Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “gravity model”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2000

Feeling Gravity's Pull: Gravity Modeling. The Gravity Field of Mars

Most people take the constant presence of gravitys pull for granted. However, the Earth's gravitational strength actually varies from location to location. This variation occurs because mass, which influences an object's gravitational pull, is not evenly distributed within the planet. Changes in topography, such as glacial movement, an earthquake, or a rise in the ocean level, can subtly affect the gravity field. An accurate measurement of the Earth's gravity field helps us understand the distribution of mass beneath the surface. This insight can assist us in locating petroleum, mineral deposits, ground water, and other valuable substances. Gravity mapping can also help notice or verify changes in sea surface height and other ocean characteristics. Such changes may indicate climate change from polar ice melting and other phenomena. In addition, gravity mapping can indicate how land moves under the surface after earthquakes and other plate tectonic processes. Finally, changes in the Earth's gravity field might indicate a shift in water distribution that could affect agriculture, water supplies for population centers, and long-term weather prediction. Scientists can map out the Earth's gravity field by watching satellite orbits. When a satellite shifts in vertical position, it might be passing over an area where gravity changes in strength. Gravity is only one factor that may shape a satellite's orbital path. To derive a gravity measurement from satellite movement, scientists must remove other factors that might affect a satellite's position: 1. Drag from atmospheric friction. 2. Pressure from solar radiation as it heads toward Earth and. as it is reflected off the surface of the Earth 3. Gravitational pull from the Sun, the Moon, and other planets in the Solar System. 4. The effect of tides. 5. Relativistic effects. Scientists must also correct for the satellite tracking process. For example, the tracking signal must be corrected for refraction through the atmosphere of the Earth. Supercomputers can calculate the effect of gravity for specific locations in space following a mathematical process known as spherical harmonics, which quantifies the gravity field of a planetary body. The process is based on Laplace's fundamental differential equation of gravity. The accuracy of a spherical harmonic solution is rated by its degree and order. Minute variations in gravity are measured against the geoid, a surface of constant gravity acceleration at mean sea level. The geoid reference gravity model strength includes the central body gravitational attraction (9.8 m/sq s) and a geopotential variation in latitude partially caused by the rotation of the Earth. The rotational effect modifies the shape of the geoid to be more like an ellipsoid, rather than a perfect, circle. Variations of gravity strength from the ellipsoidal reference model are measured in units called milli-Galileos (mGals). One mGal equals 10(exp -5) m/sq s. Research projects have also measured the gravity fields of other planetary bodies, as noted in the user profile that follows. From this information, we may make inferences about our own planet's internal structure and evolution. Moreover, mapping the gravity fields of other planets can help scientists plot the most fuel-efficient course for spacecraft expeditions to those planets.

Lemoine, Frank↗
NASA NTRS1994

Gravity model development for TOPEX/POSEIDON: Joint gravity models 1 and 2

The TOPEX/POSEIDON (T/P) prelaunch Joint Gravity Model-1 (JGM-1) and the postlaunch JGM-2 Earth gravitational models have been developed to support precision orbit determination for T/P. Each of these models is complete to degree 70 in spherical harmonics and was computed from a combination of satellite tracking data, satellite altimetry, and surface gravimetry. While improved orbit determination accuracies for T/P have driven the improvements in the models, the models are general in application and also provide an improved geoid for oceanographic computations. The postlaunch model, JGM-2, which includes T/P satellite laser ranging (SLR) and Doppler orbitography and radiopositioning integrated by satellite (DORIS) tracking data, introduces radial orbit errors for T/P that are only 2 cm RMS with the commission errors of the marine geoid for terms to degree 70 being +/- 25 cm. Errors in modeling the nonconservative forces acting on T/P increase the total radial errors to only 3-4 cm root mean square (RMS), a result much better than premission goals. While the orbit accuracy goal for T/P has been far surpassed geoid errors still prevent the absolute determination of the ocean dynamic topography for wavelengths shorter than about 2500 km. Only a dedicated gravitational field satellite mission will likely provide the necessary improvement in the geoid.

Nerem, R. S.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Influence of World and Gravity Model Selection on Surface Interacting Vehicle Simulations

A vehicle simulation is surface-interacting if the state of the vehicle (position, velocity, and acceleration) relative to the surface is important. Surface-interacting simulations perform ascent, entry, descent, landing, surface travel, or atmospheric flight. Modeling of gravity is an influential environmental factor for surface-interacting simulations. Gravity is the free-fall acceleration observed from a world-fixed frame that rotates with the world. Thus, gravity is the sum of gravitation and the centrifugal acceleration due to the world s rotation. In surface-interacting simulations, the fidelity of gravity at heights above the surface is more significant than gravity fidelity at locations in inertial space. A surface-interacting simulation cannot treat the gravity model separately from the world model, which simulates the motion and shape of the world. The world model's simulation of the world's rotation, or lack thereof, produces the centrifugal acceleration component of gravity. The world model s reproduction of the world's shape will produce different positions relative to the world center for a given height above the surface. These differences produce variations in the gravitation component of gravity. This paper examines the actual performance of world and gravity/gravitation pairs in a simulation using the Earth.

Madden, Michael M.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Further Investigations of Gravity Modeling on Surface-Interacting Vehicle Simulations

A vehicle simulation is "surface-interacting" if the state of the vehicle (position, velocity, and acceleration) relative to the surface is important. Surface-interacting simulations perform ascent, entry, descent, landing, surface travel, or atmospheric flight. The dynamics of surface-interacting simulations are influenced by the modeling of gravity. Gravity is the sum of gravitation and the centrifugal acceleration due to the world s rotation. Both components are functions of position relative to the world s center and that position for a given set of geodetic coordinates (latitude, longitude, and altitude) depends on the world model (world shape and dynamics). Thus, gravity fidelity depends on the fidelities of the gravitation model and the world model and on the interaction of the gravitation and world model. A surface-interacting simulation cannot treat the gravitation separately from the world model. This paper examines the actual performance of different pairs of world and gravitation models (or direct gravity models) on the travel of a subsonic civil transport in level flight under various starting conditions.

Madden, Michael M.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Gravity Modeling Effects on Surface-Interacting Vehicles in Supersonic Flight

A vehicle simulation is "surface-interacting" if the state of the vehicle (position, velocity, and acceleration) relative to the surface is important. Surface-interacting simulations per-form ascent, entry, descent, landing, surface travel, or atmospheric flight. The dynamics of surface-interacting simulations are influenced by the modeling of gravity. Gravity is the sum of gravitation and the centrifugal acceleration due to the world s rotation. Both components are functions of position relative to the world s center and that position for a given set of geodetic coordinates (latitude, longitude, and altitude) depends on the world model (world shape and dynamics). Thus, gravity fidelity depends on the fidelities of the gravitation model and the world model and on the interaction of these two models. A surface-interacting simulation cannot treat gravitation separately from the world model. This paper examines the actual performance of different pairs of world and gravitation models (or direct gravity models) on the travel of a supersonic aircraft in level flight under various start-ing conditions.

Madden, Michael M.↗
NASA NTRS1985

On the accuracy of recent Goddard gravity models

The Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) has occupied a central position within NASA with respect to the development of earth gravity models. The gravity models at Goddard, which are referred to as the Goddard earth models (GEM's) have been under development for more than 15 years. The fields have increased in size and (apparent) accuracy with the inclusion of new tracking data, better nongravitational force modeling, and more orbits over a wide range of inclinations and mean motions. The usefulness of the considered models depends largely on accuracy estimates. The present paper is concerned with a reevaluation of earlier accuracy assessments, taking into account the accuracies of the GEM 9 and the GEM-L2 models. It is found that GEM 9 is about 30 percent more accurate than originally estimated in 1979 from older gravimetry data.

Lerch, F. J.↗
NASA NTRS1992

High-resolution gravity model of Venus

The anomalous gravity field of Venus shows high correlation with surface features revealed by radar. We extract gravity models from the Doppler tracking data from the Pioneer Venus Orbiter by means of a two-step process. In the first step, we solve the nonlinear spacecraft state estimation problem using a Kalman filter-smoother. The Kalman filter has been evaluated through simulations. This evaluation and some unusual features of the filter are discussed. In the second step, we perform a geophysical inversion using a linear Bayesian estimator. To allow an unbiased comparison between gravity and topography, we use a simulation technique to smooth and distort the radar topographic data so as to yield maps having the same characteristics as our gravity maps. The maps presented cover 2/3 of the surface of Venus and display the strong topography-gravity correlation previously reported. The topography-gravity scatter plots show two distinct trends.

Reasenberg, R. D.↗
NASA NTRS1973

Gravity model improvement investigation

This investigation was undertaken to improve the gravity model and hence the ocean geoid. A specific objective is the determination of the gravity field and geoid with a space resolution of approximately 5 deg and a height resolution of the order of five meters. The concept of the investigation is to utilize both GEOS-C altimeter and satellite-to-satellite tracking data to achieve the gravity model improvement. It is also planned to determine the geoid in selected regions with a space resolution of about a degree and a height resolution of the order of a meter or two. The short term objectives include the study of the gravity field in the GEOS-C calibration area outlined by Goddard, Bermuda, Antigua, and Cape Kennedy, and also in the eastern Pacific area which is viewed by ATS-F.

Siry, J. W.↗
NASA NTRS1993

New error calibration tests for gravity models using subset solutions and independent data - Applied to GEM-T3

A new method has been developed to provide a direct test of the error calibrations of gravity models based on actual satellite observations. The basic approach projects the error estimates of the gravity model parameters onto satellite observations, and the results of these projections are then compared with data residual computed from the orbital fits. To allow specific testing of the gravity error calibrations, subset solutions are computed based on the data set and data weighting of the gravity model. The approach is demonstrated using GEM-T3 to show that the gravity error estimates are well calibrated and that reliable predictions of orbit accuracies can be achieved for independent orbits.

