LAUSR.org creates dashboard-style pages of related content for over 1.5 million academic articles. Sign Up to like articles & get recommendations!

The unexpected signal in GRACE estimates of $$C_{20}$$C20

Photo from wikipedia

For science applications of the gravity recovery and climate experiment (GRACE) monthly solutions, the GRACE estimates of $$C_{20}$$C20 (or $$J_{2}$$J2) are typically replaced by the value determined from satellite laser… Click to show full abstract

For science applications of the gravity recovery and climate experiment (GRACE) monthly solutions, the GRACE estimates of $$C_{20}$$C20 (or $$J_{2}$$J2) are typically replaced by the value determined from satellite laser ranging (SLR) due to an unexpectedly strong, clearly non-geophysical, variation at a period of $$\sim $$∼160 days. This signal has sometimes been referred to as a tide-like variation since the period is close to the perturbation period on the GRACE orbits due to the spherical harmonic coefficient pair $$C_{22}/S_{22}$$C22/S22 of S2 ocean tide. Errors in the S2 tide model used in GRACE data processing could produce a significant perturbation to the GRACE orbits, but it cannot contribute to the $$\sim $$∼160-day signal appearing in $$C_{20}$$C20. Since the dominant contribution to the GRACE estimate of $$C_{20}$$C20 is from the global positioning system tracking data, a time series of 138 monthly solutions up to degree and order 10 ($$10\times 10$$10×10) were derived along with estimates of ocean tide parameters up to degree 6 for eight major tides. The results show that the $$\sim $$∼160-day signal remains in the $$C_{20}$$C20 time series. Consequently, the anomalous signal in GRACE $$C_{20}$$C20 cannot be attributed to aliasing from the errors in the S2 tide. A preliminary analysis of the cross-track forces acting on GRACE and the cross-track component of the accelerometer data suggests that a temperature-dependent systematic error in the accelerometer data could be a cause. Because a wide variety of science applications relies on the replacement values for $$C_{20}$$C20, it is essential that the SLR estimates are as reliable as possible. An ongoing concern has been the influence of higher degree even zonal terms on the SLR estimates of $$C_{20}$$C20, since only $$C_{20}$$C20 and $$C_{40}$$C40 are currently estimated. To investigate whether a better separation between $$C_{20}$$C20 and the higher-degree terms could be achieved, several combinations of additional SLR satellites were investigated. In addition, a series of monthly gravity field solutions ($$60\times 60$$60×60) were estimated from a combination of GRACE and SLR data. The results indicate that the combination of GRACE and SLR data might benefit the resonant orders in the GRACE-derived gravity fields, but it appears to degrade the recovery of the $$C_{20}$$C20 variations. In fact, the results suggest that the poorer recovery of $$C_{40}$$C40 by GRACE, where the annual variation is significantly underestimated, may be affecting the estimates of $$C_{20}$$C20. Consequently, it appears appropriate to continue using the SLR-based estimates of $$C_{20}$$C20, and possibly also $$C_{40}$$C40, to augment the existing GRACE mission.

Keywords: grace estimates; slr; grace; signal grace; estimates c20

Journal Title: Journal of Geodesy
Year Published: 2017

Link to full text (if available)


Share on Social Media:                               Sign Up to like & get
recommendations!

Related content

More Information              News              Social Media              Video              Recommended



                Click one of the above tabs to view related content.