Engineering topics

Le Bail, K.

Publications and source records attributed to Le Bail, K..

7 records

NASA NTRS2016

The Development of the GSFC DORIS Contribution to ITRF2014

The NASA GSFC DORIS analysis center has processed data from January 1993 to December 2014 and provided 1141 weekly solutionsin the form of normal equations for incorporation into the DORIS solution for ITRF2014. The solution time series, designated asgscwd26, were based on tracking data to eleven DORIS satellites divided generally into seven-day arcs. With respect to the ITRF2008 submission (Le Bail et al., 2010), the measurement model was updated to model the beacon frequency variations at certain DORIS sites,to apply the DORIS antenna phase law for the Starec and Alcatel antennae, and to apply the antenna offset corrections in the NASAGSFC orbit determination software rather than using the data-supplied corrections. We show that computing the antenna offset correctionsin the orbit determination software is superior to using the offset corrections that are supplied with the DORIS data, and that thisimproves the RMS of fit for SPOT-2, Envisat, SPOT-4, and SPOT-5. The updates for the force model included: (1) the development of improved nonconservative force modeling for SPOT-2, SPOT-3, SPOT-5, Envisat, and HY-2A, and (2) the application of an updatedstatic gravity model based on GRACE and GOCE data, and weekly models of the variations in the low degree gravity field deducedindependently from tracking by Satellite Laser Ranging (SLR) and DORIS. The post-ITRF2008 DORIS coordinate WRMS afterthe launch of Envisat and SPOT-5 is improved from 11.20 to 12.45 mm with ITRF2008 (Le Bail et al., 2010), to between 8.50 and9.99 mm with the gscwd26 SINEX solution. The application of the DORIS antenna phase laws shifts the DORIS scale wrt DPOD2008by +6.0 mm from 19930103 to 20020606, and by +11.4 mm from 20020613 to 20111030. The application of more detailed models of time-variable gravity reduces the slopes in the Helmert transformation parameters Tx, and Ty (w.r.t. DPOD2008) after 2005. The annual amplitude in these parameters is reduced from 3.2 mm (for Tx), 4.1 mm (for Ty), to 1.7 mm (for Tx) and 2.8 mm (for Ty).

Lemoine, F. G.↗

NASA NTRS2015

Comparison of Realizations of the Terrestrial Reference Frame

IGN and DGFI both generated realizations of the terrestrial reference frame under the auspices of the IERS from combination of the same space geodetic data. We compared the IGN and DGFI TRFs with a GSFC CALC/SOLVE TRF. WRMS position and velocity differences for the 40 most frequently observed sites were 2-3 mm and 0.3-0.4 mm/year. There was a scale difference of 0.39/0.09 ppb between the IGN/DGFI realizations and the GSFC solution. When we fixed positions and velocities to either the IGN or DGFI values in CALC/SOLVE solutions, the resulting EOP estimates were not significantly different from the estimates from a standard TRF solution.

Comparison↗

NASA NTRS2012

Improved DORIS Reference Frame Solution from NASA GSFC

At GSFC, since 2008, we have been routinely processing data to DORIS and SLR satellites from 1993. A SINEX time series, based on processing of DORIS data from 1993 to 2008 (designated wd10) was included in the IDS combination for ITRF2008 (Le Bail et al., 2010; Valette et al., 2010). We have updated this series with the addition of new satellites Cryosat2 and Jason-2, and the new series (designated wd12) is routinely submitted to the IDS combination center for inclusion in the DORIS operational combination. In preparation for an eventual reprocessing of all the DORIS data for eventual inclusion in a new ITRF we are now updating our processing standards. As a first step, we update to the ITRF2008 reference frame as expressed through DPOD2008. In addition, we apply the GMF and GPT models for the troposphere, and we update the modeling for the change in pitch of SPOT-5 solar arrays after January 2008. Finally, we consider updated standards for static and time-variable gravity modeling. With this base series, we compute cumulative solution, expressed in ITRF2008, and examine the week-by-week station solution parameters, in particular scale, WRMS and Helmert transformation parameters. Finally we consider a joint solution with SLR, where the DORIS system is tied to SLR in two ways, first through the orbit computations using satellites tracked by both SLR and DORIS (e.g. TOPEX, Envisat, Jason-2, Cryosat2), and second through explicit ties at collocated sites. As one of the means of testing of these DORIS-only and SLR+DORIS solutions, we examine the vertical rates at sites in the vicinity of tide gauges.

