Advertisement

Global Gravity Field Models from Different GOCE Orbit Products

  • Akbar Shabanloui
  • Judith Schall
  • Annette Eicker
  • Jürgen Kusche
Chapter
Part of the Advanced Technologies in Earth Sciences book series (ATES)

Abstract

In this contribution, the in-house (processed) GOCE products including precise orbit and Earth’s gravity field are compared to the official ESA products. The comparison is drawn on orbit product as well as gravity field level. To ensure comparability, gravity field models from both orbits are estimated in an identical fashion, which is particularly true for the stochastical model. We find that the in-house processed orbit is piecewise rather smooth, but contains jumps like discontinuities in the calculated geometrical point-wise positions. This leads to a degradation of the gravity field solution about by a factor of two in terms of degree variances when compared to the solution from the official orbit product.

Keywords

Gravity Field International GNSS Service Precise Orbit Precise Orbit Determination Gravity Field Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Bock H, Jaggi A, Švehla D, Beutler G, Hugentobler U, Visser P (2007) Precise orbit determination for the GOCE satellite using GPS. Adv Space Res 1638–1647Google Scholar
  2. Drinkwater MR, Floberghagen R, Haagmans R, Muzi D, Popescu A (2003) GOCE: ESA’s first earth explorer core mission. In: Beutler GB, Drinkwater MR, Rummer R, von Steiger R (eds) Earth gravity field from space—from sensors to earth sciences of space sciences series of ISSIKluwer, vol 18, Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands, pp 419–432Google Scholar
  3. Floberghagen R, Fehringer M, Lamarre D, Muzi D, Frommknecht B, Steiger C, Piñeiro J, da Costa A (2011) Mission design, operation and exploitation of the gravity field and steady-state ocean circulation explorer mission. J Geodesy 85:749–758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ilk KH, Löcher A, Mayer-Gürr T (2008) Do we need new gravity field recovery techniques for the new gravity field satellites? In: VI Hotine-Marussi symposium on theoretical and computational geodesy, vol 132. International Association of Geodesy symposia, SpringerGoogle Scholar
  5. Mayer-Gürr T (2006) Gravitationsfeldbestimmung aus der Analyse kurzer Bahnbögen am Beispiel der Satellitenmissionen CHAMP und GRACE. Ph.D. thesis, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität BonnGoogle Scholar
  6. Mayer-Gürr T, Kurtenbach E, Eicker A (2010) ITG-Grace2010 gravity field model. http://www.igg.uni-bonn.de/apmg/index.php?id=itg-grace2010
  7. Shabanloui A (2008) A new approach for a kinematic-dynamic determination of low satellite orbits based on GNSS observations. Ph.D. thesis, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität BonnGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Akbar Shabanloui
    • 1
  • Judith Schall
    • 1
  • Annette Eicker
    • 1
  • Jürgen Kusche
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Geodesy and GeoinformationUniversity of BonnBonnGermany

Personalised recommendations