Lerch, F. J.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Terrestrial gravity data analysis for interim gravity model improvement

This is the first status report for the Interim Gravity Model research effort that was started on June 30, 1986. The basic theme of this study is to develop appropriate models and adjustment procedures for estimating potential coefficients from terrestrial gravity data. The plan is to use the latest gravity data sets to produce coefficient estimates as well as to provide normal equations to NASA for use in the TOPEX/POSEIDON gravity field modeling program.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2003

GRACE gravity model: assssment in terms of deep ocean currents from hydrography and from the ECCO ocean model

Here we assess the new generation of gravity models, derived from GRACE data. The differences between a global geoid model (one from GRACE data and one the well-known EGM-96), minus a Mean Sea Surface derived from over a decade of altimetric data are compared to hydrographic data from the Levitus compilation and to the ECCO numerical ocean model, which assimilates altimetry and other data.

oceans ocean currents El Nino TOPEX Jason seawinds↗
NASA NTRS1986

Gravity model development for precise orbit computations for satellite altimetry

Two preliminary gravity models developed as a first step in reaching the TOPEX/Poseidon modeling goals are discussed. They were obtained by NASA-Goddard from an analysis of exclusively satellite tracking observations. With the new Preliminary Gravity Solution-T2 model, an improved global estimate of the field is achieved with an improved description of the geoid.

Marsh, James G.↗
NASA NTRS1971

Tests and comparisons of gravity models.

Optical observations of the GEOS satellites were used to obtain orbital solutions with different sets of geopotential coefficients. The solutions were compared before and after modification to high order terms (necessary because of resonance) and were then analyzed by comparing subsequent observations with predicted trajectories. The most important source of error in orbit determination and prediction for the GEOS satellites is the effect of resonance found in most published sets of geopotential coefficients. Modifications to the sets yield greatly improved orbits in most cases. The results of these comparisons suggest that with the best optical tracking systems and gravity models, satellite position error due to gravity model uncertainty can reach 50-100 m during a heavily observed 5-6 day orbital arc. If resonant coefficients are estimated, the uncertainty is reduced considerably.

Marsh, J. G.↗
NASA NTRS1979

Gravity model improvement using GEOS 3 /GEM 9 and 10/

Although errors in previous gravity models have produced large uncertainties in the orbital position of GEOS 3, significant improvement has been obtained with new geopotential solutions, Goddard Earth Model (GEM) 9 and 10. The GEM 9 and 10 solutions for the potential coefficients and station coordinates are presented along with a discussion of the new techniques employed. Also presented and discussed are solutions for three fundamental geodetic reference parameters, viz. the mean radius of the earth, the gravitational constant, and mean equatorial gravity. Evaluation of the gravity field is examined together with evaluation of GEM 9 and 10 for orbit determination accuracy. The major objectives of GEM 9 and 10 are achieved. GEOS 3 orbital accuracies from these models are about 1 m in their radial components for 5-day arc lengths. Both models yield significantly improved results over GEM solutions when compared to surface gravimetry, Skylab and GEOS 3 altimetry, and highly accurate BE-C (Beacon Explorer-C) laser ranges. The new values of the parameters discussed are given.

Lerch, F. J.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Time Variable Gravity modeling for Precise Orbits Across the TOPEX/Poseidon, Jason-l and Jason-2 Missions

Modeling of the Time Variable Gravity (TVG) is believed to constitute one of the the largest remaining source of orbit error for altimeter satellite POD. The GSFC operational TVG model consists of forward modeling the atmospheric gravity using ECMWF 6-hour pressure data, a GRACE derived 20x20 annual field to account for changes in the hydrology and ocean water mass, and linear rates for C20, C30, C40, based on 17 years of SLR data analysis (IERS 2003) using the EIGEN-GL04S1 (a GRACE+Lageos-based geopotential solution). Although the GSFC Operational model can be applied from 1987, there may be long-term variations not captured by these linear models, and more importantly the linear models may not be consistent with more recent surface mass trends due to global climate change, We have evaluated the impact of TVG in two different wavs: (1) by using the more recent EIGEN-6S gravity model developed by the GFZ/GRGS tearm, which consists of annual, semi-annual and secular changes in the coefficients to 50x50 determined over 8(?) years of GRACE+Lageos+GOCE data (2003-200?): (2) Application of 4x4 solutions developed from a multi satellite SLR+DORIS solution based on GGM03S that span the period from 1993 to 2011. We have evaluated the recently released EIGEN6s static and time-varying gravity field for Jason-2 (J2). Jason-I (J1), and TOPEX/Posiedon (TP) Precise Orbit Determination (POD) spanning 1993-2011. Although EIGEN6s shows significant improvement for J2POD spanning 2008 - 2011, it also shows significant degradation for TP POD from 1992. The GSFC 4x4 time SLR+DORIS-based series spans 1993 to mid 2011, and shows promise for POD. We evaluate the performance of the different TVG models based on analysis of tracking data residuals use of independent data such as altimeter crossovers, and through analysis of differences with internally-generated and externally generated orbits.

Zelensky, Nikita P.↗