The analytical continuation bias in geoid determination using potential coefficients and terrestrial gravity data

Journal of Geodesy

Volumn 78, Issue 4-5, 2004, Pages 314-332

  Ågren, Jonag ^a  

^a ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Analytical continuation; Geoid; Geopotential model; Stokes's formula; Topographic corrections

Indexed keywords

GEOID; GRAVITY FIELD; STOKES FORMULA; TOPOGRAPHY;

EID: 10944256350     PISSN: 09497714     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00190-004-0395-0     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Albertella A, Sansó F (1997) A compendium of physical geodesy. In: Sansó F (ed) Lecture Notes, International School for the Determination and Use of the Geoid. Int Geoid Service, DIIAR-Politecnico di Milano, pp 1-70
2. Arfken GB, Weber HJ (1995) Mathematical methods for physicists, 4th ed. Academic Press, New York
3. Colombo (1981) Numerical methods for harmonic analysis on the sphere. Rep 310, Department of Geodetic Science, The Ohio State University, Columbus
4. Denker H, Lelgemann D, Torge W, Weber G, Wenzel HG (1986) Strategies and requirements for a new European geoid determination. Proceed Int Symp Definition of the Geoid, vol 1, pp 207-222. Ist, Geogr, Mil, Firenze
5. Forsberg R (1984) A study of terrain reductions, density anomalies and geophysical inversion methods in gravity field modelling. Rep 355, Department of Geodetic Science, The Ohio State University, Columbus
6. Forsberg R, Tscherning CC (1981) The use of height data in gravity field approximation. Geophys Res 86:7843-7854
7. Getech (1995) Global DTM5. Geophysical Exploration Technology (GETECH), University of Leeds, Leeds
8. Grafarend E, Engels J (1994) The convergent series expansion of the gravity field of a star shaped body. Manuscr Geod 19:18-30
9. Heiskanen WA, Moritz H (1967) Physical geodesy. WH Freeman, San Francisco
10. Holmes SA, Featherstone WE (2002) A unifed approach to the Clenshaw summation and the recursive computation of very high degree and order normalised associated Legendre functions. J Geod 76(5):279-299
11. Jekeli C (1981) The downward continuation to the Earth's surface of the truncated spherical and ellipsoidal harmonic series of gravity and height anomalies. Rep 327, Department of Geodetic Science, The Ohio State University, Columbus
12. Jekeli C (1983) A numerical study of the divergence of spherical harmonic series of the gravity and height anomalies at the Earth's surface. Bull Géod 57:10-28
13. Jekeli C (1996) Spherical harmonic analysis, aliasing and filtering. J Geod 70:214-223
14. Jekeli C, Serpas JG (2003) Review and numerical assessment of the direct topographical reduction in geoid determination. J Geod 77:226-239
15. Katsambalos K (1979) The effect of the smoothing operator on potential coefficient determination. Rep 287, Department of Geodetic Science, The Ohio State University, Columbus
16. Krarup TA (1969) Contribution to the mathematical foundation of physical geodesy. Publ 44, Dan Geod Inst, Copenhagen
17. Martinec Z (1998) Boundary-value problems for gravimetric determination of a precise geoid. Lecture Notes in Earth Sciences no. 73. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York
18. Moritz H (1980) Advanced physical geodesy. Wichmann, Karlsruhe
19. Nahavandchi H (2002) Two different method of geoidal determination using a spherical harmonic representation of the geopotential, topographic corrections and the height anomaly-geoid height difference. J Geod 76:345-352
20. Nahavandchi H, Sjöberg LE (2001) Two different views of topographical and downward-continuation corrections in the Stokes-Helmert approach to geoid computation. J Geod 74:816-822
21. Paul MK (1978) Recurrence relationships for the integral if the associate Legendre functions. Bull Géod 52:177-190
22. Press WH, Teukolsky SA, Vetterling WT, Flannery BP (1992) Numerical recipes in Fortran, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
23. Rapp RH (1997) Use of potential coefficient models for geoid undulation determinations using a spherical harmonic representation of the height anomaly/geoid undulation difference. J Geod 71:282-289
24. Reigber Ch, Schwintzer P, Neumayer K-H, Barthelmes F, König R, Förste Ch, Balmino G, Biancale R, Lemoine J-M, Loyer S, Bruinsma S, Perosanz F, Fayard T (2003) The CHAMP-only Earth Gravity Field Model EIGEN-2. Adv Space Res 31(8):1883-1888
25. Reigber Ch, Schmidt R, Flechtner F, König R, Meyer U, Neumayer KH, Schwintzer P, Zhu SY (in press) An Earth gravity field model complete to degree and order 150 from GRACE: EIGEN-GRACE02S. Journal of Geodynamics
26. Sideris MG (1994) Regional geoid determination. In: Vanicek P, Christou NT (eds) Geoid and its geophysical interpretation. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL pp 77-94
27. Sjöberg, LE (1977) On the errors of spherical harmonic developments of gravity at the surface of the Earth. Rep 257, Department Geodetic Science, The Ohio State University, Columbus
28. Sjöberg, LE (1986) Comparison of some methods of modifying Stokes' formula. Boll Geod Sci Aff 45(3):229-248
29. Sjöberg, LE (1991) Refined least squares modification of Stokes' formula. Manuscr Geod 16:367-375
30. Sjöberg LE (1995) On the quasigeoid to geoid separation. Manuscr Geod 20:182-192
31. Sjöberg LE (1996) The terrain effect in geoid computation from satellite derived geopotential models. Boll Geod Sci Aff 55(4):385-392
32. Sjöberg LE (1999) On the downward continuation error at the Earth's surface and the geoid of satellite derived geopotential models. Boll Geod Sci Aff 58(3):215-229
33. Sjöberg LE (2000) Topographic effects by the Stokes-Helmert method of geoid and quasigeoid determination. J Geod 74:255-268
34. Sjöberg LE (2001a) Topographic and atmospheric corrections of gravimetric geoid determination with special emphasis on the effects of harmonics of degree zero and one. J Geod 75:283-290
35. Sjöberg LE (2001b) The effect of downward continuation of gravity anomaly to sea-level in Stokes' formula. J Geod 74:796-804
36. Sjöberg LE (2003a) A solution to the downward continuation effect on the geoid determined by Stokes' formula. J Geod 77:94-100
37. Sjöberg LE (2003b) A computational scheme to model the geoid by the modified Stokes' formula without gravity reductions. J Geod 77:423-432
38. Sjöberg LE (2004) The ellipsoidal corrections to topographic geoid effects. J Geod 77:804-808
39. Sjöberg LE, Hunegnaw A (2000) Some aspects of the modification of Stokes formula. J Geod 74:232-238
40. Sun W, Sjöberg LE (2001) Convergence and optimal truncation of binomial expansions used in isostatic compensations and terrain corrections. J Geod 74:627-636
41. Torge W (2001) Geodesy. Third completely revised and extended edition. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin
42. Vanicek P, Martinec Z (1994) The Stokes-Helmert scheme for the evaluation of a precise geoid. Manuscr Geod 19:119-128
43. Wang YM (1994) On the error of analytical downward continuation under planar approximation. Manuscr Geod 20:34-45
44. Wang YM (1997) On the error of analytical downward continuation of the Earth's external gravitational potential on and inside the Earth's surface. J Geod 71:70-82
45. Wenzel G (1998) Ultra-high degree geopotential model GPM3E97A to degree and order 1800 tailored to Europe. In: Vermeer M and Adam J (eds) Proc 2nd Continental Workshop on the Geoid in Europe, Budapest, 10-14 March, Reports of the Finnish Geodetic Institute 98:4, pp 71-80, Marsala
46. Wilcox HJ, Myers DL (1978) An introduction to Lebesgue integration and Fourier series. Dover, New York