GOCE gravity field processing strategy

Studia Geophysica et Geodaetica

Volumn 48, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 289-309

  Pail, R ^a   Plank, G ^a  

^a GRAZ UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Austria)

Author keywords

Data gaps; Distributed non approximative adjustment; Field analysis; Global gravity field; PSD estimation; Satellite gravity gradiometry; Spherical harmonics

Indexed keywords

DATA PROCESSING; GRAVIMETRY; GRAVITY FIELD; SATELLITE DATA; SPHERICAL HARMONICS;

EID: 2542505519     PISSN: 00393169     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/B:SGEG.0000020834.28615.0d     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Arsov K., Badura T., Höck E., Pail R. Rothacher M. and Švehla D., 2002. Effect of Temporal Variations on High-low SST observations. ESA Project "From Eötvös to mGal+", Final Report, WP 4, ESA/ESTEC Contract 14287/00/NL/DC, European Space Agency, 217-319.
2. Cesare S., 2002. Performance requirements and budgets for the gradiometric mission. Technical Note, GOC-TN-AI-0027, Alenia Spazio, Turin, Italy.
3. ESA, 1999. Gravity field and Steady-State Ocean Circulation Mission. Reports for mission selection, The four candidate Earth explorer core missions, SP-1233(1), European Space Agency, Noordwijk.
4. Gerlach C., Sneeuw N., Visser P. and Švehla D., 2003. CHAMP gravity field recovery with the energy balance approach: first results. In: Ch. Reigber, H. Lühr and P. Schwintzer (Eds.): First CHAMP Mission Results for Gravity, Magnetic and Atmospheric Studies, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 134-139.
5. Han S.C., Jekeli C. and Shum C.K., 2002. Efficient gravity field recovery using in situ disturbing potential observables from CHAMP. Geophys. Res. Lett., 29, 10.1029/2002GL015180.
6. Ilk K.H., 1999. Energieintegrale und Energieaustauschbezichungen der Bewegungen k unstlicher Erdsatelliten. In: F. Krumm und V.S. Schwarze (Eds.), Quo vadis geodesia?, Schritenreihe d. Inst. d. Studienganges Geodäsie und Geoinformatik, No. 1999.6-1, Univ. Stuttgart, Stuttgart, 253-259.
7. Jekeli C., 1999. The determination of gravitational potential differences from satellite-to-satellite tracking. Celest. Mech. Dyn. Astron., 75, 85-101.
8. Kaula W.M., 1966. Theory of Satellite Geodesy. Blaisdell Publishing Company, Waltham, USA.
9. Klees R., Koop R., Visser P.N.A.M. and van den Ussel J., 2000. Efficient gravity field recovery from GOCE gravity gradient observations. J. Geodesy, 74, 561-571.
10. Koch K.R. and Kusche J., 2002. Regularization of geopotential determination from satellite data by variance components. J. Geodesy, 76, 259-268.
11. Koop R. and Sünkel H. (Eds.) and the European GOCE Gravity Consortium, 2002. GOCE: Preparation of the GOCE Level 1 to Level 2 Data Processing. ESA/ESTEC Contract No. 14986/01/NL/DC, Final Report, European Space Agency, Noordwijk.
12. Pail R., 2002. In-orbit calibration and local gravity field continuation problem. ESA Project "From Eötvös to mGal+", Final Report, ESA/ESTEC Contract 14287/00/NL/DC, WP 1, 9-112, European Space Agency, Noordwijk.
13. Pail R. and Plank G., 2002. Assessment of three numerical solution strategies for gravity field recovery from GOCE satellite gravity gradiometry implemented on a parallel platform. J. Geodesy, 76, 462-474.
14. Pail R. and Wermuth M., 2003. GOCE SGG and SST quick-look gravity field analysis. Advances in Geosciences, 1, 1-5.
15. Plank G., 2002. Implementation of the pegma-package on massive parallel systems. ESA Project "From Eötvös to mGal+", Final report, WP 3, ESA/ESTEC Contract 14287/00/NL/DC, European Space Agency, 183-216.
16. Preimesberger T. and Pail R., 2003. GOCE quick-look gravity solution: application of the semianalytic approach in the case of data gaps and non-repeat orbits. Stud. Geophys. Geod., 47, 435-453.
17. Rapp R., Wang Y. and Pavlis N., 1991. The Ohio state 1991 geopotential and sea surface topography harmonic coefficient models. OSU Report, 410, Department of Geodetic Science and Surveying, The Ohio State University, Columbus.
18. Rummel R., van Gelderen M., Koop R., Schrama E., Sansó F., Brovelli M., Miggliaccio F. and Sacerdote F., 1993. Spherical harmonic analysis of satellite gradiometry. Neth. Geod. Comm., Publications on Geodesy, 39, Delft, The Netherlands.
19. Schuh W.D., 1996. Tailored Numerical Solution Strategies for the Global Determination of the Earth's Gravity Field. Mitteilungen geod. Inst. TU Graz, 81, Graz Univ. of Technology, Graz.
20. Schuh W.D., 2002. Improved modeling of SGG-data sets by advanced filter strategies. ESA Project "From Eötvös to mGal+", Final Report, WP2, ESA/ESTEC Contract 14287/00/NL/DC, European Space Agency, 113-181.
21. Sneeuw N., 2000. A Semi-Analytical Approach to Gravity Field Analysis from Satellite Observations. Dissertation, DGK, Reihe C, Munich, 527, Bayerische Akademie d. Wissenschaften, Munich.
22. Švehla D. and Rothacher M., 2002. Kinematic orbit determination of LEOs based on zero or double difference algorithms using simulated and real SST GPS data. IAG Proceedings, Symposium No. 125, Vistas for Geodesy in the New Millenium, Springer Verlag, Heidelberg.
23. Švehla D. and Rothacher M., 2003a. CHAMP double difference kinematic POD with ambiguity resolution. In: Ch. Reigber, H. Lühr and P. Schwintzer (Eds.), First CHAMP Mission Results for Gravity, Magnetic and Atmospheric Studies, Springer Verlag, 70-77.
24. Švehla D. and Rothacher M., 2003b. Kinematic and reduce-dynamic precise orbit determination of low Earth orbiters. Advances in Geosciences, 1, 47-56.
25. Visser P.N.A.M., van den Ijssel J., Koop R. and Klees R., 2001. Exploring gravity field determination from orbit perturbations of the European Gravity Mission GOCE. J. Geodesy, 75, 89-98.