Lemoine, Frank↗

NASA NTRS2011

Weekly Solutions of Time-Variable Gravity from 1993 to 2010

The GRACE mission has been highly successful in determining the time-variable gravity field of the Earth, producing monthly or even more frequent solutions (cf. 10-day) solutions using both spherical harmonics and mascons. However the GRACE time series only commences in 2002 - 2003 and a gap of several years may occur in the series before a GRACE follow-on satellite is launched. Satellites tracked by SLR and DORIS have also been used to study time variations in the Earth's gravitational field. These include (most recently) the solutions of Cox and Chao (2002), Cheng et al. (2004, 2007) and Lemoine et al. (2007). In this paper we discuss the development of a new time series of low degree spherical harmonic fields based on the available SLR, DORIS and GPS data. We develop simultaneous solutions for both the geocenter and the low degree harmonics up to 5x5. The solutions integrate data from SLR geodetic satellites (e.g., Lageos1, Lageos2, Starlette, Stella, Ajisai, Larets, Westpac), altimetry satellites (TOPEX/Poseidon, Envisat, Jason-1, Jason-2), and satellites tracked solely by DORIS (e.g. SPOT2-5). We discuss some pertinent aspects of the satellite-specific modeling. We include altimeter crossovers in the weekly solutions where feasible and time permits. The resulting geocenter time series is compared with geophysical model predictions and other independently-derived solutions. Over the GRACE time period the fidelity and consistency with the GRACE solutions are presented.

Lemoine, F.↗

NASA NTRS2011

Combined Weekly Coordinate Solutions from SLR and DORIS

In International Terrestrial Reference Frame (ITRF) 2005 and ITRF2008, the approach for the construction of solutions by the IERS has been for individual analysis centers of each technique to process geodetic tracking data, and for each technique to develop a solution (or contribution) that is integrated into the final ITRF solution by careful combination of the technique solutions. The connections between the geodetic networks are realized by the application of local ties. In an alternate approach, we may assure processing homogeneity by creating normal equations for different techniques with the same orbit determination software, using identically derived algorithms. Another derivative of this approach is to realize the ties between the techniques using satellites tracked with multiple techniques; in effect tieing the networks together using satellite dynamics. In this solution, we develop a time series and a set of cumulative solutions from Satellite Laser Ranging (SLR) & Doppler Orbitography and Radio-positioning Integrated by Satellite (DORIS) based on homogeneous processing with the NASA GEODYN precise orbit determination suite of programs, where we jointly combine weekly the SLR data to Lageos1, Lageos2, Starlette, and Stella with the DORIS data from SPOT2-SPOT5, as well as satellites that utilize both techniques (TOPEX/Poseidon, Envisat, Jason-2). We discuss the modeling that is applied including upgrades implemented since the submission of the GSC ITRF2008 contributions for IDS. Firstly, we compare the SLR-only solutions comprising four geodetic satellites with the standard approach of utilizing only Lageos1 & Lageos2. Secondly, we evaluate the impact on the DORIS coordinates of the joint analysis with the SLR data.

Lemoine, F.↗

NASA NTRS2010

GSFC DORIS Contribution to ITRF2008

The NASA GSFC DORIS analysis center has provided weekly DORIS solutions from November 1992 to January 2009 (839 SINEX files) of station positions and Earth Orientation Parameters for inclusion in the DORIS contribution to ITRF2008. The NASA GSFC GEODYN orbit determination software was used to process the orbits and produce the normal equations. The weekly SINEX gscwd 10 submissions included DORIS data from Envisat, TOPEX!Poseidon, SPOT-2, SPOT-3, SPOT-4, SPOT-5. The orbits were mostly seven days in length (except for weeks with data gaps or maneuvers). The processing used the GRACE-derived EIGEN-GL04S1 gravity model, updated modeling for time-variable gravity, the GOT4.7 ocean tide model and tuned satellite-specific macromodels for SPOT -2, SPOT -3, SPOT -4, SPOT-5 and TOPEX/Poseidon. The University College London (UCL) radiation pressure model for Envisat improves nonconservative force modeling for this satellite, reducing the median residual empirical daily along-track accelerations from 3.75 x 10-9 m/s(exp 2) with the a priori macromodel to 0.99 x 10-9 m/s2 with the UCL model. For the SPOT and Envisat DORIS satellite orbits from 2003 to 2008, we obtain average RMS overlaps of 0.8-0.9 cm in the radial direction, 2.1-3.4 cm cross-track, and 1.7-2.3 cm along-track. The RMS orbit differences between Envisat DORIS-only and SLR & DORIS orbits are 1.1 cm radially, 6.4 cm along-track and 3.7 cm cross-track and are characterized by systematic along-track mean offsets due to the Envisat DORIS system time bias of +/- 5-1O micro s. We obtain a good agreement between the geometrically-determined geocenter parameters and geocenter parameters determined dynamically from analysis of the degree one terms of the geopotential. The intrinsic RMS weekly position repeatability with respect to the IDS-3 combination ranges from 2.5 to 3.0 cm in 1993-1994 to 1.5 cm in 2007-2008.

Le Bail, K.↗

NASA NTRS2010

Theory and Realization of Global Terrestrial Reference Systems

Comparison of realizations of the terrestrial reference frame. IGN and DGFI both generated realizations of the terrestrial reference frame under the auspices of the IERS from combination of the same space geodetic data. We examined both results for VLBI sites using the full geodetic VLBI data set with respect to site positions and velocities and time series of station positions, baselines and Earth orientation parameters. One of the difficulties encountered was matching episodic breaks and periods of non-linear motion of the two realizations with the VLBI models. Our analysis and conclusions will be discussed.

Ma, C.↗