Benchmark forward gravity schemes: the gravity field of a realistic lithosphere model WINTERC-G

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F67985815%3A_____%2F22%3A00557403" target="_blank" >RIV/67985815:_____/22:00557403 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/se-13-849-2022" target="_blank" >https://doi.org/10.5194/se-13-849-2022</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/se-13-849-2022" target="_blank" >10.5194/se-13-849-2022</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Benchmark forward gravity schemes: the gravity field of a realistic lithosphere model WINTERC-G

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Several alternative gravity forward modelling methodologies and associated numerical codes with their own advantages and limitations are available for the solid Earth community. With upcoming state-of-the-art lithosphere density models and accurate global gravity field data sets, it is vital to understand the opportunities and limitations of the various approaches. In this paper, we discuss the four widely used techniques: global spherical harmonics (GSH), tesseroid integration ( LESS), triangle integration (TRI), and hexahedral integration (HEX). A constant density shell benchmark shows that all four codes can produce similar precise gravitational potential fields. Two additional shell tests were conducted with more complicated density structures: laterally varying density structures and a crust- mantle interface density. The differences between the four codes were all below 1.5 % of the modelled gravity signal suitable for reproducing satellite-acquired gravity data. TESS and GSH produced the most similar potential fields (< 0.3 %).

Název v anglickém jazyce

Benchmark forward gravity schemes: the gravity field of a realistic lithosphere model WINTERC-G

Popis výsledku anglicky

Several alternative gravity forward modelling methodologies and associated numerical codes with their own advantages and limitations are available for the solid Earth community. With upcoming state-of-the-art lithosphere density models and accurate global gravity field data sets, it is vital to understand the opportunities and limitations of the various approaches. In this paper, we discuss the four widely used techniques: global spherical harmonics (GSH), tesseroid integration ( LESS), triangle integration (TRI), and hexahedral integration (HEX). A constant density shell benchmark shows that all four codes can produce similar precise gravitational potential fields. Two additional shell tests were conducted with more complicated density structures: laterally varying density structures and a crust- mantle interface density. The differences between the four codes were all below 1.5 % of the modelled gravity signal suitable for reproducing satellite-acquired gravity data. TESS and GSH produced the most similar potential fields (< 0.3 %).

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

10508 - Physical geography

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2022

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Solid Earth

ISSN

1869-9510

e-ISSN

1869-9529

Svazek periodika

13

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

5

Stát vydavatele periodika

DE - Spolková republika Německo

Počet stran výsledku

25

Strana od-do

849-873

Kód UT WoS článku

000790289900001

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85130637814