Vistas for Geodesy in the New Millennium pp 181-186 | Cite as
Aliasing and Polar Gap Effects on Geopotential Coefficient Estimation: Space-wise Simulation Study of GOCE and GRACE
Abstract
The effects of aliasing and polar data gap have been investigated analytically and numerically for the upcoming dedicated gravity satellite missions. It is verified that they could cause more significant systematic error in the solution via least-squares estimation than the effect from the instrument’s noise. Both effects produce similar error trends in the geoid height estimation, while they corrupt coefficients corresponding to different spectral domains.
This paper develops possible methods to reduce the errors caused by them. A new scheme is proposed to decrease the aliasing error and a combination solution is suggested to reduce the corruption due to the polar data gap. Numerical results are computed through GOCE and GRACE simulation studies. It is shown that the geoid error due to the aliasing is reduced near the poles from 11cm to less than 1cm by estimating 20% more coefficients beyond the Nyquist limit and the geoid error due to the polar data gap in the GOCE mission is reduced to less than 1cm by including GRACE measurements in the polar areas.
Keywords
Spherical harmonics geopotentials aliasing polar gap GOCE GRACEPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- Albertella, A., F. Migliaccio and F. Sanso (1990). The Aliasing Effect in Coefficients Estimation, In: Determination of the Geoid Present and Future, Rapp, R.H. and F. Sanso (ed.), International Association of Geodesy Symposia, Vol. 106, pp. 10–15.Google Scholar
- Bouman, J. (2000). Quality assessment of satellite-based global gravity field models, Ph.D. thesis, Dept. of Geodesy, Delft Univ. of Tech.Google Scholar
- Colombo, O.L. (1981). Numerical Methods for Harmonic Analysis on the Sphere. Report No.310, Department of Geodetic Science, The Ohio State University.Google Scholar
- Gelderen, M. van and R. Koop (1997). The Use of Degree-variances in Satellite Geodesy, Journal of Geodesy, Vol. 71, pp. 337–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Klees R., R.J.J. Koop, P.N.A.M. Visser, J. van den Ijssel (2000). Efficient gravity field recovery from GOCE gravity gradient observations, Journal of Geodesy, Vol. 74, pp. 561–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Jekeli, C. (1996). Spherical Harmonic Analysis, Aliasing, and Filtering, Journal of Geodesy, Vol. 70, pp. 214–223.Google Scholar
- Jekeli, C. (1999). The Determination of Gravitational Potential Differences from Satellite-to-satellite Tracking, Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy, Vol. 75, pp. 85–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sanso, F. (1990). On the Aliasing Problem in the Spherical Harmonic Analysis, Bulletin Geodesique, Vol. 40, pp.313–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sneeuw, N. and M. van Gelderen (1996). The Polar Gap, Geodetic Boundary Value Problems in View of the One Centimeter Geoid, Sanso, Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences, F. Sanso and R. Rummel (ed.), Vol. 65, pp. 559–568, Springer.Google Scholar
- Stanton, R. et al. (1998). Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE): Science & Mission Requirements Document, Release 15 May 1998, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, U. of Texas, Center for Space Res., GFZ.Google Scholar