Accuracy assessment of the monthly GRACE geoids based upon a simulation

被引:24
作者
Schrama, E. J. O. [1 ]
Visser, P. N. A. M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Delft Univ Technol, NL-2629 HS Delft, Netherlands
关键词
temporal gravity; hydrology; ocean bottom pressure; tides; air pressure; GRACE; GPS;
D O I
10.1007/s00190-006-0085-1
中图分类号
P3 [地球物理学]; P59 [地球化学];
学科分类号
0708 ; 070902 ;
摘要
The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the effect of geophysical background model errors that affects temporal gravity solutions provided by the Gravity Recovery And Climate Experiment (GRACE). Initial performance estimates by Dickey et al. (1997) suggested a formal geoid RMS error better than 0.1 mm up to spherical harmonic degree 5. Now that the GRACE gravity models and data are available, it is evident that these original expectations were too optimistic. Our hypothesis is that this is partially explained by errors in geophysical background models that need to be applied in the GRACE data reduction, and that this effect was not considered by Dickey et al. (1997). We discuss the results of a closed-loop simulation, where satellite trajectory prediction software is used for the generation of GRACE range-rate data and GRACE orbit solutions with the help of the Global Positioning System (GPS). During the recovery step in our closed-loop simulation, we show that simulated nuisance signals (based on tide and air pressure model differences) map to a 0.7 mm geoid effect for periods longer than 3 months and to less than 0.4 mm for periods shorter than 3 months. The long-period geoid hydrology signal is at a level of 4.5 mm, while the short-period hydrology is at 0.25 mm. The long-period ocean bottom pressure (OBP) signal maps at 0.8 mm and for short periods it is 0.4 mm. We conclude that short-period effects are difficult to observe by GRACE and that long-period effects, like hydrology, are easier to recover than OBP variations.
引用
收藏
页码:67 / 80
页数:14
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1997, SATELLITE GRAVITY GE
[2]   Preliminary observations of global ocean mass variations with GRACE [J].
Chambers, DP ;
Wahr, J ;
Nerem, RS .
GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, 2004, 31 (13) :L133101-4
[3]   'DEOS_CHAMP-01C_70': a model of the Earth's gravity field computed from accelerations of the CHAMP satellite [J].
Ditmar, P ;
Kuznetsov, V ;
van der Sluijs, AAV ;
Schrama, E ;
Klees, R .
JOURNAL OF GEODESY, 2006, 79 (10-11) :586-601
[4]  
Gerlach C, 2003, FIRST CHAMP MISSION RESULTS FOR GRAVITY, MAGNETIC AND ATMOSPHERIC STUDIES, P134
[5]   Time-variable aliasing effects of ocean tides, atmosphere, and continental water mass on monthly mean GRACE gravity field [J].
Han, SC ;
Jekeli, C ;
Shum, CK .
JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH-SOLID EARTH, 2004, 109 (B4) :B044031-10
[6]  
Heiskanen W.A., 1967, PHYS GEODESY
[7]   The determination of gravitational potential differences from satellite-to-satellite tracking [J].
Jekeli, C .
CELESTIAL MECHANICS & DYNAMICAL ASTRONOMY, 1999, 75 (02) :85-101
[8]   Precise GRACE baseline determination using GPS [J].
Kroes, R ;
Montenbruck, O ;
Bertiger, W ;
Visser, P .
GPS SOLUTIONS, 2005, 9 (01) :21-31
[9]  
Lefèvre F, 2002, J ATMOS OCEAN TECH, V19, P1345, DOI 10.1175/1520-0426(2002)019<1345:FAGTFE>2.0.CO
[10]  
2