Cargando…
The Accuracy Assessment of the PREM and AK135-F Radial Density Models
The Earth’s synthetic density and gravitational models can be used to validate numerical methods for global (or large-scale) gravimetric forward and inverse modelling formulated either in the spatial or spectral domains. The Preliminary Reference Earth Model (PREM) density parameters can be adopted...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9185503/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35684801 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s22114180 |
_version_ | 1784724738751332352 |
---|---|
author | Tenzer, Robert Ji, Yuting Chen, Wenjin |
author_facet | Tenzer, Robert Ji, Yuting Chen, Wenjin |
author_sort | Tenzer, Robert |
collection | PubMed |
description | The Earth’s synthetic density and gravitational models can be used to validate numerical methods for global (or large-scale) gravimetric forward and inverse modelling formulated either in the spatial or spectral domains. The Preliminary Reference Earth Model (PREM) density parameters can be adopted as a 1-D reference density model and further refined using more detailed 2-D or 3-D crust and mantle density models. Alternatively, the AK135-F density parameters can be used for this purpose. In this study, we investigate options for a refinement of the Earth’s synthetic density model by assessing the accuracy of available 1-D density models, specifically the PREM and AK135-F radial density parameters. First, we use density parameters from both models to estimate the Earth’s total mass and compare these estimates with published results. We then estimate the Earth’s gravity field parameters, particularly the geoidal geopotential number W(0) and the mean gravitational attraction and compare them with published values. According to our results, the Earth’s total mass from the two models (the PREM and the AK135-F) differ less than 0.02% and 0.01%, respectively, when compared with the value adopted by the International Astronomical Union (IAU). The geoidal geopotential values of the two models differ from the value adopted by the IAU by less than 0.1% and 0.04%, respectively. The values of the mean gravitational attraction of the two models differ less than 0.02% and 0.08%, respectively, when compared with the value obtained from the geocentric gravitational constant and the Earth’s mean radius. These numerical findings ascertain that the PREM and AK135-F density parameters are suitable for defining a 1-D reference density model. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9185503 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-91855032022-06-11 The Accuracy Assessment of the PREM and AK135-F Radial Density Models Tenzer, Robert Ji, Yuting Chen, Wenjin Sensors (Basel) Article The Earth’s synthetic density and gravitational models can be used to validate numerical methods for global (or large-scale) gravimetric forward and inverse modelling formulated either in the spatial or spectral domains. The Preliminary Reference Earth Model (PREM) density parameters can be adopted as a 1-D reference density model and further refined using more detailed 2-D or 3-D crust and mantle density models. Alternatively, the AK135-F density parameters can be used for this purpose. In this study, we investigate options for a refinement of the Earth’s synthetic density model by assessing the accuracy of available 1-D density models, specifically the PREM and AK135-F radial density parameters. First, we use density parameters from both models to estimate the Earth’s total mass and compare these estimates with published results. We then estimate the Earth’s gravity field parameters, particularly the geoidal geopotential number W(0) and the mean gravitational attraction and compare them with published values. According to our results, the Earth’s total mass from the two models (the PREM and the AK135-F) differ less than 0.02% and 0.01%, respectively, when compared with the value adopted by the International Astronomical Union (IAU). The geoidal geopotential values of the two models differ from the value adopted by the IAU by less than 0.1% and 0.04%, respectively. The values of the mean gravitational attraction of the two models differ less than 0.02% and 0.08%, respectively, when compared with the value obtained from the geocentric gravitational constant and the Earth’s mean radius. These numerical findings ascertain that the PREM and AK135-F density parameters are suitable for defining a 1-D reference density model. MDPI 2022-05-31 /pmc/articles/PMC9185503/ /pubmed/35684801 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s22114180 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Tenzer, Robert Ji, Yuting Chen, Wenjin The Accuracy Assessment of the PREM and AK135-F Radial Density Models |
title | The Accuracy Assessment of the PREM and AK135-F Radial Density Models |
title_full | The Accuracy Assessment of the PREM and AK135-F Radial Density Models |
title_fullStr | The Accuracy Assessment of the PREM and AK135-F Radial Density Models |
title_full_unstemmed | The Accuracy Assessment of the PREM and AK135-F Radial Density Models |
title_short | The Accuracy Assessment of the PREM and AK135-F Radial Density Models |
title_sort | accuracy assessment of the prem and ak135-f radial density models |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9185503/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35684801 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s22114180 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tenzerrobert theaccuracyassessmentofthepremandak135fradialdensitymodels AT jiyuting theaccuracyassessmentofthepremandak135fradialdensitymodels AT chenwenjin theaccuracyassessmentofthepremandak135fradialdensitymodels AT tenzerrobert accuracyassessmentofthepremandak135fradialdensitymodels AT jiyuting accuracyassessmentofthepremandak135fradialdensitymodels AT chenwenjin accuracyassessmentofthepremandak135fradialdensitymodels |