GRAIL gravity field determination using the Celestial Mechanics Approach

The NASA mission GRAIL (Gravity Recovery and Interior Laboratory) inherited its concept from the GRACE (Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment) mission to determine the gravity field of the Moon. We present lunar gravity fields based on the data of GRAIL’s primary mission phase. Gravity field recovery is realized in the framework of the Celestial Mechanics Approach, using a development version of the Bernese GNSS Software along with Ka-band range-rate data series as observations and the GNI1B positions provided by NASA JPL as pseudo-observations. By comparing our results with the official level-2 GRAIL gravity field models we show that the lunar gravity field can be recovered with a high quality by adapting the Celestial Mechanics Approach, even when using pre-GRAIL gravity field models as a priori fields and when replacing sophisticated models of non-gravitational accelerations by appropriately spaced pseudo-stochastic pulses (i.e., instantaneous velocity changes). We present and evaluate two lunar gravity field solutions up to degree and order 200 – AIUB-GRL200A and AIUB-GRL200B. While the first solution uses no gravity field information beyond degree 200, the second is obtained by using the official GRAIL field GRGM900C up to degree and order 660 as a priori information. This reduces the omission errors and demonstrates the potential quality of our solution if we resolved the gravity field to higher degree.

GPS-only gravity field determination from GOCE data

The Gravity field and steady-state Ocean Circulation Explorer (GOCE) is now in orbit for more than four years. This is longer than the originally planned lifetime of the satellite and after three years on the same altitude the satellite has been lowered to 235 km in several steps. In the frame of the GOCE High-level Processing Facility the Astronomical Institute of the University of Bern (AIUB) is responsible for the determination of the official Precise Science Orbit (PSO) product. Kinematic GOCE orbits are part of this product and are used by several institutions in- and outside the HPF for determining the low degrees of the Earth’s gravity field. AIUB GOCE GPS-only gravity field solutions using the Celestial Mechanics Approach and covering the Release 4 period as well as a more recent time interval at the lower orbit altitude are shown and discussed. Special attention is paid to the impact of systematic deficiencies in the kinematic orbits on the resulting gravity fields, e.g., related to the geomagnetic equator, and on possibilities to get rid of them.

Geocenter coordinates estimated from GNSS data as viewed by perturbation theory

Time series of geocenter coordinates were determined with data of two global navigation satellite systems (GNSSs), namely the U.S. GPS (Global Positioning System) and the Russian GLONASS (Global’naya Nawigatsionnaya Sputnikowaya Sistema). The data was recorded in the years 2008–2011 by a global network of 92 permanently observing GPS/GLONASS receivers. Two types of daily solutions were generated independently for each GNSS, one including the estimation of geocenter coordinates and one without these parameters. A fair agreement for GPS and GLONASS was found in the geocenter x- and y-coordinate series. Our tests, however, clearly reveal artifacts in the z-component determined with the GLONASS data. Large periodic excursions in the GLONASS geocenter z-coordinates of about 40 cm peak-to-peak are related to the maximum elevation angles of the Sun above/below the orbital planes of the satellite system and thus have a period of about 4 months (third of a year). A detailed analysis revealed that the artifacts are almost uniquely governed by the differences of the estimates of direct solar radiation pressure (SRP) in the two solution series (with and without geocenter estimation). A simple formula is derived, describing the relation between the geocenter z-coordinate and the corresponding parameter of the SRP. The effect can be explained by first-order perturbation theory of celestial mechanics. The theory also predicts a heavy impact on the GNSS-derived geocenter if once-per-revolution SRP parameters are estimated in the direction of the satellite’s solar panel axis. Specific experiments using GPS observations revealed that this is indeed the case. Although the main focus of this article is on GNSS, the theory developed is applicable to all satellite observing techniques. We applied the theory to satellite laser ranging (SLR) solutions using LAGEOS. It turns out that the correlation between geocenter and SRP parameters is not a critical issue for the SLR solutions. The reasons are threefold: The direct SRP is about a factor of 30–40 smaller for typical geodetic SLR satellites than for GNSS satellites, allowing it in most cases to not solve for SRP parameters (ruling out the correlation between these parameters and the geocenter coordinates); the orbital arc length of 7 days (which is typically used in SLR analysis) contains more than 50 revolutions of the LAGEOS satellites as compared to about two revolutions of GNSS satellites for the daily arcs used in GNSS analysis; the orbit geometry is not as critical for LAGEOS as for GNSS satellites, because the elevation angle of the Sun w.r.t. the orbital plane is usually significantly changing over 7 days.