Recent Results from the IGS Terrestrial Frame Combinations

  • P. RebischungEmail author
  • B. Garayt
Conference paper
Part of the International Association of Geodesy Symposia book series (IAG SYMPOSIA, volume 138)


Since February 2010, the Institut Géographique National (IGN) has replaced Natural Resources Canada as the terrestrial frame coordinator of the International GNSS Service (IGS). One important task of this coordination consists in weekly combinations of the solutions provided by nine IGS Analysis Centres into weekly IGS solutions which include station positions, Earth rotation parameters and coordinates of the geocenter.

These combinations enable inter-comparisons of the AC solutions. We show that such comparisons reveal systematic distortions between the AC solutions and that relating them to analysis specificities can be a way to improve the quality of both the AC and combined solutions.

Because the geocenter determination by GNSS still suffers from mismodeling issues, a rigorous combination of the AC geocenter estimates is not feasible yet. The comparison of recently reprocessed geocenter time series from GNSS and SLR is however encouraging.


IGS Terrestrial frame Combination GNSS 



All the participants to the IGS collaborative efforts are gratefully acknowledged. The significant efforts of ACs and GNAACs for submitting quality solutions week after week are particularly appreciated.


  1. Altamimi Z, Sillard P, Boucher C (2004) CATREF software: combination and analysis of terrestrial reference frames. LAREG technical note SP08, Institut Géographique National, FranceGoogle Scholar
  2. Altamimi Z, Collilieux X, Métivier L (2011) ITRF2008: an improved solution of the international terrestrial reference frame. J Geod. doi: 10.1007/s00190-011-0444-4 (in press)
  3. Ferland R (2006) Proposed IGS05 realization. IGS mail 5447, 70.html
  4. Ferland R (2010) Description of IGS submission to ITRF2008. Available at
  5. Ferland R, Piraszewski M (2009) The IGS-combined station coordinates, earth rotation parameters and apparent geocenter. J Geod 83:385–392. doi: 10.1007/s00190-008-0295-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ferland R, Kouba J, Hutchison D (2000) Analysis methodology and recent results of the IGS network combination. Earth Planets Space 52:953–957Google Scholar
  7. Hugentobler U, van der Marel H, Springer T (2006) Identification and mitigation of GNSS errors. Position paper, IGS 2006 workshop proceedingsGoogle Scholar
  8. Kouba J, Ray J, Watkins MM (1998) IGS reference frame realization. IGS analysis center workshop proceedings, European Space Operations Centre, Darmstadt, pp 139–172Google Scholar
  9. Ray J (2008) Analysis effects in IGS polar motion estimates. Available at
  10. Ray J (2009a) IGS data reprocessing campaign. Available at
  11. Ray J (2009b) IGS reprocessed polar motion estimates. Available at
  12. Ray J, Ferland R (2009) Status and prospects for IGS polar motion measurements. Presentation at IERS workshop on EOP combination and prediction, Warsaw. Available at
  13. Sillard P (1999) Modélisation des systèmes de référence terrestres. Contribution théorique et méthodologique. PhD dissertation, Observatoire de Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IGN/LAREG and GRGS, Université Paris DiderotParisFrance
  2. 2.IGN/SGNSaint-Mandé CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations