Advertisement

Conventional and New Approaches for Combining Multi-Satellite Techniques

  • Rolf König
  • Chuang Shi
  • Karl Hans Neumayer
  • Shengyuan Zhu

Summary

The combination of different space geodetic or satellite techniques offers the possibility to determine more complete, reliable, and accurate reference frame parameters. Two new approaches are proposed: the onboard collocation and the integrated method. The onboard collocation utilizes the availability of different techniques onboard a Low Earth Orbiting (LEO) satellite. For the CHAMP and GRACE satellites, and for the GPS-35 and -36 satellites, the radial distances between the Global Positioning System (GPS) phase centers and the Satellite Laser Ranging (SLR) retroreflectors are examined. The integrated method treats a multi-satellite configuration with measurements by various tracking techniques on the observation level. From three months of observations from the GRACE/GPS constellation, a series of low degree harmonics of the Earth’s gravity field, representing dynamical geocenter location and axes orientation, is determined with high accuracy and daily resolution.

Key words

Reference Frames Space Geodetic Techniques Onboard Collocation Integrated Method 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Altamimi Z, Sillard P, Boucher C (2002) ITRF2000: A new release of the International Terrestrial Reference Frame for earth science applications. J Geophys Res 107:B10, 2214, doi:10.1029/2001JB000561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chen JL, Wilson CR, Tapley BD, Ries JC (2004) Low degree gravitational changes from GRACE: Validation and interpretation. Geophys Res Letters 31: L22607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Gambis D, Bizouard C (2003) Consistency analysis between EOP series and reference frames, Proceedings of the IERS Workshop on Combination Research and Global Geophysical Fluids, IERS Technical Note 30, 57–62, Bundesamt für Kartographie und Geodäsie, Frankfurt am MainGoogle Scholar
  4. Ge M, Gendt G, Dick G, Zhang FP, Reigber Ch (2005) Impact of GPS satellite antenna offsets on scale changes in global network solutions. Geophys Res Letters 32: L06310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hu XG, Shi C, Flechtner F, Koenig R, Schwintzer P, Schmidt R, Meyer U, Massmann F-H, Reigber C, Zhu SY (2005) High frequency temporal Earth gravity variations detected by GRACE satellites. In: this issueGoogle Scholar
  6. IAG (2005) The International Association of Geodesy Site. Internet: http://www.iag-aig.org, modified June 1, 2005.Google Scholar
  7. IDS (2005) The International DORIS Service Site. Internet: http://ids.cls.fr, modified March 2, 2005.Google Scholar
  8. IERS (2003) The International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service Site. Internet: http://http://www.iers.org, modified July 23, 2003Google Scholar
  9. IERS (2004) IERS Combination Pilot Project: Call for Participation and received proposals. Internet: http://www.iers.org/iers/about/wg/wg3/cfpcppcont.html, modified August 16, 2004Google Scholar
  10. IGS (2005) International GPS Service Site. Internet: http://igscb.jpl.nasa.gov, modified April 02, 2005Google Scholar
  11. ILRS (2005) International Laser Ranging Service Site. Internet: http://ilrs.gsfc.nasa.gov, cited as of May, 2005.Google Scholar
  12. IVS (2005) International VLBI Service for Geodesy & Astrometry Site. Internet: http://ivscc.gsfc.nasa.gov, modified January 1, 2005.Google Scholar
  13. König R, Reigber Ch, Zhu SY (2005) Dynamic model orbits and Earth system parameters from combined GPS and LEO data. Advances in Space Research, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 27 April 2005Google Scholar
  14. Kouba J, Mireault Y, Lahaye F (1994) 1994 IGS Orbit/Clock Combination and Evaluation. 1994 IGS Annual Report, pp 70–94Google Scholar
  15. Neumayer KH, Massmann F-H, Meixner H, Raimondo J-C, Reigber Ch, Shi C, Yu Y, SY Zhu SY (2005) SLR Station Solutions in the GPS Reference Frame. In preparation to be submitted to the Journal of GeodesyGoogle Scholar
  16. Rothacher M (2001) Comparison of absolute and relative antenna phase centers. GPS Solutions 4: 55–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Rothacher M (2002) Towards a rigorous combination of space geodetic techniques. IERS Workshop on Combination Research and Global Geophysical Fluids, Bavarian Academy of Sciences, Munich, Germany, November 18–21, 2002Google Scholar
  18. SBGG (2004) Special Bureau for Gravity/Geocenter Home Page. http://sbgg.jpl.nasa.gov/, modified October 30, 2004Google Scholar
  19. Shi C, Grunwaldt L, Raimondo J-C, Massmann F-H, Zhu SY (2003) Determination of the CHAMP GPS Antenna with Respect to Satellite’s Mass Center. In: Reigber C, Luehr H, Schwintzer P (eds) First CHAMP Mission Results for Gravity, Magnetic and Atmospheric Studies. Springer, Berlin HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  20. Springer TA (1999) Modeling and Validating Orbits and Clocks Using the Global Positioning System. PhD dissertation, University of BernGoogle Scholar
  21. Zhu SY, Massmann F-H, Yu Y, Reigber Ch (2003) Satellite antenna phase center offsets and scale errors in GPS solutions. J of Geodesy 76: 668–672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Zhu SY, Reigber Ch, König R (2004) Integrated Adjustment of CHAMP, GRACE, and GPS Data. J of Geodesy 78: 103–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rolf König
    • 1
  • Chuang Shi
    • 2
  • Karl Hans Neumayer
    • 1
  • Shengyuan Zhu
    • 1
  1. 1.TelegrafenbergGeoForschungsZentrum PotsdamPotsdamGermany
  2. 2.GPS Research CenterWuhan UniversityWuhanP.R. China

Personalised recommendations