Advertisement

Surveys in Geophysics

, Volume 36, Issue 6, pp 773–801 | Cite as

Global and Regional Gravity Field Determination from GOCE Kinematic Orbit by Means of Spherical Radial Basis Functions

  • Blažej BuchaEmail author
  • Aleš Bezděk
  • Josef Sebera
  • Juraj Janák
Article

Abstract

We present global and regional gravity field models to degree 130 based on the GOCE kinematic orbit from the period 01 November 2009 to 11 January 2010. The gravity field models are parameterized in terms of the Shannon and Kaula's spherical radial basis functions. The relation between the unknown expansion coefficients and the kinematic orbit of the satellite is established by the acceleration approach. We show that our global GOCE-only solutions free from prior information can compete with unconstrained spherical harmonic models in terms of accuracy. Furthermore, we utilize our low-degree global GOCE-based models to introduce prior information into the least-squares adjustment. This procedure substantially improves the zonal and near-zonal spherical harmonic coefficients, which are usually degraded due to the polar gap problem. As an unwanted side effect, low-pass filtering of the geopotential may occur, but this can be adjusted by the spectral content of the prior information. We show that the regional enhancement of the global solutions reduces noise in the final model between degrees 70 and 130 by ~10 % in terms of RMS error. In general, our Shannon-based solutions systematically outperform the Kaula-based ones. To validate our results, we use the EIGEN-6S model, which is superior to the solutions from kinematic orbits at least by one order of magnitude. Both the global and the regional models satisfy the GOCE-only strategy.

Keywords

Spherical radial basis functions Spherical harmonics  Geopotential GOCE Polar gap Regularization 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge ESA for GOCE mission data and ICGEM for the access to the global gravity field models. We thank Oliver Baur for providing us with the global gravity field models from GOCE kinematic orbits (Baur et al. 2014). Two anonymous reviewers are gratefully acknowledged for their helpful reviews. Blažej Bucha and Juraj Janák were supported by the Projects APVV-0072-11 and VEGA 1/0954/15. Aleš Bezděk and Josef Sebera were supported by the Projects GA 13-36843S and RVO: 67985815. Some of the computations were performed on the computational resources kindly provided by the Department of Mathematics and Descriptive Geometry, Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava. The maps were produced using the Generic Mapping Tools (Wessel and Smith 1998).

References

  1. Albertella A, Sansò F, Sneeuw N (1999) Band-limited functions on a bounded spherical domain: the Slepian problem on the sphere. J Geod 73:436–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arabelos DN, Tscherning CC (2009) Error-covariances of the estimates of spherical harmonic coefficients computed by LSC, using second-order radial derivative functionals associated with realistic GOCE orbits. J Geod 83:419–430. doi: 10.1007/s00190-008-0250-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aster RC, Borchers B, Thurber CH (2005) Parameter estimation and inverse problems. Elsevier Academic Press, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  4. Baur O, Sneeuw N (2007) The Slepian approach revisited: dealing with the polar gap in satellite based geopotential recovery. In: Fletcher K (ed) The 3rd international GOCE user workshop, ESA, Frascati, Italy, SP-627, ISBN:92-9092-938-3, ISSN:1609-042XGoogle Scholar
  5. Baur O, Reubelt T, Weigelt M, Roth M, Sneeuw N (2012) GOCE orbit analysis: long-wavelength gravity field determination using the acceleration approach. Adv Space Res 50:385–396. doi: 10.1016/j.asr.2012.04.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baur O, Bock H, Höck E, Jäggi A, Krauss S, Mayer-Gürr T, Reubelt T, Siemes C, Zehentner N (2014) Comparison of GOCE-GPS gravity fields derived by different approaches. J Geod 88:959–973. doi: 10.1007/s00190-014-0736-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bentel K, Schmidt M, Gerlach C (2013) Different radial basis functions and their applicability for regional gravity field representation on the sphere. Int J Geomath 4:67–96. doi: 10.1007/s13137-012-0046-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bezděk A (2010) Calibration of accelerometers aboard GRACE satellites by comparison with POD-based nongravitational accelerations. J Geodyn 50:410–423. doi: 10.1016/j.jog.2010.05.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bezděk A, Sebera J, Klokočník J, Kostelecký J (2014) Gravity field models from kinematic orbits of CHAMP, GRACE and GOCE satellites. Adv Space Res 53:412–429. doi: 10.1016/j.asr.2013.11.031 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brockwell PJ, Davis RA (2002) Introduction to time series and forecasting, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bruinsma S, Thuillier G, Barlier F (2003) The DTM-2000 empirical thermosphere model with new data assimilation and constraints at lower boundary: accuracy and properties. J Atmos Sol Terr Phys 65:1053–1070. doi: 10.1016/S1364-6826(03)00137-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Čunderlík R (2013) Determination of W0 from the GOCE measurements using the method of fundamental solutions. In: VIII Hotine-Marussi symposium, Rome, Italy Google Scholar
  13. Ditmar P, van der Sluijs AAVE (2004) A technique for modeling the Earth’s gravity field on the basis of satellite accelerations. J Geod 78:12–33. doi: 10.1007/s00190-003-0362-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ditmar P, Kusche J, Klees R (2003) Computation of spherical harmonic coefficients from gravity gradiometry data to be acquired by the GOCE satellite: regularization issues. J Geod 77:465–477. doi: 10.1007/s00190-003-0349-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ditmar P, Kuznetsov V, van der Sluijs AAVE, Schrama E, Klees R (2006) ‘DEOS_CHAMP-01C_70’: a model of the Earth’s gravity field computed from accelerations of the CHAMP satellite. J Geod 79:586–601. doi: 10.1007/s00190-005-0008-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ditmar P, Klees R, Liu X (2007) Frequency-dependent data weighting in global gravity field modeling from satellite data contaminated by non-stationary noise. J Geod 81:81–96. doi: 10.1007/s00190-006-0074-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Driscoll JR, Healy DM (1994) Computing Fourier transforms and convolutions on the 2-sphere. Adv Appl Math 15:202–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. EGG-C (2010) GOCE Level 2 product data handbook. GO-MA-HPF-GS-0110, Issue 4.3Google Scholar
  19. Eicker A (2008) Gravity field refinement by radial basis functions from in-situ satellite data. Ph.D. thesis, Universität Bonn, BonnGoogle Scholar
  20. Eicker A, Schall J, Kusche J (2014) Regional gravity modelling from spaceborne data: case studies with GOCE. Geophys J Int 196:1431–1440. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggt485 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. ESA (1999) Gravity field and steady-state ocean circulation mission, report for mission selection of the four candidate Earth Explorer missions. Technical Report ESA SP-1233(1), European Space AgencyGoogle Scholar
  22. Fantino E, Casotto S (2009) Methods of harmonic synthesis for global geopotential models and their first-, second- and third-order gradients. J Geod 83:595–619. doi: 10.1007/s00190-008-0275-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fengler MJ, Freeden W, Michel V (2004) The Kaiserslautern multiscale geopotential model SWITCH-03 from orbit perturbations of the satellite CHAMP and its comparison to the models EGM96, UCPH2002_02_0.5, EIGEN-1s and EIGEN-2. Geophys J Int 157:499–514. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.2004.02209.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Förste C, Bruinsma S, Shako R, Marty JC, Flechtner F, Abrikosov O, Dahle C, Lemoine JM, Neumayer H, Biancale R, Barthelmes F, König R, Balmino G (2011) EIGEN-6 A new combined global gravity field model including GOCE data from the collaboration of GFZ-Potsdam and GRGS-Toulouse. In: EGU General Assembly, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  25. Freeden W, Schneider F (1998) An integrated wavelet concept of physical geodesy. J Geod 72:259–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Freeden W, Gervens T, Schreiner M (1998) Constructive approximation on the sphere: with applications to geomathematics. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  27. Holschneider M, Chambodut A, Mandea M (2003) From global to regional analysis of the magnetic field on the sphere using wavelet frames. Phys Earth Planet Inter 135:107–124. doi: 10.1016/S0031-9201(02)00210-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jäggi A, Bock H, Meyer U, Beutler G, van den IJssel J (2015) GOCE: assessment of GPS-only gravity field determination. J Geod 89:33–48. doi: 10.1007/s00190-014-0759-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kaula WM (1966) Theory of satellite geodesy: applications of satellites to geodesy. Waltham, Blaisdell, Mineola, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Koch KR, Kusche J (2002) Regularization of geopotential determination from satellite data by variance components. J Geod 76:259–268. doi: 10.1007/s00190-002-0245-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Korte M, Holme R (2003) Regularization of spherical cap harmonics. Geophys J Int 153:253–262. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-246X.2003.01898.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Krarup T (1969) A contribution to the mathematical foundation of physical geodesy. Meddelelse No. 44, Geodætisk Institut, KøbenhavnGoogle Scholar
  33. Lieb V, Bouman J, Dettmering D, Fuchs M, Haagmans R, Schmidt M (2013) Flexible combination of GOCE gravity gradients with various observation techniques in regional gravity field modelling. In: VIII Hotine-Marussi symposium, RomeGoogle Scholar
  34. Lyard F, Lefevre F, Letellier T, Francis O (2006) Modelling the global ocean tides: modern insights from FES2004. Ocean Dyn 56:394–415. doi: 10.1007/s10236-006-0086-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mayer-Gürr T, Ilk KH, Eicker A, Feuchtinger M (2005) ITG-CHAMP01: a CHAMP gravity field model from short kinematic arcs over a one-year observation period. J Geod 78:462–480. doi: 10.1007/s00190-004-0413-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McCarthy DD (1996) IERS Conventions (1996). IERS Technical Note 21, Central Bureau of IERS—Observatoire de Paris, Paris. ISBN: 3-89888-989-6Google Scholar
  37. Metzler B, Pail R (2005) GOCE data processing: the spherical cap regularization approach. Stud Geophys Geod 49:441–462. doi: 10.1007/s11200-005-0021-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Moritz H (2000) Geodetic reference system 1980. J Geod 74:128–133. doi: 10.1007/s001900050278 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Naeimi M (2013) Inversion of satellite gravity data using spherical radial base functions. Ph.D. thesis, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Hannover, Germany. ISSN 0065-5325, ISBN 978-3-7696-5123-2Google Scholar
  40. Naeimi M, Flury J, Brieden P (2015) On the regularization of regional gravity field solutions in spherical radial base functions. Geophys J Int 202:1041–1053. doi: 10.1093/gji/ggv210 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pail R, Plank G, Schuh WD (2001) Spatially restricted data distributions on the sphere: the method of orthonormalized functions and applications. J Geod 75:44–56. doi: 10.1007/s001900000153 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pail R, Bruinsma S, Migliaccio F, Förste C, Goiginger H, Schuh WD, Höck E, Reguzzoni M, Brockmann JM, Abrikosov O, Veicherts M, Fecher T, Mayrhofer R, Krasbutter I, Sansò F, Tscherning CC (2011) First GOCE gravity field models derived by three different approaches. J Geod 85:819–843. doi: 10.1007/s00190-011-0467-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Petit G, Luzum B (2010) IERS Conventions (2010). IERS Technical Note No. 36, Verlag des Bundesamts für Kartographie und Geodäsie, Frankfurt am Main. ISBN: 3-89888-989-6Google Scholar
  44. Press WH, Teukolsky SA, Vetterling WT, Flannery BP (1997) Numerical Recipes in Fortran 77: the Art of Scientific Computing, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  45. Reigber C, Lühr H, Schwintzer P (2002) CHAMP mission status. Adv Space Res 30:129–134. doi: 10.1016/S0273-1177(02)00276-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Reigber C, Schwintzer P, Neumayer KH, Barthelmes F, König R, Förste C, Balmino G, Biancale R, Lemoine JM, Loyer S, Bruinsma S, Perosanz F, Fayard T (2003) The CHAMP-only Earth gravity field model EIGEN-2. Adv Space Res 31:1883–1888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Reubelt T, Austen G, Grafarend EW (2003) Harmonic analysis of the Earth’s gravitational field by means of semi-continuous ephemerides of a low earth orbiting GPS-tracked satellite. Case study: CHAMP. J Geod 77:257–278. doi: 10.1007/s00190-003-0322-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Reubelt T, Baur O, Weigelt M, Roth M, Sneeuw N (2014) GOCE long-wavelength gravity field recovery from 1s-sampled kinematic orbits using the acceleration approach. In: Marti U (ed) Proceedings of the IAG symposium GGHS2012, Venice, Italy, vol 141, pp 21–26Google Scholar
  49. Reuter R (1982) Über integralformeln der einheitsphäre und harmonische splinefunktionen. Heft Nr. 33, Veröff. Geod. Inst. RWTH AachenGoogle Scholar
  50. Rexer M, Hirt C (2015) Spectral analysis of the Earths topographic potential via 2D-DFT: a new data-based degree variance model to degree 90,000. J Geod 89:887–909. doi: 10.1007/s00190-015-0822-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rummel R, van Gelderen M, Koop R, Schrama E, Sansò F, Brovelli M, Migliaccio F, Sacerdote F (1993) Spherical harmonic analysis of satellite gradiometry. New Series 39, Netherlands Geodetic Commission, Delft, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  52. Schmidt M, Fabert O (2008) Ellipsoidal wavelet representation of the gravity field. Report No. 487, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Geodetic Science, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OHGoogle Scholar
  53. Schmidt M, Fabert O, Shum CK (2005) On the estimation of a multi-resolution representation of the gravity field based on spherical harmonics and wavelets. J Geodyn 39:512–526. doi: 10.1016/j.jog.2005.04.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Schmidt M, Han SC, Kusche J, Sanchez L, Shum CK (2006) Regional high-resolution spatiotemporal gravity modeling from GRACE data using spherical wavelets 33:L08403. doi: 10.1029/2005GL025509
  55. Schmidt M, Fengler M, Mayer-Gürr T, Eicker A, Kusche J, Sánchez L, Han SC (2007) Regional gravity modeling in terms of spherical base functions. J Geod 81:17–38. doi: 10.1007/s00190-006-0101-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sebera J, Wagner CA, Bezděk A, Klokočník J (2013) Short guide to direct gravitational field modelling with Hotine’s equations. J Geod 87:223–238. doi: 10.1007/s00190-012-0591-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Simons FJ, Dahlen FA (2006) Spherical Slepian functions and the polar gap in geodesy. Geophys J Int 166:1039–1061. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.2006.03065.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sneeuw N, van Gelderen M (1997) The polar gap. In: Sansò F, Rummel R (eds) Geodetic boundary value problems in view of the one centimeter geoid, Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences, vol 65. Springer, Berlin, pp 559–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Tapley BD, Bettadpur S, Watkins M, Reigber C (2004) The gravity recovery and climate experiment: mission overview and early results. Geophys Res Lett 31:L09607. doi: 10.1029/2004GL019920 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Tscherning CC, Arabelos DN (2011) Gravity anomaly and gradient recovery from GOCE gradient data using LSC and comparisons with known ground data. In: Ouwehand L (ed) Proceedings of the 4th international GOCE User Workshop, ESA, Munich, Germany, SP-696, ISBN:978-92-9092-260-5, ISSN:1609-042XGoogle Scholar
  61. Weigelt M, van Dam T, Jäggi A, Prange L, Tourian MJ, Keller W, Sneeuw N (2013) Time-variable gravity signal in Greenland revealed by high-low satellite-to-satellite tracking. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 118:3848–3859. doi: 10.1002/jgrb.50283 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Weightman JA (1967) Gravity, geodesy and artificial satellites. A unified analytical approach. In: Veiss G (ed) The use of artificial satellites for geodesy, vol 2. National Technical University of Athens, Greece, pp 467–486Google Scholar
  63. Wessel P, Smith WHF (1998) New, improved version of generic mapping tools released. EOS Trans Am Geophys Union 79:579. doi: 10.1029/98EO00426 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wieczorek MA, Simons FJ (2005) Localized spectral analysis on the sphere. Geophys J Int 162:655–675. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-246X.2005.02687.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Wittwer T (2009) Regional gravity field modelling with radial basis functions. Ph.D. thesis, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  66. Xiancai Z, Jianqing C, Sneeuw N, Jiancheng L (2011) Numerical study on the mixed model in the GOCE polar gap problem. Geo-spat Inf Sci 14:216–222. doi: 10.1007/s11806-011-0532-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Yildiz H (2012) A study of regional gravity field recovery from GOCE vertical gravity gradient data in the Auvergne test area using collocation. Stud Geophys Geod 56:171–184. doi: 10.1007/s11200-011-9030-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Blažej Bucha
    • 1
    Email author
  • Aleš Bezděk
    • 2
  • Josef Sebera
    • 2
    • 3
  • Juraj Janák
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Theoretical Geodesy, Faculty of Civil EngineeringSlovak University of Technology in BratislavaBratislavaSlovak Republic
  2. 2.Astronomical InstituteCzech Academy of SciencesOndřejovCzech Republic
  3. 3.Research Institute of Geodesy, Cartography and TopographyZdibyCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations