eϕ, respectively represent result, it is possible to predict the minimum performance
the residual errors in amplitude and phase between the that can be achieved given some arbitrary, but finite,
perfect steering vector, and that which can be attained resolution in gain and phase rotation. A portion of the
by the combiner. Examining Equations (3) and (6), it is surface defined by Equation (9) is presented in FIGURE
clear that the minimum rejection will be achieved when 7. One useful application of this result is that it may be
the residual phase error is equal to eϕ = 1/2δϕ and the used by a designer to ensure that the resolution in gain
amplitude mismatch is given by eκ = . Substituting and in phase are commensurate. This can be inferred by
these values yields the minimum expected rejection, as examining the gradient of the surface, noting that optimal
given in Equation (7): choices of gain and phase step size will lie along the line
of steepest gradient of this surface. A flattening of the
surface in one dimension indicates that the performance
. (7) is limited by the other dimension. For example, it can be
seen that an increase in phase resolution beyond 6 bits
yields no improvement in rejection when the gain step
Determination of the average expected rejection size is greater than 0.5 dB.
level requires the averaging of Equation (6) over the
distributions of the two error variables, eκ and eϕ. As these CONCLUSION
errors are assumed to be uniform in this particular case, Early results from this study suggest that the achievable
this reduces to the following: signal rejection using a controlled radiation pattern
GNSS antenna, under ideal conditions, is in excess of
70 dB, and is primarily limited by the accuracy with
(8) which the angle of incidence of the interference can be
estimated. Accounting for typical estimation errors, the
nominal rejection levels of the order of 20 to 40 dB can
which, after some manipulation, admits the closed form be expected. However, it is observed that other aspects
expression of Equation (9): limit the signal rejection performance. In a practical
receiver, these factors stem from component selection

FEBRUARY 2016 WWW.GPSWORLD.COM G P S W O R L D 67

|
 for the signal-combining circuitry. Antenna Arrays” by A. Konovaltsev, D.S. De Lorenzo, A. Hornbostel
For analog combining schemes, this is the resolution and P. Enge in Proceedings of ION GNSS 2008, the 21st International
of the controlled attenuators and phase shifters used. Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation,
The results here attempt to characterize the relationship Savannah, Ga., Sept. 16–19, 2008, pp. 2786–2795.
between the minimum expected performance and the “Navigation Accuracy and Interference Rejection for an Adaptive GPS
component properties. Results suggest that the choice Antenna Array” by D.S. De Lorenzo, J. Rife, P. Enge and D.M. Akos in
of analog combining components should be chosen such Proceedings of ION GNSS 2006, the 19th International Technical Meeting
that the phase and gain resolution are commensurate and of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation, Fort Worth, Texas,
such that resolution in one parameter is not rendered Sept. 26–29, 2006, pp. 763–773.
useless by a lack of resolution in the other. These results “A Novel Interference Suppression Scheme for Global Navigation
may form useful guidelines when designing analog RF Satellite Systems Using Antenna Array” by M.G. Amin and W. Sun in
null-steering antennas. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, Vol. 23, No. 5, May
2005, pp. 999–1012, doi: 10.1109/JSAC.2005.845404.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This article is based, in part, on the paper “Analog and “Wideband Cancellation of Interference in a GPS Receive Array” by R.L.
Digital Nulling Techniques for Multi-Element Antennas Fante and J. Vaccaro in IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic
in GNSS Receivers” presented at ION GNSS+ 2015, the Systems, Vol. 36, No. 2, April 2000, pp. 549–564, doi: 10.1109/7.845241.
28th International Technical Meeting of the Satellite ▪ GNSS Antennas
Division of The Institute of Navigation held in Tampa,
Fla., Sept. 14–18, 2015. “GNSS Antennas: An Introduction to Bandwidth, Gain Pattern,
Polarization, and All That” by G.J.K. Moernaut and D. Orban in GPS
MANUFACTURERS World, Vol. 20, No. 2, February 2009, pp. 42–48. Available on line:
The equipment used in our study included an Agilent, http://gpsworld.com/gnss-systemreceiver-designinnovation-gnss-
now Keysight Technologies (www.keysight.com) antennas-8480/
E8361A PNA network analyzer, Antcom Corporation “A Primer on GPS Antennas” by R.B. Langley in GPS World, Vol. 9, No.
(www.antcom.com) 2DG1215A-MNS-4 GPS L1/L2 7, July 1998, pp. 50–54. Available on line: http://www2.unb.ca/gge/
antennas, an Arduino LLC (www.arduino.cc) Arduino Resources/gpsworld.july98.pdf
Uno microcontroller, a MACOM (www.macom.com)
MAPS-010143 4-bit digital phase shifter, a Skyworks
Solutions, Inc. (www.skyworksinc.com ) SKY12347- JAMES T. CURRAN received a B.E. in electrical and electronic engineering
in 2006 and a Ph.D. in telecommunications in 2010 from the Department
362LF 6-bit digital attenuator and a Tallysman Wireless of Electrical Engineering, University College Cork, Ireland. He worked as
(www.tallysman.com) TW127 in-line amplifier. a senior research engineer with the Position, Location and Navigation
group at the University of Calgary between 2011 and 2013 and is
FURTHER READING currently a grant holder at the Joint Research Center (JRC) of the
European Commission (EC), Ispra, Italy. His main research interests
▪ Authors’ Conference Paper are signal processing, information theory, cryptography and software-
“Analog and Digital Nulling Techniques for Multi-Element Antennas defined radios (SDRs) for GNSS.
in GNSS receivers” by J.T. Curran, M. Bavaro and J. Fortuny in MICHELE BAVARO received his master’s degree in computer science
Proceedings of ION GNSS+ 2015, the 28th International Technical in 2003 from the University of Pisa, Italy. Shortly afterwards, he
Meeting of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation, Tampa, started his work on SDR technologies applied to navigation. First in
Italy, then in The Netherlands and in the United Kingdom, he worked
Fla., Sept. 14–18, 2015, pp. 3249–3261. on several projects directly involved with the design, manufacture,
integration, and test of GNSS equipment and supporting customers
▪ Adaptive GNSS Antennas for Interference Suppression in the development of their applications. Today he is appointed as a
“Advances in the Theory and Implementation of GNSS Antenna Array grant holder at the EC JRC.
Receivers” by P. Arribas, C. Closas, M. Fernández-Prades, M. Cuntz, M. JOAQUIM FORTUNY-GUASCH received the engineering degree in
Meurer and A. Konovaltsev, Chapter 9 in Microwave and Millimeter Wave telecommunications from the Technical University of Catalonia,
Barcelona, Spain, in 1988, and the Dr.- Ing. degree in electrical engineering
Circuits and Systems: Emerging Design, Technologies, and Applications, from the Universität Karlsruhe, Germany, in 2001. Since 1993, he has
edited by A. Georgiadis, H. Rogier, L. Roselli and P. Arcioni and published been working for the EC JRC as a senior scientific officer. He is the head
by Wiley, 2012, pp. 227–273. of the European Microwave Signature Laboratory and leads the JRC
research group on GNSS and wireless communications systems.
“Mitigation of Continuous and Pulsed Radio Interference with GNSS

68 G P S W O R L D WWW.GPSWORLD.COM FEBRUARY 2016

View publication stats

|