Surveys in Geophysics

, 31:1 | Cite as

High Resolution Constituents of the Earth’s Gravitational Field

  • Pavel NovákEmail author


During the General Assembly of the European Geosciences Union in April 2008, the new Earth Gravitational Model 2008 (EGM08) was released with fully-normalized coefficients in the spherical harmonic expansion of the Earth’s gravitational potential complete to degree and order 2159 (for selected degrees up to 2190). EGM08 was derived through combination of a satellite-based geopotential model and 5 arcmin mean ground gravity data. Spherical harmonic coefficients of the global height function, that describes the surface of the solid Earth with the same angular resolution as EGM08, became available at the same time. This global topographical model can be used for estimation of selected constituents of EGM08, namely the gravitational potentials of the Earth’s atmosphere, ocean water (fluid masses below the geoid) and topographical masses (solid masses above the geoid), which can be evaluated numerically through spherical harmonic expansions. The spectral properties of the respective potential coefficients are studied in terms of power spectra and their relation to the EGM08 potential coefficients is analyzed by using correlation coefficients. The power spectra of the topographical and sea water potentials exceed the power of the EGM08 potential over substantial parts of the considered spectrum indicating large effects of global isostasy. The correlation analysis reveals significant correlations of all three potentials with the EGM08 potential. The potential constituents (namely their functionals such as directional derivatives) can be used for a step known in geodesy and geophysics as the gravity field reduction or stripping. Removing from EGM08 known constituents will help to analyze the internal structure of the Earth (geophysics) as well as to derive the Earth’s gravitational field harmonic outside the geoid (geodesy).


Atmosphere Correlation Earth gravitational model Gravity reduction and stripping Gravitational potential Ocean water Power spectrum Spherical harmonic series Topography 



The study was supported by the Czech Science Foundation (grant 205/08/1103) and the Czech Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (project MSM4977751301). The comments and suggestions of three anonymous reviewers are highly appreciated.


  1. Abramowitz M, Stegun IA (1972) Handbook of mathematical functions with formulas, graphs, and mathematical tables. Dover, 9th printingGoogle Scholar
  2. Arfken G (1985) Mathematical methods for physicists, 3rd edn. Academic Press, OrlandoGoogle Scholar
  3. Chao BF, Au AY (1991) Temporal variation of Earth’s zonal gravitational field caused by atmospheric mass redistribution: 1980–1988. J Geophys Res 96:6569–6575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Heiskanen WA, Moritz H (1967) Physical geodesy. Freeman and Co., San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  5. Huang J, Vaníček P, Brink W, Pagiatakis S (2001) Effect of topographical mass density variation on gravity and the geoid in the Canadian Rocky Mountains. J Geod 74:805–815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. MacMillan WD (1958) Theory of the potential. Dover Publications, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Martinec Z, Vaníček P (1994) The indirect effect of topography in the Stokes-Helmert technique for a spherical approximation of the geoid. Manuscr Geodaet 19:213–219Google Scholar
  8. Moritz H (1984) Geodetic reference system 1980. B Géod 58:388–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Novák P (2000) Evaluation of gravity data for the Stokes-Helmert solution to the geodetic boundary-value problem. Technical Report 207, Department of Geodesy and Geomatics Engineering, University of New Brunswick, FrederictonGoogle Scholar
  10. Pavlis NK, Holmes SA, Kenyon SC, Factor JK (2008) An Earth gravitational model to degree 2160: EGM2008. Presented at the 2008 General Assembly of the European Geosciences Union, Vienna, Austria, April 13–18 2008Google Scholar
  11. Phillips R, Lambeck K (1980) Gravity fields of the terrestrial planets: long-wavelength anomalies and tectonics. Rev Geophys Space Phys 18:27–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Sjöberg LE (1993) Terrain effects in the atmospheric gravity and geoid corrections. B Géod 64:178–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Swenson S, Wahr J (2002) Estimated effects of the vertical structure of atmospheric mass on the time-variable geoid. J Geophys Res 107:2194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Torge W (2001) Geodesy, 3rd edn. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Tsoulis D (2001) A comparison between the Airy/Heiskanen and the Pratt/Hayford isostatic models for the computation of potential harmonic coefficients. J Geod 74:637–643CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. United States Standard Atmosphere (1976) Joint model of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and United States Air Force, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  17. van Gelderen M, Koop R (1997) The use of degree variances in satellite gradiometry. J Geod 71:337–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Vaníček P, Najafi M, Martinec Z, Harrie L, Sjöberg LE (1995) Higher-degree reference field in the generalized Stokes-Helmert’s scheme for geoid computation. J Geod 70:176–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Wessel P, Smith WHF (1991) Free software helps map and display data. EOS Trans AGU 72:441CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of MathematicsUniversity of West BohemiaPlzeňCzech Republic
  2. 2.Research Institute of GeodesyCartography and TopographyZdibyCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations