A method, system, device and storage medium for site selection and direction selection of a fixed satellite terminal

Abstract

The application provides a fixed satellite terminal site selection and direction selection method, system, device and storage medium, and relates to the technical field of satellite communication. The method comprises the following steps: acquiring topographic data, ephemeris data, meteorological data and engineering constraint conditions of a target area; and generating a plurality of candidate point positions of the fixed satellite terminal in the target area according to the above data; performing direction selection simulation on each candidate point to generate a quantitative score corresponding to the candidate point; determining a comprehensive score of each candidate point based on the quantitative score of each candidate point and in combination with a preset site selection index; and further determining an installation scheme of the fixed satellite terminal in the target area. The application converts the traditional separate serial process into collaborative optimization parallel analysis by constructing a decision model of multi-source data fusion and site selection and direction selection linkage simulation, solves the problem of substandard communication quality caused by disconnection between the two, and improves the communication reliability, environmental adaptability and success rate of engineering deployment of the fixed satellite terminal installation scheme.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of satellite communication technology, and more specifically, to a method, system, device, and storage medium for fixed satellite terminal location and orientation selection. Background Technology

[0002] Satellite communication is widely used in remote areas, emergency rescue, and marine communication due to its wide coverage and lack of geographical limitations. Therefore, the installation site and orientation of fixed satellite terminals directly determine the quality and stability of satellite communication.

[0003] In related technologies, site selection and orientation selection are generally treated as independent processes when installing fixed satellite terminals. Site selection is completed first, and then orientation adjustments are made based on the selected location. However, because site selection and orientation selection are relatively independent and rely heavily on subjective judgment and short-term testing, it is easy to encounter situations where the site selection is qualified but the orientation selection is poor, making it difficult to meet the requirements of high-reliability satellite communication. For example, the installation site may have stable and unobstructed terrain, but the satellite's elevation angle over the sky is generally low, and weather interference is difficult to compensate for, resulting in overall communication performance falling short of expectations. Summary of the Invention

[0004] The problem addressed by this invention is how to improve the accuracy of location and orientation selection for fixed satellite terminals.

[0005] To address the above problems, this invention provides a method, system, device, and storage medium for fixed satellite terminal location and orientation selection.

[0006] In a first aspect, the present invention provides a fixed satellite terminal location and orientation selection method, comprising: Acquire topographic data, ephemeris data, meteorological data, and engineering constraints for the target area; Based on the terrain data, the ephemeris data, the meteorological data, and the engineering constraints, multiple candidate locations for the fixed satellite terminal in the target area are generated; Perform orientation simulation for each candidate point to generate a quantized score corresponding to the candidate point; Based on the quantitative score of each candidate point and combined with preset location selection indicators, a comprehensive score for each candidate point is determined. Based on the comprehensive score of all the candidate points, the installation scheme of the fixed satellite terminal in the target area is determined.

[0007] Optionally, generating multiple candidate locations for a fixed satellite terminal in the target area based on the terrain data, the ephemeris data, the meteorological data, and the engineering constraints includes: Based on the digital elevation model data in the terrain data and the satellite orbit parameters in the ephemeris data, determine the terrain occlusion rate of potential points within the target area; Based on the terrain occlusion rate of the potential points, a first candidate point set is generated; Based on the digital elevation model data and geological hazard risk data in the terrain data, the terrain stability of the points in the first candidate point set is assessed to obtain the average slope and geological stability coefficient of each point in the first candidate point set. A second candidate point set is generated based on the average slope and geological stability coefficient of each point in the first candidate point set; Based on the engineering constraints, determine the construction feasibility score of the points in the second candidate point set; Based on the construction feasibility score of each point in the second candidate point set, a third candidate point set is generated; The points in the third candidate point set are sorted, and the first preset number of points are selected as the candidate points.

[0008] Optionally, generating multiple candidate locations of the fixed satellite terminal in the target area based on the terrain data, the ephemeris data, the meteorological data, and the engineering constraints further includes: If the number of points in the third candidate point set is less than the preset number, the points are expanded according to the preset candidate point expansion strategy until the number of points is greater than or equal to the preset number.

[0009] Optionally, performing a direction selection simulation for each candidate point to generate a quantization score corresponding to the candidate point includes: Based on the ephemeris data, multiple satellites that are compatible with the candidate points for communication are identified, wherein all satellites meet the preset coverage duration conditions and preset signal power. For each of the satellites, determine the azimuth, elevation, and polarization angle of the terminal antenna of the fixed satellite terminal; Direction selection simulation is performed based on the azimuth angle, elevation angle and polarization angle, and regional meteorological compensation is performed in combination with the meteorological data to determine the signal stability index, handover interruption duration index and effective communication duration index of the candidate point. Based on the signal stability index, the handover interruption duration index, and the effective communication duration index, the direction selection score of the candidate point is determined, and the direction selection score is used as the quantization score.

[0010] Optionally, the step of performing direction selection simulation based on the azimuth angle, the elevation angle, and the polarization angle, and combining the meteorological data for regional meteorological compensation, to determine the signal stability index, handover interruption duration index, and effective communication duration index of the candidate point, includes: Based on the rainfall intensity data in the meteorological data, the rain attenuation loss is calculated in combination with the rain attenuation coefficient corresponding to the signal frequency band, and the satellite signal power corresponding to the candidate point is obtained. Based on the azimuth angle, elevation angle, and polarization angle, the simulation terminal antenna follows the dynamic direction selection process of the satellite, and performs satellite switching operation according to the preset satellite switching logic to obtain the change of the satellite signal power within the preset coverage period; based on the change of the satellite signal power, the difference between the maximum and minimum values ​​of the satellite signal power within the preset coverage period is determined; The difference is used as an indicator of signal stability. The total duration during which the satellite signal power is lower than a preset interruption threshold during satellite handover is used as the handover interruption duration indicator. The total duration during which the satellite signal power is higher than a preset effective threshold during satellite handover is used as the effective communication duration indicator.

[0011] Optionally, determining the comprehensive score of each candidate point based on its quantitative score and a preset location index includes: Obtain the preset site selection indicators for the candidate points, including the terrain obstruction rate, the geological stability coefficient, and the construction feasibility score of the candidate points; The terrain obstruction rate, the geological stability coefficient, the construction feasibility score, and the quantitative score of the candidate point are standardized, and then weighted and summed according to the weight values ​​corresponding to the terrain obstruction rate, the geological stability coefficient, the construction feasibility score, and the quantitative score to obtain the comprehensive score of the candidate point.

[0012] Optionally, determining the installation scheme of the fixed satellite terminal in the target area based on the comprehensive score of all the candidate points includes: The candidate points are sorted from high to low according to the comprehensive score to generate a candidate point ranking result; The candidate point ranked first in the candidate point ranking results is taken as the final installation point, and the azimuth, elevation and polarization angle of the terminal antenna corresponding to the final installation point are determined. The azimuth angle, the elevation angle, and the polarization angle are used as direction selection parameters; The installation plan is generated based on the final installation point and the corresponding orientation parameters.

[0013] In a second aspect, the present invention provides a fixed satellite terminal location and direction selection system, comprising: The data acquisition unit is used to acquire topographic data, ephemeris data, meteorological data, and engineering constraints of the target area; The candidate location filtering unit is used to generate multiple candidate locations of the fixed satellite terminal in the target area based on the terrain data, the ephemeris data, the meteorological data, and the engineering constraints. The orientation simulation unit is used to perform orientation simulation for each of the candidate points and generate a quantization score corresponding to the candidate point. The scoring and determination unit is used to determine the comprehensive score of each candidate point based on the quantitative score of each candidate point and in combination with the preset location index. The scheme analysis unit is used to determine the installation scheme of the fixed satellite terminal in the target area based on the comprehensive score of all the candidate points.

