Advertisement

Numerical investigation of downward continuation methods for airborne gravity data

  • I.N. Tziavos
  • V.D. Andritsanos
  • R. Forsberg
  • A.V. Olesen
Conference paper
Part of the International Association of Geodesy Symposia book series (IAG SYMPOSIA, volume 129)

Abstract

Two airborne surveys were carried out in the Crete region of Greece. A first airborne gravity survey was done in February 2001 to cover the southern part of the Aegean sea and the island of Crete in the frame of the European Community CAATER (Coordinated Access to Aircraft for Transnational Environmental Research) project, primarily aiming at the establishment of the gravity information needed to connect the existing gravity data on the island of Crete to the altimetric gravity field in the open sea. A second airborne gravity survey was carried out in January 2003 over the island of Gavdos and the surrounding sea areas south of Crete, in the frame of the GAVDOS project, an ongoing European Community-funded project aiming at the development of a calibration site in the island of Gavdos for altimetric satellites. The main goal of this paper is the evaluation of the airborne measurements from the above mentioned campaigns through a comparison of the downward continuation methods in the space and frequency domain. Different downward continuation schemes are evaluated, with comparisons to satellite altimetry showing accuracies close to 4 mGal in terms of standard deviation of the differences between the downward continued gravity anomalies and the altimetry derived gravity anomalies. Finally, some remarks are presented with regards to the construction of a detailed gravity anomaly grid based on all the available satellite and surface gravity data sources.

Keywords

Airborne gravimetry airborne gravity data downward continuation methods 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andersen OB and P Knudsen (1998): Global marine gravity field from the ERS-1 and Geosat geodetic mission altimetry, J. Geophys. Res. Vol. 103, No. C4, p. 8129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bruton AM (2000): Improving the accuracy and resolution of SINS/DGPS airborne gravimetry. Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. of Geomatics Engineering, University of Calgary.Google Scholar
  3. Forsberg R (1987): A new covariance model for inertial gravimetry and gradiometry. Journal of Geophysical Research, vol. 92, pp. 1305–1310.Google Scholar
  4. Forsberg R (2002): Downward continuation of airborne gravity data — an Arctic case story. In Proceedings of the 3rd Meeting of the International Gravity and Geoid Commission. IN Tziavos (ed.). Thessaloniki, Aug. 26–30.Google Scholar
  5. GAVDOS (2004). Internet url: http://www.gavdos.tuc.gr.Google Scholar
  6. Kern M (2003): An Analysis of the Combination and Downward Continuation of Satellite Airborne and Terrestrial Gravity Data. Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. of Geomatics Engineering, University of Calgary.Google Scholar
  7. Li YC (2000): Airborne Gravimetry for Geoid Determination. Ph.D. Thesis. Dept. of Geomatics Engineering, University of Calgary.Google Scholar
  8. Moritz H (1980): Advanced Physical Geodesy. Wichmann, 2nd edition, Karlsruhe.Google Scholar
  9. Novak P and B Heck (2002): Downward continuation and geoid determination based on band limited airborne gravity data. Journal of Geodesy, vol. 76, pp. 269–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Novak, P., M. Kern, K.-P. Schwarz, M.G. Sideris, B. Heck, S. Ferguson, Y. Hammada and M. Wei (2003): On geoid determination from airborne gravity. Journal of Geodesy, vol. 76, pp. 510–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Olesen AV, R Forsberg, K Keller, AHW Kearsley (2001): Error sources in airborne gravimetry employing spring-type gravimeter. In: K.P. Schwarz (ed.): Vistas for Geodesy in the new Millennium. Proc. LAG General Assembly, Budapest, Sept. 2001, Springer Verlag LAG Series 125, pp. 205–210.Google Scholar
  12. Olesen, AV, IN Tziavos and R Forsberg (2002): New Airborne Gravity Data Around Crete — First Results from CAATER Campaign. In Proceedings of the 3rd Meeting of the International Gravity and Geoid Commission. IN Tziavos (ed.). Thessaloniki, Aug. 26–30.Google Scholar
  13. Olesen, A.V. (2003): GAVDOS airborne gravity acquisition and processing report. GAVDOS project annual report, December 2003.Google Scholar
  14. Tscherning CC and RH Rapp (1974): Closed Covariance Expressions for Gravity Anomalies, Geoid Undulations, and Deflections of the Vertical implied by Anomaly Degree Variance Models. Rep. No. 208, Dept. of Geodetic Science and Surveying, Ohio State University, Ohio.Google Scholar
  15. Wei M (1999): From airborne gravimetry to airborne geoid mapping. Report of the LAG SSG 3.164. In Determination of the gravity field, R Forsberg (ed.), pp. 25–32.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • I.N. Tziavos
    • 1
  • V.D. Andritsanos
    • 1
  • R. Forsberg
    • 2
  • A.V. Olesen
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Geodesy and SurveyingAristotle University of ThessalonikiThessalonikiGreece
  2. 2.Geodynamics DepartmentNational Survey and Cadastre (KMS), DenmarkCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations