On the modeling of long wavelength systematic errors in surface gravimetric data

  • Nikolaos K. Pavlis
Part of the International Association of Geodesy Symposia book series (IAG SYMPOSIA, volume 121)


A satellite-only model and a set of 1°x1° area-mean terrestrial gravity anomalies were used to estimate simultaneously geopotential coefficients to degree and order 70 and a set of spherical harmonic coefficients representing regional systematic errors in the gravity data. Several test solutions were developed whereby the weighting of the gravity data and the maximum degree and order of the systematic bias coefficient set were varied. The results were evaluated using both internal consistency statistics (e.g., a posteriors signal and error statistics, calibration factors) and comparisons with independent data (orbit fits, comparisons with GPS/leveling-derived geoid undulations). The global RMS error correlation between geopotential and bias coefficients was 6.7% for an unconstrained bias expansion to degree 20, and 7.8% for an expansion to degree 25, where an a priori constraint on the bias parameters was also employed. The bias expansion to degree 25 resulted in a slight degradation of the results from comparisons with GPS1leveling-derived geoid undulations or height anomalies. Optimization of this technique requires additional tests, especially with regard to terrestrial data weighting issues. Future satellite missions (e.g., CHAMP, GRACE and GOCE) will permit bias recovery at finer resolution, thereby improving the ovesrall effectiveness of this technique.


Terrestrial gravity anomaly data systematic errors satellite-only geopotential models combination geopotential models 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Heck, B. (1990). An evaluation of some systematic error sources affecting terrestrial gravity anomalies. Bull. Geod., 64, pp. 88–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Laskowski P. 1983. The effect of vertical datum inconsistencies on the determination of gravity avi related quantities. Dept. Geod. Sci. and Surv., Rep. 349, Oleo State Univ. Columbus OH.Google Scholar
  3. Lemoine F.G. S.C. Kenyon, J.K. Factor, R.G. Trimmer, N.K. Pavlis D.S. Chinn C.M. Cox, S.M. Klosko, S.B. Luthcke M.H. Torrence Y.M. Wang, R.G. Williamson, E.C. Pavlis R.H. Rapp, and T.R. Olson (1998a). The Development of the Joint NASA GSFC and the National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) GeoPotential Model EGM96. NASA/TP-1998-206861. Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD.Google Scholar
  4. Lemoine F.G. C.M. Cox, D.S. Chinn M.H. Torrence N.K. Pavlis Y.M. Wan R.G. Williamson and E.C. Pavlis (1998b). Gravitational Models Including TDRSS Data from EP/EUVE, RXTE, CGRO, and TRMM. Presentation at the 1998 Spring AGU Meeting, Boston, MA May 26– 29.Google Scholar
  5. Mainville A. and R.H. Rapp (1985). Detection of regional bias in 1°x1° mean terrestrial gravity anomalies. Bureau Gravimetrique International Bull. d’ Information, No. 57.Google Scholar
  6. Pavlis N.K. (1988). Modeling and estimation of a low degree geopotential model from terrestrial gravity data. Dept. Geod. Sci. and Surv., Rep. 386, Ohio State Univ.,Columbus OH.Google Scholar
  7. Pavlis N.K. (1998a). Observed inconsistencies between satellite-only and surface gravity-only geopotential models. In: Proc. of IAG Symposia Vol. 119: Geodesy on the Move Springer-Verlag, pp. 144–149.Google Scholar
  8. Pavlis N.K. (1998b). Modeling of long wavelength systematic errors in surface gravimetic data. Presentation at the European Geophysical Society’s XXIII General Assembly, Nice, France, April 20– 24.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© SPringer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nikolaos K. Pavlis
    • 1
  1. 1.Raytheon ITSS CorporationGreenbeltUSA

Personalised recommendations