IGFS 2014 pp 111-121 | Cite as

The DTU13 MSS (Mean Sea Surface) and MDT (Mean Dynamic Topography) from 20 Years of Satellite Altimetry

Part of the International Association of Geodesy Symposia book series (IAG SYMPOSIA, volume 144)

Abstract

The DTU13MSS is the latest release of the global high resolution mean sea surface (MSS) from DTU Space. The new MSS is based on multi-mission satellite altimetry from 10 different satellites. Three major advances have been made in order to release the new MSS. The time series have been extended to 20 years from 17 years used for DTU10MSS creating the first multi-decadal MSS. Secondly, the DTU13MSS ingest Cryosat-2 LRM and SAR data as well as 1 year of Jason-1 geodetic mission as part as it end-of-life mission between May 2012 and June 2013. Finally, the availability of Cryosat-2 SAR altimetry enables the determination of sea level in leads in the ice, which has enabled us to derive an accurate MSS all the way to 88°N.

With the availability to determine the geoid with higher accuracy than ever before due to the launch of the GRACE and GOCE satellites, is hence become possible to derive a satellite only mean dynamic topography (MDT) from the difference between the MSS and the geoid. Here the DTU13MSS and DTU13MDT are presented and we demonstrate how these can be used to derive realistic geostrophic currents in the world’s ocean comparable to oceanographic derived MDT.

Keywords

Satellite altimetry Mean sea surface Mean dynamic topography 

Notes

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to thank the space agencies for the EO missions. Part of the work is a contribution to the ESA supported Sea level CCI and ESA supported sequel of GUT projects.

Data Availability

The DTU13MSS and DTU13MDT are both available for free download via ftp.space.dtu.dk/pub/DTU13. MSS and MDT models are available in resolution ranging from 1 min to 1/8° along with other models in the suite of DTU high resolution geophysical model. Various formats as well as software can be downloaded from the site.

References

  1. Andersen OB (2010) The DTU10 global gravity field and mean sea surface – improvements in the Arctic. Paper presented at the 2nd IGFS symposium, Fairbanks, Alaska. http://space.dtu.dk/Google Scholar
  2. Andersen OB, Knudsen P (2009) The DNSC08 mean sea surface and mean dynamic topography. J Geophys Res 114:C11. doi: 10.1029/2008JC005179 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andersen OB, Scharroo R (2011) Range and geophysical corrections in coastal regions: and implications for mean sea surface determination. In: Vignudelli S et al (eds) Coastal altimetry. Springer, New York, pp 103–145. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-12796-0_5
  4. Benveniste J, Knudsen P, the GUTS Team (2007) The GOCE user toolbox. In: Fletcher K (ed) Proceedings of the 3rd international GOCE User Workshop, 6–8 November 2006, Frascati, Italy. European Space Agency, NoordwijkGoogle Scholar
  5. Bingham RJ, Haines K (2006) Mean dynamic topography: intercomparison and errors. Phil Trans R Soc A 364:903–916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bingham RJ, Haines K, Hughes CW (2008) Calculating the Ocean’s Mean dynamic topography from a Mean sea surface and a Geoid. J Atmos Ocean Tech 25:1808–1822. doi: 10.1175/2008JTECHO568.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bingham RJ, Knudsen P, Andersen O, Pail R (2011) A new view of the mean North Atlantic circulation provided by GOCE. Geophys Res Let 38(1). doi: 10.1029/2010GL045633
  8. ESA and UCL (2013) CryoSat product handbook, April 2013. ESRIN – ESA and Mullard Space Science Laboratory – University College London. www.emits.esa.int/emits-doc/.../CryoSat-PHB-17apr2012.pdfGoogle Scholar
  9. ESA, Parrinello T (2013) Known biases in Cryosat-2. https://wiki.services.eoportal.org/tiki-download_wiki_attachment.php?attId=2699
  10. Forsberg R, Skourup H, Andersen O, Laxon SW, Ridout A, Braun A, Johannessen J, Siegismund F, Tscherning CC, Knudsen P (2007) Combination of spaceborne, airborne and surface gravity in support of Arctic ocean sea-ice and MDT mapping. Poster presented at IUGG 24th General Assembly, Perugia, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  11. Förste C, Bruinsma S, Shako R, Marty J-C, Flechtner F, Abrikosov O, Dahle C, Lemoine J.-M, Neumayer KH, 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. Geophys Res Abstr 13:EGU2011-3242-2, EGU General AssemblyGoogle Scholar
  12. Giles K, Laxon S, Ridout S (2008) Circumpolar thinning of Arctic sea ice following the 2007 record ice extent minimum. Geop Res Lett 35, L22502. doi: 10.1029/2008GL035710 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Giles KA, Laxon SW, Ridout AL, Wingham DJ, Bacon S (2012) Western Arctic Ocean freshwater storage increase by wind-driven spin-up of the Beaufort Gyre. Nature 5:194–197Google Scholar
  14. Hughes CW, Bingham RJ (2008) An oceanographer’s guide to GOCE and the geoid. Ocean Sci 4(1):15–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jain, M, O. Andersen, L. Stenseng and J. Dall (2015) The importance of empirical retracking in the Arctic for sea surface and marine gravity recovery. Advances in Space Research 55(1):40–50Google Scholar
  16. Johannessen JA, Balmino G, Le Provost C, Rummel R, Sabadini R, Sünkel H, Tscherning CC, Visser P, Woodworth P, Hughes CW, LeGrand P, Sneeuw N, Perosanz F, Aguirre-Martinez M, Rebhan H, Drinkwater M (2003) The European gravity field and steady-state ocean circulation explorer satellite mission: impact in geophysics. Surv Geophys 24:339–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Knudsen P, Andersen O (2013) The DTU12MDT Global mean dynamic topography and ocean circulation model. In: Proceeding of the living planet symposium, Edinburgh, 2013, ESA SP-772. ESA ESTEC. NordweikGoogle Scholar
  18. Knudsen P, Bingham R, Andersen O, Rio MH (2011) Enhanced mean dynamic topography and ocean circulation estimation using GOCE preliminary models. J Geodesy. doi: 10.1007/s00190/011/04858 Google Scholar
  19. Maximenko N, Niiler P, Rio M-H, Melnichenko O, Centurioni L, Chambers D, Zlotnicki V, Galperin B (2009) Mean dynamic topography of the ocean derived from satellite and drifting buoy data using three different techniques. J Atmos Oceanic Tech 26(9):1910–1919CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Raney RK (1998) The delay Doppler radar altimeter. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 36:1578–1588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Stenseng L, Andersen O (2012) Preliminary gravity recovery from CryoSat-2 data in the Baffin Bay. Adv Space Res 50(8):1158–1163Google Scholar
  22. Wingham D, Francis CR, Baker S, Bouzinac C, Brockley D, Cullen R, de Chateau-Thierry P, Laxon SW, Mallow U, Mavrocordatos C, Phalippou L, Ratier G, Rey L, Rostan F, Viau P, Wallis DW (2006) CryoSat-2: a mission to determine the fluctuations in Earths land and marine ice fields. Adv Space Res 37(4):841–871Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Space Institute, Technical University of DenmarkLyngbyDenmark

Personalised recommendations