[0014] Thirdly, an electronic device according to the present invention includes: a processor and a memory, the memory being used to store a computer program; When the computer program is loaded by the processor, it causes the processor to execute the aforementioned fixed satellite terminal location and orientation method.

[0015] Fourthly, the present invention provides a computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, characterized in that, when the computer program is executed by a processor, it implements the above-described fixed satellite terminal addressing and orientation method.

[0016] The fixed satellite terminal site selection and orientation method, system, equipment, and storage medium of this invention, by acquiring terrain data, ephemeris data, meteorological data, and engineering constraints, constitute a complete input set covering four dimensions: spatial geometry, temporal dynamics, environmental interference, and physical implementation. This collectively defines the complete constraints and optimization space for site selection and orientation. By transforming subjective experience dependence into model calculations and quantitative score comparisons based on terrain data, ephemeris data, and meteorological data, the uncertainty of human judgment and the randomness of short-term testing are fundamentally eliminated. Furthermore, by introducing a comprehensive score, the performance differences between different candidate points can be accurately quantified, thereby ensuring the optimal or near-optimal communication performance of the final installation scheme. Traditional methods only focus on the instantaneous or short-term unobstructed conditions during installation. This invention, by integrating ephemeris data to simulate the entire orbital arc of the satellite and integrating meteorological data to consider long-term climate statistical effects, enables the orientation simulation and comprehensive score to reflect the stability and reliability of the communication link under all-day, all-season conditions. The final determined installation scheme not only satisfies instantaneous communication but also possesses long-term environmental adaptability. Furthermore, engineering constraints are incorporated into the candidate site generation process from the outset, preventing iterative solution iterations due to implementation difficulties later on. Simultaneously, extensive testing and optimization are completed in the virtual orientation simulation phase, significantly reducing the uncertainty and workload of on-site debugging. This results in a shorter deployment cycle, lower resource consumption, and a fundamentally improved first-time installation success rate.

[0017] In summary, this invention transforms the traditionally separate serial process into a collaborative optimization parallel analysis by constructing a decision model that integrates multi-source data fusion and location and orientation selection simulation. This effectively solves the problem of substandard communication quality caused by the disconnect between the two processes, thereby significantly improving the overall communication reliability, environmental adaptability, and engineering deployment success rate of the fixed satellite terminal installation scheme. Attached Figure Description

[0018] Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating the fixed satellite terminal location and orientation selection method in an embodiment of the present invention. Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of the fixed satellite terminal addressing and direction selection system in an embodiment of the present invention; Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of an electronic device in an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0019] To make the above-mentioned objects, features, and advantages of the present invention more apparent and understandable, specific embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Although some embodiments of the present invention are shown in the drawings, it should be understood that the present invention can be implemented in various forms and should not be construed as limited to the embodiments set forth herein. Rather, these embodiments are provided to provide a more thorough and complete understanding of the present invention. It should be understood that the accompanying drawings and embodiments of the present invention are for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to limit the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0020] It should be understood that the various steps described in the method embodiments of the present invention may be performed in different orders and / or in parallel. Furthermore, the method embodiments may include additional steps and / or omit the steps shown. The scope of the present invention is not limited in this respect.

[0021] The term "comprising" and its variations as used herein are open-ended, meaning "including but not limited to"; the term "based on" means "at least partially based on"; the term "one embodiment" means "at least one embodiment"; the term "another embodiment" means "at least one additional embodiment"; the term "some embodiments" means "at least some embodiments"; and the term "optionally" means "optional embodiments". Definitions of other terms will be given in the following description. It should be noted that the concepts of "first," "second," etc., mentioned in this invention are used only to distinguish different devices, modules, or units, and are not intended to limit the order of functions performed by these devices, modules, or units or their interdependencies.

[0022] It should be noted that the terms "a" and "a plurality of" used in this invention are illustrative rather than restrictive. Those skilled in the art should understand that, unless otherwise expressly indicated in the context, they should be understood as "one or more".

[0023] The names of the messages or information exchanged between the multiple devices in the embodiments of the present invention are for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to limit the scope of these messages or information.

[0024] It should be noted that the information (including but not limited to user device information, user personal information, etc.), data (including but not limited to data used for analysis, data stored, data displayed, etc.) and signals involved in this application are all authorized by the user or fully authorized by all parties. The collection, use and processing of related data must comply with the relevant laws, regulations and standards of the relevant countries and regions, and corresponding operation portals are provided for users to choose to authorize or refuse.

[0025] Combination Figure 1 As shown, an embodiment of the present invention provides a fixed satellite terminal location and direction selection method, comprising: Acquire topographic data, ephemeris data, meteorological data, and engineering constraints for the target area.

[0026] Specifically, the terrain data is digital elevation model (DEM) data, used to read the elevation of the points and calculate terrain shading and slope; the ephemeris data is the publicly available orbital parameters of the target satellite constellation, such as the satellite's right ascension, declination, and orbital altitude, used to calculate the satellite's transit trajectory and relative position; the meteorological data is long-term observation data of the candidate point's area, with rainfall intensity data as the core, used to construct a regionalized meteorological compensation model to calculate rain attenuation loss; the engineering constraints specifically include the available area of ​​the site, the distance to the nearest paved road, and the distance to the nearest power supply interface, and these conditions are quantified as the basis for calculating the construction feasibility score.

[0027] Based on the terrain data, ephemeris data, meteorological data, and engineering constraints, multiple candidate locations for fixed satellite terminals in the target area are generated.

[0028] Specifically, a three-level quantitative screening model generates a candidate set of 5-10 locations. First, a first-level screening (terrain obstruction quantification calculation) is performed: based on digital elevation model (DEM) data and ephemeris data, the satellite signal obstruction rate of each potential location is calculated, and locations meeting the criteria are retained based on a set obstruction rate threshold. Second-level screening (terrain stability) calculates the average slope of the location based on DEM data and combines this with geological hazard risk data to calculate the location's stability coefficient; locations meeting the criteria are retained based on set slope and stability coefficient thresholds. Third-level screening (construction feasibility) quantifies and scores the locations based on three dimensions: site area, accessibility, and power supply conditions, obtaining a total construction feasibility score; locations meeting the criteria are retained based on a set scoring threshold. The locations that pass all screenings are ranked to form an initial candidate set. If the number of candidate points is less than expected, an expansion strategy is initiated, including: relaxing the obstruction rate threshold, lowering the construction feasibility score threshold, and expanding the geographical search area, until a sufficient number of candidate points are obtained.

[0029] Perform orientation simulation for each candidate point to generate a quantized score corresponding to the candidate point.

[0030] Specifically, for each candidate point, the effective coverage duration and predicted signal power of each satellite in the constellation at that point are calculated. Based on the set duration and power thresholds, a subset of satellites constituting the optimal satellite set is selected. For each satellite in the optimal satellite set, the azimuth, elevation, and polarization angles required for the terminal antenna to align with that satellite are calculated. Regional meteorological data is used to compensate for signal propagation loss. The dynamic process of the terminal switching satellites within the optimal satellite set based on signal conditions is simulated. Three key performance indicators are extracted from the simulation: signal fluctuation amplitude, total handover interruption duration, and daily effective communication duration. Based on these three performance indicators, a signal stability score, a handover performance score, and a meteorological adaptability score are calculated using a set scoring function. These three scores are then summed to obtain the quantitative score of the candidate point's orientation selection effect.

[0031] Based on the quantitative score of each candidate point and combined with preset location selection indicators, the comprehensive score of each candidate point is determined.

[0032] Specifically, a comprehensive evaluation system is constructed that includes site selection indicators and orientation indicators, and weights are assigned to each indicator, with the weights adjustable according to the application scenario. The original values ​​of each indicator, including occlusion rate, stability coefficient, orientation effect score, and construction feasibility score, are standardized to eliminate differences in dimensions. The standardized values ​​of each indicator for each candidate point are multiplied by their corresponding weights and then summed to obtain the comprehensive score of the candidate point.

[0033] Based on the comprehensive score of all the candidate points, the installation scheme of the fixed satellite terminal in the target area is determined.

[0034] Specifically, all candidate points are sorted in descending order according to their comprehensive scores; the candidate point ranked first is determined as the preferred installation scheme, and its geographical location information and corresponding antenna pointing parameters are output; the other candidate points ranked higher are output as alternative schemes.

[0035] Optionally, generating multiple candidate locations for a fixed satellite terminal in the target area based on the terrain data, the ephemeris data, the meteorological data, and the engineering constraints includes: Based on the digital elevation model data in the terrain data and the satellite orbit parameters in the ephemeris data, determine the terrain occlusion rate of potential points within the target area; Based on the terrain occlusion rate of the potential points, a first candidate point set is generated; Based on the digital elevation model data and geological hazard risk data in the terrain data, the terrain stability of the points in the first candidate point set is assessed to obtain the average slope and geological stability coefficient of each point in the first candidate point set. A second candidate point set is generated based on the average slope and geological stability coefficient of each point in the first candidate point set; Based on the engineering constraints, determine the construction feasibility score of the points in the second candidate point set; Based on the construction feasibility score of each point in the second candidate point set, a third candidate point set is generated; The points in the third candidate point set are sorted, and the first preset number of points are selected as the candidate points.

[0036] Specifically, the process begins by inputting the latitude and longitude coordinates and altitude of the potential location, as well as the satellite's orbital parameters. Next, the surrounding 360-degree radius is discretized around the location to be evaluated, with directions divided according to a fixed azimuth step (e.g., 1 degree). In each specific direction, digital elevation model data is read to calculate the altitude of the highest point within a certain distance range in that azimuth. Then, based on the relative elevation difference and horizontal distance between this highest point and the location to be evaluated, the elevation angle of the terrain obstruction line in that direction is calculated using the arctangent function. Simultaneously, based on the satellite's real-time or predicted ephemeris, the actual elevation angle of the satellite relative to the location when it reaches that azimuth within a set time period is calculated using a spatial geometric model. Finally, statistics are compiled for all azimuth angles and the entire time period to calculate the proportion of time during which the actual satellite elevation angle is lower than the elevation angle of the terrain obstruction line; this proportion is the terrain obstruction rate of that location.

[0037] Simultaneously, a qualified threshold for terrain occlusion rate is pre-set. The calculated occlusion rate of all potential points is compared with this threshold one by one. Only points with occlusion rates not exceeding the set threshold are selected and aggregated to form the first candidate point set. For each point in the first candidate point set, the elevation values ​​of the neighboring area centered on the point grid are extracted from the digital elevation model data. A specific difference algorithm is applied to calculate the rate of change of surface slope at that point in the east-west (longitude) and north-south (latitude) directions. Combining the rates of change in both directions, the average ground slope value of the area where the point is located is obtained through geometric conversion. In addition, landslide hazard risk level and debris flow hazard risk level data of the area where the point is located are obtained from an external database. Based on the pre-set quantitative model, these two geological hazard risk levels are substituted into the formula for comprehensive calculation to obtain a value between 0 and 1, which serves as a coefficient characterizing the geological stability of the point; the higher the value, the more stable the geological conditions.

[0038] An upper threshold for the average slope and a lower threshold for the geological stability coefficient are pre-defined. For each point in the first candidate set, its average slope is simultaneously checked to ensure it is less than or equal to the upper threshold, and its geological stability coefficient is greater than or equal to the lower threshold. Only points that simultaneously satisfy both stability constraints are retained, forming the second candidate set. For each point in the second candidate set, its construction feasibility is evaluated from three quantifiable engineering dimensions. The first dimension is site conditions, calculated as a site area score based on the size of the flat area available for equipment installation and operation at the point. The second dimension is traffic conditions, calculated as a traffic accessibility score based on the straight-line distance from the point to the nearest passable paved road, with higher scores awarded for closer locations. The third dimension is power supply conditions, calculated as a power supply condition score based on the straight-line distance from the point to the nearest accessible permanent power supply node, again with higher scores awarded for closer locations. Finally, the scores from these three dimensions are summed to obtain the overall construction feasibility score for the point.

[0039] A passing score for the overall construction feasibility score is set. The overall construction feasibility score of each point in the second candidate point set is compared with this passing score. Only points with an overall score not lower than the passing score are selected, and these points form the third candidate point set. All points in the third candidate point set are sorted according to a composite rule of prioritizing those with lower terrain obstruction rates and then those with higher geological stability coefficients, generating a priority list. Starting from the top of this sorted list, a pre-set number of points are selected sequentially as the final set of candidate points for subsequent in-depth analysis. If, after the above multi-level screening, the number of points meeting all conditions is still less than the preset number, an expansion strategy is automatically executed. The expansion strategy is executed sequentially, including: appropriately relaxing the terrain obstruction rate screening threshold to include more points; appropriately lowering the passing score for the construction feasibility score; or expanding the geographical search range within the target area and restarting the entire screening process until a sufficient number of candidate points are obtained.

[0040] In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the specific steps include: First-level screening: terrain occlusion quantification calculation, based on digital elevation model (DEM) data (publicly available online data, with directly readable altitude data) and the orbital parameters of the target satellite constellation (publicly available online data), calculating the satellite signal occlusion rate for each potential location, and screening locations with acceptable occlusion rates. Specifically, S1: Inputting potential location coordinates. ,in For longitude, For latitude, Altitude; orbital parameters of the target satellite constellation. S2: Obstruction angle calculation: Within a 360° range around the point, the azimuth angle is divided into 1° increments. Calculate the maximum elevation angle of the terrain at each azimuth angle. : ; In the formula, This refers to the elevation of the highest point within a 0-5km radius of the location at that azimuth angle. This is the horizontal distance from the highest point to the location (unit: m).

[0041] Calculate the difference between the geocentric angle of the point and the right ascension of the satellite. Used for calculating elevation angle: ; In the formula, Right ascension of the satellite (publicly available data online, updated in real time). This refers to the geographical latitude of the location (unit: °, North latitude is positive, South latitude is negative). If... ,according to Correction.

[0042] Calculate the satellite's elevation angle at this point. Based on satellite ephemeris data, a spatial geometric model is used to calculate any time interval. The satellite's elevation angle relative to the point: ; In the formula, The radius of the Earth is taken as 6371 km. The altitude of the satellite orbit. Satellite declination (unit: rad).

[0043] S3: Obstruction rate calculation, statistics during satellite transit time (00:00-24:00 daily). The percentage of time spent at that location is the occlusion rate. : ; In the formula, This is an indicator function (it takes the value 1 if the condition is met, and 0 otherwise). (Time step) (Azimuth step size).

[0044] S4: Filtering criteria, retaining occlusion rate The location (the threshold can be adjusted according to the scenario; for low-orbit satellite scenarios, it can be relaxed to) ).

[0045] Secondary screening: Quantitative assessment of terrain stability, specifically including: A1: Slope calculation (which can also be directly read using GIS software), calculating the average slope of the area (100m×100m) where the point is located using DEM data. The core idea is to first calculate the elevation change rate in the longitude (X-axis) and latitude (Y-axis) directions using the DEM neighborhood difference method. , Then, substitute the values ​​into the slope formula to solve, as follows: The spatial resolution of the DEM data is... (Unit: m, e.g., 30m), data format is raster matrix, and the elevation value of each raster is denoted as... ( For line numbers, (Column number).

[0046] Neighborhood grid selection: Centered on the grid where the target point is located. Nine 3×3 neighborhood grids were selected, and their distribution is shown in Table 1. Table 1 Neighborhood Grid Distribution Table

[0047] Elevation change rate calculation (using the third-order Sobel difference method, with optimal noise resistance), longitude direction (X-axis, east is positive, corresponding to grid column number). Increasing): ; Latitude direction (Y-axis, north is positive, corresponding to grid column number) Decreasing): ; In the formula, This represents the elevation value of the corresponding raster cell in a 3×3 neighborhood. The spatial resolution of the DEM is (m).

[0048] Average slope calculation: ; A2: Calculation of geological stability coefficient, combined with regional geological hazard risk data (landslide risk level) Debris flow risk level (Originated from publicly available online channels), constructing stability coefficients : ; In the formula, , The value range is 1-5 (1 is the lowest risk, and 5 is the highest risk). The value ranges from 0 to 1, and the closer it is to 1, the better the stability.

[0049] A3: Site selection, retaining average slope And stability coefficient The location.

[0050] Three-level screening: quantitative assessment of construction feasibility, specifically including: constructing a construction feasibility score F from three dimensions: site area, traffic accessibility, and power supply conditions, with a maximum score of 100 points.

[0051] Field area score (30 points): The location can utilize flat area. (Unit: m²): The minimum usable area must be ≥10m², otherwise... ; Traffic accessibility score (30 points): Distance from the location to the nearest paved road (Unit: km): ; Power supply condition score (40 points): Distance from the point to the nearest power supply interface (Unit: km): ; Total score for construction feasibility: ; Screening criteria: retain construction feasibility score The points are divided.

[0052] In this optional embodiment, a multi-level progressive screening process—including terrain obstruction rate screening, terrain stability assessment, and construction feasibility scoring—is employed. Ultimately, a candidate site set is generated based on a comprehensive ranking and expansion strategy, achieving fully automated optimization across all dimensions, from communication performance and environmental safety to engineering implementation. This transforms the traditional experience-based discrete site selection into a quantifiable, repeatable, and fault-tolerant systematic analysis process. It ensures that each generated candidate site meets basic visibility requirements while also possessing a sound geological safety foundation and on-site construction convenience. This provides a high-quality input set for subsequent accurate orientation selection and scheme decision-making, significantly improving the reliability and efficiency of the overall planning.

[0053] Optionally, generating multiple candidate locations of the fixed satellite terminal in the target area based on the terrain data, the ephemeris data, the meteorological data, and the engineering constraints further includes: If the number of points in the third candidate point set is less than the preset number, the points are expanded according to the preset candidate point expansion strategy until the number of points is greater than or equal to the preset number.

[0054] Specifically, the terrain occlusion screening criteria are adjusted by increasing the original occlusion rate qualification threshold by a set percentage (e.g., 5%). Then, based on this relaxed threshold, the terrain occlusion rate of potential points within the target area that have not yet been selected is recalculated and screened, and newly selected points are added to the candidate set. If the number of candidate points is still insufficient after the previous expansion, the construction feasibility screening criteria are further adjusted by decreasing the original construction feasibility score qualification threshold by a set score (e.g., 10 points). Then, based on this reduced threshold, points that have passed terrain and stability screening but were previously eliminated due to insufficient construction scores are re-evaluated and screened, and points meeting the new scoring criteria are added to the candidate set. Finally, if the number of candidate points is still insufficient after the above two steps, the geographical search range within the target area is expanded, for example, from 5 kilometers to 10 kilometers. Within this expanded area, the complete multi-level screening process from terrain occlusion rate screening, terrain stability assessment to construction feasibility scoring is re-executed to obtain more qualified points until the total number of candidate points reaches or exceeds the preset number. By gradually and conditionally relaxing the screening criteria and expanding the spatial scope, a sufficient number of candidate solutions can be generated for subsequent optimization decisions, while ensuring the basic quality of candidate sites.

[0055] In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the points that have passed the three-level screening are sorted by occlusion rate from low to high and stability coefficient from high to low, and the top 10 are selected as candidate points. If there are fewer than 10 points that pass the screening, an expansion strategy is initiated. The expansion strategy specifically includes: First, increasing the occlusion rate threshold by 5% (e.g., adjusting from 15% to 20%), re-screening, and supplementing candidate points; Second, if still insufficient, decreasing the construction feasibility score threshold by 10 points (e.g., adjusting from 60 points to 50 points), and screening again; Third, if the final number of candidate points is still less than 5, expanding the site selection range (from the original search radius of 5km to 10km), and repeating the above screening process to ensure that the candidate set has no less than 5 points.

[0056] In this optional embodiment, a flexible and fault-tolerant automated site selection closed loop is constructed through a three-step progressive candidate point expansion strategy: relaxing the occlusion rate threshold, reducing construction scoring requirements, and expanding the geographical search range. When there are insufficient qualified points under strict screening, the system can first relax the occlusion rate requirement, which has a relatively direct but partially compromising impact on communication quality; secondly, relax the cost constraints at the engineering implementation level; and finally initiate the spatial range expansion, which has a higher computational cost. In this way, while ensuring the basic geological safety and construction feasibility of the candidate points, the system can intelligently and orderly discover suboptimal but usable alternative locations. This effectively solves the problem of planning failure caused by the lack of available points in complex or harsh environments in traditional methods, and significantly improves the robustness, scenario adaptability, and deliverability of the final solution in the site selection process.

[0057] Optionally, performing a direction selection simulation for each candidate point to generate a quantization score corresponding to the candidate point includes: Based on the ephemeris data, multiple satellites that are compatible with the candidate points for communication are identified, wherein all satellites meet the preset coverage duration conditions and preset signal power. For each of the satellites, determine the azimuth, elevation, and polarization angle of the terminal antenna of the fixed satellite terminal; Direction selection simulation is performed based on the azimuth angle, elevation angle and polarization angle, and regional meteorological compensation is performed in combination with the meteorological data to determine the signal stability index, handover interruption duration index and effective communication duration index of the candidate point. Based on the signal stability index, the handover interruption duration index, and the effective communication duration index, the direction selection score of the candidate point is determined, and the direction selection score is used as the quantization score.

[0058] Specifically, firstly, based on satellite ephemeris data, the trajectory of each satellite in the constellation relative to the candidate point is simulated and calculated over the next 24 hours. The cumulative time that each satellite maintains an elevation angle no lower than a set minimum value (e.g., 10 degrees) above the candidate point without being momentarily blocked by terrain is counted as the effective coverage duration of that satellite. Simultaneously, based on satellite transmit power, antenna gain, and a model of signal propagation loss in free space, the theoretical signal power of the satellite reaching the candidate point is calculated. Then, two screening thresholds are set: firstly, the effective coverage duration must meet a preset standard, such as no less than 4 hours per day; secondly, the signal power must exceed a preset threshold, such as no less than -120 dBm. Only satellites that simultaneously meet both conditions are selected, forming the optimal set of satellites serving the candidate point.

[0059] For each satellite selected in the optimal satellite set, the physical pointing parameters that the terminal antenna installed at that candidate point must adjust to align with that satellite need to be precisely calculated. These parameters include three angles: azimuth (0 degrees north, increasing clockwise to 360 degrees), elevation (0 degrees horizontally, 90 degrees vertically), and polarization (rotation of the antenna feed direction to match the satellite signal polarization for optimal signal reception). In one embodiment of this invention, these three angle values ​​can be calculated using a spherical geometric model between the satellite and the ground station. After obtaining the pointing parameters of all preferred satellites, the system simulates the dynamic tracking process of the terminal in actual operation. The simulation follows a preset switching logic: when the elevation angle of the communicating satellite is too low or the signal strength attenuates to the switching threshold, the terminal automatically selects another satellite with the strongest current signal from its optimal satellite set for tracking and switching. Throughout the simulation, long-term meteorological data (mainly rainfall intensity data) of the candidate point's region is dynamically incorporated to correct for additional signal loss during atmospheric propagation—a process known as meteorological compensation. Through this high-fidelity dynamic simulation, the system can extract three key quantitative performance indicators: first, signal stability, characterizing the range of signal strength fluctuations; second, handover interruption duration, used to calculate the total time communication links are below the available threshold during all satellite handovers; and third, effective communication duration, used to calculate the total time within a 24-hour period when signal strength is above the reliable communication threshold.

[0060] Finally, the three performance indicators obtained from the simulation are converted into individual scores using a pre-defined scoring function model. Specifically, the signal stability indicator is mapped to a signal stability score, with lower scores indicating smaller signal fluctuations; the handover interruption duration indicator is mapped to a handover performance score, with higher scores indicating shorter total interruption time; and the effective communication duration indicator is mapped to a weather adaptability score, with higher scores indicating longer effective communication time. Finally, the scores from these three dimensions are summed to obtain a total score, which is the direction selection performance score for the candidate point, serving as the final quantitative score for its direction selection performance, with a maximum score of 100 points.

[0061] In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, orientation analysis is performed on each candidate point. The orientation performance score for each candidate point is obtained through a four-step process: optimal satellite selection, antenna parameter calculation, dynamic effect simulation, and quantitative scoring. (100 points total). Based on the satellite constellation type (Low Earth Orbit / Medium Earth Orbit / High Earth Orbit), select the subset of satellites with the best communication compatibility with the candidate points. Specifically: B1: Satellite coverage duration calculation, for each satellite in the constellation... Calculate its effective coverage duration at candidate points each day. Effective coverage is defined as a satellite elevation angle ≥ 10° and an obstruction rate ≤ 5% ( ; In the formula, For satellite At any moment The angle of elevation, For satellite At any moment Instantaneous occlusion rate, .

[0062] B2: Satellite signal strength prediction, based on a free-space propagation model, calculates satellite... Signal power to candidate point : ; In the formula, Satellite transmit power (unit: dBm); Satellite transmitting antenna gain (unit: dBi); The terminal receiving antenna gain (unit: dBi). For free space propagation loss, , This represents the straight-line distance between the satellite and the candidate point (in meters). The signal wavelength (unit: m); For other losses (rain attenuation, atmospheric loss, etc., we take 5dB for now, and will adjust it in the subsequent meteorological compensation).

[0063] B3: The optimal satellite set has been determined, and selection is carried out to meet the requirements. daily The satellites constitute the optimal satellite set for this candidate point. ( If there are fewer than 3, the screening threshold is increased to ensure at least 2.

[0064] In this embodiment, for each satellite in the optimal satellite set, the azimuth angle, elevation angle, and polarization angle of the terminal antenna are calculated to provide reference parameters for dynamic orientation selection.

[0065] Specifically: azimuth angle : The horizontal angle of the satellite relative to the candidate point (0° is due north, increasing clockwise): ; In the formula, The latitude of the candidate point For satellite declination, , Let the right ascension of satellite k be... The longitude of the candidate point is given; if the calculation result is negative, add 360°.

[0066] Angle of elevation The vertical angle of the satellite relative to the candidate point (0° at the horizon and 90° at the zenith) is calculated using the satellite overpass elevation angle calculation formula in 5.1.1, taking the average elevation angle during the satellite coverage period. ; In the formula, For satellite The set of effective coverage time periods.

[0067] polarization angle The angle between the antenna polarization direction and the satellite signal polarization direction (linearly polarized signal): ; Among them, the circular polarization signal is when No adjustments are needed.

[0068] In this optional embodiment, an automated closed-loop process—optimal satellite set selection, high-precision antenna parameter calculation, dynamic handover simulation with weather compensation, and multi-dimensional performance index quantification scoring—transforms the traditional direction selection process, which relies on static pointing calculation and post-event field testing, into a precise performance prediction based on multi-source data fusion and dynamic behavior simulation. This process customizes an optimal subset of communication satellites for each candidate point, accurately calculates antenna parameters, simulates real handover logic, and compensates for regional meteorological influences. Ultimately, it outputs a quantified score that comprehensively reflects signal stability, handover reliability, and weather adaptability. This allows for an objective and comprehensive assessment and comparison of the potential communication quality at different locations before installation, fundamentally changing the subjectivity and lag of direction selection decisions and laying a core data-driven foundation for achieving optimal and reliable communication upon terminal installation.

[0069] Optionally, the step of performing direction selection simulation based on the azimuth angle, the elevation angle, and the polarization angle, and combining the meteorological data for regional meteorological compensation, to determine the signal stability index, handover interruption duration index, and effective communication duration index of the candidate point, includes: Based on the rainfall intensity data in the meteorological data, the rain attenuation loss is calculated in combination with the rain attenuation coefficient corresponding to the signal frequency band, and the satellite signal power corresponding to the candidate point is obtained. Based on the azimuth angle, elevation angle, and polarization angle, the simulation terminal antenna follows the dynamic direction selection process of the satellite, and performs satellite switching operation according to the preset satellite switching logic to obtain the change of the satellite signal power within the preset coverage period; based on the change of the satellite signal power, the difference between the maximum and minimum values ​​of the satellite signal power within the preset coverage period is determined; The difference is used as an indicator of signal stability. The total duration during which the satellite signal power is lower than a preset interruption threshold during satellite handover is used as the handover interruption duration indicator. The total duration during which the satellite signal power is higher than a preset effective threshold during satellite handover is used as the effective communication duration indicator.

[0070] Specifically, long-term observed rainfall intensity data for the candidate location area is used as input. Based on the specific frequency band planned for the satellite communication link, specific coefficients from an internationally accepted rain attenuation calculation model for that frequency band are selected. The rainfall intensity data is then substituted into the model to calculate the additional power attenuation experienced by the electromagnetic wave signal when passing through the typical rainfall environment of that region—the rain attenuation loss. Finally, this rain attenuation loss value is subtracted from the theoretical received power of the satellite signal to obtain a more realistic satellite signal received power value that has been corrected for regional climate characteristics.

[0071] A high-precision time-series simulation environment is then constructed, with the simulation progressing in second- or sub-second steps to simulate the continuous operation of the terminal antenna over a 24-hour period. At each simulation moment, the system dynamically calculates the azimuth, elevation, and polarization angles of the antenna based on the satellite's real-time ephemeris position and pre-calculated antenna pointing parameters, and updates the link's geometry accordingly. Simultaneously, the simulation strictly adheres to preset switching rules: continuously monitoring the signal strength and elevation angle of the currently serving satellite, and immediately triggering a switching process when any parameter falls below a set threshold. During switching, the system automatically selects the next satellite with the best overall conditions from a pre-selected optimal satellite list as the target, and simulates the antenna rotating to the angle required to align with the new satellite. Through this full-process dynamic simulation, the complete curve of the corrected signal power changing over time is recorded. After completing the full-day dynamic simulation and obtaining the signal power change curve, statistical analysis is performed on the curve data. The highest peak and lowest trough of signal power during the entire simulation period are identified. The arithmetic difference between these two extreme values ​​is calculated, expressed in decibels. This value is defined as the signal fluctuation amplitude of the communication link at the candidate point, and is directly used as the core quantitative indicator for evaluating its signal stability. The smaller the fluctuation amplitude, the more stable the signal.

[0072] Furthermore, this embodiment, based on dynamic simulation, specifically performs fine-grained analysis on each satellite handover event, setting a signal power threshold value to characterize a complete communication interruption. Within the time window corresponding to each handover process, the signal power at each moment is checked with high temporal resolution. When the signal power is lower than the aforementioned interruption threshold, communication is determined to be interrupted at that moment. The duration corresponding to all moments determined to be in an interrupted state within all handover event windows is accumulated, and their sum is used as the total handover interruption duration index. This index directly quantifies the time during which communication service may be completely lost due to satellite handover. By setting a minimum signal power threshold value to characterize the reliable service that the communication link can provide, the signal power is checked moment by moment on the simulated 24-hour timeline. When the signal power is higher than or equal to this effective threshold, communication is determined to be effective at that moment. The duration corresponding to all moments determined to be in an effective state throughout the day is accumulated, and their sum is used as the single-day effective communication duration index. This index comprehensively reflects the absolute length of time that the candidate point can maintain reliable communication after experiencing satellite handover and weather attenuation.

[0073] In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the simulation terminal follows the dynamic process of switching to the optimal satellite at the candidate point, and combines meteorological data to perform signal compensation and evaluate the stability of the direction selection.

[0074] Specifically: C1: Regionalized meteorological compensation model: based on meteorological observation data (rainfall intensity) of the candidate point's region. ), correcting signal loss (rainfall intensity data obtained from public sources); rain attenuation compensation: ,in , Frequency correlation coefficient (C-band: , Ku band: , ); Corrected signal power: ,in , This includes additional losses caused by wind load and atmospheric refraction (empirical values ​​are taken as 2-5 dB). (Among these, rain attenuation compensation is mainly considered; other additional losses caused by wind load and atmospheric refraction are directly calculated using empirical values.) C2: Signal Fluctuation Amplitude Indicator The difference between the maximum and minimum corrected signal power during the effective coverage period: ; C3: Satellite handover logic: When the current communication satellite... When the elevation angle is ≤8° or the signal power is ≤-125dBm, switch to the satellite with the highest signal power and elevation angle ≥10° in the optimal satellite set. Switching duration Keep it within 500ms; C4: Switching interrupt duration metrics The total duration during all satellite handover processes where the signal power is below the interruption threshold, defined as signal power ≤ -130dBm, in seconds (s): based on satellite signal strength prediction. In addition, the satellite handover logic is used to extract the start and end times of all satellite handover events, thus obtaining a set of handover time periods. ,in This represents the number of times the device can be switched per day.

[0075] For each switching period Iterate through all time steps within that time period. Determine signal power Does the interrupt condition meet? In the formula, This is an interrupt indicator function (recorded as 1 if the condition is met, otherwise 0). The interrupt duration for each switching period is the sum of the time steps in which the indicator function value is 1 within that period. The total interrupt duration is the sum of the interrupt durations for all switching periods. In the formula, (Time step).

[0076] C5: Effective Communication Duration The total duration during which the signal power is higher than the effective threshold within a 24-hour period, where effective is defined as signal power. -120dBm, unit: hours (h).

[0077] Traverse all time steps of a single day Determine the signal power at each time step. Does it meet the valid conditions? In the formula, A valid indicator function is defined as 1 if the condition is met, and 0 otherwise. The valid communication duration is the sum of the time steps in which the indicator function value is 1, converted to hours. In the formula, Dividing by 3600 converts seconds to hours.

[0078] C6: Quantitative scoring of direction selection effect, constructing a three-dimensional scoring system of signal stability + switching performance + meteorological adaptability, and calculating the direction selection effect score. .

[0079] Specifically, this includes: signal stability score (40 points): ;in, Unit: dB, if A perfect score of 40 points is awarded. Switch performance score (30 points): ;in, Unit: s, if A time of ≤10 seconds earns a perfect score of 30 points. Weather adaptability score (30 points) ;in, Unit: h, if A score of 30 points is awarded for 20 hours. Total score for orientation performance: .

[0080] In this optional embodiment, by embedding the regionalized meteorological compensation model, especially the rain attenuation loss calculation depth, into the dynamic direction selection simulation process, and extracting three core indicators—signal fluctuation amplitude, total handover interruption duration, and effective communication duration—based on high-precision time step simulation, a microscopic, quantitative, and objective evaluation of the satellite communication performance of candidate points under actual complex climatic environments is achieved. This not only transforms the weather impacts (such as rainfall) that are traditionally difficult to quantify accurately into calculable signal power correction values, but also fully reproduces the real scenario of the terminal dynamically switching between satellites through simulation. This allows for the accurate measurement of the three key dimensions that determine user experience: signal stability, handover reliability, and service availability, providing accurate multi-dimensional data support based on real-environment simulation for the final direction selection decision.

[0081] Optionally, determining the comprehensive score of each candidate point based on its quantitative score and a preset location index includes: Obtain the preset site selection indicators for the candidate points, including the terrain obstruction rate, the geological stability coefficient, and the construction feasibility score of the candidate points; The terrain obstruction rate, the geological stability coefficient, the construction feasibility score, and the quantitative score of the candidate point are standardized, and then weighted and summed according to the weight values ​​corresponding to the terrain obstruction rate, the geological stability coefficient, the construction feasibility score, and the quantitative score to obtain the comprehensive score of the candidate point.

[0082] Specifically, a complete set of quantitative evaluation indicators is extracted for each candidate point from the site selection screening and orientation simulation analysis results. These preset site selection indicators mainly include four items: the first is the terrain obstruction rate, which reflects the communication line-of-sight conditions. This value is calculated through previous obstruction analysis and is a negative indicator where a smaller value is better. The second is the geological stability coefficient, which reflects the geological safety conditions. This value is calculated through a geological risk assessment model and is a positive indicator where a larger value is better. The third is the construction feasibility score, which reflects the engineering implementation conditions. This value is quantified through multi-dimensional engineering constraints and is a positive indicator where a larger value is better. The fourth is the quantitative score reflecting communication performance, i.e., the orientation effect score. This value is obtained through dynamic orientation simulation analysis and is also a positive indicator where a larger value is better. These four indicators together constitute a complete input set for evaluating the overall merits of candidate points.

[0083] Furthermore, since the four indicators differ in their dimensions, numerical ranges, and directions of advantage / disadvantage, they cannot be directly compared and synthesized. Therefore, the values ​​of the same indicator for all candidate points are normalized, converting them into relative values ​​between 0 and 1. For positive indicators such as the geological stability coefficient, construction feasibility score, and quantitative score, the calculation method is to subtract the minimum value among all candidate points from the original value of a candidate point, and then divide by the difference between the maximum and minimum values ​​among all candidate points. For negative indicators such as terrain obstruction rate, the opposite calculation method is used: subtract the original value of the candidate point from the maximum value among all candidate points, and then divide by the difference between the maximum and minimum values. After this step, all indicators are converted into a unified relative score, where a larger value represents better performance. Subsequently, the system assigns a preset weight value to each standardized indicator. The weight configuration can be adjusted according to different application scenarios. For example, in low-Earth orbit satellite communication scenarios, the weight of the quantitative score is increased to emphasize dynamic communication performance. Finally, the comprehensive score for each candidate point is calculated by multiplying the standardized values ​​of the four indicators of the candidate point by their respective preset weights, and then summing the four products. The sum is the final comprehensive score of the candidate point. This score comprehensively and evenly reflects the overall performance of the candidate point in the four dimensions of communication line of sight, geological safety, construction feasibility, and dynamic communication quality.

[0084] In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, a comprehensive evaluation system of site selection indicators and orientation indicators is constructed, and combined with scenario-based weight configuration, the comprehensive score of candidate points is calculated and ranked to generate the final solution. First, four core indicators are selected, divided into site selection and orientation categories, supporting scenario-based weight configuration, as shown in Table 2: Table 2 Comprehensive Evaluation Index System and Scenario-Based Weight Configuration Table

[0085] It should be noted that the scenario-based weight configuration rules are as follows: Low Earth Orbit satellite scenario: the weight of orientation selection effect is increased to w3=0.6, and the weight of occlusion rate is w1=0.15; Natural disaster relief scenario: the weight of construction feasibility is increased to w4=0.2, and the weight of stability coefficient is w2=0.25; Multi-terminal collaborative deployment scenario: the weight of occlusion rate is w1=0.25, and the weight of orientation selection effect is w3=0.45.

[0086] Furthermore, to eliminate the differences in the dimensions of different indicators, each indicator is standardized and transformed (positive indicators: the larger the better; negative indicators: the smaller the better).

[0087] Positive indicators ( , , Standardized formula: In the formula, The original value of this indicator for the candidate points. , These represent the maximum and minimum values ​​of this indicator for all candidate points, respectively.

[0088] negative indicators ( Standardized formula: ; Formula for calculating the overall score: ; In the formula, , , , These are the standardized values ​​for occlusion rate, stability coefficient, orientation effect score, and construction feasibility score, respectively. .

[0089] The 10 candidate points were ranked according to their overall scores. The options are ranked from highest to lowest. The first option is the optimal solution, and its corresponding address and antenna angle parameters (azimuth, elevation, polarization) are the final installation parameters. The second and third options are alternative solutions, used to deal with unexpected scenarios, such as when the construction of the optimal solution is hindered.

[0090] In this optional embodiment, standardization eliminates the differences in dimensions and advantages / disadvantages among heterogeneous indicators such as terrain obstruction rate, geological stability, construction feasibility, and orientation effectiveness, transforming them into comparable normalized values. Furthermore, a configurable weighting system allows for flexible adjustment of decision priorities across various dimensions based on different application scenarios, such as low-Earth orbit constellations and emergency rescue. Ultimately, the overall merits of each candidate point are quantified using a single comprehensive score. This effectively solves the problems of traditional methods that rely on experience to balance various indicators, resulting in ambiguous and difficult-to-reproduce decision-making processes. It achieves a shift from multi-dimensional qualitative weighing to single-dimensional quantitative ranking, ensuring that the final selected installation scheme is the optimal solution after scientifically balancing communication performance, environmental safety, and engineering costs under the preset scenario objectives.

[0091] Optionally, determining the installation scheme of the fixed satellite terminal in the target area based on the comprehensive score of all the candidate points includes: The candidate points are sorted from high to low according to the comprehensive score to generate a candidate point ranking result; The candidate point ranked first in the candidate point ranking results is taken as the final installation point, and the azimuth, elevation and polarization angle of the terminal antenna corresponding to the final installation point are determined. The azimuth angle, the elevation angle, and the polarization angle are used as direction selection parameters; The installation plan is generated based on the final installation point and the corresponding orientation parameters.

[0092] Specifically, after calculating the comprehensive score of all candidate points, all candidate points are treated as a set to be decided. Based on the unique comprehensive score value corresponding to each candidate point, the entire set is sorted in descending order from high to low. After sorting, an ordered list is generated, which clearly shows the relative superiority and inferiority of all candidate points under the comprehensive evaluation system. The higher the ranking of the candidate point, the higher its comprehensive score, indicating that its overall installation conditions and expected communication effect are better. Then, the first-ranked candidate point is selected from the sorted list and determined as the final installation point of the plan. Subsequently, the system extracts the optimal communication pointing parameters associated with it from the detailed analysis data of this point. These parameters are the specific antenna pointing values ​​calculated from the optimal satellite set for this point in the previous direction selection simulation analysis, that is, the precise azimuth angle, elevation angle, and polarization angle that the terminal antenna needs to be set to align with the preferred satellite. Furthermore, the extracted azimuth, elevation, and polarization angle values ​​are uniformly defined and encapsulated into a complete set of orientation parameters. This set of parameters directly specifies the physical orientation that the fixed satellite terminal antenna must be set to during installation and commissioning at the final installation location. The final determined geographical location information of the installation location, such as latitude and longitude coordinates, is logically associated and packaged with the aforementioned set of orientation parameters to form a complete technical solution that can directly guide on-site construction and commissioning. This solution clarifies the two core issues of where to install and which direction the antenna should point, thus forming the final output installation plan.

[0093] In this optional embodiment, an automated decision-making and output process is constructed, consisting of comprehensive score ranking, optimal location selection, and pointing parameter binding. This process converges the complex evaluation results generated from multi-source data fusion analysis, multi-level screening, and dynamic simulation in the early stages, presenting them as a clear, unique, and directly executable engineering instruction. This process uses a quantified comprehensive score as the sole ranking criterion, objectively and unambiguously determining the optimal installation location and automatically associating it with the pre-calculated optimal antenna pointing parameters for that location. This generates a complete installation scheme integrating the optimal location and optimal pointing. This not only avoids the subjective wavering and ambiguity that may occur in the final decision-making stage of traditional methods but also directly transforms all the results of the early intelligent analysis into a precise operational guide that can be implemented on-site, significantly improving the certainty, automation level, and execution efficiency of the final stage from analysis and decision-making to project implementation.

[0094] Combination Figure 2 As shown, the fixed satellite terminal location and direction selection system of this invention includes: The data acquisition unit is used to acquire topographic data, ephemeris data, meteorological data, and engineering constraints of the target area; The candidate location filtering unit is used to generate multiple candidate locations of the fixed satellite terminal in the target area based on the terrain data, the ephemeris data, the meteorological data, and the engineering constraints. The orientation simulation unit is used to perform orientation simulation for each of the candidate points and generate a quantization score corresponding to the candidate point. The scoring and determination unit is used to determine the comprehensive score of each candidate point based on the quantitative score of each candidate point and in combination with the preset location index. The scheme analysis unit is used to determine the installation scheme of the fixed satellite terminal in the target area based on the comprehensive score of all the candidate points.

[0095] The fixed satellite terminal location and orientation system of the present invention has the same advantages over the prior art as the fixed satellite terminal location and orientation method described above, and will not be repeated here.

[0096] Combination Figure 3 As shown, the electronic device of this embodiment includes: a processor and a memory, wherein the memory is used to store computer programs; When the computer program is loaded by the processor, it causes the processor to execute the aforementioned fixed satellite terminal location and orientation method.

[0097] The electronic device of the present invention has the same advantages over the prior art as the fixed satellite terminal location and orientation method described above, and will not be repeated here.

[0098] An embodiment of the present invention provides a computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements the fixed satellite terminal addressing and direction selection method as described above.

[0099] The computer-readable storage medium of the present invention has the same advantages over the prior art as the fixed satellite terminal location and orientation method described above, and will not be repeated here.

[0100] While the present invention has been disclosed above, its scope of protection is not limited thereto. Those skilled in the art can make various changes and modifications without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention, and all such changes and modifications will fall within the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for site selection and orientation selection of a fixed satellite terminal, characterized in that, include: Acquire topographic data, ephemeris data, meteorological data, and engineering constraints for the target area; Based on the terrain data, the ephemeris data, the meteorological data, and the engineering constraints, multiple candidate locations for the fixed satellite terminal in the target area are generated; Perform orientation simulation for each candidate point to generate a quantized score corresponding to the candidate point; Based on the quantitative score of each candidate point and combined with preset location selection indicators, a comprehensive score for each candidate point is determined. Based on the comprehensive score of all the candidate points, the installation scheme of the fixed satellite terminal in the target area is determined.

2. The fixed satellite terminal location and orientation selection method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The step of generating multiple candidate locations for a fixed satellite terminal in the target area based on the terrain data, ephemeris data, meteorological data, and engineering constraints includes: Based on the digital elevation model data in the terrain data and the satellite orbit parameters in the ephemeris data, determine the terrain occlusion rate of potential points within the target area; Based on the terrain occlusion rate of the potential points, a first candidate point set is generated; Based on the digital elevation model data and geological hazard risk data in the terrain data, the terrain stability of the points in the first candidate point set is assessed to obtain the average slope and geological stability coefficient of each point in the first candidate point set. A second candidate point set is generated based on the average slope and geological stability coefficient of each point in the first candidate point set; Based on the engineering constraints, determine the construction feasibility score of the points in the second candidate point set; Based on the construction feasibility score of each point in the second candidate point set, a third candidate point set is generated; The points in the third candidate point set are sorted, and the first preset number of points are selected as the candidate points.

3. The fixed satellite terminal location and orientation selection method according to claim 2, characterized in that, The step of generating multiple candidate locations for a fixed satellite terminal in the target area based on the terrain data, the ephemeris data, the meteorological data, and the engineering constraints further includes: If the number of points in the third candidate point set is less than the preset number, the points are expanded according to the preset candidate point expansion strategy until the number of points is greater than or equal to the preset number.

4. The fixed satellite terminal location and orientation selection method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The step of performing orientation simulation for each candidate point to generate a quantized score corresponding to the candidate point includes: Based on the ephemeris data, multiple satellites that are compatible with the candidate points for communication are identified, wherein all satellites meet the preset coverage duration conditions and preset signal power. For each of the satellites, determine the azimuth, elevation, and polarization angle of the terminal antenna of the fixed satellite terminal; Direction selection simulation is performed based on the azimuth angle, elevation angle and polarization angle, and regional meteorological compensation is performed in combination with the meteorological data to determine the signal stability index, handover interruption duration index and effective communication duration index of the candidate point. Based on the signal stability index, the handover interruption duration index, and the effective communication duration index, the direction selection score of the candidate point is determined, and the direction selection score is used as the quantization score.

5. The fixed satellite terminal location and orientation selection method according to claim 4, characterized in that, The process of performing direction selection simulation based on the azimuth, elevation, and polarization angles, and combining this with regionalized meteorological compensation using meteorological data to determine the signal stability index, handover interruption duration index, and effective communication duration index of the candidate points includes: Based on the rainfall intensity data in the meteorological data, the rain attenuation loss is calculated in combination with the rain attenuation coefficient corresponding to the signal frequency band, and the satellite signal power corresponding to the candidate point is obtained. Based on the azimuth angle, elevation angle, and polarization angle, the simulation terminal antenna follows the dynamic direction selection process of the satellite, and performs satellite switching operation according to the preset satellite switching logic to obtain the change of the satellite signal power within the preset coverage period; based on the change of the satellite signal power, the difference between the maximum and minimum values ​​of the satellite signal power within the preset coverage period is determined; The difference is used as an indicator of signal stability. The total duration during which the satellite signal power is lower than a preset interruption threshold during satellite handover is used as the handover interruption duration indicator. The total duration during which the satellite signal power is higher than a preset effective threshold during satellite handover is used as the effective communication duration indicator.

6. The fixed satellite terminal location and orientation selection method according to claim 2, characterized in that, The determination of a comprehensive score for each candidate point based on its quantitative score and a preset location selection index includes: Obtain the preset site selection indicators for the candidate points, including the terrain obstruction rate, the geological stability coefficient, and the construction feasibility score of the candidate points; The terrain obstruction rate, the geological stability coefficient, the construction feasibility score, and the quantitative score of the candidate point are standardized, and then weighted and summed according to the weight values ​​corresponding to the terrain obstruction rate, the geological stability coefficient, the construction feasibility score, and the quantitative score to obtain the comprehensive score of the candidate point.

7. The fixed satellite terminal location and orientation selection method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The determination of the installation scheme for the fixed satellite terminal in the target area based on the comprehensive score of all the candidate points includes: The candidate points are sorted from high to low according to the comprehensive score to generate a candidate point ranking result; The candidate point ranked first in the candidate point ranking results is taken as the final installation point, and the azimuth, elevation and polarization angle of the terminal antenna corresponding to the final installation point are determined. The azimuth angle, the elevation angle, and the polarization angle are used as direction selection parameters; The installation plan is generated based on the final installation point and the corresponding orientation parameters.

8. A fixed satellite terminal location and direction selection system, characterized in that, include: The data acquisition unit is used to acquire topographic data, ephemeris data, meteorological data, and engineering constraints of the target area; The candidate location filtering unit is used to generate multiple candidate locations of the fixed satellite terminal in the target area based on the terrain data, the ephemeris data, the meteorological data, and the engineering constraints. The orientation simulation unit is used to perform orientation simulation for each of the candidate points and generate a quantization score corresponding to the candidate point. The scoring and determination unit is used to determine the comprehensive score of each candidate point based on the quantitative score of each candidate point and in combination with the preset location index. The scheme analysis unit is used to determine the installation scheme of the fixed satellite terminal in the target area based on the comprehensive score of all the candidate points.

9. An electronic device, characterized in that, include: Processor and memory, the memory being used to store computer programs; When the computer program is loaded by the processor, it causes the processor to execute the fixed satellite terminal location and orientation method as described in any one of claims 1-7.

10. A computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, characterized in that, When the computer program is executed by the processor, it implements the fixed satellite terminal location and orientation selection method as described in any one of claims 1-7.

Images